2005 – 2006 A RECONSIDERATION OF DEPOSITIONAL PRACTICES ISSN 1233-6246

31

A Reconsideration of Depositional Practices

in Early Bronze Age Crete

EMILY MILLER BONNEY

Aegeanists typically argue that the state formed on Crete as it did in the ancient Near East. Hierarchical structures developed
over the course of the Bronze Age culminating in the centralization of civil and religious power at Knossos near the beginning of
the Late Bronze Age. Already at EM I Knossos emerging elites competed in the conspicuous consumption of food, drink and fine
pottery to legitimate their authority. Artistic productions in all media reflected the wealth, access to specialized knowledge, and
power of these elites in the competitive display that was a hallmark of elite life on palatial Crete. Analysis of the pottery placed
in tombs at Lebena, Koumasa and Ayia Kyriaki presents a more egalitarian society that was ordered heterarchically not hierarchi-
cally. While some of the deceased no doubt were wealthier than others none of the grave goods displayed the cosmologically
charged symbols that distinguished the deceased as a prince or high priest. For all the pyxis was a significant component of the
burial kit at Lebena and Koumasa although apparently not at Ayia Kyriaki from EM I through EM IIA. Across this area in EM IIB,
however, the pyxis disappears from the burial assemblages replaced by the broadly shared custom of depositing large quantities of
cups in and around the tombs. These cups were used in drinking or toasting rituals by which the survivors celebrated the ances-
tors and re-affirmed the corporate cognitive code.

Introduction

From 1958 to 1960 Stylianos Alexiou excavated
three unlooted tholos tomb complexes at Lebena,
modern Lendas, on the south coast of Crete. Photo-
graphs of a selection of pottery, seals, stone vases, figu-
rines and jewelry from the site appeared in the popu-
lar press in August 1960.1 In the article Alexiou wrote
that he had found at least 700 complete vessels with
sufficient additional sherd material for a total of more
1 S. ALEXIOU, New Light on Minoan Dating: Early Minoan
Tombs at Lebena, ILN 237, No. 6314 (August 6, 1960), 225–227,
figs 6 – 20. Earlier reports of the excavations had included fewer pho-
tographs: S. ALEXIOU, Ein frühminoisches Grabe bei Lebena auf
Kreta, AA 1958, 2 – 10, abb. 3 – 6 (four vases, three seals and a gold
diadem); G. DAUX, Chronique des fouilles 1958, Leben, BCH 84
(1959), 742–744 (scarab, two seals, 19 vases); G. DAUX, Chronique
des fouilles 1959, Leben, BCH 85 (1960), 841– 846 (two seals,
34 vases).
than 1 000 vases. Numerous photographs of unusual
vessel shapes, a gold diadem, and an Egyptian scarab
underscored the exceptional nature of the finds. The
final report, published in 2004, reveals the true signifi-
cance of the excavations. 2 The three relatively small
complexes had produced more than 3 000 vases span-
ning EM I through at least early MM I. 3 The relatively
intact sequence of pottery and Alexiou’s meticulous
excavation records provide scholars with a unique pic-
ture of Cretan depositional practices over the course
2 S. ALEXIOU and P. WARREN, The Early Minoan Tombs of
Lebena, Southern Crete, (Sävedalen 2004). Alexiou discussed the sites
and their excavation; Warren prepared the extensive catalogue which
included all the sherd material that had been boxed.
3 The number included 917 catalogued pieces and at least another
2 137 accountable through sherd material.
32 EMILY MILLER BONNEY
of nearly 1 000 years. 4 Analysis of the report reveals
that roughly three-quarters of preserved EM I pottery
consists of two vessel types – pyxides and tankards in
nearly equal numbers. Both pyxides and tankards were
extremely varied in shape and decoration. By the begin-
ning of EM IIA pyxides, now much more standardized
in shape and decoration, comprise the essential element
of the mortuary kit. In turn, perhaps already by the
beginning of EM IIB, even more standardized cups and
bowls supersede the pyxides. Similar patterns of dis-
placement of locally diverse behavior by a clear pref-
erence for cups and bowls are detectable at other sites
in south central Crete. These alterations of depositional
practices suggest that, although there may be evidence
of hierarchical ordering at sites such as Burial Build-
ing 19 at Arkhanes or the cemetery at Mochlos, the
Cretan society at least throughout much of the Early
Minoan period was heterarchically organized. 5 In part
through the repeated deposition of certain ceramic ves-
sels in the tomb social actors restructured their rela-
tionships following the loss of a member of the com-
munity. These shared standards and associated behavior
concerning the consumption of resources at the tombs
integrated the communities, established communal soli-
darity and affirmed the corporate cognitive code. 6
Background
The number of identifiable Early Minoan settle-
ments has grown each year, but publication of the ex-
cavations at Myrtos (Fournou Koriphi) remains our only
window on the daily life of Early Minoan II.7 For the
most part our understanding of Cretan culture before
4 Dates follow V. WATROUS, Crete through the Protopalatial
Period. Addendum: 1994 –1999 in T. CULLEN (ed.), Aegean Pre-
history: A Review (AJA Suppl. 1, New York 2001), 222, and allow
400 years for EM I.
5 There has been recent interest in reconceptualizing Prepalatial
society as heterarchical. D.C. HAGGIS, Integration and Complexity
in the Late Prepalatial Period: A View from the Countryside in East-
ern Crete, in Y. HAMILAKIS (ed.), Labyrinth Revisited. Rethink-
ing ‘Minoan’ Archaeology (Oxford 2002), 120 –142. I. SCHOEP and
C. KNAPPETT, Dual Emergence: Evolving Heterarchy, Exploding
Hierarchy, in J.C. BARRETT and P. HALSTEAD (eds.), The Emer-
gence of Civilisation Revisited (Sheffield Studies in Aegean Archaeo-
logy 6, Sheffield 2004), 21–38.
6 R. BLANTON, Beyond Centralization: Steps Toward a Theory
of Egalitarian Behavior, in G.M. FEINMAN and J. MARCUS (eds.),
Archaic States (Santa Fe 1998), 163–166.
7 P. WARREN, Myrtos. An Early Bronze Age Settlement in Crete
(BSA Suppl. 7, London 1972).
AEA 8
the appearance of the palaces depends on finds from
mortuary contexts – the tholos tombs of the Mesara
Plain in south central Crete and the house tombs of
eastern Crete. 8 The story that the tombs and their
contents tell is fragmentary at best. Early Cretans used
communal tombs intended for multiple burials. Re-
peated entries into the tombs, the moving and occasio-
nal sweeping away of bones and artifacts, disrupted stra-
tification. None of the tombs, including those at Lebena,
contained a clearly continuous sequence of burials.
Some tombs were used for awhile, abandoned and then
returned into service at a much later date. Even the rich-
est tombs, such as those at Mochlos, provide very little
unambiguous evidence about the Cretan mortuary cus-
toms. Additionally looters have ransacked most of the
tombs often leaving very little behind for archaeologists.
As a consequence excavators usually find only small
quantities of pottery, frequently in the form of sherds,
and fragments of other objects in stone or metal. Not
surprisingly one consequence of the limited record has
been a lack of publication of tomb excavations. 9
Nevertheless archaeologists have drawn on Early
Bronze Age Cretan mortuary activity for data about
social organization and in particular for evidence of the
presumed emergence of a hieararchically ordered so-
ciety. 10 Maggidis’s study of Burial Building 19 at
Archanes exemplifies this approach in which the
8 Archaeologists have identified at least 90 structures that are or
are likely to be tholos tombs, see K. BRANIGAN, Dancing with
Death. Life and Death in Southern Crete c. 3000 –2000 BC (Amster-
dam 1993), 144 –148; Soles has identified 68 house tombs, J. SOLES,
The Prepalatial Cemeteries at Mochlos and Gournia and the House
Tombs of Bronze Age Crete (Hesperia Suppl. 24, Princeton 1992).
9 Aside from Lebena only seven other tholos tomb sites have been
published. L. BANTI, La grande tomba a tholos di Haghia Triada,
ASAtene 13–14 (1933), 155–251; S. MARINATOS, Äýï ðñþéìïé ìéíùú-
êïß ôÜöïé åê Âïñïý ÌåóáñÜò, AD 13 (1931), 137–170; S. MARINA-
TOS, Ðñùôïìéíùúêüò èïëùôüò ôÜöïò ðáñÜ ôï ÷ùñßïí ÊñÜóé ÐåäéÜäïò,
AD 12 (1929), 102–41; D. PANAGIOTOPOULOS, Das Tholosgrab E
von Phourni bei Archanes. Studien zu einem frühkretsichen Grabfund
und seinem kulturellen Kontext (BAR International Series 1014, Ox-
ford 2002); Y. PAPADATOS, Tholos Tomb Gamma: A Prepalatial Tho-
los Tomb at Phourni, Archanes (Philadelphia 2005); D. BLACKMAN
and K. BRANIGAN, The Excavation of an Early Minoan Tholos Tomb
at Ayia Kyriaki, Ayiofarango, Southern Crete, BSA 82 (1987), 1– 57.
10 For example, A. KARYTINOS, Sealstones in Cemeteries: A Dis-
play of Social Status?, in K. BRANIGAN (ed.), Cemetery and Society
in the Aegean Bronze Age (Sheffield Studies in Aegean Archaeology 1,
Sheffield 1998), 78–86; K. SBONIAS, Frühkretische Siegel: Ansätze
für eine Interpretation der sozial-politischen Entwicklung auf Kreta
während der Frühbronzezeit (BAR International Series, Oxford 1995);
J.S. SOLES, Social Ranking in Prepalatial Cemeteries, in E.B. FRENCH
and K.A. WARDLE (eds.), Problems in Greek Prehistory (Bristol 1988),
49 – 61.
2005 – 2006 A RECONSIDERATION OF DEPOSITIONAL PRACTICES
investigator creates an analytical framework based on
criteria established by scholars in other disciplines for
other cultures. 11 The author presents a list of “vari-
ables” set out by these other specialists and identified as
indicia of social ranking. He then scrutinizes the burials
themselves, the tomb architecture and the grave goods
for displays of the characteristics identified in the list
and concludes by situating the burial building within
the larger social context at Archanes as an example of
the emergence of elites within this society. For Maggi-
dis and others mortuary activity is a means by which
some members of the society legitimated their right to
exercise authority and control resources.12 The archi-
tecture of the tomb and the kinds of grave goods, re-
flects the ideological, economic and social underpinn-
ings of Cretan society before the palaces.13 In this way
the narrative of funerary ritual and other activities at
the cemeteries has become a composite integrating
elements from different sites and times.
While the blurring of temporal and spatial distinc-
tions with respect to mortuary behavior may facilitate
consideration of an issue such as whether an archaic
state developed on Crete, the practice does not fully
acknowledge that the Cretans who made and used these
tombs were real people, human agents living in a spe-
cific historical moment.14 Actions in the mortuary
context served the particular function of bringing the
11 C. MAGGIDIS, From Polis to Necropolis: Social Ranking from
Architectural and Mortuary Evidence in the Minoan Cemetery at
Phourni, Archanes, in BRANIGAN (n. 10), 87–102.
12 For example, J. MURPHY, Ideology, Rites and Rituals: A View
of Prepalatial Minoan Tholoi, in BRANIGAN (n. 10), 27–40; SOLES
(n. 8), 255–258; PANAGIATOPOULOS (n. 8), 128–134.
13 K. BRANIGAN (n. 8); K. BRANIGAN, The Nearness of You:
Proximity and Distance in Early Minoan Funerary Behaviour, in
BRANIGAN (n. 10), 13–26; Y. HAMILAKIS, Eating the Dead:
Mortuary Feasting and the Politics of Memory in the Aegean Bronze
Age Societies, in BRANIGAN (n. 10), 115–132; M. RELAKI, Con-
structing a Region: the Contested Landscapes of Prepalatial Crete, in
J.C. BARRETT and P. HALSTEAD (eds.), The Emergence of Civili-
sation Revisited (Sheffield 2004), 170 –188; J.S. SOLES, Reverence
for the Dead Ancestors in Prehistoric Crete, in R. LAFFINEUR and
R. HÄGG (eds.), Potnia. Deities and Religion in the Aegean Bronze
Age (Aegaeum 22, Liège 2001), 230–236; P.M. DAY, D. WILSON
and E. KIRIATZI, Pots, Labels and People: Burying Ethnicity in the
Cemetery of Aghia Photia, Siteias, in BRANIGAN (n. 10), 133–149.
14 J.C. BARRETT, Agency, the Duality of Structure and the Prob-
lem of the Archaeological Record, in I. HODDER (ed.), Archaeological
Theory Today (Cambridge 2002), 141–164; J.C. BARRETT, A Thesis
on Agency, in M.-A. DOBRES and J. ROBB (eds.), Agency in Archaeo-
logy (London 2000), 61– 68; J. C. BARRETT and K. DAMILATI,
‘Some Light on the Early Origins of Them All,’ in BARRETT and HAL-
STEAD (n. 5), 145–169; This is not the appropriate space for an
extended discussion of agency theory about which the literature is vast.
33
society forward after the loss of a member and had the
power to shape social realities.15 The rituals of the
funeral, interment and subsequent secondary burial
were among the strategic and routinized sequences of
actions by which individuals produced and reproduced
their society. Participants, by their actions, which they
assumed were appropriate and effective, represented,
affirmed and ultimately maintained the values of the
community, responding to the contingencies of their
existence and only secondarily reflecting on the under-
lying reality of that experience. The deposition of grave
goods was one of the institutionalized ways by which
the survivors drew upon “the available cultural and
material resources to restructure relationships between
themselves.” 16 Although the participants viewed these
practices as stable (the simple repetition of the same
actions every time), at the same time they recognized
that in fact each iteration varied slightly from all that
had gone before.17 Diachronous use of the tombs re-
sulted in a material record that was the product of
perhaps hundreds of small actions, the continuity of
which could be abruptly broken depending in part on
the frequency of the funerals.18 As individuals inter-
acted within the certainty and security of their quotid-
ian practicalities, discourse and the manufacture and
deposition of artefacts created meaning that was not
fixed at the moment of origin but metamorphosized as
subsequent actions and material interventions reshaped
people’s perceived reality. It is this process that the
archaeologist must first attempt to understand before
resorting to the material traces as evidence for social
organization outside the mortuary context.19
15 L.A. BECK (ed.), Regional Approaches to Mortuary Analysis
(New York 1995); L.H. GAMBLE, P.L. WALKER and G.S. RUS-
SELL, An Integrative Approach to Mortuary Analysis: Social and
Symbolic Dimensions of Chumash Burial Practices, AmerAnt 66
(2001), 185–187; I. MORRIS, The Archaeology of Ancestors: The
Saxe-Goldstein Hypothesis Revisited, CAJ 1 (1991) 147–169.
16 J.C. BARRETT, The Monumentality of Death: The Character
of Early Bronze Age Mortuary Mounds in Southern Britain, World-
Arch 22 (1990), 182.
17 K. MIZOGUCHI, Time in the Reproduction of Mortuary Prac-
tices, WorldArch 25 (1993), 223 – 235.
18 L. FOXHALL, The Running Sands of Time: Archaeology and
the Short-Term, WorldArch 31 (2000), 484 – 498; W.Y. ADAMS, In-
vasion, Diffusion, Evolution?, Antiquity 42 (1968), 203.
19 At a minimum the relationship between mortuary ordering and
social structures in the world of the living should be problematized.
The claim that mortuary relics reflect social realities has been rejected
by some archaeologists, for example I. HODDER, The identification
and interpretation of ranking in prehistory: a contextual perspective,
in C. RENFREW and S. SHENNAN (eds.), Ranking, Resource and
Exchange (Cambridge 1982), 150 –154.
34 EMILY MILLER BONNEY
Methodology
This essay argues that analysis of the pottery de-
posited in the tombs at Lebena reveals traces of the
actions by which those Cretan communities sought to
reconstitute themselves after a death and move forward
with redefined roles and obligations. Unlike the selec-
tive placement of prestige goods whose consumption
was limited to a small number of individuals, the in-
clusion of pottery, occasionally in vast numbers, re-
flected popular understanding of regular, appropriate
and effective conduct in the mortuary context. Al-
though the volume of pottery from the Lebena tombs
provides a good basis for statistical analysis there are
no really good comparanda. 20 Comparison with such
data, as are available from other south central Cretan
tombs, reinforces the impression of the Lebena pottery,
that is that locally diverse customs became more stand-
ardized within and among different communities. In
making this comparison only two sites were sufficiently
well-published to provide adequate evidence, Ayia Ky-
riaki in the Ayiofarango and the Mesara tholos com-
plex at Koumasa. 21 The circumstances of the excava-
tion of the former site are dramatically different from
those at Lebena. The tholos had been thoroughly looted
and nearly demolished. Blackman and Branigan had
only a short period of time within which to collect and
analyze what turned out to be sherds from more than
15 000 vessels, none of which was preserved to any
significant extent. Nevertheless the excavators were
able to identify 12 sealed deposits containing small
quantities of pottery to determine the period of use for
the tomb and concluded that it had been constructed
during EM I and remained in use through at least the
beginning of MM I. Of the Mesara tholoi only the
complex at Koumasa, excavated early in the 20th cen-
tury, had produced a significant amount of pottery.
Unfortunately archaeological practices at the time were
less precise than they are today, and Xanthoudides did
not record levels. The complex of three tholoi, one
house tomb and the traces of several smaller buildings
appeared not to have been disturbed except for an
“excavation” undertaken by nearby villagers who
brought their finds to Xanthoudides. The complex was
20 Other tholos tombs near Lebena either remain unexcavated or
unpublished. See the list in BRANIGAN (n. 8), 144 –148. In most
instances in which Branigan identifies the tomb as having been pub-
lished he actually refers to a brief report in a journal.
21 BLACKMAN and BRANIGAN (n. 9); S. XANTHOUDIDES,
Vaulted Tombs of the Mesara (London 1924).
AEA 8
covered by a singular large mound with a Roman burial
near the surface, and its nature was revealed only af-
ter the excavation had begun. The deposits appear to
have been largely undisturbed. 22
In spite of the obvious perils of comparing pottery
from sites with such different excavating histories com-
parisons can be made that identify important trends in
mortuary deposition practices for much of the Early
Minoan phase. The data from the three sites have been
organized in two ways. First the pottery was sorted in
terms of those shapes which were most plentiful at Le-
bena and in particular at the tomb at Gerokampos:
bowls, conical cups, cups, jugs, lids, pyxides, tankards
and other. 23 “Jugs” include all closed forms that could
be used for pouring liquids including the familiar Min-
oan teapot. “Jugs” also include all examples of the
shape irrespective of whether the excavator identified
the form as a “juglet” (Warren) or a miniature jug
(Xanthoudides). Blackman and Branigan, because of
the fragmentary nature of the pottery obviously did not
distinguish between larger and smaller jugs. “Mugs”
have been included as “cups” because their ‘distin-
guishing features’ do not suggest they were used for
a purpose distinctly different from that of the cups. 24
The remaining shapes – e.g. amphoriskoi, askoi, pots,
teapots, zoomorphic vases, goblets – are categorized
as “other” because none of them, taken individually,
is statistically important. Dates for the pottery are those
assigned by Warren, Blackman and Branigan, whereas
Except for Koumasa and Ayia Kyriaki the tholoi in the Mesara
22
and adjacent areas have produced or at least the excavators have
published only modest amounts of pottery. The tholos at Haghia Triada
contained some EM I–II pottery but only a few pieces were published;
BANTI (n. 9), 1–14. Tholos E at Arkhanes had two distinct levels,
the lower apparently the remains of a clearing of the tomb contents
which than were covered with a thin layer of white clay. The pottery
from the upper level was datable to MM IA through MM II. The lower
level contained one vase and fragments of 64 additional vases, all
apparently EM IIA although some of the material may date to EM
IB; PANAGIOTOPOULOS (n. 9), 31f. Pottery from Tholos Gamma
at the same site of Archanes “is small in quantity and in most cases
very fragmented, worn, and non-diagnostic in terms of shape and deco-
ration.” The only distinctly EM IIA sherds were 146 fragments of Fine
Grey ware and one fragment of dark on light painted ware, all from
the lower level of the stratum of the tholos; PAPADATOS (n. 9), 13f.
23 ALEXIOU and WARREN (n. 2), 28f. Warren distinguished
cups from bowls as follows: cups had a single vertical handle and
bowls do not. As a result a “conical cup” is a subset of a “bowl”.
“Lids” do not include the larger version frequently argued to be an
offering stand. SOLES (n. 8), 25f.
24 ALEXIOU and WARREN (n. 2), 84: “These five vases could
well be classified as CUPS but each of the two subtypes has a shape
corresponding to what is often called a MUG in English.”
2005 – 2006 A RECONSIDERATION OF DEPOSITIONAL PRACTICES 35

the Koumasa pottery dates reflect the revisions made

by Zois, Betancourt and Warren. 25 In creating the ta-
bles and pie charts for each site I have included the
relatively small amounts of EM I/EM IIA pottery from
Gerokampos IIa under EM IIA. I also have charted
separately the pottery identified as generally EM II
from the material categorized as EM II–MM I. That
said most of the Lebena cups appear to be more like
the EM III cups identified by Betancourt with a more
elaborate or worked base than the earlier simple flat-
based cups. Blackman and Boardman did not have suf-
ficient time to date closely the pottery from Ayia Kyria-
ki and instead divided the material into two groups:
EM I – EM II and EM III – MM I. Tables and accom-
panying pie charts have been prepared for each dis-
tinct burial site. All statistical data were subjected to
a Chi Square test to determine significance and only the
statistics for the pottery from the lower level at Lebena
IIa were insignificant, and therefore have been omit-
ted. Finally, to compare the sites with each other dur-
ing EM I – EM IIA and EM IIB – MM I, I created bar
graphs. For clarity in the bar graphs cups, bowls and
conical cups were treated as one class of vessel in part
because all could have been or were used for drinking.

Examination of Ceramics from Koumasa,
Lebena Papoura, Lebena Gerokampos
and Ayia Kyriaki
The four sites lie within a day’s walk of each other
in the southwestern corner of central Crete. The Kou-
masa cemetery is in the foothills of the Asterousia
Mountains, approximately six kilometers from the
coast, and is visible from the settlement on the twin
peaked hill of Korakies, 100 meters to the east.
Roughly ten kilometers southwest, near ancient Lebena,
modern-day Lendas, are two additional clusters of
tombs, one just to the west, at Papoura, and the sec-
ond three kilometers west at Gerokampos.26 A fourth
tomb is situated near Ayia Kyriaki just west of the
Ayiofarango river and not far from its effluence into
the Libyan Sea.
25 ALEXIOU and WARREN (n. 2), passim in the discussion of
the pottery; P.P. BETANCOURT, The History of Minoan Pottery
(Princeton 1985), 41f; A. ZOIS, Åñåõíá ðåñß ôçò ìéíùúêÞò êåñáìåéêÞò,
Åðåôçñßò Åðéóôçìïíéêþí Åñåõíþí (1967– 68), 703 – 732.
26 The tomb at Zervou, as noted above, was badly eroded and
any analysis of the pottery subject to real question to that group of
pottery has been omitted.
Fig. 1. Plan of Lebena Papoura I and Papoura Ib
(after ALEXIOU and WARREN, 2004, fig. 2)
Lebena Papoura: EM II – MM I
At Lebena Papoura two tholoi, I and Ib, were con-
nected to each other (Fig. 1). The vault of Tomb I (in-
ternal diameter of 5.0–5.15 m) and its entrance had col-
lapsed. 27 Based on the quantity of bone the excavators
estimated that originally there were 50 burials. Inter-
ments had filled the interior of the tomb at which point
burials continued into the entrance passage which con-
tained only pieces of MM I pottery. Compartments to
the east of Tomb I contained no bones and only a few
pieces of pottery, all MM I. 28 Tomb Ib (interior diam-
eter 4.5 m), the vault of which also had collapsed, was
built against Tomb I although when is not clear. Chart 1
displays the distribution of the pottery by shapes and
dates in Papoura I. 29 In the layers of successive burials
27 ALEXIOU and WARREN (n. 2), 11.
28 Ibid., 11–14.
29 Included in the statistics for this deposit and all others at Lebena
are the sherds that Warren identified as sufficient to account for ad-
ditional examples of a particular shape.
36 EMILY MILLER BONNEY
in Tomb I the excavator found 68 pots with sufficient
identifiable sherds for a total of at least 148 vases,
perhaps 3 vases per person. Chart 1 shows that un-
painted EM II pyxides constituted the highest pro-
portion of ceramic finds (45.6%) and lids may have
accounted for an additional 4.4% for a total of 50%
with bowls 44.1% next in order. If Alexiou’s estimate
of 50 interments is relatively close these numbers sug-
gest that each person was buried with a pyxis. By
contrast almost all of the EM II – MM I pottery con-
sisted of cups. 30 Tomb Ib had few burials but was in
use in MM I since there was at least one burial ac-
companied by MM I cups. 31 As Chart 2 demon-
strates most of the pottery was EM II – MM I with cups
constituting almost 87% of the ceramic material. Of
the 54 EM II or IIA vases found in Ib almost half (26)
were pyxides.
Lebena Gerokampos: EM I – MM I
At Lebena Gerokampos the primary tomb was
Tomb II (interior diameter of 5.10 – 5.15 m), to which
Tomb IIa (interior diameter 3.3 – 3.40 m) and the four
rectangular rooms, A, M, AN, and Ä, had been added
(Fig. 2). According to Alexiou, interments were made
in Tomb II throughout EM I with no perceptible break
into EM IIA. Tomb IIa was added some time during
EM IIA, but since most of the EM II pottery was EM
IIB it may have been late in IIA. Before the end of
IIB Tomb IIa underwent a major burn, and sand was
laid down. All the pottery above the sand appeared to
be EM III – MM IA. Rooms AN (1.70×1.45 m) and Ä
(2.60×1.65 m.), which were constructed at the same
time as IIa, may be contemporary with IIa’s initial
period of use because some of the EM IIB pottery
shows traces of burning. Room Ä contained burials but
AN did not. Apparently AN served as a shrine as it
had a bench along one wall. The latter was filled with
individual vases and sherd material for a minimum of
643 vases. 32 Rooms A and M were built last after the
tholoi had gone out of use but while AN and Ä were
still being used. 33
The burial stratum of Tomb II, 1.0 to 1.1 m. thick,
had four distinct levels: earliest EM I, EM I to latest
30 ALEXIOU and WARREN (n. 2), 13.
31 Ibid., 14.
32 Ibid., 171.
33 Ibid., 16.
AEA 8
EM I, EM I – EM II – MM IA, and EM II – MM IA.
Including vases accounted for by sherds, at least 959
or a maximum of 2 263 pots were deposited in a tomb
which, with an interior diameter of approximately 5 m,
was half the size of either Tholos B or Tholos E at
Koumasa. All of the vases designed to have lids –
pyxides and tankards – had been left open, the lids
placed on the floor. 34 As Chart 3 shows the large
number of vases excavated in Tomb II displays the
same predominance of pyxides prior to EM IIB that we
have noted at Papoura. The lids may be from tankards
or pyxides. EM I material included almost equal num-
bers of pyxides (177) and tankards (179), the term
Warren uses for two-handled vases with flaring low necks
presumably used for drinking. 35 Jugs, cups and bowls
are present, but only in very small numbers. There are
no examples of the chalices found at other sites such
as Pyrgos, Ayia Photia, Kalo Khorio, Knossos and even
Ayia Kyriaki. 36 In the transition from EM I to EM IIA
the tankards no longer appear and the percentage of
pyxides increases dramatically to just over 75% of all
pottery. 37 During this phase there are even fewer cups,
jugs and bowls than in EM I. The numbers virtually
34 Ibid., 12.
35 Ibid., 105.
36 For tankards: Pyrgos in S. XANTHOUDIDES, ÌÝãáò ðñùôï-
ìéíùúêüò ôÜöïò Ðýñãïõ, AD 4 (1918), 144 – 147, fig. 5:2; 6, 13, 17 –
19; 147, fig. 40; Krasi in MARINATOS 1929 (n. 9) 112f, fig. 9 : 9;
10B; Chalices: Pyrgos in XANTHOUDIDES, AD 4 (1918), 149 –156,
fig. 8, 41– 45; 9, 56 – 60; 10, 74 – 78, 80, 82; 11; Kalo Khorio in
D. C. HAGGIS, Excavations at Kalo Khorio, East Crete, AJA 100
(1996), 664, fig. 21, KT 5, KT 6, KT 9; 665, fig. 22, KT 10, KT
13 – 15, KT 17 – 19; fig. 23, KT 21; 666, KT 39; 25, KT 42 – 47; 667,
fig. 26, KT 47 – 55; 668, fig. 28, KT 73, 74, 76; 669, fig. 29, KT
78 – 83; 30, KT 93, 94, 97, 104, 109; 671– 672; Ayia Kyriaki in
BLACKMAN and BRANIGAN (n. 9), 41, fig. 10, 55; Knossos in
D.E. WILSON and P.M. DAY, EM I Chronology and Social Practice:
Pottery from the Early Practice Tests at Knossos, BSA 95 (2000),
28 – 30; Ayia Photia in P. M. DAY, D. E. WILSON and E. KIRIATZI
(n. 13), 133 – 149; generally D. C. HAGGIS, The Typology of the
EM I Chalice and the Cultural Implications of Form and Style in Early
Bronze Age Ceramics, in R. LAFFINEUR and P. BETANCOURT
(eds), Techni: Craftsmen, Craftswomen and Craftsmanship in the
Aegean Bronze Age (Aegaeum 16, Liège 1997), 291 – 300.
37 Warren identified 14 subtypes of pyxides. ALEXIOU and
WARREN (n. 2), 85f. Some subtypes (e.g. subtype 1, a biconical
pyxis) are based on a gourd prototype. The pyxides appear in a vari-
ety of wares (grey burnished, Lebena ware, Ayios Onouphrios ware)
although the EM IIA pyxides are frequently in Fine Grey Ware or
local imitations of that ware. One class of pyxides, a variant on
a flat-shouldered bowl subtype, has projections at either end that re-
call the churns or bird vases from Chalcolithic Palestine, apparently
crafted in imitation of a goat skin. R. AMIRAN, Pottery of the An-
cient Holy Land From Its Beginnings in the Neolithic Period to the
End of the Bronze Age. (New Brunswick 1970), 33f.
2005 – 2006 A RECONSIDERATION OF DEPOSITIONAL PRACTICES
Fig. 2. Plan of Gerokampos showing successive phases of construction (after ALEXIOU and WARREN, 2004, fig. 47)
reverse in the latter part of EM II and on into MM I
pottery although there is not much material from this
phase in Gerokampos II. Cups and jugs are prominent
and pyxides extremely rare in the later material.
Tomb IIa had two distinct levels separated by the
sand laid down after the EM IIB burn. The lower level
produced only few vases, probably evidence of a clear-
ing of the tomb after the fire. As Chart 4 indicates the
upper level of IIa yielded more than 200 vases, mostly
cups. 38 Alexiou observes that he found only a few
burials in this level. 39 The striking discrepancy be-
tween the small number of burials and the large quan-
tity of cups suggests that many if not most of the cups
had not been placed in the tomb as part of the pri-
mary deposition and the bowls and jugs may more
accurately reflect the actual number of interments.
Since Alexiou does not specify we cannot tell whether
the upper level filled the tomb. 40
38 The vast majority of the cups are represented solely by sherds.
Only 20 intact conical cups and two cups with handles were found.
ALEXIOU and WARREN (n. 2), 148 – 152.
39 ALEXIOU and WARREN (n. 2), 18.
40 Ibid., 171–173.
37
According to Alexiou Room AN was constructed
in EM IIB, as was also Room Ä, although evidence for
burials in the latter room are no earlier than EM III. 41
They may have been added because IIa was full. Both
rooms served as tombs although Ä produced only
18 vases with sherds for an additional 77. By contrast,
AN (only 2.45 m2 in size) contained intact examples
and sherds for a minimum of 643 vases, almost all
conical cups. 42 Rooms A and M were added toward
the end of the life of the complex and never served as
tombs. Room A was attached to the entry to the tomb
and served solely as an ossuary. The same appears
to have been true for room M. While fragments of
a few other shapes were found, the vast majority in
Rooms A and M consisted of cups, and almost exclu-
sively conical cups.
41 Ibid., 177.
42 Ibid., 171–73.
38 EMILY MILLER BONNEY
Fig. 3. Plan of Koumasa (after XANTHOUDIDES, 1921, pl. LXVI)
Koumasa: EM II – MMI (?)
By contrast to the publications of Lebena and Ayia
Kyriaki the report for Koumasa is somewhat sketchy.
The excavator published only complete vases so there
are no sherd counts or data concerning fragmentary
vases. 43 The complex consisted of three separate tholoi
– A (interior diameter 4.10 m), B (interior diameter
9.52 m) and E (interior diameter 9.30 m), and an al-
most square built tomb à (as preserved 4.10×4.2 m)
(Fig. 3). 44 Xanthoudides reported that there were rect-
angular “sunken” areas before the entrances to all three
tholoi, and that at tombs A and E there also were walls
of sufficient height at the entries that access might have
required a ladder. There were no external walls at B
except, perhaps, four stones on either side of the en-
trance. Xanthoudides found additional burials and grave
43 XANTHOUDIDES (n. 21), published approximately 100 vases.
ZOIS (n. 25) published four more vases from the excavation.
44 XANTHOUDIDES (n. 21), 3f, and 32.
AEA 8
goods in Area Ä between tomb A and tomb Ã, in area
AB between A and B, and in Area Z to the east of
tholos B, the latter bounded on the southeast by a low
wall overlooking a bluish slate pavement. The exca-
vator postulated smaller “lightly built” structures in Ä,
AB and Z because of “a great mass of stones that must
have come from the ruin of such buildings.”45 It is
unclear whether the burials between the tombs were
contemporaneous with interments in the tholoi or later
on the theory they postdate the use of tholos A and
tomb Ã, although the pottery from these “burials” out-
side the tombs seems to be contemporary with the
pottery from these areas.46 The construction and use
of the tombs appear to be confined to EM IIA; there
is no certain EM I pottery at the site. The absence of
EM IIB Vasilike Ware, common elsewhere in the re-
gion, and the relatively small quantity of MM I pot-
tery at the site overall tend to support Xanthoudides’
45 Ibid., 33.
46 ZOIS (n. 25), 719f; SOLES (n. 8), 158.
2005 – 2006 A RECONSIDERATION OF DEPOSITIONAL PRACTICES
original account in which the tombs went out of use
in EM II, perhaps even before the end of EM IIA, and
were revisited in MM I as part of a memorial cult. 47
Distribution of pottery across the site was uneven
as Chart 5 indicates. Tholos E had been cleared and
a layer of white clay covered the floor. Two vases –
a MM I lamp stand and a horned vase – were found
in the fill above the tomb. Tombs A and Ã, both sealed
EM II deposits, yielded four and three vases respectiv-
ely. 48 Tholos B and Area Ä produced the overwhelm-
ing majority of the pottery, 43% and 31% of the total
ceramic material respectively. Modest amounts of pot-
tery were found in Areas AB and Z. Chart 5 shows the
distribution at Koumasa of the four shapes that are the
subject of this study. An exceptional number of zoo-
morphic vases were found at Koumasa. No other Pre-
palatial site has produced more. The high proportion
of jugs compared to the distribution at other sites is
unusual, but a more comprehensive accounting of sherd
material might provide a different picture.
Xanthoudides’ report raises important questions.
The excavator reported on the large number of burials
that apparently had filled Tholos B.49 At the same time
he reports only 45 pieces of pottery and 80 stone vases
from B,50 a tomb almost twice the size of Gerokam-
pos II. Although archaeologists often treat Tholos B
as undisturbed the relatively low number of vases and
stone vessels, given the mass of skeletal material and
the size of the tholos, must raise some questions. Even
assuming that Xanthoudides did not pay attention to
sherd material, there should have been more than 45 in-
tact vases given the volume of pottery from the much
smaller Gerokampos. Tholos E clearly had been de-
spoiled of all the various grave goods since Xanthou-
dides reports nothing from beneath the layer of white
clay and only 2 vases above. Tholos A and tomb Ã
may be sealed EM II deposits, but together they yielded
only 7 vases. Even Area Ä, a relatively small and cir-
cumspect part of the site produced 31 vases, a third
the number of vessels from tholos B. Given these
circumstance it seems to me that we must assume that
at some time a significant proportion of the grave
47 XANTHOUDIDES (n. 21), 42. K. BRANIGAN, The Tombs
of Mesara. A Study of Funerary architecture and Ritual in Southern
Crete, 2800 –1700 (London 1970), 158, “EM I (?)” suggested there
may have been EM I burials.
48 SOLES (n. 8) 158.
49 XANTHOUDIDES (n. 21), 7: “the mass of bones point to
many hundreds of interments.”
50 Ibid., 17.
39
goods in tholos B had been removed. Nevertheless the
prominence of the pyxides in an otherwise EM II as-
semblage still supports the conclusion that the pyxis
was crucial to a proper interment in EM II.
Ayia Kyriaki: EM I – MM I
In 1973 Blackman and Branigan excavated this
badly damaged tholos tomb after detecting it in sur-
veys in the vicinity of the Ayiofarango River. 51 Ac-
cording to the report the tomb and two antechambers,
5 and 3, had been constructed in EM I with a third
(2) and fourth (1) antechamber added in EM II and
MM IA respectively (Fig. 4 and 5). 52 There also were
remains of an enclosure wall with a bench and a rough
stone platform both apparently added when ante-
chamber 2 was built. In their analysis of the pottery
the excavators emphasize that they had been forced to
work quickly and that of the 16 392 sherds collected only
7.7% had been found in a stratified context. Excava-
tors identified thirteen deposits which appeared to be-
long to specific horizons within the history of the tomb.
With respect to the stratified material the excavators
estimated that the sherds represented 1 245 EM I –
EM II and 712 EM III – MM I for a total of 1 957 vases.
As Chart 6 shows cups represented more than 50% of
EM I – EM II wares, with jugs in second position at
26% and pyxides a tiny proportion. There also were
53 pedestal bowl or chalice fragments all found out-
side the tomb although these would still constitute only
4.3% of the datable fragments. The excavators con-
cluded that these fragments should therefore be identi-
fied with rituals that took place outside the tomb much
as the chalices at Ayia Photia were placed at the en-
trance to the individual tombs.53 Both of the deposits
contained chalice fragments dated to EM I. In EM II –
MM I the proportion of cups became even larger.
51 D. BLACKMAN and K. BRANIGAN, An Archaeological
Survey on the South Coast of Crete between the Ayiopharango
and Chrisostomos, BSA 70 (1975), 17 – 36; D. BLACKMAN and
K. BRANIGAN, An Archaeological Survey of the Lower Catchment
of the Ayiopharango Valley, BSA 72 (1977), 13 – 84; BLACKMAN
and BRANIGAN (n. 9).
52 BLACKMAN and BRANIGAN (n. 9), 1.
53 BLACKMAN and BRANIGAN (n. 9), 54; C. DAVARAS, Ðñù-
ôïìéíùúêüí íåêñïôáöåßïí Áãßáò ÖùôéÜò Óçôåßáò, AAA 4 (1971), 394;
C. DAVARAS and P. BETANCOURT The Hagia Photia Cemetery I:
The Tomb Groups and architecture (Philadelphia 2004) 234. D. HAG-
GIS (n. 38), 297.
40 EMILY MILLER BONNEY
Fig. 4. Plan of Ayia Kyriaki (after BLACKMAN and BRANIGAN,
1982, fig. 15)
Analysis
Comparison of EM I – IIA and EM II – MM I
The above data are summarized and compared in
bar graphs 1 and 2. Graph 1 displays the distribution
of bowls, conical cups, cups, jugs, lids, pyxides and
tankards during the period EM I to EM IIA at Gero-
kampos, Papoura, Koumasa and Ayia Kyriaki. As ap-
parent in Chart 3 during much of EM I tankards and
pyxides were deposited together in approximately equal
numbers.54 Jugs, cups and bowls constitute a much
smaller proportion of the total ceramics. Then from the
latter part of EM I and through some part of EM II
54 The lids, the third largest category of vases deposited in EM I
belong to either pyxides or tankards and thus there probably were an
even larger number of those two shapes.
AEA 8
Fig. 5. Schematic plan of Ayia Kyriaki (after BLACKMAN
and BRANIGAN, 1982, fig. 2)
tankards no longer were deposited in the tomb and
pyxides became the predominant shape inside the tomb.
Graph 2 shows that by the end of EM II and on into
MM I, while there are a few pyxides, cups have be-
come by far the object most frequently deposited in
the tombs. During EM I and much of EM II the pot-
tery deposited in these tombs in statistically significant
numbers included at least five basic shapes whereas
in later EM II and into MM I cups and bowls, both
receptacles for holding liquids, and jugs, for pouring
those liquids, appear to be the only ceramic shapes
included in the funerary deposits with any regularity.
While we should not make too much of the data, be-
cause of the different circumstances in which each group
of objects was found, these basic patterns seem clear
at all sites. The patterns are important because they
reflect what the members of the community thought
were crucial to an effective and appropriate burial.
2005 – 2006 A RECONSIDERATION OF DEPOSITIONAL PRACTICES
The EM I Tankard and the Pyxis
The approximately equal numbers of EM I pyxides
and tankards indicate the vases were viewed, for depo-
sitional purposes, as a pair. Their prominence within
the depositional record demonstrates that they were the
objects viewed as necessary and appropriate for burial.
The tankards, whose two handles make them best-
suited to be held with two hands, are only slightly
larger than most of the cups at Gerokampos and thus
of a size appropriate for individual use. 55 The tank-
ards are almost always painted with the dark on light
decorations characteristic of Ayios Onouphrios Ware
but in other respects differ from each other. Some may
have had lids but it is not certain that all did. The
tankards presumably were used for drinking. 56 The
earliest pyxides, Warren’s subtype 1, differ from tank-
ards only by the presence of lugs instead of handles. 57
Both the tankards and most of the pyxides are deco-
rated, the former with paint both light-on-dark and
dark-on-light, and the latter with paint (primarily dark-
on-light) or pattern burnishing. Decoration includes
hatched triangles and multiple line chevrons and loz-
enges. The earliest pyxides did not have lids. The way
in which these two types of vessels figured in the mort-
uary ritual is unknown, but their presence in the tomb
was essential. Nevertheless the inclusion of tankards
and of pyxides decorated with paint or pattern burnish-
ing ends during the transition from EM I to EM II.
Late EM I – EM II or IIA Pyxides
The transitional pyxides from the latter part of EM I
and through EM IIA are more standardized than those
from the earliest levels at Gerokampos II. Most are
variants on cylindrical, lenticular and globular shapes,
55 Tankards at Gerokampos have average diameters at around
9 –11 cm and a height of 13 –14 cm, dimensions which are roughly
half those of the average chalice.
56 A. GIBSON, Introduction, in A. GIBSON (ed.), Prehistoric Pot-
tery, People, Pattern and Purpose (BAR International Series 1156,
Oxford 2003), xi. As an interesting sidelight to the practicality of the
tankard shape Gibson describes simulations he staged with similarly-
shaped vessels from sites in England. He found that drinking from
such vessels may have been a bit hazardous as the diameter of the
opening, the flare and the somewhat bulbous body required that one
tilt the vessel at an angle such that the liquid would pour out more
quickly and forcefully than one might have expected.
57 ALEXIOU and WARREN (n. 2), 86, no. 229, pl. 59A, 106,
no. 438, pl. 94A, no. 298, pl. 70A and no. 500, pl. 105C.
41
and many have pierced lugs through which a cord
could have been passed to secure the lid. At least
37 are in the Fine Grey Ware which appeared in very
small quantities as early as EM I and is typical of
EM IIA. 58 Examples of Fine Grey Ware pyxides have
been found across Crete, and comprise the most sig-
nificant shape in this particular ware which was popu-
lar in domestic as well as mortuary contexts, although
the pyxides were far more likely to be deposited in
tombs than the other Fine Grey Ware shapes. 59 The
EM IIA pyxides are either undecorated or embell-
ished with incisions in the familiar lozenges and chev-
rons as well as delicate pointillee patterns. Warren
dated 135 pyxides to late EM I to EM IIA and an
additional 59 to EM II. These EM II pyxides and the
two pyxides Warren dated EM II – MMI at present defy
efforts to assign the more specific dates. Most are burn-
ished but lack other diagnostic decoration. At the same
time it seems unlikely that production of these sorts
of EM II pyxides continued into the end of the Pre-
palatial period or the beginning of the Protopalatial
period. Middle Minoan pyxides are straight-sided with
out-turned rims, that is, open shapes, sometimes black
with incised decoration filled with white.60 EM II pyx-
ides are closed forms, either rounded (lentoid, biconical,
depressed globular) or cylindrical with an in-turned
58 D.E. WILSON and P.M. DAY, Ceramic Regionalism in Pre-
palatial Central Crete: the Mesara Imports at EM I to EM IIA Knossos,
BSA 89 (1994), 77 – 81.
59 Domestic examples include Knossos in WILSON and DAY
(n. 58), 6 –11, 21 examples, almost half of all grey ware found at
Knossos; Myrtos in WARREN (n. 7), 107, six sherds; Vasiliki in
H.B. HAWES, B. E. WILLIAMS, R. B. SEAGER and E. H. HALL,
Gournia Vasiliki and Other Prehistoric Sites on the Isthmus of Hiera-
petra Crete. Excavations of the Wells-Houston-Camp Expeditions
1901, 1903, 1904 (Philadelphia 1908), pl. XII, 13. In the Cyclades,
once thought to be the source of the Cretan pyxis, pyxides are more
frequent in domestic contexts at least during the Grotta-Pelos culture,
i.e. roughly contemporary with EM I on Crete; C. BROODBANK,
An Island Archaeology of the Early Cyclades (Cambridge 2000), 263.
It now seems clear that the Cretan pyxis has its own trajectory; PANA-
GIOTOPOULOS (n. 9), 42. Pyxides are found in EM IIA levels
outside the Mesara; SOLES (n. 8), in tombs at Gournia, Tomb I,
G I-13 and G I-14, 13 – 15, fig. 5, pl. 5; Tomb III, G III-1– 4 and
G III-6, 31– 34, fig. 13, pl. 13 and 14; Rock Shelter VI, G VI-4, 38,
and Palaikastro, Tomb I, P I-1, 180; Tomb V, P V-10, 187; Phourni
Archanes IDEM, Tholos E, C 6, 34, pl. 20.
60 J.A. MACGILLIVRAY, Knossos: Pottery Groups of the Old
Palace Period (London 1998), 77, 83, fig. 2.20, pl. 141; N. MOMI-
GLIANO, MM IA Pottery from Evans’ Excavations at Knossos: A Re-
assessment, BSA 86 (1991), 171, 175, pls. 23, 26; J. A. MACGIL-
LIVRAY, P. M. DAY and R. E. JONES, Dark-faced Pyxides and Lids
from Knossos: Problems of Date and Origin, Problems in Greek Pre-
history (Bristol 1988), 91– 93.
42 EMILY MILLER BONNEY
rim. 61 I suggest that ultimately scholars will determine
that the pyxis of the sort deposited in the Prepalatial
tombs disappeared early in EM IIB. For purposes of
the present inquiry perhaps the most striking develop-
ment is that no shape appears to have replaced the
tankard in the depositional assemblage. Although some
of the cups and bowls deposited in Gerokampos II,
Papoura I and Koumasa B are unquestionably EM IIA
(compare for example the bowls from Area Ä) with
more refined shapes and flat bases, many of the other
cups and bowls exhibit ceramic developments of EM
IIB including ring bases and conical bowls. 62 In any
case excluding EM IIA examples, the absolute number
of EM II pyxides on the one hand (61), and EM II
bowls and cups on the other (35), suggests that the
cups and bowls did not have the same significance with
respect to the pyxides that the tankards had. Instead it
appears that the pyxides themselves, without any other
support as it were, had become effective and appro-
priate for deposition in the tomb. 63
EM II – MM I cups
At some point in EM IIB the pyxides become so
rare that we must assume that whatever rituals or sym-
bolism had been associated with them had gone out of
use. 64 Instead cups and bowls are now the essential
item for deposition in the tombs. Although Blackman
and Branigan have suggested that a standardized burial
kit of a jug and two cups existed already in EM I, the
evidence from Gerokampos II indicates otherwise. 65
Cups do not become a prominent part of the burial
61 ALEXIOU and WARREN (n. 2), pls. 68 – 89 (rounded); XAN-
THOUDIDES (n. 21), pl. XVIII, nos 4195 and 4196 (cylindrical).
62 P. BETANCOURT, The History of Minoan Pottery (Princeton
New Jersey 1985), 37f; ALEXIOU and WARREN (n. 2), fig. 20, nos
42 and fig. 21, no. 89.
63 There are two alternative interpretations to the facts presented
here. First, those who drank at the tombs used gourds for their ritu-
als. But given the abundance of tankards in EM I and the presence of
at least some cups throughout the EM I – EM IIA phase if drinking
rituals were important then they could easily have used the same
finewares they used for everything else in the tombs. One other pos-
sibility is that they saw no reason to deposit the drinking vessels in
the tombs. If this is what happened, a better explanation is that the
drinking was done in association with the primary interment, and since
the departed already had what he/she needed there was no reason to
leave the cups behind. By contrast offering drinks to the ancestors
would account for leaving the cups behind as a perpetual memorial.
64 PANAGAIOTOPOULOS (n. 9) 41, “kurzlebige Beliebtheit.”
65 BLACKMAN and BRANIGAN (n. 9), 51.
AEA 8
assemblage at either Gerokampos or Papoura until late
in EM IIB or perhaps MM I. Further, there is no cor-
responding increase in jugs. Indeed comparison of the
relative proportions of cups at Papoura 1b, Gerokam-
pos IIa upper level and Ayia Kyriaki demonstrates that
contrary to Blackman and Branigan’s assertion the cups
completely dominate the burial assemblage. 66 For
example at Papoura I during EM II (IIA) there were
13 cups and 17 bowls, making up 30% of the total pot-
tery. In the next phase the 66 cups and 20 bowls made
up almost 87% of the total pottery. Further, the cups
themselves do not feature the variety of decoration ap-
parent in EM I and to a lesser extent in EM IIA. Some
bowls of conical cup type are covered with black paint
and feature two white bands at the rim. 67 The masses
of cups and bowls in Room AN (at least 643), were
for the most part undecorated.
Interpretation
The complex picture that emerges from analysis of
the distribution of pottery deposited in tombs at Lebena
and Ayia Kyriaki, suggests that local practices were
diverse in EM I. This is the same impression we gain
from other sites. Koutsokera produced fragments of
EM I pyxides but nothing identifiable as a sherd of
a tankard. 68 At Krasi there were at least two tankards
but no pyxides, while at the burial cave at Pyrgos tank-
ards and chalices are found together. 69 Ayia Kyriaki
yielded some chalices and even more large bowls.70
Both the tankards and the painted or pattern-burnished
pyxides do not survive the end of EM I. During at least
the first part of EM II fewer types of vases were de-
posited in the tombs. At Lebena Papoura, Lebena Gero-
kampos II and Koumasa, although relative proportions
vary, jugs and pyxides are the most numerous. During
EM IIB, and perhaps early in that phase, cups and bowls
outnumber significantly all other shapes at all sites.
Interpreting this dynamic requires in the first in-
stance formulating a general characterization of what
66 The appearance of cups in a local variant of Vasiliki ware in
levels in AN, formed after Gerokampos II went out of use, seems to
support the later appearance of significant quantities of cups,
ALEXIOU and WARREN (n. 2), 166, nos 74 and 77.
67 Ibid., 68, nos 62 (“perhaps MM I by decoration”) and 63
(“probably MM I by style.”).
68 XANTHOUDIDES (n. 21), pl. Xla, all but top row. EM I pyxis
fragment third from left bottom row; third from right third row.
69 MARINATOS 1929 (n. 9), 112, fig. 9, no. 9; fig. 10B.
70 BLACKMAN and BRANIGAN (n. 9), 51.
2005 – 2006 A RECONSIDERATION OF DEPOSITIONAL PRACTICES
these depositional practices appear to be intended to
communicate. One possibility would be that burial and
attendant rituals seemed focused on differentiating
among groups of people and establishing certain
social barriers. For example Barrett has demonstrated
that the appearance of burial mounds at the beginning
of the Neolithic in England did not result from the
emergence of a ranked society in the early Neolithic. 71
The monumental burial mounds, Barrett argues, are not
a product of the Neolithic but a contribution to its for-
mation. These structures made possible “ancestral in-
tervention among the living, and enabled the staging
of practices which could” determine who had access
and who must be excluded. 72 As social groups became
more differentiated, these mounds and the attendant
rituals contributed to that process. Parker Pearson simi-
larly observed that the extent to which the dead be-
came incorporated into the community signaled an
interest in establishing one’s lineage and thus one’s
place in the society. 73 Hastorf’s investigation of the
evolution of funerary rituals and architecture at Chiripa,
Bolivia, in the Lake Titicaca Basin demonstrated how
the process to which Parker Pearson refers actually
plays out. 74 According to Hastorf initially only a few
individuals, all female, were wrapped in reed mats and
placed in simple burial pits. The exclusion of other
people in the community from being so buried identi-
fied these women as the ancestors. Subsequently, per-
haps 500 years later, a sunken court was constructed
adjacent to the area of the pits and the volume of fired
ceramics expanded, both pointing to an elaboration of
ritual practices attendant on the burials. In a third
phase, three more precincts were added and ultimately
a stepped mound was created. In the precincts small
rooms emphasized the presence in the community of
separate and distinct lineages. The mound established
a two-tiered lineage. In this fashion the relationship
between the living and the dead took on a physical
presence within the community over a period of per-
haps 1 000 years. Although there is much more to say
about the Chiripa sequence the Andean example es-
71 J. C. BARRETT, The Monumentality of Death: The Character
of Early Bronze Age Mortuary Mounds in Southern Britain,
WorldArch 22 (1990), 182 – 87.
72 Ibid., 183.
73 M. PARKER PEARSON, The powerful dead: archaeological
relationships between the living and the dead, CAJ 3:2 (1993), 203.
74 C. HASTORF, Community with the ancestors: ceremonies and
social memory in the Middle Formative at Chiripa, Bolivia, Journal
of Anthropological Archaeology 22 (2003), 305 – 332.
43
tablishes certain ways in which stratification and the
importance of the ancestors can take form within the
community. Examples in the Aegean seem obvious. One
thinks immediately of the Grave Circles at Mycenae,
the later mainland tholos tombs, and the Temple Tomb
at Knossos.
By contrast the tholos tombs at Lebena, Koumasa
and perhaps even Ayia Kyriaki tell a different story at
least for the first millennium of their existence. Al-
though situated near the community, the entrance to
the tholos always pointed east, frequently although not
always away from the settlement. Thus the ancestors,
or however Cretans envisioned those who had preceded
them, were close at hand but not really incorporated
into the community. Instead as subsequent interments
took place the bones of the previously dead were moved
aside somewhat haphazardly to make room for new
residents. 75 There is some evidence for the separation
and collection of skulls and long bones but no clear
signs that this practice was systematic or universal.
Although burials throughout this period could include
unusual items – Cycladic figures, stone tools, and cop-
per blades – the evidence from Lebena suggests that
the vast majority of burials were accompanied simply
by pottery and that those assemblages were uniform
within the period. It would be premature to suggest at
this juncture what the living intended by the deposi-
tion of the combination of tankard and pyxis or of
pyxis alone or of masses of cups. 76
Recognition of these patterns has so far been hin-
dered by the general tendency to interpret the tombs
as evidence for the emergence of local elites. 77 In this
approach as previously noted local deviations are de-
emphasized since the construction of an argument
75 The answer to the question of whether the Cretans practiced
true secondary burial as it is understood is far from clear. Typically
the dead bodies are deposited in a place dedicated to this end for the
decay of flesh and other tissue to occur. Such a location might have
been a pit from which, after a suitable amount of time, all the
skeletons were gathered together with no apparent disarticulation of
the skeleton and placed in a single burial deposit. G. DUNHAM,
D. L. GOLD and J. L. HANTMAN, Collective Burial in Late Pre-
historic Virginia: Excavation and Analysis of the Rapidan Mound,
AmerAnt 68:1 (2003), 109 – 128. More common is the use of an
ossuary for the preliminary decay purpose, D. ILAN, Mortuary Prac-
tices in Early Bronze Age Canaan, NEA 65:2 (2002), 92–104.
76 Xanthoudides observed a similarity in the grave goods associ-
ated with the complex at Platanos which produced very little pottery
and hundreds of stone vessels. XANTHOUDIDES (n. 21), 98. Most
of the stone vases were discovered in walled trench A so the extent
to which they actually were deposited in the graves is uncertain.
77 See (n. 10) for the relevant bibliography.
44 EMILY MILLER BONNEY
relies on pulling together bits of evidence from differ-
ent sites. This “top-down” approach obscures the fact
that the indicia for elite status may be absent from most
other sites and this in turn overstates the actual power
and influence of the elite over the rest of the popula-
tion. For example investigation of a mound in the
Black Warrior Valley in Alabama revealed that while
the summit sites that were centers of power for the
Mississippian cultures contained the full range of elite
symbols, local sites revealed a significant level of in-
dependence from the central authority. 78 Excavators at
a small site in the Moundville region found clear evi-
dence that the local population had developed inde-
pendent rituals that were not affected by the ideology
of the central authority. At the same time in demon-
strating that the central authority does not fully con-
trol local actions we are not compelled to accept Cre-
tan culture as other than complex. Complex cultures
may not necessarily require competition, the establish-
ment of a ruling class and the centralization of re-
sources. 79 Crete may not have followed the same
developmental trajectory as other territorial units in the
ancient Mediterranean. The possibility that Crete in fact
developed in a different way already has been proposed
by other scholars as noted above. Driessen, express-
ing frustration with the cognitive dissonance between
the material evidence and the types of ‘territorial or-
ganizations’ recognized in the Bronze Age Mediterra-
nean, already has asked “whether, where Minoan Crete
is concerned we are not trapped into established theo-
retical models and definitions of political and territo-
rial organization?” 80
An alternative model that appears more likely in
view of the material evidence is that Cretan society
was heterarchically structured, that is that the elements
of Cretan social and political structures were either
unranked or had the “potential for being ranked in
a number of ways.” 81 Heterarchical societies do not
78M. D. MAXHAM, Rural Comunities in the Black Warrior
Valley, Alabama: The Role of Commoners in the Creation of the
Moundville I Landscape, AmerAnt 65 (2000) 337 – 354.
79 R. BLANTON (n. 6); R. PAYNTER, The Archaeology of
Equality and Inequality, Annual Review of Anthropology 18 (1989),
369 – 399.
80 J. DRIESSEN, History and Hierarchy: Some Preliminary
Observations on the Minoan Settlement Pattern of Minoan Crete, in
K. BRANIGAN (ed.), Urbanism in the Bronze Age Aegean (Shef-
field Studies in Aegean Archaeology 4, Sheffield 2001), 65.
81 C. L. CRUMLEY, A dialectical critique of hierarchy, in
T.C. PATTERSON and C. WARD GAILEY (eds.), Power Relations
and State Formation (Washington, D.C. 1987), 158; C.L. CRUMLEY,
AEA 8
preclude hierarchical structures, rather the identities of
social groups are fluid and dynamic. Following this
model there may well have been elite families on Pre-
palatial Crete, but their precise status, rights and privi-
leges would have been subject to change. Parallels for
such decentralized social and political organization
existed in other early cultures, most notably Teotihu-
acan Mexico, the Harappan Civilization of the Indus
Valley and more recently Southeast Asia.82 For both
Cowgill and Possehl the “facelessness” of these soci-
eties, the apparent absence of an exclusionary social
system in which power is invested in a few individu-
als, suggests a different kind of social organization
without any central authority. 83 Blanton argues that
Teotihuacan and Harappa are examples of corporate
political economies characterized by egalitarian be-
havior, by which he means “a type of political action
that aims at preventing the exercise of exclusionary
power strategies”. 84 In particular such societies have
a ‘corporate cognitive code that serves to limit
the exercise of power’.85 The ‘corporate cognitive
code’ is reaffirmed through ritual. “Where corporate
political strategies are found in archaic states, ritual
may serve in part to sanctify and culturally reinforce,
through numinous experience ... the propositions of the
egalitarian cognitive code”. 86 Rituals are performed as
an expression of acceptance of the egalitarian cogni-
tive code.
The dynamic that we have observed in the se-
quences of deposits in the EM tombs of South Central
Crete suggests that there may have been a similar
“egalitarian cognitive code” operating in these EM
communities as reflected in the depositional assem-
blages of EM I and again in EM IIA. During EM I,
the pyxides and the tankards displayed enormous va-
riety in shape and decoration, and yet both were es-
Heterarchy and the Analysis of Complex Societies, in R. M. EHREN-
REICH, C. L. CRUMLEY and J. E. LEVY, Heterarchy and the Analy-
sis of Complex Societies (Arlington 1995), 1– 5.
82 G. L. COWGILL, State and Society at Teotihuacan, Mexico, An-
nual Review of Anthropology 26 (1997), 129 – 161; G.L. POSSEHL,
Sociocultural Complexity without the State: The Indus Civilization,
in FEINMAN and MARCUS (n. 3), 261– 292; D. J. W. O’REILLY,
Further Evidence of Heterarchy in Bronze Age Thailand, CurrAnthr
44 (2003), 300 – 306.
83 J. M. KENOYER, The Indus Valley Civilization, in J. RICH-
ARDS and A. VAN BUREN (eds.), Order, Legitimacy and Wealth in
Ancient States (Cambridge 2000), 99.
84 BLANTON (n. 6), 152.
85 Ibid.
86 Ibid., 164.
2005 – 2006 A RECONSIDERATION OF DEPOSITIONAL PRACTICES
sential for an effective burial. At some point the tank-
ard no longer was viewed as an essential part and the
pyxis became the essential vessel for deposition. These
pyxides were distinguished from their predecessors by
a lack of painted decoration and reliance instead on
more austere incised decoration. The other pottery
deposited with the pyxides was painted, much of it in
the distinctive dark-on-light style associated with the
pottery from Koumasa. The use of contrasting pottery,
the incised pyxides and the other painted pottery in the
tombs, parallels the combination of painted pouring
vessels and dark burnished drinking vessels from EM
IIA Knossos. 87 The pairing of dark cups and painted
pouring vessels stops in EM IIB with the introduction
of matched drinking sets. The possibility that the same
social forces that provoked this change at Knossos also
affected depositional practices in South Central Crete
is intriguing but requires further investigation. Does the
replacement of the pyxides by cups for deposit in the
tombs reflect a response on some level to pressures
from emerging elites to assert control? In this reading
the cups may indicate that drinking at the tomb had
acquired an importance that the earlier archaeological
record does not reflect. Elite sponsorship of the drink-
ing rituals could have reflected a cosmological order
that celebrated the group over the individual, and these
rituals were part of the way order was maintained.
They in turn affirmed that solidarity through the com-
munal drinking at the tomb. The standardization of the
burial kits, the absence of individual burials, the uni-
formity of the cups all point toward a communal ritual
that was intended to integrate the group not empha-
size the power of the particular few. More than one
researcher has observed that even when we encounter
pithos or larnax burials they still are within the im-
mediate context of, either adjacent to or inside, a tomb.
The sense of a society in which individualism was sub-
ordinated to the interests of the group seems obvious
from the reliance on communal burials in which dif-
ferences in wealth did not apparently translate into dif-
ferences in authority. The communal aspect of Cretan
culture requires further investigation, and this study is
only a beginning. I emphasize the goals of solidarity
87 P. M DAY and D. E. WILSON, Ceramic Change and the
Practice of Eating and Drinking in Early Bronze Age Crete, in
P. HALSTEAD and J. C. BARRETT, Food, Cuisine and Society in
Prehistoric Greece (Sheffield Studies in Aegean Archaeology 5, Shef-
field 2004), 50.
45
and group identity that I argue were built into the
mortuary rituals not with the intent of displacing the
ongoing discussion of elite competition, but to sup-
plement that perspective with the proposal any com-
munal feasting at the tombs was an integral part of
shaping those practices by which subsequent elites
would create solidarity, practices that persisted into the
Mycenaean occupation.88
Conclusion
The ceramic evidence from the tombs indicates
a distinct change in deposition practices first in EM I
and again around the end of EM IIA or the beginning
of EM IIB. The heterarchical structure already was in
place. Tankards and pyxides were deposited over and
over again affirming the links among the members of
the community. The reasons for the “decision” to cease
depositing the tankards and use only pyxides are ob-
scure. Was this alteration in practice stimulated in part
by a desire to emulate Knossian behavior? Was the
change from pyxides to cups the consequence of
broader social pressures? Whatever the reason for the
alteration of their practices the members of the com-
munity engaged in actions vis-a-vis the burial of their
dead that were accepted as expressions of the confi-
dence of these individuals in the efficacy of their own
actions. Each object was imbedded in an understand-
ing of the way in which the society was ordered, and
the ways in which both people and material objects
participated in the community, effected changes and
addressed external events. Performed at the cemeter-
ies these rituals of deposition integrated not only the
living who were physically present but the ancestors
who were present only in spirit, affirming the lineage
of the community and its solidarity. Alteration of those
practices was a serious matter, and the dynamics de-
scribed above were the result of a communal decision.
Emily MILLER BONNEY
Department of Liberal Studies
California State University at Fullerton
88 E. BORGNA, Aegean Feasting: A Minoan Perspective, in
J. C. WRIGHT (ed.), The Mycenaean Feast (Princeton 2004), 127 – 161.
46 EMILY MILLER BONNEY AEA 8

Graph 1. EM I – EM II shapes/site.
2005 – 2006 A RECONSIDERATION OF DEPOSITIONAL PRACTICES 47

Graph 2. EM II – MM I shapes/site.
48 EMILY MILLER BONNEY AEA 8

EM II EM II – MM I

Chart 1. Papoura I.

EM II EM II – MM I

Chart 2. Papoura Ib.

2005 – 2006 A RECONSIDERATION OF DEPOSITIONAL PRACTICES 49

EM I EM IIA

EM II EM II – MM I

Chart 3. Gerokampos II.

EM II – MM I

Chart 4. Gerokampos IIa Upper Level.

50 EMILY MILLER BONNEY AEA 8

Tholos A Tholos B Tholos E

Tomb G Area AB Area Delta

Chart 5. Koumasa.

EM I – EM II EM III – MM I

Chart 6. Ayia Kyriaki.