minoan archeological landscape

Chapter 2. Earth: The Minoan archaeological landscape.

Chapter 2. Earth: The Minoan eruption in its archaeological landscape

2.1 Introduction

It has been proposed that the eruption of Santorini volcano in the Aegean Sea was

responsible in the Late Bronze Age for a series of destruction horizons on the nearby island

of Crete (e.g. Marinatos 1939; Luce 1969; 970; Pichler and Schiering 1977). Much

research has been conducted on this question and the proposition has fallen in and out of

favour (Kaloyeropoulou 1971; Doumas 1978; Doumas 1980; Hardy et al. 1990a; Hardy et

al. 1990b; Hardy and Renfrew 1990; Driessen and Macdonald 1997). The purpose of this

work is to bring together the results of disparate strands of research across many

disciplines to examine in-depth the principal possible causes of destruction: tephra fallout,

and tsunami inundation. There are two main areas of research that can provide this data:

archaeology and volcanology. This chapter will concentrate on the archaeological data

whilst chapter 3 will look at the volcanological research that has taken place on Santorini.

To assess the archaeological data set it first needs to be put in context; what are the traits of

the culture under consideration, when and where did it exist and what was its relationship

with other cultures in existence at the time? This chapter will focus on these issues and

then look in greater depth at three particular aspects of the Minoan culture that would have

been most at risk from the eruption:

• Minoan buildings

• The coastal littoral

• Crops and subsistence

To put this study in perspective the following facts should be realised. The eruption event

took place approximately 3,500 years ago. The size of the eruption is open to

interpretation (see chapter 3) but it is acknowledged to have been one of the largest on the

planet during the last 10,000 years (Newhall and Self 1982). As well as direct effects,

most evident at the site of Akrotiri on Santorini, it may well have produced by-products or

created secondary environmental effects which affected a larger area. The archaeological

evidence for its impact is based upon excavation of sites from cultures that had largely

- 10 -


disappeared from our knowledge and were only rediscovered approximately 100 years ago.

No site from that period of time under consideration has been excavated in its entirety and

no site outside Santorini has been excavated with the specific purpose of assessing this

volcanic impact. Any evidence is spread across both the land and sea therefore hindering a

coherent pattern of deposition. The eruption is securely dated in the mid 2nd millennium

BC, but a precise date that allows a close-historical analysis is currently a problem because

the eruption occurs at a period in time for which 14C dating has inherent difficulty, leading

to differences of interpretation (Manning 1990; Warren 1990; Baillie 1995, chapter 7;

Manning 1999).

2.2 The Minoan culture and problems of interpretation

2.2.1 Terminology

The term Minoan refers to a number of different things depending upon its use, for

example; chronological period, style of architecture or geological event. I define the

Minoan culture area as that area which is predominantly influenced by or solely

represented by the culture centred on Crete in the Neolithic and Bronze Age periods (see

figures 1.3, 2.1 and 2.2). Initially this culture area was limited geographically by Crete,

but from an early period there were links with other groups (Hägg and Marinatos 1984;

Wiener 1990). The culture expanded its influence through trade and contact to include

other islands in the Aegean that were part of the Cycladic culture area. Later this influence

started to wane and towards the nadir of the culture it in turn was heavily influenced by the

mainland or Helladic culture area. These culture areas are therefore flexible and very hard

to represent physically on a map. There are no fixed boundaries between them and

because of the nature of the disparate settling of the land in this period there are large areas

where we have evidence of no cultural group. This complication is of great importance as

it is reflected in the separate chronologies that have built up for these three culture areas:

Minoan, Helladic and Cycladic. Each is largely based on the pottery seriation of that

group and a break or change in one is not necessarily reflected in the other chronologies.

Often the breaks in the chronologies are linked to destruction horizons. The Minoan

eruption may have been of such magnitude that it affected all the culture groups possibly

creating a unique concordance between them.

- 11 -


Figure 2.1 Map illustrating the major Late Bronze Age sites (in italics) and islands of the Aegean.

2.2.2 Textual and iconographic sources

The period of time in question is on the cusp of recorded history; the Minoans used writing

for everyday administrative functions rather than story telling and the clay tablets that they

inscribed on were largely designed as temporary dockets rather than permanent records to

be kept. The script in use at the time of the eruption, Linear A, is still undeciphered and

the later Linear B, which has been deciphered, was used during the Mycenaean hegemony

when organisational structures may have changed. The earliest narrative works in the area

are those of Homer, which have been ascribed to the 8th century BC (Janko 1982) and

whilst there are elements of the stories which provide some insights it is difficult to use

them to form the basis for a qualitative study of the earlier period (Kirk 1985). The work

of the Classical authors is in my opinion largely irrelevant to this discussion. Whilst some

- 12 -


elements, such as technological details, may be of worth, to use the stories as the basis for

recorded history is taking them too far. Many Classical authors were working over a

thousand years after the event and it would be similar to a writer now giving an opinion on

Anglo Saxon Britain largely based upon the works of wandering Medieval jongleurs.

Textual sources from other cultures such as the Amarna letters or the Mari Archive record

details of high level contact and gift exchange. Some well documented tomb paintings

from Egypt would actually seem to demonstrate the moment of gift exchange between

Egyptians and a group called the Keftiu who are likely to have been Minoans (Wachsmann

1987; Matthäus 1995; Rehak 1998). Unfortunately the rare examples of Egyptian artefacts

within Minoan cultural deposits and vice-versa have become highly charged because of

their link to a 'solid' chronology (see discussion on chronology for details).

Figure 2.2 Major Late Minoan sites on Crete. Land over 500 m in dark grey.

1. Vrysses, 2. Chania, 3. Stavromenos, 4. Kamares, 5. Agia Triada, 6. Phaistos, 7. Kommos, 8. Pitsidia, 9. Tylisos, 10. Poros, 11. Prasa, 12. Amnisos, 13. Knossos, 14. Juktas, 15. Archanes, 16. Vathypetro, 17. Galatas, 18. Nirou Chani, 19. Mallia, 20. Myrtos Pyrgos, 21. Priniaktikos Pirgos, 22. Gournia, 23. Vasiliki, 24. Pseira, 25. Mochlos, 26. Zou, 27. Palaikastro, 28. Zakros.

2.2.3 Initial discovery and incipient bias

The Minoan civilisation is a relatively recent rediscovery; the initial archaeological

reconstruction of this culture was largely the work of one man, Sir Arthur Evans, and the

product of his excavations at Knossos. This fact has biased much of the later work carried

- 13 -


out on the culture as new sites and ideas fit into or modify the concepts that he laid out in

his excavation reports (Evans 1921-36).

Evans' initial excavations at Knossos were undertaken without a chronological framework

to hang upon. It has to be admitted that his work was immense; the dedication which he

showed and the insight into such a complex site have been listed elsewhere (Horwitz 1981;

Brown 1993; Momigliano 1996). Evans was creating a culture almost from nothing and he

needed to describe and give life to the culture that he was excavating. In many ways this

became as much a Victorian/Edwardian construct of an ideal society as it was based in fact

(Bintliff 1984; MacGillivray 2000). It could be supposed that Evans saw in this society,

which was older than the Argive Society of the Mycenaeans, the Golden Age of Classical

mythology and he endowed it with that ethos. The lithe body of the bull leapers reflects

the British sporting aesthete and the Thalassocracy of Minos (see section 2.5.2.2) is

reflected in the navy of England and the Empire. The pottery system defined by Evans

was based upon the Three Age system (Renfrew and Bahn 1996, p25) first advocated by

Thomsen and was split into the Early, Middle and Late with sub-divisions of periods I, II

and III. This worked initially but as other sites were excavated it became increasingly

unwieldy and the tinkering that the system has undergone has made the pottery seriation

almost unreadable by a non-expert. As in any other discipline, however, there are schools

of thought or new ideas that come along for each generation which challenge the accepted

views. This increase in complexity has been matched by an increase in complexity of the

skills and techniques used in excavation creating a plethora of information for the Minoan

period.

The result of this growth in complexity means that conclusions drawn from excavation

should always be assessed in terms of the time that the site was excavated. As an example

Seager excavated Pseria in the 1900's and found no evidence of tephra (Seager 1910).

More recent excavations have found tephra deposits which are truncated by Seager's

excavations (e.g. Soles and Davaras 1990, p91-92). If a modern excavation that had

conducted soil-sampling processes and was aware of the interest in tephra had failed to

find any evidence then this could be taken as a null result, the 1900 excavation should not.

The same could be said to be true for building collapse and evidence for earthquake

damage. Much of this evidence may have been regarded as overburden and removed.

Fotou in her re-analysis of Hall's excavations at Gournia states how rooms were cleared - a

- 14 -


workman would dig down until a floor layer was reached and then they would excavate

sideways until walls were met (Fotou 1993).

There are a number of synthesis works on Minoan culture that bring together the relevant

traits but several of the broad themes can be stated here (Castleden 1990; Dickinson 1994;

Rehak and Younger 1998). The culture was a hierarchical, complex society based on a

redistributive system (Cherry 1983; Rehak and Younger 1998). The redistribution was

based around a hierarchy of sites centred on the main palace sites. Writing was used for

administrative purposes and the storage and exchange of goods was formalised. There was

a distinctive style and tradition of both art and architecture. The redistribution system

encouraged craft specialisation to take place. Some of the raw materials for this craft

production were acquired through an interlinked network of international trade. The

civilisation probably had many aspects that would be recognised by Cretans up to the

beginning of the 20th century.

2.3 Problems with chronology

The framework upon which archaeology is based is time, but not time as we live it now in

the present, composed of hours and minutes, but rather blocks of time or periods. These

periods represent broad brush-strokes of human past rather than the thoughts and

aspirations of individuals. Particular periods are defined by many disparate objects,

ranging from utilitarian (tools, pottery), to the existential (religion, art). The defining

events which bring one period to an end and herald the next are in many instances violent

and marked by the destruction of key or type-sites. This is certainly true for some periods

of the chronology of the island of Crete with the periods being defined by successive

destruction and rebuilding phases at the major palace sites.

Archaeological time differs from the present in its ability to ignore the actuality of time.

The effect of seriation of artefacts within culture area groups leads to a disassociation with

actual time, which in turn has caused a difficulty in bringing different culture areas into

alignment with each other. Within its own cultural sphere time can be seen as linear and

the archaeological periods are all relative to each other although they do not necessarily

have an absolute calendrical date that we would recognise. Cross-referencing of cultures

- 15 -


using seriation and typology is achieved by the elements of one culture area occurring

within the cultural deposits of another. By cross-referencing, correlations can be built up

between the cultural groups with which they interacted. Sometimes, because of the paucity

of cultural links, there is a problem that this sample size is not large enough and is biased

by such phenomena as heirlooms and the influence of special purpose burial archaeology

over material abandoned in domestic settings.

Figure 2.3 Chronological seriations for the Minoan, Helladic and Cycladic cultures. Instead of portraying the boundaries between phases as hard and fixed lines, I have tried to show them as more fluid, melding into each other. The figure also shows the architectural phase of Neo Palatial and Final Palatial.

The initial chronology of the Aegean cultures was created when the theory of diffusion of

culture from the Near East was prevalent (Childe 1925). Civilisation diffused from this

area in a similar process to osmosis. The chronology of the civilisations of Mesopotamia

and Egypt based on regnal years and cosmological links formed a bedrock from which

other cultures could be given an absolute date. The destruction of this theory by the 14C

revolution placed studies of Aegean civilisation in a quandary (Renfrew 1973). The

Aegean cultures had some cultural links with Near Eastern centres; some of these were

open to question, and they had few 14C dates and many of these were contentious. Thus

we have two types of chronology to date the Santorini eruption, the relative which will

allow us to see how the eruption affects sites on Crete and the absolute which will help us

- 16 -


to cross-reference any impact with other cultural groups. The absolute date will be based

on correlations between scientific dating such as 14C and dendrochronology but must fit in

with the traditional dates of the Near Eastern cultures which are based on fixed

astronomical dated events.

The three main pottery chronologies that are relevant to this discussion are the Minoan,

Helladic and Cycladic, each of which has their own nomenclature. Figure 2.3 shows the

relevant relative chronologies for each of these cultures. The absolute chronologies are

more problematical and open to debate and so can be found in specific works on this

subject (e.g. Warren and Hankey 1989; Rehak and Younger 1998; Warren 1998; Manning

1999).

2.3.1 The Minoan pottery seriation

Pottery analysis has formed the backbone of much archaeological research and many

chronologies are based upon it. This is as a result of the fundamental nature of pottery in

that it reflects human endeavour whilst remaining essentially a geological item which can

withstand the burial process. The study of the development of form and style through a

series of changes over time has a long tradition (see Renfrew and Bahn 1996, p116 for

outline). The relative chronologies of the Aegean Late Bronze Age period are based upon

this type of pottery seriation. The history of the developments of pottery typology is

summarised in Orton et al. 1993 table 1.1 (Orton et al. 1993). Much of the initial work in

this area was done by Evans at Knossos (Evans 1921-36). Unfortunately Knossos is an

exceptional site and has many features which are not reflected elsewhere and the neat

system devised by Evans has had to be adapted to conform to other Minoan sites as the

discipline has developed.

The particular phase with which this work is mainly concerned is the Late Minoan I, which

was subsequently split into two separate phases, LM IA and LM IB. Both phases make up

part of the Neo Palatial tradition with the destructions at the end of LM IB heralding in the

Final Palatial period (following Rehak and Younger 1998, p92). The LM IA phase of

decorated fine wares does not die out completely and continues into the LM IB. There is

very little variation between coarsewares in the two phases and so they are often assigned

- 17 -


on the presence or absence of finer wares within the same context (Betancourt 1985, p124).

Many of the types, both cooking and storage vessels, carry on from MM III traditions.

Figure 2.4 Theoretical model illustrating the development of pottery styles.

To help illustrate the problems of using pottery seriation at sites I have developed figure

2.4, which is a theoretical model and does not represent actual pottery styles. Style A

represents a pot type developed in the MM III which continues into LM IA. Style B is a

coarseware that is present in all phases but in varying quantities. Style C develops and is

in use solely in LM IA. Style D develops and is in use solely in LM IB. The presence of

Style A pottery in a context probably means that the context was in use during the MM III

or LM IA periods but it could be an heirloom and may have continued in use during the

LM IB phase. Because of the problem of residuality much of the pottery that is preserved

in an archaeological context may be from an earlier period. The presence of Style B

pottery only confirms that the material comes from a general period in the Late Bronze

Age but it is not specific. Style C confirms that the context cannot be earlier than LM IA

whilst Style D confirms that the context is not earlier than LM IB. It can be seen that this

can generate false assumptions and that a large dataset containing many pottery styles is

the best way of eradicating this. The site of Akrotiri has produced huge amounts of sherds

and complete vessels of Minoan origin, none of which has been dated to the LM IB.

The LM IA decorated wares concentrate upon four types of decoration, the spiral, rosette,

ripple motif and the floral band in horizontal friezes (Betancourt 1985, p128). There is

- 18 -


some development of the styles through time and an early and mature phase has been

recognised.

LM IB decorated wares have proved more difficult to define. The initial characterisation

was made by rare examples of palatial manufactured ware, such as the Marine Style or the

Reed Painter. A reanalysis of material particularly from older sites has revealed a more

complex scenario (Betancourt 1985, p133). Many of the deposits come from the series of

destructions that were thought to occur at the end of the period, when many sites across

Crete were destroyed by fire. Betancourt's list of destroyed sites nicely illustrates the

problem of creating a synthesis across sites; it shows the years when the sites were

excavated varying from 1908 to 1980 (Betancourt 1985, p134). The LM IB pottery has

effectively been divided into two main traditions, the standard, which is the more

conservative, and the palatial. The standard tradition follows some of the precepts of the

LM IA tradition; many of the styles are so similar to LM IA that they cannot be

distinguished from it. The conclusion that all sites that were destroyed by fire must

represent the end of the period has been questioned, some probably occurred during, and

would have contained pottery actually manufactured, in LM IA (Betancourt 1985, p139).

The second main tradition has been referred to as the Special Palatial tradition and has four

main divisions, the Marine Style, the Floral, the Abstract and the Geometric. Any of these

works are highly distinctive and are possibly a result of the translation of Minoan frescoed

themes to the pottery medium. So where do the excavations at Santorini fit into this

schema? Marthari (1990) outlined the first detailed stratigraphical analysis from the

Akrotiri excavations (see figure 2.5). This concentrated on the West House which offered

the most complete sequence, and was based on nearly one thousand complete or nearly

complete vessels. The majority of these were of local Theran manufacture. But there were

three significant groups of imports, Cycladic, Helladic and Minoan. The Cycladic vessels

confirmed interaction with islands such as Melos and Kea. The Helladic vessels, mainly

Vaphio cups have a number of Middle Helladic vessels but there are enough LH I vessels

to confirm that as the period of eruption. The majority of the foreign wares are Minoan

however, and appear to date to the mature LM IA from central and eastern Crete. Despite

the huge numbers of sherds and complete vessels excavated at Akrotiri no sherd of LM IB

has been positively identified. Therefore the hypothetical link between the LM IB

destructions on Crete and the eruption of Santorini can not be sustained. In terms of the

- 19 -


relative archaeological chronology, the Minoan eruption of Santorini was not directly

responsible for island-wide destruction of sites on Crete in the LM IB.

PERIOD PHASE FEATURES CERAMIC DEPOSITS CRETAN

CONTACTSMAINLANDCONTACTS

Earliermaterial

Earliermaterial

Earlier depositsWallsEarlierphases

Earlierperiods

Lastperiod

Phase A New buildings MMIIIB-early LM IA

Late MH

LH IMature LM IAPhase B

EARTHQUAKES

Reconstructedbuildings

(architectural innovations)

Incompleterepairing

WH Pits(WH Group C)

SDL Deposts(WH Group B)

SEISMICDESTRUCTION

VOLCANICDESTRUCTION

VDL Deposits(WH Group A)

Figure 2.5 Stratigraphic sequence for Akrotiri in the light of the West House evidence (after Marthari 1990, table 1, p67). WH refers to West House. SDL refers to Seismic Destruction Level. VDL refers to Volcanic Destruction Level.

From the thousands of pottery examples from Santorini two particular vessels have

emerged as being important. This is because they are involved in the debate for the

absolute date of the eruption. Two different absolute chronologies have been proposed,

termed High and Low which are discussed in greater detail below. The first vessel is a

Canaanite storage jar that Niemeier identifies as similar to material from excavations of a

tomb at Tel Kabri in the Levant (Niemeier 1990). This very rich tomb is dated to the MB

IIB and links Santorini with the Palestinian chronology. The palace at Tel Kabri also

produced a floor decorated in the true fresco technique which is very unusual for Near

Eastern sites and is possibly indicative of an Aegean influence (see Niemeier and Niemeier

1998, Manning 1999 for background and discussion).

The second pot was a White Slip vessel found in the earliest French excavations. The bowl

was only poorly recorded and illustrated at the time of excavation and was subsequently

lost (Fouqué and McBirney 1998, Plate XLII number 6; Manning 1999, fig 31 and p150-

154). This vessel ties Santorini to the pottery chronology of Cyprus and, because of the

incidence of this ware at the Egyptian site of Tell el Dab'a, with Egyptian chronology as

well (Bietak 1995; Bietak 1998). This is a complex issue based upon the uneven

- 20 -


development of pottery styles across Cypriot cultural regions. The White Slip bowl forms

a central piece of the recent work by Manning who argues for a High chronological date

for the eruption (Manning 1999).

2.3.2 The absolute chronology and questions of High versus Low

As stated above the relative chronology for the eruption appears to have been settled, the

absolute chronology however has not been and there are two main chronologies put

forward, a High and Low Chronology (see figure 2.6). The Low Chronology which is the

traditional or established date would place the eruption around in the early to mid 16th

century BC and is based principally on the cross-referencing of Aegean archaeological

material with other established chronologies, in particular the Egyptian absolute

chronology (Warren and Hankey 1989, p137-146). The Egyptian chronology is regarded

as being one of the most robust archaeological chronologies. The High Chronology places

the eruption in the early to mid 17th century BC and is based on a number of scientific

methods as well as cross-referencing archaeological material. This chronology places a

greater strain on the relative chronological sequence and therefore is the more radical

interpretation. Kuniholm, in the introduction to the chronology session at the third Thera

conference succinctly outlined how the new evidence has built up and the recent work by

Manning which focuses particularly on this issue outlines the work to 1999 (Kuniholm

1990; Manning 1999).

Manning illustrates how the Low Chronology is based upon conventional archaeological

dating whilst the High Chronology takes into account dendrochronology, 14C and evidence

from ice cores as well (Manning 1999, fig 17, p25). Although these differing techniques

do not completely agree on a specific date, statistically they indicate that the High

Chronology is the most likely. At the present time the argument cannot be solved

categorically and the discussion is still open. Below I discuss some of the problems

associated with each of the techniques to help illustrate why there is no consensus.

- 21 -


Figure 2.6 Archaeological time periods with the High Chronology on the left and the Low Chronology on the right. The High Chronology data is taken from Rehak and Younger (1998, table 1, p99) and based on Manning (1995), the Low Chronology data is taken from Driessen and Macdonald (1997, fig2.3, p23) and based on Warren and Hankey (1989, p169).

2.3.2.1 Archaeological cross-referencing

The basis of archaeological cross-referencing is that there was trade and exchange between

cultures. Material from one culture is then preserved within the archaeological record of

another. If one of those cultures has a good absolute chronology then it can be used to

provide a framework for the other culture. In this case the main evidence comes from the

Egyptian chronologies and is a complex web of facts, assumptions and art-historical

developments. To illustrate this I have laid out below some of the points from a discussion

article in Archaeometry on the question of the Thera date (Aitken et al. 1988). Within the

article Michael and Betancourt, and Warren presented two different opinions about three

archaeological artefacts. Michael and Betancourt (p169) discounted from the debate an

Egyptian stone lid with a cartouche of Khyan found at Knossos because it came from a

mixed context. Warren (p176) accepted the Khyan lid because although there was mixed

pottery the stratigraphic position was fixed. The el-Lisht jug, another of the examples

- 22 -


used, is a vase decorated in the Tell el-Yahudiyah ware technique with birds and dolphins.

Michael and Betancourt felt the iconography of the dolphins was from the LM I (p170)

whilst Warren preferred a MM III date (p176). Since this article was written more items

have been included in the debate (Warren 1998) but I am fundamentally wary of relying

totally on this type of absolute dating when so much of the evidence is based on personal

opinion.

2.3.2.2 Radiocarbon

In theory Akrotiri should be an excellent case for the use of 14C dating. The quality of the

deposits and the fixed nature of their emplacement, with both long and short-lived samples

being present, were seen as an ideal case. The first suite of 16 samples gave a calibrated

date of 1625 BC and since then a growing number of samples have given this approximate

date as the most likely result. There are, however, a number of problems with the 14C data

which means that their validity is often called into doubt.

There is the possibility of contamination by ‘old’ volcanic CO2 due to the fact that the

samples were close to an active volcano. Work presented at the Third Thera conference

states that although some contamination does occur this is limited to material close to the

point of degassing and that such contamination would be unlikely to affect the whole suite

of samples (Hubberten et al. 1990).

14C dating uses calibration curves to make up for the variable amounts of 14C in the

atmosphere over time. A number of these curves have been generated and effectively

provide a standard used by researchers. The problem with the calibration curves as far as

the Santorini eruption is concerned is that they are very flat across the dates which have

been proposed for the eruption. This means that statistically both the mid 16th century and

mid 17th century dates could be correct.

The third main area of contention lies in the use and manipulation of data. Often when

suites of samples are produced by the various Radiocarbon laboratories there may be an

odd result or outlier. These outliers if included cause the statistical date to move. If they

are excluded then there is the possibility of massaging the results to achieve a specific aim.

This manipulation of statistics in my view creates unease amongst some researchers, which

in turn causes them to doubt the validity of the process as a whole.

- 23 -


Possibly where 14C could be of use is in the periods surrounding the LM IA eruption, the

MM IIIA, earlier LM IA and LM IB and LM II. This is the argument behind a recent

article that looked to date the LM IB destruction layers on Crete (Housley et al. 1999).

The proposed date obtained from the analysis for the close of the LM IB phase was 1525 to

1490 BC which would support the High Chronology. The article did however discount

some of the results that were obtained. Whilst these may be due to valid reasons such as

contamination, it opens up the question of statistical manipulation and therefore means that

such results are not acceptable to all.

The problem with 14C dating can in my opinion be expressed by an idea taken from

quantum physics. Heisenbergs' Uncertainty Principle states that it is impossible to

completely accurately measure the position and momentum of a particle in space because

by measuring its position you actually move the particle. The question for 14C dating is

whether the number of consistent results for this case will convince the majority of people

of the technique’s accuracy, or whether the number of outliers and spurious results will be

of sufficient number to provide doubt for a significant number of the interested

community.

2.3.2.3 Ice cores

In 1980 Hammer et al. published a paper outlining the proposal that ice-cores taken from

polar regions could preserve evidence of major volcanic events (Hammer et al. 1980). In

normal conditions precipitation falling out over the ice sheets of Greenland and Antarctica

is very pure. A volcanic eruption can inject into the atmosphere large quantities of

impurities. Despite the spread of the cloud and washout by precipitation any ‘clean-air’

locations in the same hemisphere will receive a greater load of polluted aerosols than the

normal background (Hammer 1977, p482). Volcanic eruptions produce large amounts of

acid (H2SO4, HCl, and HF) and the frequent snowfalls over the Greenland region will

scavenge some of these impurities. Layers of snow and ice are built up in this region over

time and it is possible to correlate these layers on a temporal basis. Measurable peaks in

acidity in these layers can then be related to the fallout from large volcanic events (Clausen

et al. 1997).

The size of an acidity peak does not necessarily correlate exactly with the size of the

- 24 -


volcanic eruption. Thus a large eruption does not have to create a large acidity peak. The

quantity of acid aerosol created varies with the size of the eruption, the location (which

hemisphere) and concentration of sulphur in the magma. Hence there are several

unknown, ambient factors that can affect the size of the acidity signal.

The initial paper by Hammer et al. proposed a date of 1390 ± 50 BC for just such an

acidity peak and they proposed that this related to Santorini (Hammer et al. 1980).

However this paper has since been publicly retracted, as it became obvious to the authors

that there was a break in the Camp Century core that they had used. A subsequent paper

published a date of 1645 ± 20 BC for a new core called Dye 3 which would appear to back

the High Chronology (Hammer et al. 1987). In 1994 a team working on the GISP2 ice

core found an acidity signal dated 1623 ± 36 BC which they felt could be the Santorini

eruption since it agreed well with the dendrochronology dates being put forward (Zielinski

et al. 1994).

The fundamental problem with these dates is that when they were published it could not be

shown that the acidity signal shown was related to the Santorini eruption. In an attempt to

get around this problem the section of the GISP2 core which contained the acidity signal

was examined and a number of tephra shards were recovered. If these shards could be

shown to be from Santorini then this would confirm the High Chronology date.

Unfortunately the results have not been conclusive and have instead created a more

confused picture; a more in-depth analysis of the results is developed in chapter 4. An

initial article by the GISP2 team proposed that the tephra shards found could not be linked

to Santorini (Zielinski and Germani 1998a). This result was noted by Warren in an

addendum to his article on new contributions to Aegean archaeology and he felt this

removed a fundamental plank in the argument for a High Chronology (Warren 1998).

Manning (1998) refuted the Zielinski and Germani claims and stated that it actually

showed the tephra could have come from Santorini. Zielinski and Germani (1998b)

rejected his arguments. The findings of the Zielinski team do not appear as clear cut as

they first stated and Schmid et al. (2000), for example, raised doubts about their methods.

The most recent development is from the GRIP ice core team which states that the 1628

BC acidity peak is actually irrelevant and that the GISP2 core is missing a 1645 BC acidity

- 25 -


peak. Thousands of tephra shards have been found from the 1645 BC GRIP signal and the

early indications are that they are from the Santorini eruption (Hammer 2000).

Despite much work in this area the ice core data can not as yet provide a definitive answer

to the conundrum of the absolute date of the Santorini eruption. The withdrawal of the

initial proposal put forward for a 1390 BC date has in my opinion hampered the acceptance

of this dating method. The work to link specific acidity signals with tephra particles found

in the cores would appear to be the right approach. However, because there is now a

debate about the validity of the first results published, the data has again proved

inconclusive and has provided points of argument for both the High and Low Chronology

proponents.

2.3.2.4 Dendrochronology

The evidence of dendrochronology in many ways follows a similar principle to the ice-core

data. Instead of an acidity peak, an anomaly is shown in the amount of tree ring growth

produced during a particular year. The change in growth is related to climatic variability

caused by the volcanic eruption (Baillie 1995). The size of the climatic variability and

therefore the size of the anomaly can not be directly correlated with the size a volcanic

eruption.

In 1984 a paper by LaMarche and Hirshboeck stated that there was a correlation between

volcanic eruptions and small growth rings on trees (LaMarche and Hirschboeck 1984).

The lack of growth would correlate with a cold snap or frost event caused by the volcanic

eruption. In particular they were using the long-lived bristlecone pine as a source for this

data. In their studies there appeared to be no restricted growth in the 16th century BC but

there was one event which they correlated with 1626 BC. This was followed by a paper by

Baillie and Munro which found a similar event dated from 1628 to 1626 BC in Irish bog

oaks (Baillie and Munro 1988). A study of Anatolian tree rings indicated an anomalous

exceptional growth period which may correlate with the 1628 BC event, but further work

still needs to be done (Kuniholm et al. 1996).

The problem with this evidence is that although it points to a significant world-wide event

it does not mean that it was Santorini. Although Santorini is the most studied volcano of

the period there are many other volcanoes that could have erupted at that time to produce

- 26 -


such a proxy record. At this stage the results of the dendrochronology work are still

equivocal.

2.3.3 Summary

Undoubtedly the absolute date of the eruption is an important issue but it is not the main

focus of this work. Statistically the High Chronology would appear to be the most likely

result on the basis of the radiocarbon evidence. At the current time I find the data from

dendrochronology and ice-cores useful but not persuasive. Generally though, I find the

art-historical nature of much of the Low Chronology data, some of which is obtained from

dubiously excavated contexts also unconvincing. As will be shown in chapter 4 there are

significant quantities of Santorini tephra preserved in sites to the east of Santorini. Further

excavation combined with dendrochronology and 14C dating from this area may hold the

key to an absolute date.

2.4 Akrotiri and Santorini in context

The island of Santorini and the Late Bronze Age town of Akrotiri are anomalies. The

dramatic caldera and the tephra-clad cliffs of Santorini set it apart from other Greek

islands. The archaeological excavations at Akrotiri reveal a Bronze Age town with

unprecedented preservation not only of artefacts but also of the upstanding architecture that

is so often lost at other sites. In order to assess how important this island was in the Late

Bronze Age the effects of this anomalous degree of preservation must be removed. To

place Akrotiri and Santorini in context it is necessary to look at how populated the island

was, what links it had with other Cycladic islands, with Crete and with the Greek mainland

and how important was it to the trading system that existed at that time. Then we can see

how its loss, which after all is the minimum impact of the eruption, affected those other

Bronze Age centres.

2.4.1 Late Bronze Age settlements on Santorini

The shape of the island of Santorini was significantly altered during the course of the

Minoan eruption; therefore any assessment of where sites are located on Santorini should

be made using the Bronze Age landscape rather than the present one. There are a number

of different interpretations of what the Bronze Age landscape may have looked like and

- 27 -


these will be addressed in greater detail in chapter 3. In summary here though, the general

consensus at the present time is that a caldera existed in the southern half of the island

before the Minoan eruption, and that there was no strato-volcano of any significant height

covering the position of the Minoan vent (Heiken and McCoy 1984; Friedrich et al. 1988;

Druitt and Francaviglia 1992). Figure 2.7 illustrates the proposition put forward by Heiken

and McCoy for the pre-eruption shape of the island (Heiken and McCoy 1984).

Figure 2.7 The modern islands of the Santorini archipelago are shown in light grey. The black line outlines a reconstruction of the Late Bronze Age shoreline according to Heiken and McCoy (1984). Sites are shown where Late Bronze Age material has been located. Akrotiri is highlighted in bold.

The archaeological sites on Santorini are obviously hard to locate because of the thick

volcanic deposits draping the Bronze Age landscape, however either because of erosion or,

more often, quarrying of the tephra deposits a number of Bronze Age sites have been

located (see figure 2.7 and table 2.1). Akrotiri is the main site and this is where the

- 28 -


modern research effort has been concentrated. A number of other sites have undergone

some excavation; unfortunately the recording of many of them has been poor.

Table 2.1 Archaeological sites found on Santorini and the type of material recovered.

Akrotiri: Extensive LC I town References: (Doumas 1978; Doumas 1980; Doumas 1983; Hardy et al. 1990a), (Barber 1981, no 40), Alphouzos: Buildings References: (Fouqué 1879), (Barber 1981, no 48) Archangelos: Walls and pottery References: (Doumas 1983, p27) Ayios Nikolaos: Stone column base References: (Marinatos 1968, p57) Balos: Buildings References: (Fouqué 1879; Doumas 1983, p45), (Barber 1981) no 41. Cape Akrotiri: Pottery References: (Marinatos 1976, p12; Forsyth 1997, p45) Cape Colomvos: Tombs References: (Lenormant 1866; Scholes 1956), (Barber 1981), no 42 Exomiti: Pottery References: (Hiller von Gaertringen 1899-1909; Scholes 1956), (Barber 1981), no 43 Ftellos: Buildings References: (Doumas 1973; Marthari 1982; Barber 1987; Marthari 1987), (Barber 1981), 44 Kamara (Potamos): Buildings References: (Hiller von Gaertringen 1899-1909; Doumas 1983), (Barber 1981), no 45. Katsadhes: Pottery References: (Marinatos 1968), (Barber 1981), no 49 Kokkino Vouno (Mavro Rhachidi): Walls, pottery References: (Marinatos 1969, p35-36; Doumas 1983, p55-56), (Barber 1981), no 50 Mavromatis Quarry: Finds References: (Doumas 1983, p45) Megalochori Quarry: Pottery References: (Hiller von Gaertringen 1899-1909, Thera 1, p307; Sperling 1973, p26) Mesa Vouno (Selladha): Pottery References: (Lenormant 1866; Hiller von Gaertringen 1899-1909) Oia Quarry: Finds References: (Doumas 1983, p129) Profitis Ilias: Walls pottery References: (Sperling 1973, p34)

The site at Akrotiri is obviously the major site so far discovered and Doumas has included

a number of sites as suburbs of Akrotiri (Doumas 1983, p45). He states that Balos and

Mavromatis quarry may have been suburbs of the town whilst Kamara (Potamos) may

- 29 -


have been part of it. Attempts to determine the limits of the site have so far failed but

Doumas estimated the size of the town as approximately 200,000 m2 (20 ha), of which

around 10,000 m2 have been uncovered. Because there are so many unknown variables it

is not possible to provide a very precise estimate of the size of the population but Doumas

proposed that there must have been several thousand inhabitants (Doumas 1983, p45).

The buildings so far excavated at Akrotiri appear to follow the lines of earlier buildings of

the Middle Cycladic (MC) period that were destroyed in what has been termed the Seismic

Destruction Level (SDL) early in the LM IA period (see figure 2.5). Sondage excavations

and trials have confirmed that the site of Akrotiri appears to have been occupied

continuously since the Late Neolithic (Sotirakopoulou 1990). MC graves have been

reported at Karageorghis Quarry (Doumas 1983, p28) and excavations at Ftellos (Doumas

1973; Marthari 1982) included MC period buildings. A valid conclusion would seem to be

that there was a distinct Cycladic tradition on the island and that the settlement at Akrotiri

was not a direct colony of Crete. This is in contrast with, for example, the Kastri

settlement on Kythera which does seem to be a Minoan colony (Coldstream and Huxley

1972).

The distribution of sites across Santorini appears intensive, especially in the south of the

island. This may have been because the north was more inhospitable due to the older

strato-volcanoes in that area. The site of Akrotiri dominates the island with satellite

suburbs but there is evidence of rural sites and farmsteads scattered across the island. The

amount of sites identified on Santorini is surprising given that no normal pedestrian survey

would locate sites under the volcanic overburden. The distribution of a stratified site

hierarchy is more indicative of Minoan than Cycladic site distribution and appears

anomalous when compared with other Cycladic islands (Davis and Cherry 1990, p191).

2.4.2 Cycladic settlement patterns

As Davis points out at the start of his 1992 survey of archaeology in the Aegean, the level

of information on Cycladic sites has been relatively poor (Davis 1992, p699). Information

had concentrated on the three sites of Phylakopi on Melos, Ayia Irini on Kea and Akrotiri

on Santorini, with the site of Phylakopi, which had the longest stratigraphic sequence,

providing the dating framework for the Cycladic culture area. Recently this has changed a

- 30 -


little with a number of islands being investigated by survey methods (Renfrew and

Wagstaff 1982; Cherry et al. 1991) as well as excavation and the publication of older

excavations.

Because of the excavations and hence the greater quality of information of these three main

sites, trade and interconnection theory had tended to concentrate on Kea, Melos and

Santorini. The Western String Network was a theory developed by Schofield as a way of

showing how those sites provided a conduit between the more dominant Minoan, and the

increasingly sophisticated mainland sites, and the Near East (Schofield 1982). More recent

work, for example the survey of Mikre Vigla on Naxos, has challenged this. Mikre Vigla

has traces of monochrome painted wall plaster associated with a main building (structure

7) and pottery at the site ranges from EC to LC III in date with some Middle Minoan

(Barber and Hadjianastasiou 1989). There are loomweights of the Minoan discoid type

and pottery analysis has confirmed that large quantities of pottery were imported from

Melos and from Crete (Davis 1992, p740). This may well mean that Naxos was more

involved with trading connections and it is possible that archaeological theories of

interaction such as the Western String Trading network are products of modern site

survival rather than archaeological truth.

The archaeological evidence from the islands of Melos and Kea does however present a

different picture of site distribution from the hierarchical distribution of sites found on

Santorini. As Davis and Cherry, outline despite a number of different types of survey on

Melos over a period of time, there has been no evidence for any other site on the island in

the LC I period other than Phylakopi (Cherry 1982; Renfrew 1982, p39). A modern survey

on Kea used an intensive survey approximately 20 km in size around the 1 ha site of Ayia

Irini (Cherry et al. 1991). This would take in any hinterland that might have been

exploited by the main town. Very little pottery or chipped stone artefacts were recovered

by the survey and those sites which were located only produced at maximum a handful of

sherds. They conclude,

"Speaking, then, of the immediate hinterland of Ayia Irini, it seems clear that

MCyc-LCyc II finds are so scarce that one may question whether there

existed any settlements outside the centre, let alone whether there was a

hierarchy of settlement."

(Cherry et al. 1991, p220-221)

- 31 -


Other islands of the Cyclades provide little evidence for occupation during this period. No

Cycladic sites seem to have been directly affected by the eruption as no extant layers of

tephra have been recorded. Some small number of shards were found at the site of Melos

(Renfrew 1978). The only Cycladic island for which any impact has been suggested is

Anaphi to the east of Santorini. Yokoyama had suggested that the island was inundated by

a tsunami to a height of 50m on the evidence of pumice remains (Yokoyama 1978). As

explained in chapters 4 and 5 this conclusion is now untenable and any conclusions based

upon that argument by other writers should be severely questioned. Barber has no sites

listed on the island (Barber 1981) and exploratory work by Gale and Stos-Gale on the

island suggested that there was no conclusive evidence that the island had been exploited

during this period for its natural deposits.

"…(ore deposits were) too small to have permitted silver extraction in the

Bronze Age, whilst the amounts of galena seem to have been too small even

as a source of lead."

(Gale and Stos-Gale 1981, p191).

2.4.3 Summary

Recent evidence from the sites of Mikra Vigla and Grotta on Naxos suggests that the island

had significant links with other Cycladic islands as well as other culture groups. Naxos

can therefore be considered as one of the four main islands of the Cyclades along with

Santorini, Melos and Ayia Irini which had important trading links with other culture areas.

These links had existed for a period of time but do not show a complete domination or

colonisation by an outside culture. The area is not a cultural backwater but is involved

with international trade providing a number of raw materials and finished goods.

However, the nucleation of sites evidenced from Phylakopi and Ayia Irini and the

defensive walls around the settlements might be indicative of a feeling of threat. This

defensive attitude could be a response to EC IIIA disturbances, although Ayia Irini appears

to have been deserted in the MC period and the island may have been recolonised. At the

current time there is no evidence for a defensive wall around Akrotiri and the distribution

- 32 -


of sites across the island suggests the inhabitants of Santorini did not suffer from the same

fears as other Cycladic islanders.

Doumas has estimated the size of Akrotiri as being about 20 ha and Weiner has

summarised a number of other relevant settlements for the period which are shown in table

2.2 (Wiener 1990, p131). From this table it can be seen that Akrotiri is an anomaly in

terms of settlement size when compared to other Cycladic centres, being vastly greater in

size and comparable to the size of the Minoan palace sites (except the massive site of

Knossos).

Table 2.2 Site size and population for selected sites in the Aegean region.

Site Estimated size in hectares in LC-LM1

Population Island

Knossos 75 12000 Crete Mallia 23 +? - Crete

Palaikastro 20 to 36 - Crete Zakros 7.5 to 9 - Crete

Gournia 2.5 700 Crete Pseira 1.6 400 Crete (Pseria)

Akrotiri 20 ? several 000's Santorini (Cyclades)

Phylakopi 2 <2000 Melos (Cyclades) Ayia Irini 1 780 to 1250 Kea (Cyclades)

Kastri 1 or less - Kythera (Cyclades)

Trianda 15 - Rhodes (Dodecanese) Seraglio 7.5 ? - Kos (Dodecanese)

There is a possibility that Akrotiri was a Minoan colony and was dominated by powers on

Crete which then threatened other islands of the Cyclades. Certainly it would appear that

the influence of Minoan civilisation had been steadily growing throughout the MBA period

and was significant by the time of its destruction. However, that influence is possibly

overstated because of the earthquake that struck the island in the early LM IA. This means

that the town was rebuilt when the Minoanising influence was at its height. Thus there are

the Minoan architectural features such as polythyra, lustral basins and horns of

consecration as well as the frescoes. But there are also elements which are Cycladic in

origin. As Rehak and Younger state in their article on Late Bronze Age Crete there are a

number of different ways that Crete may have influenced the Cycladic islands (Rehak and

Younger 1998, p137). One of those is the Classical Greek tradition of a trading emporia

linked back to the mother city and following its constitution and forms (Morkot 1996,

p51). Other forms may be more subtle such as what has been termed the "Versailles

- 33 -


effect" where the styles of a culture are imported without political or military control

(Weiner 1984). It is difficult to say which of these paradigms Akrotiri most closely

resembles but what can be stated is that Santorini must have played a very important role

within the Aegean.

Overall Santorini appears to have functioned as a conduit or what has been termed a

Gateway Community (Hirth 1978; Branigan 1991) between the Cycladic and Minoan

cultures. It redistributed goods from Crete and it gathered raw materials from the Cycladic

hinterland, possibly creating finished goods itself, to distribute back into the wider Eastern

Mediterranean trading system. The island would have thus been an important stop on the

Eastern Mediterranean trading cycle. The loss of the island would have created severe

disruption, and in effect a vacuum, that could have been a major disruption to the function

of Minoan society. The needs of the Minoans, in particular the Elite of that society, would

not disappear and their ability to acquire items of trade and inherently power may be

affected. The most significant impact of the eruption of Santorini might be a shifting of

the balance of power and interaction within the Cycladic sphere and in the subsequent

phase the power that would fill that vacuum.

2.5 A consideration of three aspects of Minoan culture at risk

The Santorini eruption is, in principle, of sufficient magnitude to have caused serious

damage to Bronze Age sites in the Aegean. The most densely populated area, Crete, lay

approximately 120 km to the south, consisting of a variety of sites of different sizes and

components from villages and ports to major towns. The two broad elements that might

affect a particular site are tephra fallout and tsunami inundation. In order to determine how

much damage the eruption may have caused I have created a schematic for a 'typical' site

and divided this into three zones (figure 2.8). These zones reflect an object orientated

approach rather than a more intangible socio-political or religious one, which will be dealt

with in the summing up of the effect on the culture as a whole. The three zones are

Minoan buildings, the coastal littoral, and crops and subsistence. Not only will each of

these zones be affected in different ways, their preservation in the archaeological record is

very different as is the amount of research undertaken on them.

- 34 -


A

B

C

D

F

G

H

I

ECoastal zone

Crops

Buildings

J

Figure 2.8 Theoretical model of three zones at risk, buildings, crops and the coastal littoral. White blocks represent buildings. Specific items of interest are designated by a letter.

In figure 2.8 the three zones are shown by the red dotted lines, the letters indicates specific

features. Area A shows small boats used by local fishermen drawn up onto the beach area,

whilst B indicates the main harbour used by some of the larger vessels. The structure of

Bronze Age harbours may have been more complicated than was originally thought (Shaw

1990, Raban 1991). Two vessels are drawn up to quays for unloading, one quay is made of

wood and the other of stone. A ship is also anchored further from shore in the centre of the

bay. Area C represents warehouses and shipsheds in the coastal zone. Building D

indicates a shrine outside the main concentration of the site. Crops at E represent delicate

crops that need a specific and rare environment. Area F is the main subsistence area close

to the site which is used for a variety of fields and crops. Area G is the main site and

- 35 -


shows a number of different building types and sizes. The building at H represents a

temporary shepherd's hut where the majority of sheep/goats are kept at a particular time of

year. The field at I is situated by the river, but this means that it is more vulnerable to a

tsunami propagating up the lower lying river area. Finally J shows a number fields and

crops in the coastal zone and temporary buildings used by the fishermen. This theoretical

model tries to illustrate some of the complexity of use in the Minoan landscape and how

much information is missed if excavation is concentrated on the main settlement area.

The majority of archaeological work has focussed on Minoan buildings, and in particular

on the best preserved buildings at a site since they can by inference provide the greatest

amount of data. The result of this is that buildings from outside the core area of a site are

often ignored or are simply not found. Survey work may provide some details on them but

they would not necessarily be excavated. Temporary structures such as shepherds’ huts

may not survive at all.

Data on the coastal littoral during the Late Bronze Age on Crete is particularly poor. The

change in sea level and the fragmentary nature of remains are just two reasons why it is has

been poorly studied in relation to a culture that obviously had a great deal of interaction

with maritime resources.

The subsistence resources of the Minoan population is of critical importance in the debate

on the impact of the Santorini eruption but evidence is ephemeral and often extrapolated

from a single site across the whole of the Minoan culture. The Late Bronze Age period is

not covered by a single pollen core from Crete (Rackham and Moody 1996, p125).

2.5.1 Minoan buildings

The most direct method for collateral damage to the Minoan culture is through the fallout

of significant amounts of tephra on Minoan sites leading to a structural collapse of

buildings and therefore the possibility of injury. Any structural damage would probably

occur through the overloading of tephra material on roof structures leading to the collapse

of upper stories (Blong 1980; Blong 1984). The site of Akrotiri and other sites on

Santorini were directly affected by a wide range of phenomena such as bombs, direct blast

and pyroclastic flows. Sites on Crete however would not have been subjected to bombs or

large projectiles which would have fallen out before reaching Crete and if there was any

- 36 -


fallout it would be of tephra particles settling in a similar way to snow fallout. The weight

of the material could then form a critical load and the supporting structures give way.

Blong has suggested that a figure of around 10 cm of tephra with a density of around 1000

kg/m3 may have been enough to cause structural damage (Blong 1980, p221). This figure

will decrease if the tephra became wet, and so rain following on from a tephra fall could

have had a greater effect.

The evidence for Minoan roof structures is very fragmentary, mainly because in most sites

nothing above the footings of walls has survived and only minimal amounts evidence can

be extrapolated about the roof construction. Therefore any comments about roofs will be a

synthesis of material drawn from archaeological evidence, iconography of the period and

ethnographic resources.

2.5.1.1 Archaeological evidence

The range of building types across Late Minoan culture is extensive, from the multi-storied

palace of Knossos visualised, for example, in one of Piet de Jongs' pictures (e.g. Higgins

1973, facing p33) to the stable/store from Ftellos on Santorini (Doumas 1973, p162).

Many of the main synthesis works on Minoan architecture, such as The Palaces of Crete

(Cadogan 1980) or the Palaces of Minoan Crete (Graham 1987), have concentrated on the

central palace buildings rather than the ordinary buildings that would have made up the

majority of structures. There are however some basic principles of construction that

probably held for both domestic and palatial buildings. The walls would usually be built of

unfired mudbrick or adobe built upon low stone footings in a tradition going back to the

Neolithic (Graham 1987, p149; Dickinson 1994, p144). The height of these footings would

depend upon the building but the upper story would consist of mudbrick, (except for

Phaistos see Graham, 1987, p151). Foundations for walls appear to have been limited in

depth or generally do not exist (Dickinson 1994, p147; Graham 1987, p149). Mud mortar

would be used to face the majority of buildings, hiding the often haphazard construction of

the wall itself. Specific features may have been constructed of different stone types, such

as gypsum in the grander buildings. Wood would often be used to brace or add support to

the building, either internally within the walls or sometimes externally creating a half-

timbered effect. There is no evidence for the use of tile in this period in Crete.

- 37 -


The majority of buildings must have been made up of domestic dwellings and it is

convenient to use the subdivision of types as produced by McEnroe (McEnroe 1982). He

divided Neo Palatial housing into three groups on the basis of size, construction and types

of rooms. As McEnroe points out each building is unique and therefore any distinction

between houses may be completely arbitrary. Therefore he uses combinations of attributes

or characteristics to form the boundaries between his groups. Writing in 1982 he was

working from a corpus of approximately 180 houses.

Type 1

Type 1 houses contain the most distinctive set of rooms and include such areas as lustral

basins, pillar crypts and light wells, and correspond to the sets of rooms that can be found

in the palatial complexes,

" …the relationship between the Type 1 houses and the palaces cannot be

overstated; it is the most important characteristic of this group of houses."

(McEnroe 1982, p5)

Type 2

The main characteristic of the Type 2 structures is that the residential and

storage/residential areas of the house are combined within the ground floor space.

McEnroe divided his Type 2 into two subgroups, a and b, the difference being that Type 2a

adopt some elements of the Type 1 house.

Type 3

These houses are usually less than half the size of Type 2 houses, they do not contain Type

1 details and they only rarely have details finished off with metal saws or chisels. They

make up the majority with about 70% of McEnroe's corpus.

Using the figures presented in McEnroe's table 1 the average areas for the three groups are:

• Type 1 352 m2

• Type 2 316 m2

• Type 3 128 m2

(McEnroe 1982, table 1, p18).

- 38 -


McEnroe also makes some mention of local traditions. Architecture at a particular site

may well have been influenced by the availability of local resources. This is evidenced,

for example, at the island site of Pseira where although some walls were constructed of

limestone boulders many are dry walled of schist and limestone slabs. This factor of local

tradition has also been used to explain the difference between buildings on Kea which are

also of schist slabs and the use of ashlar blocks evidenced at Akrotiri (Barber 1987, p12).

Thus the apparent Minoan influence at Akrotiri may actually be due to availability of

resources biasing the archaeological record.

Another interesting conclusion of McEnroe's work is that of the 46 excavated buildings at

Gournia, all but the 'palace' are of Type 3. This may be a construct of tradition, and when

a new house is built it is modelled on those around it and has a similar layout, thus

restricting the innovative element and proving that the extrapolation of data over limited

sites is viable.

Hallager (1990) specifically looked at the question of roofs and upper stories and proposed

a reconstruction for two buildings from Chania. He agreed with McEnroe's division of

Minoan domestic housing but made a significant point about the area of the ground floors,

with his opinion being that this area is too large for a normal dwelling space. This is

coupled with the lack of open areas in LM I sites. He used five criteria to reconstruct the

second story.

1. Staircases

2. Different construction and thicknesses of ground floor walls

3. Preserved fragments of roof/ceiling construction

4. Architectural remains , such as thresholds fallen from above

5. Drainage systems connected to the upper story

From this his main conjecture was that much of the second story space was not devoted to

sealed rooms but was rather an open space which would be used for a variety of activities

including storage, preparation and cooking (Hallager 1990, p289).

- 39 -


Plate 2-1 Roof construction from a building in Tunisia abandoned in the 1960's.

The actual data on roof construction is limited but is probably relatively similar to the

method used in the area up to the introduction of concrete. The greatest amount of

evidence comes from Santorini where timbers used in the construction process are

preserved as voids. Floors and ceilings were supported by beams across which were laid

slabs, or probably more commonly reeds or branches. These were then overlaid by

vegetation such as hay or spiny burnet on top of which there was a thickness of earth. If

this was the roof then the earth would be waterproofed in some fashion (Rackham 1978).

Plate 2-1 illustrates this type of roof construction from a house in Tunisia which was

abandoned around 1960. Some of the roof has collapsed revealing in section how the roof

is constructed. Timbers support a layers of reeds upon which is a layer of leaves; this is

then sealed by a number of earth layers providing the waterproofing.

Graham assessed the palace roof structures and believed it unlikely that there would be

three stories to the main Knossos complex (Graham 1979). The stresses combined with

the tectonic nature of the area would not have made this viable. Rather he suggested that

the riser that Evans identified as leading up to a third floor forms a stairwell leading to the

roof of the second story. He conjectured that from here views could again be gained of the

Central Court activities. Small structures over such a stairwell to protect them from the

- 40 -


elements would explain the attic-like structures visible on the Town Mosaic (Morgan 1988,

fig 53, p68).

A problem with Graham's interpretation is an over emphasis of the religious and

ceremonial nature of the palace structures and the fact that reconstruction’s are based on an

ideal rather than the practical. Klynne (1998) discussed the appearance of the palaces in

graphical reconstruction's. He suggested that the cleanliness of the sites and the aesthetic

are over emphasised also that the architecture is often a concrete blankness with sharp

lines. They are a construction as much of a modern viewpoint as of reality and based fairly

rigidly on Evans work, which was of its time, but also was necessary to be able to excavate

the areas underneath (Klynne 1998, p207). The inability to recognise palatial structures in

Minoan iconography may be linked to a fixed view of their appearance, central courts with

tripartite shrines topped by horns of consecration. The proposal put forward by Klynne for

a reconstruction of Knossos is for a much less sterilised site (Klynne 1998, fig 9, p223).

Individual elements are emphasised so that sections of the building are painted and

decorated differently and it is obvious that some were built at different times. He

emphasises the importance of the roof space as an activity centre with projections, parapets

and temporary coverings.

Seen in this context the roof area becomes more vulnerable to tephra fall. Parapets and

obstructions may have led to a drifting of material which might have increased the chance

of roof collapse. Tephra could also have blocked drainage channels from the roof, which

depending upon the time of year may have increased risk of collapse. Also food stuffs and

preparation areas on the roof may have been contaminated by the tephra.

2.5.1.2 Iconography

The iconographic evidence for buildings is limited to a number of sources, namely

frescoes, seals and sealings, house models and furniture inlays. The most important of

these are fresco depictions and in particular the Miniature Fresco from Akrotiri which

shows two towns (Morgan 1988). Seals and sealings provide limited evidence mainly

because the small scale of the media predicated against many buildings being shown. The

tripartite shrine appears to be the most popular form shown in this medium. The House

model from Archanes is a clay model of a Minoan house that confirms in the round many

of the details outlined by the archaeological evidence, in particular the flat roof area and

- 41 -


parapet. The Town Mosaic is a series of faience plaques discovered by Evans at Knossos

which may have been from an inlaid piece of furniture (Evans 1921, fig 226). They show

individual houses and buildings from a front-on 2-Dimensional perspective with the viewer

placed centrally and suspended in mid air.

The depiction of multiple buildings and by inference a town or village needs a particular

medium, which is influenced by scale. It needs to be large enough to depict a scene, but

the individual buildings also need to be reduced in size. So called miniature frescoes

depicting buildings exist from Ayia Irini on Kea and there is a fragmentary example from

Tylissos but the best example is the Miniature Fresco from the West House at Akrotiri

which depicts two towns as well as other structures.

All these sources confirm the individual nature of many buildings. There is great detail on

the Miniature Fresco but distinguishing between stories and different buildings is difficult.

Colour appears to be used in registers on the buildings reflecting different plasters and

white washes. Some ashlar details can be distinguished but much detail such as mud brick

is hidden beneath plaster facade.

The elements that are most important for this study are that the buildings are 2 or 3 stories

and have flat roofs which must have been accessible because people are watching from

them. There are parapets and stairwells as well as small dome-like features.

2.5.1.3 Summary

Using the general principles outlined by Blong for tephra fallout a number of conclusions

can be drawn about the fallout of tephra on buildings (Blong 1984, p206). It is likely that

there would have been sufficient wind to create uneven distribution of fallout; many of the

Minoan sites are coastal sites which have significant changes of sea breeze during the day.

The parapets and structures on flat roofs combined with wind drifting would probably lead

to asymmetrical loads on roofs. However, as was noted above it appears that the Minoan

roof space was a fully functioning part of the building structure. If areas of the roof were

used for storage then the amount of weight that these structures could bear may have been

significant. The depth of 10 cm of tephra fall should thus be seen as a minimum depth of

tephra that could cause some structural collapse in buildings. In areas experiencing more

than 10 cm of deposit then structural collapse of some buildings is more likely. The roof

- 42 -


space appears to be an integral part of a functioning Minoan community and was probably

used for storage, food preparation and some industrial activity. Tephra fall of less than 10

cm may have contaminated some foodstuffs and caused minor damage but such an amount

was probably disruptive rather than catastrophic.

2.5.2 The coastal littoral and maritime zone

The coastal littoral or maritime zone components include ships, harbour installations and

cultivated land. These components of Minoan sites situated on the north coast of Crete

could have been at risk from tsunami inundation. A number of articles from Marinatos

(1939) to Antonopoulos (1992) stress the massive destruction that could have been caused

by tsunami waves, but these arguments are usually a gross simplification of not only the

area at risk but also of the possible damage caused. To be able to assess if this threat from

tsunami inundation was a significant one I feel it is necessary to draw up some conclusions

about how the Minoans interacted with the sea, the types of ships that they used and how

they secured these vessels.

The main difficulty with trying to reconstruct the potential damage to this littoral zone is

that the evidence is very fragmentary and poorly researched. There are a number of

reasons for this but a breakdown of some of them is given by Raban in his discussion on

Minoan and Caananite harbours (Raban 1991, p136).

1. The preconception that harbours were only naturally sheltered bays where ships could

be drawn up onto sandy beaches and were lacking in any man made features.

2. The interaction between earth sciences and 'traditional archaeology' was limited in the

region and ignored by a number of major excavations which could have carried out this

type of study.

3. The cost of involving expertise from other areas and expensive equipment to examine

both land and near shore sites was too much for most excavations when well preserved

in-situ deposits were available inland.

4. The regulations and different permits required to investigate land and sea zones work

against a holistic approach to this problem.

5. The significant change in topography means that the search for a harbour site is

difficult and will not always be successful.

- 43 -


These factors need to be borne in mind when trying to assess this important and poorly

understood zone. The change in sea level since the Late Bronze Age is particularly

relevant and this is dealt with in depth in chapter 5. The main conclusion though is that the

north coast has dipped into the sea on the eastern side, but has been raised out of the sea on

the western side.

The evidence for maritime subsistence products is dealt with below in section 2.5.3.1. The

coastal zone would have been at risk from tsunami inundation with many sites situated on

the low-lying coastal plains. Inundation of fields and wells may have occurred leading to

saline poisoning but such an event cannot be quantified. Driessen and Macdonald

(Driessen and Macdonald 1997, p100) state that a number of wells went out of use or were

freshly dug in this period but there is no direct evidence of a link to Santorini.

2.5.2.1 Ports and harbours

The only Minoan port site to have been examined in depth is Kommos on the south coast

which serviced the Messara plain (Shaw and Shaw 1996). The reconstruction drawings of

Building J/T and Building P which are presented in Shaw’s paper on Aegean harboursides

reveal a sophistication and scope lacking from the excavated remains (Shaw 1990, fig 8,

p424 and fig 9, p425). A combination of change in sea-level, tectonic forces and winter

storms has battered this poorly preserved resource. Whilst it may be that some sites used

lighters and beached vessels to unload supplies, the Arrival town with its double harbour in

the Miniature Fresco from the West House and the unloading of produce shown by the

Miniature Fresco from Kea (Morgan 1990, fig 2, p255) are indicative of a more

sophisticated harbour arrangement. Chapter 6 shows walls and structures of probable

Minoan date at a number of coastal sites on Crete that were noted during fieldwork on the

island in 1999 and 2000.

2.5.2.2 The Minoan Thalassocracy

The question of the Minoan relationship with the sea has become intimately bound with a

description by the Classical writer Thucydides. He mentions a Minoan thalassocracy, or

rulership of the sea, when the legendary king of Crete, Minos, kept the sea lanes free of

pirates and colonised the Aegean islands (Book 1:4 and Book 1:8). This has meant that

many discussions on Minoan interaction with other areas have focussed on concepts of

- 44 -


domination and whether trade was based on the state or the individual. Cherry (1999) in a

recent introduction to the Minoan economy stated that we were a long way from,

"..naively unproblematized charaterisations of the Minoans as a nature-loving

folk, under the beneficent rule of priest-kings, enjoying the fruits of a pax

minoica and the Minoan thalassocracy."

(Cherry 1999, p18).

I am not sure that this has filtered through to disciplines outside archaeology and it is

obviously difficult to get away from the term when discussing the interaction of the

Minoan heartland of Crete with that of other Aegean centres. A recent in-depth

scientific study of Late Bronze Age pottery was termed 'The Minoan thalassocracy

reconsidered: provenance studies of LH IIA/LM IB pottery from Phylakopi, Ay Irini

and Athens' (Mountjoy and Ponting 2001).

In my opinion the term should not be used since it creates the image of a large centrally

organised fleet for which we have no evidence. In terms of the present discussion this is

important since the eruption cannot have destroyed a brittle, centrally controlled,

politically dominating fleet if we have no evidence that such a construct existed.

2.5.2.3 Ships and shipping

No actual shipwrecks of the period have been identified but there are some wrecks from

which some conclusions can be drawn. The Dokos wreck has Early Helladic II pottery and

other items but the lack of preserved timbers and the findings of material on both sides of

Cape Myti Komeni have raised doubts that this is a wreck (Wachsmann 1998, p205). Cape

Iria, the other shipwreck found in Greece dates to the 13th century BC as does the wreck

from Cape Gelidonya off Turkey (Wachsmann 1998, p205-208). The shipwreck of Ulu

Burun off the Turkish coast is the most impressive and the best preserved (Bass 1986; Bass

1987; Wachsmann 1998). A number of absolute dates for some dunnage from the wreck

have been published (e.g. Kuniholm et al 1996; Manning 1999, p345), the latest published

date is of 1327 +4/-7 BC (Manning et al. 2001, note 38). The extraordinary wealth and

preservation raise fundamental questions about the nature of Late Bronze Age trade. The

layout of the cargo could be reconstructed (Bass 1987, p694) and enough timbers were

preserved to show the construction was by pegged mortice and tennon, pushing back our

knowledge of this technique by a thousand years (Wachsmann 1998, p206).

- 45 -


The iconographic evidence is the largest comprising many depictions on seals, models and

frescoes and in particular the Miniature Fresco from Akrotiri (Wachsmann 1998, Chapter

6). The Miniature Fresco provides many details on Minoan ships and has been studied

and interpreted by a number of different researchers and there are issues of its cultic

significance and the role of a water procession (Morgan 1988; Wachsmann 1998 for

summary). The main issue from the point of view of this study is that there were a wide

variety of seagoing craft from small fishermen’s boats to large merchant ships. These

boats represented a great deal of effort and wealth in an area where timber was a limited

resource. The loss and wreckage of boats and ships by tsunami inundation could have

caused a long term damage to both large and small communities that relied on shipping

and trade to function and survive.

2.5.2.4 Trade and interconnections

An unusual element of Minoan shipping is that there is little evidence for anchor devices.

Most cultures at the time used large drilled stones for attachment to hawsers to anchor their

ships at sea. A small number have been found at Minoan sites (one at Akrotiri, two at

Kommos for example), but not enough when compared to other Mediterranean areas.

They may have used smaller unworked stones encased in wicker as a substitute and these

leave little evidence behind. Stone anchors have been used to track the ports of call used

during the period (McCaslin 1980). However a review of McCaslins thesis on stone

anchors and maritime trade routes by Knapp (Knapp 1985) criticises this study for still

being reliant on an object orientated approach to archaeology. Knapp states that any study

of international trade at this period should draw upon ethnographic studies and theories of

economic anthropology, (whether the dominant paradigm be Substantavist, Formalist or

Marxist is unimportant), to enhance the object approach.

This difference in approach is emphasised in the Aegean sphere by two books on trade

both of which call upon Homeric echoes to alert the reader to their subject matter. Ulysses'

Sail (Helms 1988) examines the ethnographic ideas behind trade and the power that long

distance trade can generate, whilst Sailing the Wine Dark Sea (Cline 1994) essentially

catalogues the artefacts that define long distance trade for the Late Bronze Age Aegean.

Cline's work shows the problem of only relying on archaeological object evidence, the Ulu

Burun shipwreck for example is so rich that it provides anomalous data. Table 60 (Cline

- 46 -


1994, p99) shows the incidences of Canaanite Jar for all sites in the Aegean totalling 93 for

the Late Bronze Age; this compares with a figure of over 140 recovered from Ulu Burun

alone.

In a study based on Helms' approach Broodbank has used point analysis between islands

and the geological sourcing of materials to show that there was complex interactivity

between Cycladic islands in the Early Bronze Age (Broodbank 1993). He concludes that

the physical result of trade, i.e. artefact exchange, might not be the only justification for

distance travel and the use of boats but might equate with a social or psychological need as

well. Whilst such a discussion is beyond the remit of this work it does show that by the

time of the Late Bronze Age there may well have been a multi-faceted complex tradition of

interaction between Cycladic islands, and by this stage the Helladic and Minoan spheres as

well, and that the disruption caused by the Santorini eruption may have had not just a

physical manifestation, the loss of Santorini, but also a social and psychological blocking

and disruption of interaction.

2.5.2.5 Summary

The fragmentary nature of the evidence in the coastal zone has meant that it has been little

studied. Rather, many works have concentrated on issues of trade and interconnection at

the object level or on the issue of the Thalassocracy of Minos from Classical literature

(Hägg and Marinatos 1984; Wiener 1990; Knapp 1993). It is my opinion that this zone

which provided food, tradable items, contact and identity was at risk from the Minoan

eruption. Because of the disruption caused by the possible destruction of shipping, food

supplies and coastal buildings this effect may have continued for a number of years and

possibly caused some communities to fail.

2.5.3 Crops and subsistence

The third major zone that would have been at risk from the Santorini eruption was the food

supply of the Minoan settlements. This threat could have come from a number of sources,

including tephra falling on crops and destroying them, tsunami inundation of coastal and

low-lying areas leading to destruction and salt pollution, sulphur content from the eruption

creating noxious gasses and affecting animals, climatic change leading to a loss of crops.

- 47 -


All of these ultimately have the same result; possible starvation of the Minoan population.

This in turn could lead to stress in the community leading to internecine conflict. It will be

shown however that there was great diversity both of the agriculture exploited and of the

ecological zones.

2.5.3.1 Subsistence evidence

Our evidence for crops and animals exploited during this period is limited. There are two

main direct sources of archaeological evidence; excavated sites producing animal bones

and seed remains and pollen cores. Other sources of information include ethnographic

information, processing tools and equipment from archaeological contexts and some

elements from Linear B texts. Rackham and Moody in their work on the Cretan landscape

detail the difficulties of reconstructing the wider landscape during the Late Bronze Period,

with fragmentary archaeological evidence and no pollen cores from Crete for the period

(Rackham and Moody 1996, p125).

The mainstays of Bronze Age agriculture have been seen as a supposed triad of three cash

crops; cereals, the vine and the olive (Renfrew 1972). These cash crops allowed the build

up of a stratified society and dedicated craftsmen through the redistribution of surplus

crops. Sarpaki would add legumes to this list as a mainstay of the economy, but one

masked by poor preservation (Sarpaki 1992). Although there have been discussions about

whether certain crops could be regarded as being domesticated in the Early Bronze Age

(Hansen 1988; Halstead 1996), by LM IA the use of the olive and the vine seem

established.

The subsistence economy of the Minoans appears to be based on a suite of crops

supplemented by animal produce. Some of the crops grown or harvested, such as carob or

vetch, could have been used as a fodder crop for animals. Animals could be used as a

supplementary food source in times of stress, effectively acting as a walking larder.

Agricultural resources would also produce products for more than just sustenance, they

would also have provided a major input into craft specialisation and provided tradeable

goods. Thus sheep would be kept for wool and leather as well as milk and meat. Linen

could be grown for cloth, the deposit of over four hundred loomweights from the West

House at Akrotiri illustrating the factory nature of some of these products (Schofield 1990,

- 48 -


p210). Many of these goods may not survive in the archaeological record and their loss on

a society may not be immediately catastrophic but could place considerable strain on a

redistributive society.

For the period of the Late Bronze Age the site of Kommos on the south coast provides the

most comprehensive and well studied site on which to base an analysis of agricultural

resources (Shaw and Shaw 1996). This is due to a dry and wet sieving regime of

excavation and sampling backed up by a range of specialist studies encompassing oft

neglected groups such as small mammals and fish (Reese et al. 1996). The range of groups

and species found at Kommos is probably typical for Neo Palatial coastal sites.

In their table 4.11 Shay et al. (1996, p123) show the charred seeds recovered from

Kommos and their frequency by period. This illustrates the problem of data preservation

with, for example, only two cereal grains recovered from the MMI to LM III. The data

that have been collected however, combined with the charcoal wood data, suggest a mixed

environment of natural, semi-natural and planted communities in the vicinity of the site.

This confirms the use of olive, cereal, vine and legumes as the main crops but these are

supplemented by such items as bean trefoil, almonds, carob, lentisc and pear. Table 2.3

shows the modern harvest times for some of the crops that might have been exploited by

the Minoans (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations 1959, p12). The

crops could be for immediate consumption or stored for later human use or animal fodder.

Table 2.3 Table showing a variety of crops and the months over which they are harvested and the main harvest period (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations 1959, p12).

Crop Harvest period Main harvest period Wheat May-August June-July Barley June-July June-July Onions May-August May-July

Dry beans July-October July-September Dry peas June-July June-July Lentils June-July June-July

Chick peas June-July June-July Vetch May-July June-July

Grapes, table July-October August-October Grapes, wine September-October September-October

Carobs August-September September Olives, table October-December November Olives, oil October-May November-January Almond July-August July-August

Flax May-June May-June

- 49 -


The animal bone assemblage from Kommos compares with sites across Greece and is

dominated by the three main species of sheep/goat (53%), pig (31%) and cattle (16%)

(Reese, et al. 1996, p165). The sheep/goat bones indicate that many are slaughtered

young, which is consistent with exploitation for meat. Pigs likewise show that they were

bred for meat, whilst the cattle were probably mainly used for traction and ploughing and

only partly as a food resource. These main animals were probably supplemented by other

species such as deer and hare.

Kommos also provides important information on the rarely recovered marine resources. In

all over a thousand fish bones and otoliths were recovered from MM IB to LM IIIB

contexts (Reese et al. 1996, p204). The majority of the fish bones come from shallow

coastal waters and the assemblage is dominated by small sea bream. There are some

remains from fish found in slightly deeper water, such as grouper or cardinal fish. The

presence of one tunny and one jack could indicate open water fishing. Nets and hooks

were used to capture the fish. There were also a number of marine invertebrates, of which

98% come from rocky, shallow water shore locations.

2.5.3.2 Storage

The element of storage within Neo Palatial society is crucial. Christakis outlines three

types of food storage during this period (Chistakis 1999, p2). Intra-corporeal is the

accumulation of fat to help survival during a lean period. This does not really work for

humans but livestock can be fed with fodder crops and surplus which is then retrieved

when the animal is eaten. Social storage is where food is exchanged for social obligation

which can be reconverted in times of stress. Material storage is where the food is directly

stored at the household level. The range of foods listed for material storage include wine,

water, salted olives, meat and fish, dried fruits, butter, cheese, carobs, beans, raisins, honey

and beeswax (Chistakis 1999, p4). These were stored in a variety of containers, of which

pithoi are the most prevalent. Christakis used the division of households developed by

McEnroe (1982) and noted that there was a large range of storage potential, but that 76%

of households had storage facilities for no more than a productive season (Christakis 1999,

p14). However, insect pests have been found within stored products on Santorini and these

may have reduced further the amount of edible produce (Panagiotakopulu and Buckland

1991). Christakis found no evidence to support the contention made by Driessen and

- 50 -


Macdonald (1997, p54) that there was a decrease in the palatial storage capacity and an

increase in household storage in the LM IB phase possibly as a reaction to the Santorini

eruption (Christakis 1999, p15).

2.5.3.3 Summary

Parts of the Minoan subsistence economy would have been at risk from the eruption of

Santorini. Crops in the field could be have been damaged by tsunami inundation or tephra

fallout, marine resources may have been decimated because of the tsunami or shock caused

by the eruption. Processing or storage facilities may have been destroyed or damaged.

Any short term effect such as the destruction of a crop in the field could probably be dealt

with by the society as it would be used to crop failure from other sources. What might

have been more serious was if there were a combination of factors such as destruction of

storage buildings, damage to crops and then a climatic down-turn for the next year which

meant another failure. It is probably this synchronicity of factors which is the most

harmful but also the hardest to assess. These effects will not be uniform across all Minoan

sites however, and widespread destruction is unlikely, rather there might be some loss of

life across sites and maybe the abandonment of particular sites which fail.

2.6 Conclusions

This chapter has attempted to define what is meant by the Minoan civilisation and culture

so that any analysis of its capacity to deal with a natural hazard of the size of the Minoan

eruption can be ascertained. This touches upon a number of areas, it is necessary to know

when the eruption took place, what was the nature of the society that the eruption was

interacting with and how the eruption could effect that society.

It now appears that the relative position in time of when the eruption occurred within

Minoan society was the mature LM IA. It has also been shown that the absolute date of

the eruption is still a matter of intense debate and is not fixed. The consequence of this is

that any wider syntheses looking for evidence of the eruption in Levantine and Egyptian

contexts are open to interpretation and question.

The island of Santorini has been demonstrated to be of major influence in the trading

system of the region and had links with the major culture areas in the Eastern

Mediterranean. The site of Akrotiri appears to have been the dominant settlement in the

- 51 -


Cycladic culture and its loss, which was the minimum effect of the eruption, would have

had far reaching impacts. These would have been multi-facted and are not always obvious

and direct, possibly affecting society on levels such as the influence of elite groups and the

religious beliefs of the Minoan culture.

For the Minoan heartland I have illustrated the three main areas which I have identified as

being most at risk of disruption from the eruption and have shown how paucity of survival

within the record has often meant that these areas have been poorly investigated. I have

attempted to illustrate that the impact of the Santorini eruption on these areas may have

affected Minoan culture on a number of different levels. The impact may have had both

short and long term influences that in themselves are not necessarily catastrophic, and

preserved in a discrete horizon, but that these factors could have had a significant influence

on Minoan society for a number of years as it entered the LM IB period.

The main conclusion must be that there is no simplistic collapse of the Minoan culture

following the eruption and that the majority of sites survive. The final abandonment of a

site may follow a gradual wind down of activity with very limited acquisition of the latest

artefacts, this may present a problem with the dating of a site. I feel that some of the sites

which do not appear to survive from the LM IA to the LM IB may be as a result of either

particular collapse in a micro region or a re-entrenchment of an organised society leading

to an abandonment of isolated and marginal sites.

- 52 -

minoan archeological landscape

Documents