Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-tdptf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-22T05:40:05.288Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Tumulus-Burials of Leucas and their Connections in the Balkans and Northern Greece

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 September 2013

N. G. L. Hammond
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The discovery of so many tumulus-burials since 1955, especially in Albania and Greece, has lent an added importance to the tumulus-burials which were excavated by W. Dörpfeld in Leucas. The dating of the latter has always been controversial; and it should be reconsidered in the light of the new evidence. This article is concerned with the relationship only between the Leucas tumuli and those in Albania and northern Greece, because I have discussed elsewhere some of the links between the tumuli in Leucas and those in the Peloponnese and Attica.

Type
Research Article
Information
Annual of the British School at Athens , Volume 69 , November 1974 , pp. 129 - 144
Copyright
Copyright © The Council, British School at Athens 1974

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Special Abbreviations:

AE: Arkhaiologike Ephemeris

AI: Archaeologia Iugoslavica

BUSS: Buletin për Shkencat Shoqërore

CAH: The Cambridge Ancient History 3rd edn. 1970–

D i: Dörpfeld, W., Alt-Ithaca i (1927)Google Scholar

D ii: Dörpfeld, W., Alt-Ithaca ii (1927)Google Scholar

Ep.: Hammond, N. G. L., Epirus (Oxford, 1967)Google Scholar

Mac: Hammond, N. G. L., Macedonia i (Oxford, 1972)Google Scholar

PMac: Heurtley, W., Prehistorie Macedonia (Cambridge, 1939)Google Scholar

SA: Studia Albanica Tsountas: Tsountas, C., Dimini and Sesklo (Athens, 1908).Google Scholar

I am particularly grateful to Professor Frano Prendi, Professor M. Garašanin, and Mr. Mark Stefanovich for sending me offprints which helped towards the writing of this article in 1972.

2 Ep. 342 f.; ‘Tumulus-burial in Albania, the Grave Circles of Mycenae, and the Indo-Europeans’, BSA lxii (1967) 77–105; Mac. 247 ff.; Studies in Greek History (Oxford, 1973) 9 ff.

3 G. Novak, Prethistorijski Hvar (1955), with a summary in English, and in AI iii (1959) 11 f. See also Mac. 228.

4 D i 294 (of the copper tools and weapons in the R graves) ‘Sie sind primitiver als die Bronzen der Gräber S und F, aber auch als die der Gräber von Sesklo.’

5 D i 223 remarked that the R graves form a chronological group, although he obscured the fact when he attributed them to his Achaean period, e.g. D i 286.

6 There has been a tendency, for instance, to date the R graves as a whole to one period or another; thus J. L. Caskey put the R graves in EH II (CAH i. 2 (1971) 793 and ii. 1 (1972) 128) and F. H. Stubbings held that all the tumuli—R, F, and S—should be dated ‘not … very late in the Middle Helladic period’ (in A Companion to Homer 411–14). The Albanian archeologists have dated almost all their tumuli to the very end of the Bronze Age or to the Early Iron Age except the inner tumuli at Pazhok; I have argued the case against their view in Ep. 202 f. and 228 f. and in BSA lxii (1967) 77 f. and lxvi (1971) 229 f. I am most grateful to my Albanian colleagues for their generosity in sending me offprints.

7 In BSA lxii (1967) 84 f. I argued that the Grave Circles of Mycenae were crowned by tumuli.

8 D i 300 f. and D ii B(eilage) 64 and 65.

9 SA 1966 (1) pl. iii d and f and 257 ff.; see 261–2 for fluting (‘cannelure’) and pl. xi. 4–5; D i 294, where the reference to a fish-hook in R 22 is not made clear in the description of finds in R 22 on p. 240; for celts D i 293 f. (‘Meissel’); for illustrations see D i B 62, 12 and 63, 5 and 9. For fluting (‘Riffelung’) in Leucas see D i 224 (a pot beside R 1) and D i 305 (on fruitstands) in R 1 and 15c. For the thin plaques see D ii B 62, 10 and 11; in D i 227 and 293 he thinks the plaque shown on B 62, 11 may have been a piece of a knife, but it is too tiny and there is only one knife otherwise in the R graves.

10 SA 1966 (1) 256 and 270 f. The excavator, Frano Prendi, to whose kindness I owe a debt of gratitude, says (273–4) that Malik Ila is close to the Larissa phase of Late Neolithic in Greece and Malik II in general continues when the Early Helladic period is in force in Greece.

11 D i 291; a small piece of iron was found in the original fill of R 25 (D i 243).

12 Branigan, K., Copper and Bronze Working in Early Bronze Age Crete (1968) 47 f.Google Scholar

13 Jovanović, B., ‘Early Copper Metallurgy of the Central Balkans’, Bulletin d'archéologie sud-est européenne (Bucarest) i (1971) 131 f.Google Scholar

14 Korkuti, M., ‘Fouilles archéologiques en Albanie 1967–69’, Bulletin d'archéologie sud-est européenne ii (1971) 14Google Scholar; for Kolonie see Ep. 680 and Map 12.

15 Tsountas 351 f. with figs. 292–3; REG xxv (1912) 276–7 (for Ayia Marina).

16 D i 292.

17 Tanged flat swords are shown in D ii B 62, I and 2; and a short sword in D ii B 62, 3 = here FIG. 2g. See Sandars, N. K., ‘The First Aegean Swords and Their Ancestry’, AJA lxv (1961) 26.Google Scholar

18 Prendi, F., ‘Tumat ne fushën e fshatit Vajzë’, BUSS 1957 (2) 87 fig. 12Google Scholar; Ep. 229, 320 f., and fig. 20g.

19 D i 292 and D ii B 62, 8.

20 Garašanin, M. and Garašanin, D., ‘Neue Hügelgräberforschung in Westserbien’, AI ii (1956) 11 f.Google Scholar with fig. 3 = here FIG. 2a; Sbornik Radova Narodnog Myzeja i (1956–7) 20 and 47 f. with fig. 2.

21 D i 241 and 292 and D ii B 62, 7 and B 63a, I and 2.

22 One may compare those from Amorgos shown in AE 1898 189 f. and pl. 12, nos. 1, 2, and 5, of which the last has a tang-like prolongation as in D ii B 63a, 2.

23 BUSS 1957 (2) 86 with fig. 11b (cf. Ep. 337); H. B. Walters, Catalogue of the Bronzes in the British Museum, no. 2778. See Ep. fig. 23, A and M.

24 D i 225 and 293 and D ii B 62, 9. Branigan, K., ‘Early Bronze Daggers of Crete’, BSA lxii (1967) 218Google Scholar with fig. 2.

25 D i 225, 230 and 292, and D ii B 62, 4–6.

26 D i 237 and 242 and 293, and D ii B 63a? 3 and 4: Branigan loc. cit. 216 f. with fig. 1.

27 D i 237 and 293; D ii B 63a, 4. The small rivets support an early date. See Barfield, L. H., ‘Two Italian Halberds and the Question of the Earliest European Halberds’, Origini iii (1969) 67 f.Google Scholar and Branigan, K. ‘Halberds, Daggers and Culture Contact’, Origini v (1972) 65 f.Google Scholar The latter article has been generously shown to me by Dr. Branigan while still in typescript. My conclusion about the date is in agreement with Branigan's suggestion that the Italian halberds of the Remedello-Rinaldone group were approximately contemporary with blades in Crete of EM II. Of course Leucas is a natural stepping-stone on the route from the Minoan colony on Cythera to Italy or to the Adriatic Sea. For the blades at Lerna see Hesperia xxiv (1955) 43 and 46 with pl. 23a and b, and for the tumulus see BSA lxii (1967) 90 with fig. 2b.

28 BUSS 1956 (1) 186 with fig. iii, 3; and a better illustration in BSA lxvi (1971) pl. 34, 3. Branigan loc. cit. 216 with fig. 1.

29 Ep. 203, 310, and fig. 17, 1–7. As I reported there and again in BSA lxvi (1971) 232, Grave 16 with which the dagger was associated was partly above Grave 17, which contained a violin-shaped javelin-head. At that time my knowledge derived from rather dim illustrations, but in September 1972 I saw this javelin-head at Tirana. It has a faceted socket, the individual facets having been ground and hammered. Similar faceting appeared on other javelin-heads and on spearheads which were on view at Tirana, Elbasan, and Korcë. It is evidently a particular feature of Albanian weapons; for it has been found only rarely in Greek Epirus. As other faceted weapons were dated by associated finds from LH IHB to early in the Iron Age, the specimen from Grave 17 at Vodhinë should be dated in the same way. When we consider the dagger in relation to the javelin-head we are faced by two possibilities: either the dagger in Grave 16 should be dated later than the javelin-head and had an after-life of some 700 years, or Grave 17 was inserted at a later date partly under Grave 16, which is possible as Grave 16 rested upon the cairn of stones and not on soil (see Ep. 202 and Prendi in BUSS 1956 (1) 180 f.).

30 REG xxv (1912) 276 with fig. 13. The analysis of the copper which Soteriades gives is confusing as it adds up to 95 per cent or so in all.

31 D i 230, 236 and 293 f., and D ii B 62, 13—14.

32 Tsountas 354 with pl. 4, 4–5.

33 D i 294 and D ii B 63a, 6 and 7, where the reference is to copper; and D i 237, where both the double nails are said to be of bronze.

34 D i 237 and 293, and D ii B 63a, 8.

35 D i 290 and D ii B 60, 5–8; BUSS 1957 (2) 91 item 8 and fig. 14a.

36 D ii B 60, 1–3 and 61, 1–2; BUSS 1957 (2) 89 fig. 14b.

37 D ii B 65, 3–4. This burial had also the distinctive circular bowl with four pierced lugs (D ii B 65, 2); similar ones were in R 2b (D ii B 64, 4) and R 26a (D ii B 66c, 1).

38 D ii T 13.

35 D i 223 f. and fig. 18, where the slabs of the gravecircle wall are used as the slabs of the walls of the mortuary chamber of R 1a.

40 D i 222 f. argued on a priori grounds that the largest tumuli were the latest; the opposite is generally the case in Albania and seems certainly to be so in Leucas.

41 D i 246, looking always for a place of cremation, suggested that the grave itself (R 26c) had taken its site, and explained the presence of ash in the grave and round it on this hypothesis. I prefer to explain the ash as the remains of a funerary feast; when the roof of the mortuary chamber collapsed, the ash fell in from above. Offering of meat with the corpse in a grave is not an accompaniment of cremation in these tumuli.

42 PMac 54 fig. 49; AM xxx (1905) 120 f.; AE 1908, 65 f.; PAE 1909, 123 f.; REG xxv (1912) 263 f. I discuss these burials in BSA lxii (1967) 94 and more fully in Mac. 243 f., 260 n. 5, and 262 n. 14.

43 Mac. 244 n. 3 and 262 n. 14 for zoomorphic vases at Servia, Chaeronea, Porodin, and Malik. See Jovanović, B. in Starinar xix (1968) 38Google Scholar with pl. 1 for the zoomorphic vases of Danilo and Central Jugoslavia. For Cakran see Bulletin d'archéologie sud-est européenne 1971 (2) 13 with fig. 1. For Bulgaria see Bull, de la soc. archéol. bulgare iv (1914) 152 fig. 3 and vi (1916) pl. 4, 1 and 2.

44 SA 1964 (1) 96 and BSA lxii (1967) 79.

45 AE 1908, 94 f. and AM xxxi (1906) 402 f.

46 BUSS 1956 (1) 180 f. and Ep. 202 f.

47 BSA lxii (1967) 79–81 with Pl. 62, 3 and 4.

48 D i 227.

49 BUSS 1957 (2) 78–92; Ep. 229.

50 Sbornik Radova Narodnog Myzeja i (1956–7) 47.

51 AI ii (1956) 12.

52 D i 237 and 293, and D ii B 63a, 8.

53 D i 247–8; but in D i 291 in the table the nail is shown as copper. I take the detailed account in D i 248 ‘eine dünne Bronzenadel, noch o, 05 lang’ to be the correct version.

54 AI ii (1956) 14 fig. 8, with vertical fluting (as at Malik and Leucas; see n. 9 above); BUSS 1957 (2) 81 fig. 5b and 91, with teat-shaped lugs; PAE 1964 pl. 90d.

55 For such a vessel of a more elaborate kind in a tumulus-burial at Aphidna in Attica see AM xxi 391 f. and pls. 14 and 15.

56 D i 229.

57 D i 241 f.

58 D i 213 f. and D ii T 15.

59 Marinatos, Sp., ‘Further Discoveries at Marathon’, AAA iii (1970) 355 fig. 10.Google Scholar

60 For the occurrence of corded-ware in this area see Mac. 248 and add Sqiperia Arkeologjike (Tirana, 1971) fig. 23, where the jug which I thought was painted in SA 1964 (1) 119 pl. vii. 2 = BSA lxii (1967) pl. 20. 2 is shown to be incised. I saw the jug at Tirana in September 1972, and I was told that it had come from the circular pit of the inner tumulus at Pazhok which was dated by the excavators to MH.

61 D ii B 60, 4 and B 73,4; Tsountas pl. 4. 6 (cf. 134 fig. 32).

62 BUSS 1957 (2) 86 fig. 11a and c, ana Ep. fig. 23b and c; Tsountas 146 with pl. 4. 10; G. Karo, Schachtgräber von Mykenai item no. 463 and pl. cii.

63 So in D i 216 but the rivets become ‘silver’ in D i 316; I prefer the former account (see also n. 53, above); illustrated in D ii B 73, 15.

64 Tsountas pl. 4. 11 and pl. 5. 16; Karo, op. cit., item 224c; AE 1898, 190 fig. 11 and pl. 12. 3.

65 D i 207 f. and D ii T 14; Ep. 202 f.

66 For these objects see Mac. 387 f. They are central European in origin, and they occur in the Aegean area at the end of the Bronze Age and in the Early Iron Age. The bosses at Leucas are the earliest known on the fringes of the Aegean world. Burial 1 of Tumulus III at Bela Crkva near Belotić had a bronze shield-boss with a spike on it; its diameter was 4·4 cm.; those at Leucas are 4·5 cm. in dia meter. The burial at Bela Crkva is dated to the European Middle Bronze Age by M. and Garašanin, D. in Sbornik Radova Narodnog Muzeja i (1956–1957) 38 and 50Google Scholar with fig. 15b.

67 D i 309.

68 D i 311.

69 D i 310 f.

70 PPS xx (1955) 182 fig. 4.2; PAE 1964 87 f. with pl. 91a and b; AE 1908 94 fig. 16.

71 BUSS 1957 (2) 90 fig. 15b; Buletin Arkeologjik 1969, 48 pl. i. 1.

72 BUSS 1957 (2) 90 fig. 15a; Buletin Arkeologjik 1969, 48 pl. ii. 2.

73 M. Korkuti, ‘Les rapports de civilisation illyro-égéens à l'âge du fer’ bronze et la survivance de certains objets de type Mycènes à l'âge du fer’, et la communication at the Second International Congress of South-east European Studies (1970), illustrating these knives on pl. iii.

74 Karo, op. cit., items 216 and 227 from Shaft Grave II, 154 from III, and 457 and 461 from IV.

75 Overlapped by LNA of Macedonia and northern Greece.

76 Overlapped by Balkan Eneolithic Age and Italian Copper Age.

77 The finds suggest that a tumulus-burial lay in the lowest stratum of the settlement as at Servia and Chaeronea.