The Cemeteries at Marki: Using a looted landscape to investigate prehistoric Bronze Age Cyprus 9781841714066, 9781407324111

Table of contents :
Front Cover
Title Page
Copyright
Table of Contents
LIST OF PLATES
LIST OF TABLES
LIST OF FIGURES
ABBREVIATIONS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
ABSTRACT
CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION
CHAPTER 2. THE CEMETERIES OF MARKI IN CONTEXT
CHAPTER 3. SURVEY THEORY AND METHODOLOGY
CHAPTER 4. TAPHONOMIC PROCESSES AFFECTING THE CEMETERIES OF MARKI
CHAPTER 5. ARTEFACT ANALYSIS
CHAPTER 6. ASSESSING THE VALUE OF LOOTED CEMETERIES
CHAPTER 7. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
BIBLIOGRAPHY
PLATES
TABLES
PLANS AND GRAPHS
ILLUSTRATIONS OF ARTEFACTS

Citation preview

The Cemeteries at Marki Using a looted landscape to investigate prehistoric Bronze Age Cyprus

Andrew C. Sneddon

B A R

BAR International Series 1028 2002

The Cemeteries at Marki Using a looted landscape to investigate prehistoric Bronze Age Cyprus

Andrew C. Sneddon

l --

~ ..-;-.·

"--.....

_:.~

.

..

BAR International Series 1028 2002

Published in 2016 by BAR Publishing, Oxford BAR International Series 1028 The Cemeteries at Marki

© A C Sneddon and the Publisher 2002 COVER IMAGE Two modelled human .figuresfrom the 'Margi Bowl' in the Pierides Collection,

c. 1800 BC, probably from the cemeteries of Marki Alonia.

The author's moral rights under the 1988 UK Copyright, Designs and Patents Act are hereby expressly asserted. All rights reserved. No part of this work may be copied, reproduced, stored, sold, distributed, scanned, saved in any form of digital format or transmitted in any form digitally, without the written permission of the Publisher.

ISBN 9781841714066 paperback ISBN 9781407324111 e-format DOI https://doi.org/10.30861/9781841714066 A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library BAR Publishing is the trading name of British Archaeological Reports (Oxford) Ltd. British Archaeological Reports was first incorporated in 1974 to publish the BAR Series, International and British. In 1992 Hadrian Books Ltd became part of the BAR group. This volume was originally published by Archaeopress in conjunction with British Archaeological Reports (Oxford) Ltd/ Hadrian Books Ltd, the Series principal publisher, in 2002. This present volume is published by BAR Publishing, 2016.

BAR

PUBLISHING BAR titles are available from:

EMAIL PHONE

FAX

BAR Publishing 122 Banbury Rd, Oxford, OX2 7BP, UK [email protected] +44 (0)1865 310431 +44 (0)1865 316916 www.barpublishing.com

CONTENTS List of Plates

iv

List of Tables

iv

List of Figures

Vl

Abbreviations

viii

Acknowledgements

IX

Abstract

ix

Chapter 1 - Introduction

1

•

The mortuary archaeology of Prehistoric Bronze Age Cyprus The problems and potential Looting activity on Cyprus Project aims

• •

Chapter 2 - The Cemeteries of Marki in Context Marki Alonia - The settlement Site chronology The environment -Geology and geography -Climate -Vegetation Cemeteries in the vicinity of Marki Alonia -Marki Davari -Marki Kappara -Marki Davari-Kappara -Marki Vounaros -Marki Vounaros-Pappara Other sites in the vicinity of Marki Alonia

• • •

•

•

Chapter 3 - Survey Theory and Methodology Previous excavations at Davari and the decision to survey The value of surface assemblages Potential uses for the surface assemblages from the cemeteries of Marki The multivariate approach to surface survey The practical application of survey methodologies, with reference to survey on Cyprus Why not sample? The sites selected for survey Point provenance and bulk provenance techniques Collection policy and in-field recording The upper tier at Davari The middle and lower tiers at Davari Davari-Kappara Vounaros The tombs on the middle and lower tiers at Davari

• • • • • • • • • • • • • •

Chapter 4 - Taphonomic Processes Affecting the Cemeteries of Marki •

Taphonomic processes affecting the cemeteries at the time that they formed part of the systemic context

1 5 6

8 8

8 8 9 9 9

10 11

12 12 12 12 14 14 15 16 16 18 20 21 22 22 23 24 28 28 28 30

30

• • •

• • • •

Taphonomic processes affecting the cemeteries after Marki Alonia was abandoned and before the cemeteries were looted The effects of looting and the deposition of the surface assemblage Taphonomic processes operating on the surface scatters left behind by the looters -Disturbance to the composition of the surface assemblages -Disturbance to the spatial pattering of the surface assemblages Horizontal movement on the upper tier at Davari Davari's middle tier Davari's lower tier Conclusions

•

•

32 34 34 35 38 38 39

Chapter 5 - Artefact Analysis

• •

30 31

The pottery recording system Ceramics analysis -General comments -Issues of quantification -Other issues relating to the data Red Polished Ware -General -Vessel form Size and shape Rim shape Handles and lugs -Fabric Texture Hardness Inclusions Fabric colour Cores -Surface treatment Exterior surface Interior surface -Decoration Decoration and shape Decoration and fabric quality Decorative motifs Red Polished Ware - description and discussion of specific vessel types -Small bowls Undecorated. Without handle or with handle of indeterminate type Undecorated. Elongated vertical lugs - pierced or unpierced Undecorated. Horizontal lug below rim - unpierced, pierced or partially pierced vertically Undecorated. Knob lug - pierced or unpierced Decorated. With and without handles Undecorated. Horizontal handles Crudely-made bowls Small spouted bowls Bowl-ladies/dippers -Large bowls and basins Large bowls/basins. Undecorated and unspouted. Without handle or handle indeterminate Spouted large bowls and basins. Decorated and undecorated Large bowls and basins with handles. Decorated and undecorated Large bowls and basins without handles or spouts. Decorated -RP Pans -Small closed vessels -Large jugs Large jugs with cutaway spouts Large jugs with round mouths

11

39 40 40 42 44 45 45 46 46 47 47 48 48 48 49 50 51 51 52 53 53 54 55 55 57 57 59 60 61 61 63 64 65 65 66 66 68 70 72 75 78 79 80 80 81

•

• • • • • • • •

• •

Large jugs. Precise shape uncertain -Storage jars, cooking pots and pithoi -Large closed vessels generally specific shapes uncertain -Amphorae -Miscellaneous Red Polished (Philia) Ware -Small open vessels -Small closed vessels -Large open vessels -Large closed vessels White Painted (Philia) Ware Black Polished Ware Black Slip Ware Cooking Pot Ware Drab Polished Ware Middle Cypriot White Painted Ware Other wares Miscellaneous finds -Figurines -Modified sherds Stone artefacts Metal artefacts

Chapter 6 - Assessing the Value of Looted Cemeteries • • • • • • • • • • •

Surface assemblages as a sample of the unlooted mortuary assemblage Assemblage comparisons Spatial analysis Chronology Analysing social complexity The Philia debate Prehistoric Bronze Age Cypriot mortuary symbolism Individual tomb groups and the individual in Marki's mortuary assemblage Demographic analysis Reconstructing a prehistoric landscape Observations and recommendations

82 82 84

86 86 86 89 89 89 89 90 90 91 91 91 92 93 93 94 95 95 97 97 97 98 98 100 104 105 109 110 110 110

Chapter 7 - Summary and Conclusions

112

Bibliography

115

Plates

132

Tables

140

Figures • •

Plans and graphs (Figures 1. I- 1. 1 12) Artefact illustrations (Figures 2.1-2.45)

111

172 231

A.C. Sneddon, The Cemeteries at Marki

12.

LIST OF PLATES Plate

13.

1.

2. 3. 4. 5.

6. 7. 8.

9. 10. 11. 12. 13.

14. 15. 16.

The settlement at Marki Alonia viewed from Davari, with looted tombs m the foreground. Davari (facing south) from the high hills to its north. Davari viewed from the settlement (facing north west). View of Davari' s upper tier illustrating its layered, tilted limestone. View of Davari facing upslope (north) with looted tombs dug into the soft limestone (havara). Stony fanglomerate of Davari's lower tier in section. Survey in progress on the steep north east slope of Davari. Davari Tomb 35 with large imported stomion block (scale 1 m). Note the potsherds deposited by looters to the right of the stone. Davari Tomb 300 with stones wedged upright into the ground to the left (east). Kappara viewed from Davari (facing west). Vounaros viewed from the settlement at MarkiAlonia (facing east). View of Vounaros-Pappara facing north north-east. View of Vounaros-Pappara facing north east along the Souvannik Dere, towards the dairy complex. Chamber Tomb 5 on Davari's middle tier after excavation. Pit Tomb 6 on Davari's upper tier after excavation. Survey in progress at Davari.

14. 15. 16. 17.

18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28.

29. 30. 31. 32.

LIST OF TABLES 33.

Table 34.

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11.

Mortuary assemblage - bulk level Diagnostics by ware - all cemeteries Diagnostics by shape - all wares Diagnostics - shape by cemetery (all wares) Vounaros - by shape Davari-Kappara - by shape Davari (Upper Tier)- by shape and ware Mortuary assemblage - RP diagnostics by shape Type and number of tombs by cemetery Number of tombs and number of artefacts per tomb by cemetery Diagnostics as a percentage of the estimated number of vessels by cemetery

35. 36. 37.

38. 39. 40.

IV

Occurrence of combinations of different attributes of rim for each shape class mortuary assemblage (RP only) Occurrence of attributes of rim shape (RP only) - Rim profile Occurrence of attributes of rim shape (RP only) - Rim course Occurrence of attributes of rim shape (RP only) - Rim end Occurrence of different kinds of handle by vessel shape (RP only) Occurrence of grades of texture in each shape class (RP only) Occurrence of fabric hardness in each shape class (RP only) Occurrence of attributes of fabric quality (inclusions) by shape (RP only) Occurrence of attributes of fabric in each shape class - colour of inclusions (RP only) Occurrence of attributes of fabric in each shape class - size of inclusions (RP only) Fabric colours by texture (RP only) - very fine fabric Fabric colours by texture (RP only) - fine fabric Fabric colours by texture (RP only) medium fabric Fabric colours by shape (RP only) - small open vessels Fabric colours by shape (RP only) - small closed vessels Fabric colours by shape (RP only) - large open vessels Fabric colours by shape (RP only) - large closed vessels Occurrence of cores in each shape class (RP only)- mortuary assemblage Surface treatment- burnishing (RP only) Occurrence of grades of exterior slip quality on each shape class (RP only) Exterior surface colours by shape (RP only) - small open vessels Exterior surface colours by shape (RP only) - small closed vessels Exterior surface colours by shape (RP only) - large open vessels Exterior surface colours by shape (RP only) - large closed vessels Exterior surface colours by lustre (RP only) - matt lustre Exterior surface colours by lustre (RP only) - slight lustre Exterior surface colours by lustre (RP only) - medium lustre Exterior surface colours by lustre (RP only) - high lustre Exterior surface colours by fabric texture (RP only)-very fine fabric

A.C. Sneddon, The Cemeteries at Marki

41. 42.

43. 44. 45. 46. 47. 48. 49.

50. 51. 52. 53. 54.

55.

56. 57.

58. 59. 60. 61.

62. 63. 64.

65. 66. 67. 68. 69.

Exterior surface colours by fabric texture (RP only)- fine fabric Exterior surface colours by fabric texture (RP only)- medium fabric Surface treatment- mottling (RP only) Occurrence of grades of exterior lustre in each shape class (RP only) Interior surface colours by shape (RP only) - small open vessels Interior surface colours by shape (RP only) - large open vessels Interior surface colours by fabric texture (RP only) - very fme fabric Interior surface colours by fabric texture (RP only) - fine fabric Interior surface colours by fabric texture (RP only)- medium fabric Quantity of decorated sherds in each shape class (RP only) Quantity of decorated sherds in each shape class (all wares) Decoration techniques by cemetery (RP only) Proportion of total sherds decorated Association of decorative techniques and general shapes - mortuary assemblage (RP only) Occurrence of combinations of decorative techniques in each shape class (RP only) Percentage of each shape decorated by each technique Relationship between fabric quality (texture) and technique of decoration (RP only) Incised decoration - mortuary assemblage motifs (RP only) Decorative motifs by cemetery (RP only). Vounaros - incised motifs Decorative motifs by cemetery (RP only). Davari (upper Tier)- incised motifs Decorative motifs by cemetery (RP only). Davari - incised motifs Relief decoration - mortuary assemblage motifs (RP only) Decorative motifs by cemetery (RP only). Davari - relief motifs Decorative motifs by cemetery (RP only). Vounaros - relief motifs Decorative motifs by cemetery (RP only). Davari (Upper Tier) - relief motifs Impressed decoration mortuary assemblage motifs (RP only) Decorative motifs by cemetery (RP only). Vounaros - impressed motifs Decorative motifs by cemetery (RP only). Davari (Upper Tier)- impressed motifs Decorative motifs by cemetery (RP only). Davari-Kappara - impressed motifs

70. 71.

72.

73.

74.

75.

76.

77.

78.

79.

80.

81.

82.

83.

84.

85. 86. 87. 88. 89.

90. 91.

92.

V

Decorative motifs by cemetery (RP only). Davari - impressed motifs Incised decoration by shape - mortuary assemblage motifs (RP only). Small open vessels Incised decoration by shape - mortuary assemblage motifs (RP only). Small closed vessels Incised decoration by shape - mortuary assemblage motifs (RP only). Large open vessels Incised decoration by shape - mortuary assemblage motifs (RP only). Large closed vessels Impressed decoration by shape - mortuary assemblage motifs (RP only). Small open vessels Impressed decoration by shape - mortuary assemblage motifs (RP only). Large closed vessels Impressed decoration by shape - mortuary assemblage motifs (RP only). Small closed vessels Impressed decoration by shape - mortuary assemblage motifs (RP only). Large open vessels Relief decoration by shape - mortuary assemblage motifs (RP only). Small open vessels Relief decoration by shape - mortuary assemblage motifs (RP only). Small closed vessels Relief decoration by shape - mortuary assemblage motifs (RP only). Large open vessels Relief decoration by shape - mortuary assemblage motifs (RP only). Large closed vessels Comparison of identifiable incised motifs settlement and mortuary assemblages (RP only) Comparison of identifiable relief motifs settlement and mortuary assemblages (RP only) RP (Philia) diagnostic sherds by shape Occurrence of grades of exterior lustre mmorwares Occurrence of grades of exterior slip quality -mmorwares Occurrence of attributes of fabric quality (texture) for minor wares Occurrence of fabric hardness - minor wares Occurrence of attributes of fabric quality (inclusions)- minor wares Fabric colours (RP (Philia) - all shape classes Ceramics summary

A.C. Sneddon, The Cemeteries at Marki

LIST OF FIGURES

1.36

1. Plans and diagrams

1.37

1.1 1.2

1.38

1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9 1.10 1.11 1.12 1.13 1.14 1.15 1.16 1.17 1.18 1.19 1.20 1.21 1.22 1.23 1.24 1.25 1.26 1.27 1.28 1.29 1.30 1.31 1.32 1.33 1.34 1.35

Map of Cyprus showing the location of Marki Contour plan of Marki Alonia and the surrounding cemeteries Distribution of tombs at Davari Three-dimensional plan of Davari viewed from the southeast Slope profiles of Davari Davari with survey grid overlaid Davari' s upper tier showing tombs and artefacts Vegetation cover on Davari's lower tiers in summer Vegetation cover on Davari's lower tiers in the wetter months Types of vegetation on Davari' s lower tiers Tombs 200,201 and 202 Tomb 170 Tomb 190 Distribution of tombs and ceramic artefacts on Davari's lower tiers Relationship between ceramic artefacts and topography on Davari' s lower tiers Structure on Davari' s lower tier Contour plan of Kappara showing location of tombs Contour plan of Davari-Kappara showing location of tombs Contour plan of Vounaros showing location of tombs Contour plan of Vounaros-Pappara showing location of tombs Plan and section of Tomb 5 Plan and section of Tomb 6 Relationship between geology and chamber tombs at Davari Relationship between ceramic artefacts and geology on Davari' s lower tiers Relationship between ceramic artefacts and visibility on Davari' s lower tiers Location of imported stone blocks at Davari Number of sherds relative to slope profile Average sherd weights relative to slope profile Relationship between ceramic artefacts and vegetation on Davari's lower tiers Conjoining diagnostic sherds on Davari's lower tiers The ACE's pottery recording sheet Distribution of Philia ceramics on Davari's upper tier Distribution of Philia ceramics on Davari's lower tiers Distribution of sherds from RP open vessels on Davari' s lower tiers Distribution of sherds from RP closed vessels on Davari's lower tiers

1.39 1.40 1.41 1.42 1.43 1.44 1.45 1.46 1.47 1.48 1.49

1.50 1.51 1.52 1.53 1.54

1.55 1.56 1.57 1.58 1.59 1.60 1.61 1.62 1.63 1.64

Vl

Proportion of open and closed vessels. Intercemetery comparison Proportion of all vessels with decoration. Intercemetery comparison Quantity of sherds from open and closed vessels (RP only). General shape classes as percentage of diagnostics (RP only). Percentage of rims from large open vessels with flattened ends (RP only). Handles on small open vessels as a percentage of diagnostics in that shape class. Attributes of fabric quality for small open vessels - texture (RP only). Attributes of fabric quality for small closed vessels - texture (RP only). Attributes of fabric quality for large open vessels - texture (RP only). Attributes of fabric quality for large closed vessels - texture (RP only). Attributes of fabric quality for small open vessels - hardness (RP only). Attributes of fabric quality for small closed vessels - hardness (RP only). Attributes of fabric quality of large open vessels - hardness (RP only). Attributes of fabric quality for large closed vessels - hardness (RP only). Attributes of fabric quality for small open vessels - inclusions (RP only). Attributes of fabric quality for small closed vessels - inclusions (RP only). Attributes of fabric quality for large open vessels - inclusions (RP only). Attributes of fabric quality for large closed vessels - inclusions (RP only). Fabric colours by texture - fmer fabrics (RP only). Fabric colours by texture - medium fabrics (RP only). Fabric colours by shape - small open vessels (RP only). Fabric colours by shape - small closed vessels (RP only). Fabric colours by shape - large open vessels (RP only). Fabric colours by shape - large closed vessels (RP only). Broad fabric colours by texture - fmer fabrics (RP only). Broad fabric colours by texture - medium fabrics (RP only). Broad fabric colours by shape - small open vessels (RP only). Broad fabric colours by shape - small closed vessels (RP only). Broad fabric colours by shape - large open vessels (RP only).

A.C. Sneddon, The Cemeteries at Marki

1.65 1.66 1.67 1.68 1.69 1.70 1.71 1.72 1.73 1.74 1.75 1.76 1.77 1.78 1.79 1.80 1.81 1.82 1.83 1.84 1.85 1.86 1.87 1.88 1.89 1.90 1.91 1.92 1.93

Broad fabric colours by shape - large closed vessels (RP only). Quality of surface appearance (lustre) for small open vessels (RP only). Quality of surface appearance (lustre) for small closed vessels (RP only). Quality of surface appearance (lustre) for large open vessels (RP only). Quality of surface appearance (lustre) for large closed vessels (RP only). Quality of slips (exterior) for small open vessels - thickness (RP only). Quality of slips (exterior) for small closed vessels - thickness (RP only). Quality of slips (exterior) for large open vessels - thickness (RP only). Quality of slips (exterior) for large closed vessels - thickness (RP only). Exterior surface colours by shape - small open vessels (RP only). Exterior surface colours by shape - small closed vessels (RP only). Exterior surface colours by shape - large open vessels (RP only). Exterior surface colours by shape - large closed vessels (RP only). Exterior surface colours by lustre - matt (RP only). Exterior surface colours by lustre - slight (RP only) Exterior surface colours by lustre - medium lustre (RP only). Exterior surface colours by lustre - high lustre (RP only). Exterior surface colour by fabric texture - fmer texture (RP only). Exterior surface colour by fabric texture medium texture (RP only). Interior surface colours by shape - small open (RP only). Interior surface colours by shape - large open (RP only). Interior surface colours by fabric texture - fmer fabrics (RP only). Interior surface colours by fabric texture medium fabrics (RP only). Percentage of all diagnostics within each shape class that was decorated (RP only). Decorated sherds for each shape class as a percentage of all decorated sherds (RP only). Proportion of main RP shape classes with decoration. Inter-assemblage comparison RP large jugs - techniques of decoration. Interassemblage comparison Percentage of each technique of decoration broken down by shape class. Percentage of decorated sherds in each shape class decorated by each technique.

1.94

1.95

1.96 1.97 1.98 1.99 1.100 1.101 1.102 1.103 1.104 1.105 1.106 1.107 1.108 1.109 1.110 1.111 1.112

The ten most common identifiable incised motifs in the mortuary assemblage compared to in settlement (RP only). The five most common identifiable relief motifs in the mortuary assemblage compared to in settlement (RP only) Main RP shape classes as a percentage of total vessels. Inter-cemetery comparison Distribution of diagnostics deriving from RP small bowls on Davari's lower tiers Average number of large bowls/basins per chamber. Inter-cemetery comparison Distribution of diagnostics deriving from RP basins on Davari's lower tiers Distribution of diagnostics deriving from RP large jugs on Davari's lower tiers RP large jugs - proportion of mouth types. Intercemetery comparison Distribution of the minor wares and lithics on Davari's lower tiers Distribution of Drab Polished Ware and Cooking Pot Ware on Davari's lower tiers Distribution oflugs on Davari' s lower tiers Distribution of horizontal handles on Davari' s lower tiers Distribution of sherds with the relief chain motif on Davari' s lower tiers Distribution of sherds from very large closed vessels on Davari's lower tiers Distribution of sherds with very fine fabric on Davari' s lower tiers Distribution of bases with use wear on Davari' s lower tiers Proportions of the zigzag motif in the mortuary and settlement assemblages Distribution of sherds with the zigzag motif on Davari's lower tiers Distribution of grooved rims on Davari's lower tiers

2. Artefact illustrations

2.1 2.2

2.3 2.4

2.5

2.6

Vll

RP small bowls. Undecorated. Without handle or with handle of indeterminate type RP small bowls. Undecorated. Elongated vertical lugs - pierced or unpierced and RP small bowls. Undecorated. Horizontal lug below rim - unpierced or partially pierced vertically RP small bowls. Undecorated. Knob lug pierced or unpierced RP small bowls. Undecorated. Knob lug pierced or unpierced (cont.) and RP small bowls. Decorated - with and without handles RP small bowls. Decorated. With and without handles (cont.) and RP small bowls. Undecorated. Horizontal handles RP small bowls. Undecorated. Horizontal handles (cont.) and RP small bowls. Crudely-

A.C. Sneddon, The Cemeteries at Marki

2.7

2.8

2.9

2.10

2.11

2.12 2.13

2.14 2.15 2.16 2.17 2.18 2.19 2.20 2.21 2.22 2.23 2.24 2.25 2.26 2.27 2.28

made and RP small bowls. Spouted bowl and RP small bowls. Ladle/dipper RP large bowls/basins. Undecorated and unspouted, without handle or handle indeterminate (a) rim sherds RP large bowls/basins. Undecorated and unspouted, without handle or handle indeterminate (a) rim sherds (cont.) RP large bowls/basins. Undecorated and unspouted. Without handle or handle indeterminate (a) rim sherds (cont.) and RP large bowls/basins. Undecorated and unspouted. Without handle or handle indeterminate (b) base sherds RP large bowls/basins. Undecorated and unspouted. Without handle or handle indeterminate (b) base sherds (cont.) RP large bowls/basins. Undecorated and unspouted. Without handle or handle indeterminate (b) base sherds (cont.) and Spouted large bowls and basins. Decorated and undecorated Spouted large bowls and basins. Decorated and undecorated (cont.) Spouted large bowls and basins. Decorated and undecorated (cont.) and Large bowls and basins with handles. Decorated and undecorated Large bowls and basins with handles. Decorated and undecorated (cont.) Large bowls and basins with handles. Decorated and undecorated (cont.) Large bowls and basins with handles. Decorated and undecorated (cont.) Large bowls and basins with handles. Decorated and undecorated (cont.) Large bowls and basins with handles. Decorated and undecorated (cont.) Large bowls and basins with handles. Decorated and undecorated (cont.) Large bowls and basins with handles. Decorated and undecorated (cont.) Large bowls and basins with handles. Decorated and undecorated (cont.) RP large bowls and basins. Without handles or spouts. Decorated RP large bowls and basins. Without handles or spouts. Decorated (cont.) RP large bowls and basins. Without handles or spouts. Decorated (cont.) RP large bowls and basins. Without handles or spouts. Decorated (cont.) RP large bowls and basins. Without handles or spouts. Decorated (cont.) RP large bowls and basins. Without handles or spouts. Decorated (cont.) RP large bowls and basins. Without handles or spouts. Decorated (cont.) and RP pans and RP small closed vessels

2.29 2.30 2.31 2.32

2.33

2.34 2.35

2.36 2.37 2.38 2.39

2.40 2.41

2.42 2.43 2.44 2.45

RP small closed vessels (cont.) and RP large jugs with cutaway spouts RP large jugs with round mouths. Decorated and undecorated RP large jugs with round mouths. Decorated and undecorated (cont.) RP large jugs with round mouths. Decorated and undecorated (cont.) and RP large jugs. Precise shape uncertain RP large jugs. Precise shape uncertain (cont.) and RP storage jars/cooking pots and pithoi (a) rim sherds RP storage jars/cooking pots and pithoi (b) base sherds RP storage jars/cooking pots and pithoi (b) base sherds (cont.) and RP large closed vessels generally. Specific shapes uncertain RP large closed vessels generally. Specific shapes uncertain (cont.) RP large closed vessels generally. Specific shapes uncertain (cont.) RP large closed vessels generally. Specific shapes uncertain (cont.) and RP amphora RP miscellaneous and RP (Philia) small open vessels and RP (Philia) small closed vessels and RP (Philia) large open vessels RP (Philia) large closed vessels RP (Philia) large closed vessels (cont.) and WP (Philia) and Black Polished Ware and Black Slip Ware and Cooking Pot Ware Drab Polished ware and Middle Cypriot White Painted Middle Cypriot White Painted (cont.) and Other wares and Figurines Modified sherds and Lithic artefacts Metal artefacts

ABBREVIATIONS

ACE - Australian Cyprus Expedition BP - Black Polished BS - Black Slip CAARI - Cyprus-American Archaeological Research Institute CPSP/WCP Canadian Palaipaphos Survey Project/Western Cyprus Project CPW - Cooking Pot Ware D.UT-Davari upper tier DK- Davari-Kappara DP - Drab Polished EC - Early Cypriot EDM - Electronic Distance Measurement GIS - Geographic Information System LC - Late Cypriot MC - Middle Cypriot MC WP - Middle Cypriot White Painted MVASP - Maroni Valley Archaeological Survey Project RP - Red Polished

vm

A.C. Sneddon, The Cemeteries at Marki

RP (P)- Red Polished (Philia) SCSP - Sydney Cyprus Survey Project V- Vounaros WP - White Painted WP (P)- White Painted (Philia)

ABSTRACT This monograph presents the results of an intensive site survey of three Prehistoric Bronze Age cemeteries in the vicinity of Marki Alonia, in central Cyprus. These cemeteries contained around 370 pit and chamber tombs, and were in use from the Philia facies of the Early Cypriot Bronze Age into the Middle Cypriot period. Each of the cemeteries has been looted since the Second World War, with the result that a sizeable scatter of ceramic artefacts lies across their surfaces. It is this scatter that forms the main subject of this work.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I am very grateful to Dr. David Frankel and Dr. Jenny Webb for making it possible for me to participate in the excavations of the Australian Cyprus Expedition at Marki Alonia, and for giving me the opportunity to conduct my fieldwork under the auspices of their project. Dr Frankel and Dr Webb were co-supervisors of the doctoral thesis forming the basis of this monograph. I am also very grateful for their learned and attentive supervision of that thesis.

Marki's cemeteries provided an important opportunity to assess the value of looted cemeteries to archaeologists. The taphonomic processes that have affected the sites are therefore discussed in detail, with the conclusion that although cultural and natural processes can significantly affect a ceramic assemblage from a looted cemetery, they do not render them valueless.

Tom Rymer and Greg Deftereos assisted me in the field for the two months of the survey, in often very difficult conditions. Tom also assisted me in analysing the ceramic artefacts, while Greg was responsible for the bulk of the illustrations of artefacts. I owe them both a great debt of gratitude. My thanks also go to Lindy Crewe and Kerrie Grant who helped in the field for short periods during the survey.

This monograph also provides a detailed technical analysis of the large ceramic assemblage recovered from the surveyed cemeteries, and takes the opportunity to compare it with the material from the cemeteries' parent settlement at Marki Alonia, and with other cemeteries on the island. It concludes that the ceramics interred in Prehistoric Bronze Age cemeteries differed little from those used in day-to-day life in the settlement, and that although mortuary assemblages from across Cyprus were generally similar, some idiosyncrasies existed from site to site. Additionally, the work considers issues of social complexity, chronology, burial customs and symbolic behaviour. It concludes that a looted cemetery is of some value (although limited) in addressing these matters. A rough chronology could be established for the development of the cemeteries. No evidence of rank, status or prestige was found in the spatial patterning or distribution of the surface assemblage, and no unambiguous evidence of symbolic behaviour was recovered.

I also extend my thanks to Rudy Frank for assisting me with the early phases of the survey, and for his later technical advice. Wei Ming kindly answered many computer-related questions, while Dr. Armando Anaya patiently assisted me with some of the more technical elements of the GTSwork. The thesis upon which this monograph is based was researched and written while the author held an Australian Commonwealth Government postgraduate research scholarship (APA). When the scholarship expired, the Research Committee of the School of Historical and European Studies, La Trobe University, made a generous financial contribution from its Research Enhancement Funds to enable me to complete the work. The Department of Archaeology at La Trobe University kindly gave me unlimited access to its computer and laboratory facilities. I am also grateful to the Cyprus Department of Antiquities for giving its permission for me to work on the sites, and to the staff of the Cyprus-American Archaeological Research Institute in Nicosia, Cyprus for providing me with access to their library and office facilities during the course of my fieldwork. Finally, I thank not only my own long-suffering family but also the Rymers, who extended overwhehning hospitality to me during the years of my studies.

IX

Chapter 1. Introduction

of the tombs have been excavated, and the paucity of published material, has resulted in a number of deficiencies in our knowledge. We know far less about the mortuary practices of this period than is usually assumed.

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION The mortuary archaeology of Prehistoric Bronze Age Cyprus - The problems and potential

This is partly because no complete compendium of published tombs from the Prehistoric Bronze Age had been compiled before 1995 (Davies 1995). His review of published mortuary data from EC-MC tombs demonstrated some of the flaws in the database. In 1995 twenty-four Prehistoric Bronze Age cemeteries yielding meaningful quantities of data had been published from Cyprus. Most of these were represented in the literature by only a handful of tombs, fifteen of them having ten or fewer published tombs (Davies 1995:54). Only Lapithos and Vounous contained in excess of a hundred published tombs (a sample size adequate for meaningful intra-site and inter-site analysis), and even the Vounous excavations had a far from ideal publication record (see Merrillees 1988).

When Luigi Palma di Cesnola published an account of his time on Cyprus in the nineteenth century he was able to boast of having explored (most would now say looted) sixty-five necropolises and almost 61 000 tombs from across the island and spanning all periods (Johnston 1878:452-3). With such an abundance of material derived from cemeteries it is little wonder that mortuary archaeology came to dominate the thinking of archaeologists on Cyprus over the next century. This preoccupation with the mortuary domain was particularly evident in the study of the Early and Middle Bronze Age, which received considerable encouragement in the early decades of the twentieth century from the excavation of the extensive Prehistoric Bronze Age cemeteries of Lapithos Vrysi tau Barba and Bellapais Vounous. The artefacts recovered from these two north coast sites became the foundations upon which typologies, chronologies and histories were based.

A recent review of Philia mortuary remains, which belong to the period of transition from the Chalcolithic to the Early Bronze Age, presents an equally disappointing picture. Philia burials are represented at only fifteen sites. None of these Philia cemeteries is represented in publications by more than a handful of tombs (Webb and Frankel 1999:8-12).

Over the last 150 years countless tombs have been illegally opened, or excavated under difficult rescue conditions, with the result that a great many artefacts are now known but are inadequately provenanced or published. The archaeological record of the Prehistoric Bronze Age (i.e. the Early and Middle Cypriot Periods, including the Philia period) has suffered particularly badly in this regard. Consequently, mortuary practices from this period have been reconstructed using an imperfect database.

This small sample of Prehistoric Bronze Age cemeteries is also affected by a regional bias in favour of the north coast. The central region and south coast of the island are seriously under-represented (Davies 1995:65-66, Table 1). Although there are six published Prehistoric Bronze Age cemeteries on the north coast, and the central region and south coast region have eleven and seven respectively, most of the central and south coast cemeteries are represented by only a few tombs. This bias is similarly reflected in the numbers of ceramic, stone and metal artefacts recorded (Davies 1995: Tables 10ft). The great majority of individual tombs and artefacts derive from the north coast sites of Vounous and Lapithos. A byproduct of this bias in the data is that aspects of the north coast mortuary domain, which may be regional idiosyncrasies, have been assumed to apply to the other regions on the island.

In recent decades there has been a shift in focus away

from mortuary archaeology, with the record of the Early and Middle Bronze Age being more fully investigated through the excavation of settlements such as Marki Alonia (Frankel and Webb 1996, 1997, 1999, 2000, 2001 ), Alambra Mouttes (Coleman et al. 1996) and Sotira Kaminoudhia (Swiny 1985a and 1985b; see also Held 1988). Given the large quantities of artefacts already known to derive from burials of the Prehistoric Bronze Age, archaeologists on Cyprus might well be forgiven for questioning the value of a great deal more work on cemeteries from the period.

These difficulties are further compounded by a chronological bias in the data in favour of later (i.e. MC I - MC III) tombs (Davies 1995:67). Of the 12 694 published ceramic artefacts recovered from Prehistoric Bronze Age cemeteries, 7651 derive from MC I-MC III tombs. Only 3241 come from EC I-EC III tombs (Davies 1995:73).

fact, Cypriot archaeology is still in need of scientifically conducted cemetery-based projects. Although it is true to say that a great deal of artefactual material has been recovered from Prehistoric Bronze Age cemeteries, it is incorrect to assume that this has resulted in a complete picture of the mortuary practices of the period emerging. The haphazard manner in which many In

Notwithstanding these difficulties an archaeologist investigating Prehistoric Bronze Age mortuary practices might, at first glance, consider that he or she still had a

1

Chapter 1. Introduction

sizable sample to work with: 571 individual published tombs, 12 694 recorded ceramic artefacts, and 1408 metal artefacts (Davies 1995:80). However, this collection is derived from a particularly disturbed dataset. Of the 571 tombs noted, only seven (1.2%) were intact at the time of excavation. Only 322 of the others (56.4%) could be classified as being of medium quality (i.e. all artefacts were recorded, there was no evidence of looting but there was incomplete skeletal data and some structural damage) (Davies 1995:41). A further 262 (42.4%) showed major structural damage and evidence of looting (Davies 1995:41).

Kalavasos over the last twenty years have (through survey and excavation) gathered data from a considerable assemblage of Prehistoric Bronze Age artefacts, recovered from both settlements and cemeteries in the Vasilikos Valley (Todd 1985, 1986, 1988, 1989). However, although the project has a good publication record, little detailed inter-assemblage comparative analysis has yet been done (though some general comparative work has been published e.g. Todd 1985:69ff and Todd 1993). Similarly, the settlement of Sotira Kaminoudhia was excavated together with twentyone tombs from its cemeteries. However, to date, very little of the ceramic data has been published, with only Since Davies' inventory of mortuary data in 1995, a small general comparisons being made between the ceramics from the settlement and those from the cemeteries (Swiny amount of additional material has been published ( e.g. Belgiomo 1995 and 1997; Ba~oupavciKTJS and MayyivT]c; 1985a; Swiny 1985b; Swiny 1991). 1995; Coleman et al. 1996; Frankel and Webb 1996, 1997; Moyer 1997; Webb and Frankel 2001), some of it The Cornell University excavations at Alambra serving to reinforce the north coast bias (e.g. Kehrberg commenced with a full appreciation of the need for 1995). However, the database remains deficient in many Prehistoric Bronze Age cemeteries to be excavated with respects. Most particularly, very few cemeteries have their parent settlement (Coleman et al. 1983:85). Alambra been excavated in conjunction with their parent provided a rare opportunity to do just that. However, the excavations produced a disappointingly small sample of settlements (Coleman et al. 1983:85 for a slightly outdated list), with the result that comparisons between grave goods. Nevertheless, an effort was made to draw mortuary and settlement assemblages are limited. The comparisons between the settlement and cemetery settlements associated with the largest excavated assemblages. Although it concludes that the assemblages are generally of similar character and composition Prehistoric Bronze Age cemeteries (Lapithos, Vounous, Nicosia Ayia Paraskevi and Katydhata) have not been (Coleman et al. 1983:88; 1996:266), the project also located. Where associated cemeteries and settlements identified some vessel shapes and wares with a higher were excavated, the mortuary domain was usually representation in the cemeteries (Coleman et al. 1983:87; represented by only a handful of tombs (often disturbed), 1996: 117-8). However, the small sample size and the or the settlement was represented by only a small disturbance to many of the tombs caused by looting and exposure, and little, if any, explicit comparison between natural processes presented the Alambra excavations with the same problems as those confronted by Webb (1992) the assemblages was made or was possible ( e.g. Kyra Alonia (Dikaios 1962), Ambelikou Aletri (Dikaios 1945, in another rare example of a comparison between cited in Coleman et al. 1983:85), Nitovikla (Gjerstad et cemetery and settlement assemblages. al. 1934; Astrom 1972a:3ff), Enkomi (Dikaios 1969), Other deficiencies in the Prehistoric Bronze Age Kalopsidha (Astrom 1966, 1972a) and Ayios Iakovos mortuary record can also be identified. For example, (Astrom 1972a:1, 10, 178)). In some cases, cemeteries were excavated instead of settlements lmown to be there is a need for more specimens of human skeletal nearby, as was the case at Myrtou Stephania (Hennessy remains to be added to the existing, inadequate dataset, 1963). due to a failure by earlier cemetery excavations to conserve and store skeletal material (Bright 1995), and Some examples of joint settlement-cemetery excavations because it is often very poorly preserved. Skeletal do exist. However, the focus of these projects was usually remains were frequently undervalued in the past with skulls (if anything) often being favoured because it was the settlement assemblage with only brief reference being made to inter-assemblage comparisons. Other examples believed that they would assist in the study of race and remain inadequately published, with the result that by ethnicity (Bright 1995). As a result, age and sex profiles 1997 only 571 chambers out of a total of around 1017 are difficult to generate from the data. For example, in excavated and salvaged chambers had been published, 1995, of 571 published Prehistoric Bronze Age tombs and only 324 of these were intact (Davies 1997:12ff). For only a small number could be assigned to a particular example, at Episkopi Phaneromeni the settlement and gender solely by reference to the osteological evidence cemeteries were excavated together and comparisons (eighteen female burials, fourteen male burials and six were made between assemblages. However, this was mixed burials) (Davies 1995:71). Although this problem initially done with an inadequate appreciation of the fact is being addressed by some recent work (e.g. Moyer 1985 that the settlement almost entirely post-dated the and 1997; Fischer 1986; Coleman et al. 1996:515-518; Prehistoric Bronze Age tombs, with seriously misleading Shulte-Campbell 1986; see also Lunt 1995 on results (Weinberg 1965:193; see Carpenter 1981 for the Chalcolithic remains), more remains to be done. revised chronology). The archaeologists working at

2

Chapter 1. Introduction

Finally, the mortuary record of the Prehistoric Bronze Age is made difficult to interpret by the nature of the burial process itself (multiple interments commonly disturb the burial context), and by the widespread looting activities on the island. These issues will be discussed in more detail in Chapter 4.

Nicolaou 1988:Tomb 167 Dhenia Kafka/la and Tomb 25 Dhenia Mali for bell-shaped tombs). They are found dug into soft havara (e.g. Nicolaou and Nicolaou 1988:71), soft pillow lavas (e.g. Coleman et al. 1996:114) and stony fanglomerate (e.g. Frankel and Webb 1996:llff). They are commonly 0.5-1.5 m deep, circular in shape and with flattened bases. They usually contained only one burial.

Notwithstanding these many difficulties some general observations can be made about Prehistoric Bronze Age burial practices on Cyprus. The period is characterised by two main types of tomb, often present together in the one cemetery: chamber tombs and pit tombs. Chamber tombs are usually cut into soft limestone havara or the harder kajkalla (e.g. Gjerstad 1926:48ff; Dikaios 1940:95-6; Todd 1986:24; Frankel and Webb 1997:91ff), into the sides of sloping ground on ridges, hills, scarps and plateaux (e.g. Stewart 1962; Nicolaou and Nicolaou 1988; Herscher and Swiny 1992; Frankel and Webb 1997:91), though Lapithos and parts of Dhenia are notable exceptions, being vertical shafts in level ground (Stewart 1962:215; Schaeffer 1936: PL IV.2; Nicolaou and Nicolaou 1988). Chamber tombs were usually entered through a short square or rectangular dramas or shaft (e.g. Stewart and Stewart 1950:Tombs 81, 83, 85, 87; Schaeffer 1936:11 (Fig.4) and 13 (Fig. 5)), though longer and more elaborate dromoi are occasionally found (e.g. Tombs 1-2 in Hennessy, Eriksson and Kehrberg 1988). Although one dramas usually served a single chamber tomb, with time a single dromos might link a number of chamber tombs (e.g. Stewart and Stewart 1950:224; Schaeffer 1936:17). The entrance (stomion) to the chamber was commonly sealed with a single worked stone (plaka/stomion block) (e.g. Stewart 1962:216; Frankel and Webb 1997:91; Astrom and Flourentzos 1989:Tombs 28 and 73). However, rare examples were walled closed (Hennessy, Eriksson and Kehrberg 1988:25ff, and Figs. 34 and 57a-b), or sealed with a stomion block held in place by numerous smaller stones (e.g. Stewart and Stewart 1950:131; Schaeffer 1936: Pl.VII.3). Chamber tombs are usually rounded or oval in shape (e.g. Dikaios 1940:97; Todd 1986:24; Frankel and Webb 1997:92). However, oblong ones are also reported (Herscher and Swiny 1992). Chamber dimensions vary but they are usually approximately 2-3 m in diameter with a flat floor and a domed roof around 1.2 m high. They are large enough to accommodate several bodies. The chambers are sometimes furnished with small niches and platforms (e.g. Gjerstad 1926:76, 81; Dikaios 1940: 97-98; Stewart 1962: 216ft). Some chamber tombs are inter-connected. Rare examples have carvings on the dromoi (Stewart and Stewart 1950:160, 162, 165; Frankel and Tamvaki 1973; Merrillees 1994).

The type of tomb used, and the shape and orientation of the tomb itself, was apparently determined by the topography and geology of the land available for the cemetery (Dikaios 1940:95-6; Webb 1992:87). Although intact tombs survive, the majority of Prehistoric Bronze Age tombs have been damaged by flooding, tomb collapse and looting. The cemeteries are extra-mural, which contrasts with the tradition prevailing during the Chalcolithic. However, isolated examples of intra-mural burials are recorded at Marki Alonia (Frankel and Webb 1996, 1997, 2000; Moyer 1997) and Sotira Kaminoudhia (Swiny 1985a: 120121). Where both cemeteries and settlements are known, they are almost always distinct from one another (although rarely in excess of 1 km apart). However, cemeteries and habitation areas could also be in very close proximity to each other, with the distinctions between tomb clusters and habitation areas being somewhat less clear ( e.g. parts of Alambra, Coleman et al. 1996). A settlement could also have multiple cemetery areas as at Marki and Alambra. Chamber tombs were used for multiple successive burials, especially after EC II, though there are some examples of multiple contemporary burials (Keswani 1989:232-3). However, tombs rarely contained more than two or three bodies (Keswani 1989:229). These group burials have been interpreted as being family tombs (Keswani 1989:228; Kehrberg 1995:129) but this has not been scientifically confirmed (for example, by DNA testing). The deceased was usually placed in the extended position, though some are crouched and on their sides. However, there is little consistency in the orientation of the bodies within tombs. There may be a small tendency to place the head closest to the dramas (Dikaios 1940:989). No obvious distinction is made between the sexes (Webb 1992:88). Children are under-represented in the mortuary record (possibly due to differential rates of preservation). Where they are found they are often placed in specially cut niches (Webb 1992:88; Keswani 1989:229). There is no clear evidence of secondary burial (Webb 1992:88; contrast Keswani 1989:231). The deceased was apparently buried fully clothed (Webb 1992:90). The body was buried with a variety of grave goods, these being pushed aside, with the old bones, with each successive burial (e.g. Todd 1986). Ceramic grave goods predominate but metal, bone, shell and faience artefacts (Todd 1986) are also found. The grave goods are generally utilitarian in nature, and the mortuary

Pit tombs ( e.g. Hennessy, Eriksson and Kehrberg 1988:12ff; Frankel and Webb 1997; Coleman et al. 1996:113ff) have been subdivided into 'open' and 'closed' pits (i.e. those with vertical sides, as opposed to those with incurving sides which create a bell-shaped interior) (Coleman et al. 1996:114; see also Nicolaou and

3

Chapter 1. Introduction

assemblages are very similar in character and composition to settlement assemblages, as best as can be determined from the few inter-assemblage comparisons made. Many ceramic artefacts show signs of use prior to burial (Dugay 1996). Items of personal adornment (pins, earrings, beads) are also recovered.

scholars have demonstrated a desire to move beyond merely descriptive studies of the mortuary data. For example, as early as 1940, Dikaios made some attempt at Vounous to identify funerary behaviour by reference to tomb size and orientation, and body position. He concluded that most of these factors were determined by simpler matters, such as the topography and geology of the cemetery (Dikaios 1940). Similarly, in the early 1970s Frankel used elements of the mortuary record (in conjunction with other data) to develop a model of interregional interaction based on the exploitation of certain resources and the movement of women between villages upon marriage (Frankel 1973 and 1974). In the following year the same author used potters marks from Vounous A in an attempt to establish social relationships between burial groups (Frankel 1975). This represented an advance on the similar work of Hennessy who identified a number of individual potters from tomb assemblages but took the data no further (Hennessy 1973). Frankel has since used mortuary remains to analyse issues concerning the organization of ceramic production, and social complexity (1988). By 1983 mortuary data were being used to explain the transition from the Chalcolithic to the Early Bronze Age on Cyprus (Bolger 1983), and in 1995 some attempt at inter-assemblage comparison was made (Kehrberg 1995: 149ft).

Obvious status symbols are rare, although metal hoards and pieces (Astrom and Flourentzos 1989; Coleman et al. 1996:138) and imported objects (e.g. Keswani 1989:235; Kehrberg 1995:32, 110, 170) may have served this purpose. Cult or ritual pieces (if they existed) are also difficult to identify with confidence. Plank figurines were once thought to have a specific mortuary function (e.g. Merrillees 1994) but this can now be challenged given that they have been found in domestic contexts (Webb 1992:90; Lubsen Admiraal 1994:29ff). Some have argued that other unusual items ( e.g. pyxides, zoomorphic vessels and composite vessels) may have served a ritual or ceremonial function (e.g. Keswani 1989:224; Kehrberg 1995:47, 78; Webb 1992:89; Stewart 1950: PL LXXXI; Schaeffer 1936:33). Striking artefacts ( e.g. the wellknown 'shrine' models and 'sacred enclosure' model) have been similarly explained (Karageorghis 1970; Dikaios 1940:101). The presence of animal bones in some tombs might also imply ritual behaviour ( e.g. feasting or sacrifices) though this has been disputed ( e.g. Gjerstad 1926:76-77; Kehrberg 1995: 141ff; Astrom and Flourentzos 1989:40).

Similarly, Webb (1992) conducted a systematic study of the formal attributes of Prehistoric Bronze Age burials. Webb was critical of earlier assumptions as to beliefs in the afterlife in the Prehistoric Bronze Age ( and later) as being based on "broadly stereotyped behaviour in the burial record" with little attempt being made "to distinguish ritual activity, based on formal ideological prescriptions" (Webb 1992:87). However, she was unable to find any persuasive evidence of a belief in the afterlife, largely because such 'beliefs' are not amenable to archaeological demonstration. This problem, she found, was compounded by the considerable disturbance caused to the Bronze Age mortuary record by floods, agriculture and looting. Where certain consistent features were identified (which have been or might be interpreted as being of ritual or ceremonial derivation) they could usually be explained by reference to the topography and geology of the cemetery (e.g. shape and orientation of tombs, orientation of bodies within tombs) (Webb 1992:96).

This brief summary of mortuary practices of the Prehistoric Bronze Age necessarily deals in generalisations and is coloured by the biases already noted in the data. It is also largely descriptive. Unfortunately, the literature dealing with this period has rarely moved beyond descriptions into behavioural archaeology and social reconstructions. This is in part due to the deficiencies described above in the data. These deficiencies have placed serious obstacles in the path of archaeologists who want to attempt any reconstruction of Prehistoric Bronze Age social history generally, and mortuary practices specifically. This is another reason why further mortuary research on the island is necessary. Archaeologists of Cyprus' mortuary remains have been criticised for their preoccupation with the cataloguing of artefacts at the expense of deeper social analysis; that is, they have been accused of being too descriptive while failing to provide synthesis and analysis (particularly as regards burial customs) (Bright 1995). Although there is some truth in this observation with regard to archaeologists of the Prehistoric Bronze Age, it is perhaps a little ungenerous in that it was only through this early work that comprehensive typologies and chronologies (that form the foundations of almost all subsequent ceramic studies) could be generated.

Furthermore, while noting the dangers inherent in the assumption of an association between grave goods and ritual beliefs or ceremony, Webb analysed a small sample of tomb pottery (largely from the later periods of the Bronze Age) and noted that the mortuary ceramics were generally the same as the settlement ceramics, with no clear indicators of ritual, ceremonial or symbolic meaning (zoomorphic vases being possible exceptions) (Webb 1992:89).

Furthermore, although the criticisms are broadly accurate, there are some notable exceptions. A small number of

4

Chapter 1. Introduction

Perhaps the most comprehensive study that has examined mortuary behaviour (primarily Late Bronze Age, though incorporating Prehistoric Bronze Age data) is Keswani (1989). Keswani sought to use mortuary evidence to identify social complexity, particularly social hierarchy. She reviewed a wide range of mortuary literature and theory, and emphasised the archaeological and ethnographic difficulties associated with the interpretation of burials (especially collective burials like those of the Prehistoric Bronze Age) (Keswani 1989:lff). Keswani concluded that reconstructing social hierarchies by reference to the mortuary record is fraught with difficulties given the levels of disturbance to the burials themselves, and the arbitrariness of symbolic behaviour. However, she then used tomb architecture and contents (sometimes incautiously, in spite of her own warnings) to argue for family burials in the Prehistoric Bronze Age within the context of specific rituals/ceremonies such as funeral festivities (Keswani 1989:234-5) and secondary burial (Keswani 1989:231), and the emergence of ranked groups within local communities (Keswani 1989:224). Keswani's conclusions are perhaps a little optimistic given the poor quality of the dataset. However, her work is an important contribution to that small body of literature from Cyprus which seeks to use mortuary data for other than simple descriptive purposes.

Cypriot period. However, before those cemeteries can be used to address the deficiencies in the mortuary data noted above, the effects of the looting that they have suffered must be understood and quantified. Looting activity on Cyprus

Tomb looting on Cyprus has a long history. In the nineteenth century men such as Luigi Pahna di Cesnola and Sir Robert Hamilton Lang systematically worked through cemeteries of all periods on the island, removing all antiquities of value to them (Goring 1988). Despite protestations to the contrary (Cesnola 1878:vii-viii), and in spite of occasional charitable and academic benefactions (e.g. Lang's gifts to the Glasgow Art Gallery and Museum (Goring 1988:9-10)), the 'excavations' conducted by these men (and others) amounted to little more than rampant plundering. Early efforts were made to curtail this behaviour (e.g. laws were passed between 1878 and 1890) (Goring 1988:2122) and more scientific excavations were undertaken (e.g. by Ohnefalsch-Richter and the Cyprus Exploration Fund). However, the damage done to Cyprus's ancient mortuary record in this period was enormous. The frustration expressed by scholars of the nineteenth century at the unscrupulous dealings of men like Cesnola, and the government's inability to stop them (e.g. Hogarth and Myres in Goring 1988: 11, 28), are echoes of similar complaints still heard on Cyprus today.

In summary, a number of observations can be made about the mortuary record of the Prehistoric Bronze Age on Cyprus:

•

Mortuary data for this period are far less complete than often assumed.

•

The database is small and unrepresentative. It displays a regional and chronological bias. Postdepositional disturbance has further damaged the database.

•

As a result, intra-site and inter-regional analysis has been inadequate, and the body of literature that utilises mortuary remains for the purposes of reconstructing social systems is particularly small.

•

Very few cemeteries have been excavated in conjunction with their parent settlements with the result that site-specific inter-assemblage comparisons have not yet been made in detail.

•

There is a distinct need for more systematic, scientific fieldwork on Prehistoric Bronze Age cemeteries on Cyprus.

The twentieth century was also characterised by regular and repeated tomb looting despite considerable efforts to stop it. The century began with the passing of an Antiquities Law (1905) aimed at controlling illegal excavations but the looting seems to have continued largely unchecked except for a brief lull during World War I (Herscher and Swiny 1992:69). The inauguration of the new Cyprus Museum in 1908 had little effect on the continued illegal activities. The Department of Antiquities was established in 1935 and a harsher Antiquities Law was passed (see UNESCO 1985 for the legislation with amendments), but by 1952 the problem was still so serious that measures had to be taken to increase surveillance on sites and tighten controls on licensed dealers (Herscher and Swiny 1992:69). These moves came too late for some of Marki Alonia 's tombs. A number of tombs (probably from the VounarosPappara cemetery) had already been plundered by as early as 1940 (Karageorghis 1958; Frankel and Webb 1996:11). In 1955 a State of Emergency was declared with some positive results for archaeology. Patrols and security searches slowed the looting for a time but by 1958-9 the tomb-robbers were back at work (Herscher and Swiny 1992:69).

In light of the above, new attention has been directed towards the five extensive cemeteries surrounding the Prehistoric Bronze Age site at Marki Alonia. These cemeteries contained around 786 pit and chamber tombs, and were in use from the Philia facies into the Middle

The 1960s and 1970s saw a sharp increase in intercommunal violence on Cyprus with the result that some areas were 'enclaved' and therefore beyond the supervision of the Department of Antiquities. In this

5

Chapter 1. Introduction

environment the looters thrived (Herscher and Swiny 1992:69-70). Unfortunately, Marki lay within one such enclave, and it suffered badly at the hands of looters from 1964 to 1974. A great many pieces were acquired in the 1970s by both public and private collections which have a recorded provenance of either Marki (or 'Margi') or nearby Kotsiatis (or 'Kotchati'), a place known to have been a distribution centre for illegally acquired antiquities from the area (Frankel and Webb 1996:12). These pieces augmented others purchased by collectors in the preceding decades. It seems certain that Marki Alonia 's cemeteries were major suppliers of EC-MC artefacts to collectors at this time (e.g. des Gagniers and Karageorghis 1976:18, Pl.11.2; Karageorghis 1991:117, 119-121, 132, 136, 148, 159, SC.I, 6, 10, 12, Pls. LXVLXVII, LXXVI-LXXIX, LXXXI-LXXXIII, XCl.2, XCV.3, CVI.1-1, CX.1, CXXVl.4; Karageorghis 1970, 1985:66ff; Swiny 1986:33, Fig. 55.c; Karageorghis 1991: 120-121, SC.9, Pl.LXXX, CM 1942/ XI-25/1; Morris 1985; Laffmeur and Vandenabeele 1990:56-57). Ironically, as the looting proliferated, a UN convention on means of preventing the illicit trade in world antiquities took place. However, Cyprus did not become a signatory to the convention until 1980 (Clement 1995; UNESCO 1985). Not surprisingly, by the early 1980s Swiny could describe one of Marki's cemeteries (Kappara) as looking like "a First World War battle field with dozens of little craters, each representing a looted tomb and its spoil heap" (Swiny 1986:36). Unfortunately Marki was not the only site to suffer in this way and, in fact, the looting of tombs on Cyprus continues to this day (for a relatively recent example in the Paramali Valley see Herscher and Swiny 1992).

over broken ones. When broken vessels were encountered it appears that they were simply removed with the spoil and dumped on the surface. As a result the cemeteries of Marki Alonia are covered in an extensive surface scatter of pottery (12 852 sherds were recorded during survey).

Project aims It is this surface scatter of pottery that forms the basis of this monograph. A decision was made to conduct a systematic, intensive site survey of a number of the cemeteries around Marki Alonia. The aims of this survey were:

Local informants report that in better policed areas the looting was commonly done at night. A vehicle would be driven up to the tombs and the contents of the tomb would be emptied into its boot. Sorting of the robbed material would be done later in the security of the looter's home. However, in poorly patrolled areas (like Marki in the 1960s-1970s) the looting could be carried out more systematically and in daylight. At Marki, the looters have thoroughly worked their way across entire cemeteries. It is said that the looters would walk across the site thumping the ground with a long pole, listening for a hollow sound indicating the presence of a tomb. The evidence at Marki suggests that the pit tombs were dug out (possibly with both pick and shovel) with little concern for the ancient edges of the tomb. The looters stopped digging when they reached sterile ground. Spoil was dumped immediately next to the tomb. Chamber tombs were sometimes entered through the prehistoric entrance, but were also often entered through a hole picked through the roof. Again, spoil was dumped adjacent to the looted tomb. It is possible that the spoil from one tomb was sometimes emptied into other tombs close by. Significantly, the looters appear to have been discerning. Undamaged vessels were clearly favoured

6

•

To fully document as many of the Prehistoric Bronze Age cemeteries of Marki Alonia as possible, beyond the more general level of previous surveys (e.g. Karageorghis 1958: 146151; Catling 1963: 152; Stanley Price 1979; Held 1992:80; Franl-:el and Webb 1996:5ft). This documentation would involve the use of electronic surveying equipment to record precisely the location and character of the tombs, pottery, geology, vegetation and topography of the cemeteries.

•

To describe a large, Prehistoric Bronze Age ceramic assemblage, thereby producing a valuable resource for future reference.

•

To test the archaeological value of a looted cemetery on Cyprus. Salvage archaeology has been conducted on Cyprus for many decades (e.g. Karageorghis 1958; Herscher and Swiny 1992). However, it has generally been limited in scope. This aim is of considerable importance with respect to cultural resource management, particularly on an island that is being developed as rapidly as Cyprus.

•

To complement the work of the Australian Cyprus Expedition (ACE) carried out at the Prehistoric Bronze Age settlement of Marki Alonia. The survey formed a part of the wider ACE project.

•

To document a number of sizable Prehistoric Bronze Age cemeteries before they are permanently lost to development and natural processes.

•

To understand and quantify the taphonomic processes responsible for the existing archaeological record at Marki's cemeteries.

•

To use the data obtained by survey to conduct intrasite spatial analysis with a view to

Chapter 1. Introduction

identifying any meaningful social, chronological and topographic patterns. •

•

•

To conduct an intensive analysis of the ceramic artefacts from a number ofMarki's cemeteries in order to compare them to each other and to the assemblage from the neighbouring settlement. To help to correct the regional bias in the Prehistoric Bronze Age mortuary data by gathering data from cemeteries of the central region of Cyprus. To help to correct the chronological bias in the Prehistoric Bronze Age mortuary data by analysing ceramics from the earlier periods of the Prehistoric Bronze Age (including the Philia facies), which are represented at Marki's cemeteries.

7

•

To gather data from across entire cemeteries, not just from a few tombs within larger cemeteries, as has often been the case in the past.

•

To contribute to the debates amongst archaeologists concerning the nature of the Philia facies in the Prehistoric Bronze Age, and the rise of social complexity on the island, and to use the data obtained by the survey to consider social and ritual behaviour generally.

•

To apply the innovative, attribute-based recording system implemented by the Australian Cyprus Expedition at Marki Alonia. This issue will be discussed in more detail below in Chapter 5.

Chapter 2. The Cemeteries of Marki in Context

vicinity of Marki Alonia (Frankel and Webb 1996:6-7). With the exception of these sites there is no evidence of any other habitation in the area immediately before the Early Bronze Age (Frankel and Webb 1996:8). The Chalcolithic is not represented in the survey material (Frankel and Webb 1996:2). However, excavations at Marki Alonia have produced one Chalcolithic potsherd.

CHAPTER2 THE CEMETERIES CONTEXT

OF MARKI IN

Marki Alonia - the settlement

Marki Alonia was continuously occupied for all of the Early Bronze Age and into the Middle Bronze Age and can be dated to c. 2500/2300-lS00BC (Frankel and Webb 1996:2). By c.1700BC the focus of settlement had shifted c.1.3 kilometres west to Marki Reximon, which may have been a more defensible area (Frankel and Webb 1996:9). By the late Middle Bronze Age (MC ill-LC) the regional focus of settlement was 20 km east in the Ayios Sozomenos region (Rowe 1995; Catling 1963), while the small settlement at Reximon appears to have become an intermediary village linking these sites to nearby mining areas (Frankel and Webb 1996:9). By the middle of the Late Bronze Age the settlement of Analiondas Palioklichia, at the foot of Reximon Hill, may have been an agricultural processing and distribution site for the region (Frankel and Webb 1996:9).

Marki Alonia is an Early and Middle Cypriot Bronze Age settlement 16 km south of Nicosia in central Cyprus (see Fig. 1.1 and Plate 1). It is an estimated 5-6 ha in size, and located on gently sloping ground adjacent to what is now a high escarpment overlooking the south bank of the Alykos River. It was an agricultural settlement occupied probably continuously for approximately 500 years. Marki Alonia grew from a small original population of probably several families in the Philia period (around 50 people) to a peak of around 400 people by the beginning of the MBA (Frankel and Webb, in press, revising Adams and Simmons 1996:24). They engaged in plough agriculture, and they produced wheat, barley, olives, pulses and grapes (Adams and Simmons 1996:22). Faunal remains indicate that Marki Alonia 's inhabitants had domesticated sheep and goats, cattle, donkeys and pigs, and although they appear to have valued these animals primarily for meat they also made use of their secondary products (traction, milk and wool) (Croft 1996:218ff). Wild deer were also hunted to supplement the diet (Croft 1996:219).

Initial surveys and small-scale excavation of the cemeteries around Marki Alonia indicated that the Philia facies of the Early Bronze Age is represented in the upper portions of Davari cemetery, and possibly at VounarosPappara. The rest of the cemeteries had been assigned by reference to the excavated, rescued and survey material mainly to EC ill-MC I (Frankel and Webb 1996:11-15).

Marki Alonia 's development appears to have been characterised by a continuous process of expansion and localised demolition, rebuilding and renovation, with newer structures built against or over older ones (Frankel and Webb 1999). The rectilinear architecture is generally typical of the period, though some interior features are possibly unique to Marki Alonia (see Frankel and Webb 1996:53ff on kerbs, benches and pot emplacements). Copper/bronze artefacts have been found in small quantities (Frankel and Webb 1996:213-214) (see also p. 95 below), while a considerable quantity of lithic artefacts (especially ground stone) has been excavated (Frankel and Webb 1996:72ff; Smith 1996; Debney 1997)(see also p. 95 below). The ceramic assemblage conforms generally to the island-wide tradition, being dominated by Red Polished Ware (RP) (Frankel and Webb 1996:113). RP (Philia) is also well represented (Frankel and Webb 2000). Marki Alonia's ceramic assemblage will be discussed in detail in Chapter 5 below.

The environment

Geology and geography Marki Alonia and the neighbouring cemeteries are located in an area distinguished by a sharp division between the sedimentary regime of the Cypriot central plain and the igneous foothills of the Troodos massif (Gass 1960; Frankel and Webb 1996:2; Xenophontos 1996:16). To the north and east of Marki Alonia there are distinctive sedimentary plateaux and long ridges of sedimentary chalks, marls and limestones. These regions are hilly and the soils often shallow and degraded but in areas they are suited to cultivation. Rugged and eroded igneous pillow lavas lie to Marki Alonia 's south and west, forming bare and rocky hills interspersed with narrow valleys (Xenophontos 1996:16). The Alykos River follows the interface between the sedimentary north and igneous south for much of its course. Where it reaches Marki Alonia the river has created a ten metre high cliff by cutting through the old river terraces (Xenophontos 1996:16). The northern edge of the settlement now overlooks the cliff edge, giving it great prominence when viewed from Davari and Kappara. The settlement is built on a bedrock of weathered marl and marly chalk (locally

Site chronology

Two prehistoric lithic scatters (Ayia Varvara Pyros and Kotsiatis Ormanli Laxia, c. 2 km north and 1.5 km south of Marki Alonia respectively) and one aceramic Neolithic site (Kataliondas Kourvellos) have been located in the

8

Chapter 2. The Cemeteries of Marki in Context

known as havara) and the deep colluvium which overlies the bedrock (Xenophontos 1996:16).

and Perakhorio is 369, 372 and 349 mm respectively, sufficient to sustain agriculture, and comfortably in excess of the 240 mm necessary for Near Eastern dry cereal cultivation (Xenophontos 1996: 17). The relevance of these factors as taphonomic processes affecting the surface assemblage at the cemeteries will be discussed in Chapter 4 below.

The cemeteries of Davari, Kappara and Davari-Kappara lie north of the Alykos on long ridges of sedimentary chalks, marls and limestones. The Vounaros and Pappara cemeteries are located south of the Alykos but they are north and northeast of the igneous-sedimentary divide. Therefore, they are also dug into bedded sedimentary chalks (Frankel and Webb 1996:11). No EC-MC tombs have yet been found in the igneous pillow lavas south and west of the settlement.

Vegetation The semi-arid environment of central Cyprus has probably always been characterised by evergreen woody trees (maquis) and shrubs (garrigue) (Adams and Simmons 1996:19). Reconstructions of vegetation for the immediate vicinity of Marki Alonia, based on established degradation sequences and proceeding from a theoretical ecological position (Adams and Simmons 1996:19, 21), argue that prior to human occupation the chalk cliffs and hills north and east of the Alykos (including Davari, Kappara and Vounaros) were covered with a low maquis with patches of taller maquis where conditions allowed (Kermes Oak, Golden Oak, Mediterranean Medlar and possibly Calabrian Pine) (Adams and Simmons 1996:22). The pillow lavas to the south and west of Marki Alonia probably sustained a mix of taller arborescent maquis and patches of forest, with a shrubby understorey (Adams and Simmons 1996:22). The river was probably fringed with a typical scrubby riparian environment with open forest and woodland (Holm Oak, Kermes Oak and Calabrian Pine) extending along the valley (Adams and Simmons 1996:22).

The Alykos River flows only intermittently, being dry for all but the winter months. Like all rivers in the region it trends northwards, away from the Troodos. It is joined further downstream by the Almyros River and meets the Yalias River, in the Ayios Sozomenos region (Frankel and Webb 1996:5). Copper reserves exist in the foothills of the Troodos 5-10 km away but there are none in the immediate vicinity of Marki Alonia (Xenophontos 1996:16). There are two springs c. 400 m northwest of the site, a short distance from Davari (Xenophontos 1996: 17), and there were probably more in prehistory (Xenophontos 1996: 18). The amount of cultivable land around Marki Alonia now is probably similar to the amount present in the Early Bronze Age (Xenophontos 1996:17). Cereal crops were probably restricted to the river terraces of the Alykos flood plain and to open areas south and southeast of the settlement, and north of Vounaros Hill (Xenophontos 1996:17).

By 2000BC when the settlement was at a peak, the cultivable floodplains and flatter areas had almost certainly been cleared and replaced with cereal crops. Although the riparian habitat was probably being heavily cut and grazed it may have regenerated quickly enough to remain relatively intact. Burning, clearing and grazing are likely to have reduced most arborescent maquis to a low maquis, while the low maquis originally on the chalky ridges of Davari, Kappara and Vounaros was probably reduced to patchy maquis-garrigue (Adams and Simmons 1996:22). However, this reconstruction does not consider the possibility that all maquis on these slopes was systematically cleared in order to open the area for the cemeteries.

The local stone resources available for working include vesicular lava, diabase, gabbro, silicified umber, red and green jasper, chalk and chalk with chert (Xenophontos 1996: 18). Large blocks of yellow calcarenite found in both the settlement at Alonia and the cemeteries, are notable imports from over ten kilometres away (Xenophontos 1996:18).

Climate The modem climate around Marki Alonia is a typically semi-arid Mediterranean one (Adams and Simmons 1996:19), and probably similar to that prevailing in the Bronze Age (Xenophontos 1996:17). The mean daily maximum is 24° C and the mean daily minimum is 13.2° C (Xenophontos 1996:17). Summers are hot and dry, with July and August being the hottest months (34.9° C and 34.7° C mean daily max. respectively). January and February are the coldest months (mean daily min. of 5.9° C and 5.7° C respectively) (Xenophontos 1996: 17). Ground frost occurs only occasionally (Xenophontos 1996: 17). Precipitation occurs mostly as rainfall and is concentrated in the winter months between October and March (Xenophontos 1996:17). The mean yearly precipitation for the nearby towns of Politico, Analiondas

The reduction in vegetation cover caused by human occupation is likely to have resulted in some soil loss. However, similar regimes appear to stabilise in time, and there was therefore probably no severe soil degradation (Adams and Simmons 1996:23).

The cemeteries in the vicinity of Marki Alonia Marki Alonia is roughly encircled by at least five discrete cemeteries (Figure 1.2 and Plate 1). In the discussion that

9

Chapter 2. The Cemeteries of Marki in Context

follows the word 'cemetery' will be used (following Pardoe 1988:1-2) to mean: •

An area with a 'significant' number of burials (significance depending on the context).

•

Where those burials are 'contiguous' i.e. adjacent to each other, and where later burials are placed within the same area on the basis of earlier interments being known to be at that place.

•

Where the burial area 1s bounded (e.g. by a natural landform).

•

And where the area is used exclusively for burial purposes.

In places it underlies a thin, harder skin of limestone

known locally as kajkalla (Gass 1960:59). The lower tier is dominated by the local fanglomerate. This fanglomerate takes the form of a heterogeneous collection of igneous rocks and cherts, the fragments varying in size from pebbles of only a few centimetres to large stones 30 cm across. This fanglomerate shows considerable cementation in places, being well bonded by secondary limestone (Gass 1960:57). The fanglomerates are therefore relatively difficult to dig. However, in places they are shallow and/or poorly cemented, and overlie the soft, easily excavated havara (Plate 6). Davari is steepest on the east faces of the upper and middle tiers (see Plate 7). No tombs were located on these faces. By contrast, the lower tier is relatively flat, sloping only gradually to the surrounding fields (see Figure 1.5).

Of course, all five cemeteries around Marki Alonia might equally be regarded as elements of just the one cemetery. Thus, Coleman et al. (1996:113) prefer the term 'cluster' in describing the burial areas around Alambra. However, although the five cemeteries at Marki are all generally contemporary and share many features, each is defined clearly enough by the local topography and by the extent of the associated surface scatters to be regarded as distinct entities. Each cemetery is identified below (following Frankel and Webb 1996:6) with grid references from the Cyprus 1:5000 topographic maps (Series DLS 17 (DOS 155) 1976, 1977), and Cyprus Survey (CS) site numbers are included where available. In some cases several numbers appear to refer to the same site:

The fields around Davari are only under cultivation during the wetter months. The shallow stony soils support grain crops interspersed with numerous well-established olive trees. The fields extend all the way to the edges of the ridge, and ploughing has disturbed some of the lowest placed tombs at the foot of the lower tier. All the surrounding land has been utilised for agriculture except for a long, narrow escarpment extending in a southward line from the south-east edge of the lower tier. No tombs were placed in or near this escarpment. For most of the year Davari is a bare ridge with only the hardiest vegetation surviving on its slopes (generally thyme bushes and a handful of short thorny trees) (Figure 1.8). The more sheltered gullies support tussocks of long grass. Similarly, the depressions formed by the looted tombs, especially the chamber tombs, support long grass and thyme. In the wetter winter months the vegetation cover increases considerably over all of the tiers. However, even in winter when vegetation cover is at its thickest, Davari is only lightly vegetated (see Figures 1.9 and 1.10).

Marki Davari (30/XXIX 294765, CS 2659) Also known as Tavari and Touvari, hereafter 'Davari'. Davari is located approximately 450 m northwest of Marki Alonia on a narrow limestone ridge, approximately 200 m long (Figure 1.3; Plates 2 and 3). It lies north of the Alykos River, which separates it from the parent settlement at Marki. The ridge is on a north-south orientation. It joins a high limestone hill immediately to its north. The ridge can be divided into three distinct tiers, hereafter called the upper tier, the middle tier and the lower tier (Figures 1.4, 1.5, 1.6 and 1.7. See also Figure 1. 15). Each tier is characterised by its own distinct geology (see Figures 1.23 and 1.24 discussed below p. 24).

The three tiers are distinguished by specific forms of tomb architecture. In 1994 a survey by the Australian Cyprus Expedition identified approximately 324 tombs at Davari (Frankel and Webb 1996:13) - nine in the upper tier, about 160 in the lower tier and about 150 in the middle tier (Figure 1.3). All of these tombs have been looted, the main period of illegal activity being in the 1960s and 1970s (the nature of these looting activities will be discussed in more detail in Chapter 4). However, many of the tombs in the middle tier still present clearly, in spite of the looting, as chamber tombs of considerable size. Although part of the roof has often collapsed they retain their basic form: the original tomb entrance sometimes survives as a round hole c. 50 cm across, with a domed interior, sometimes still a metre or more in diameter in spite of roof collapse. Most chamber tombs have circular holes cut through the roof, dug by the tomb-

The upper tier is characterised by tilted limestone with bedding planes running in a number of directions, which is hard and ill-suited to digging (Plate 4 ). By contrast, the middle tier is defined by a soft, white, secondary limestone, known locally as havara (Plate 5).

10

Chapter 2. The Cemeteries of Marki in Context

robbers in an effort to gain access to the tomb's interior. Large stones (c. 110 x 70 x 20 cm), some of them worked into rectangular shape, are still visible on the surface. They almost certainly served as stomion blocks/sealing stones for the chamber tombs. Most of these are limestone but many are made of calcarenite (imported from over 10 km away) (Plate 8. See also Plate 14). Smaller fragments of white laminated gypsum are also visible on the surface (probably deriving from deposits north ofKotsiatis c. 3 km away) (Gass 1960:103).

earth moving equipment into the base of the ridge. They are big enough to accommodate tanks and artillery. Fortunately, these trenches are all on the steeper sides of Davari, on the east and west slopes, and do not appear to have damaged many, if any, tombs. However, some bulldozing on the southern edge of the lower tier has clearly destroyed around thirty tombs in an area of roughly 30 x 10 m (Figures 1.6 and 1.14). One positive result of this activity is that it provides some useful geological sections.

Nine pit tombs have been identified in the upper tier. They survive now as shallow depressions approximately lm across, filled with fine wash and light grass and shrubs.

The remnants of a small stone structure are evident on the northern part of the lower tier at Davari (Figures 1.6 and 1.16). A number of tombs have been damaged in its construction, and it clearly post-dates those tombs. The presence of some tile fragments in its vicinity suggests a late date. It is a rectangular construction measuring approximately 4 x 4.3 m, made of river cobbles and limestone pieces. Only one course survives. Its precise function is uncertain.

The lower tier is dominated by what were all probably pit tombs cut into the stony fanglomerate. They generally survive as shallow depressions c. l m across with some slope wash and vegetation in them. However, some of the tombs are considerably larger than the other tombs. Some of the largest of these lie in close proximity to each other on the western edge of the lower tier, and give the impression of deliberate clustering. One cluster of three pit tombs (Tombs 200, 201, 202, see Figure 1.11) may even have been interconnected, and one of them may have incorporated a small niche or recess in one side (though this may be a product of the looting activities).

Marki Kappara (30/XXIX 292766-293767, CS2653, CS 2658) (Figures 1.2 and 1.17)

Also known as Kapparia and Kapparka, hereafter 'Kappara'. Kappara is located approximately 750 m west north west of Marki, and approximately 120 m west of Davari (Plate 10). It is also north of the Alykos River and separated from the settlement by it. Kappara is also a limestone ridge being approximately 100 m long and 70 m wide, and like Davari, it is oriented on a roughly north-south alignment. It adjoins the same limestone hills to the north as Davari. In form it resembles a flat-topped plateau tilted a little from north to south. Its sides are relatively steep and littered with pottery slipping downslope. A large surface scatter of pottery extends across the top of the ridge, being the discard left behind by the looters who robbed the tombs here after the Second World War, mainly during the 1960s and 1970s. A 1994 survey by the Australian Cyprus Expedition identified approximately 310 tombs at Kappara (Frankel and Webb 1996:13). Most of the tombs are on top of the ridge. A few can also be seen on its sides and on small spurs radiating out from its edges. Most of the tombs appear to be chamber tombs dug into the soft havara.

Some of the pit tombs on the lower tier seem to have been furnished with long, flat capping stones, some of calcarenite and others of limestone, measuring c. 155 x 65 x 10 cm. In some cases the tomb robbers have even placed these stones over the looted tombs after the looting was completed, possibly in their original positions ( e.g. Tomb 170, Figure 1.12). A small number of tombs on the lower tier (e.g. Tombs 190 and 300) have flat limestone pieces (c. 40 x 30 x 8 cm) wedged upright at either end of the pit, apparently still in situ (Figure 1.13 and Plate 9). The middle tier contains a dense surface scatter of pottery. The upper and lower tiers display noticeably less surface pottery (see Figures 1.7, 1.14 and 1.15). The pottery lying on the surface at Davari is concentrated around the openings of tombs, and downslope of those tombs. It comprises the discard left behind by the tomb robbers. In some cases, when a tomb is somewhat isolated from the others, the scatter of pottery immediately around it is likely to derive mainly from that tomb. However, where tombs are clustered together the pottery in their vicinity gives the impression of having been substantially mixed by the looting activities.

In most other respects Kappara resembles Davari, though

it does not display the same obvious internal divisions as Davari. The same vegetation regimes predominate, and similar artefact scatters cover the site (though some ground stone tools are evident on the surface at Kappara, in contrast to Davari). The looted tombs also survive in the same form. Some army fox-holes have been established along Kappara 's eastern and southern edges but they are much smaller than the trenches at Davari. Although Kappara is separated from Davari by

The looters of this cemetery have left low mounds of spoil beside most of the tombs. These are particularly evident on the middle tier. Additionally, the island's military forces have excavated a number of military trenches into the sides of the ridge. These trenches take the form of large rectangular areas cut with mechanical

11

Chapter 2. The Cemeteries of Marki in Context

approximately 120 m of difficult terrain (mainly gullies in the eroded havara) its similarity to Davari caused Karageorghis (1958:147, 151) and Catling (1963:152) to regard the two cemeteries as being parts of the same necropolis in previous surveys.

surface scatter of pottery lies across the cemetery, deriving from the activities of tomb-robbers in recent decades. Vounaros has a thin cover of thyme bushes and grass, and a few short thorny trees.

Marki Davari-Kappara (30/XXIX 293765) (Figures 1.2 and 1.18)

Marki Vounaros-Pappara (30/XXIX 304761-302758, 39/V 300765, CS 994, CS 2381, CS 2655, CS 2660) (Figures 1.2 and 1.20)

Hereafter 'Davari-Kappara '.

Hereafter 'Vounaros-Pappara'.

Davari-Kappara is a small cemetery located between the ridges of Davari and Kappara. It lies approximately 700 m west north west of the settlement at Marki. It is separated from Davari's western edge by c. 70 m of ploughed fields. Davari-Kappara is a small knoll. Its eastern face slopes up gradually from the fields while its western face is a steep, almost perpendicular cliff cut by the Alykos River. Seven tombs can now be identified at Davari-Kappara, surv1vmg as shallow circular depressions. They were probably pit graves dug into the soft havara. A comparatively sparse scatter of pottery extends across Davari-Kappara to the edge of the ploughed fields. No other artefacts are evident.

Vounaros-Pappara is located mainly south and east of Marki Alonia, separated from the parent settlement by the Souvannik Dere (Plates 12 and 13). This collection of tombs forms the least coherent cluster. It stretches for several hundred metres along a low scarp, from the southern slopes of V ounaros Hill, southwards and westwards to the igneous ridges southwest of Marki Alonia. It may be more correct to regard this cemetery as a broken line of tomb clusters rather than as a single cemetery. Much of the cemetery has been damaged by modem building activity. A dairy has been built on the southern slopes of V ounaros Hill, destroying numerous tombs at the eastern end of the cemetery. Several houses and both sealed and unsealed roads have damaged and destroyed others. Vounaros-Pappara has also suffered at the hands of looters. 107 tombs were recorded at VounarosPappara in the Australian Cyprus Expedition's 1994 survey (Frankel and Webb 1996:13). However, they are badly preserved and there are few surface artefacts still visible. The tombs are cut into the top and slopes of the scarp, into soft limestone havara. Many seem to have been chamber tombs, some of considerable size. At the western end of this long, narrow cemetery (in the vicinity of Marki Mavroyi), the tombs overlook the course of the Souvannik Dere. No tombs have been located in the igneous rock at the western end of the cemetery, where the contrast between the sedimentary regime and hard igneous rocks is particularly stark. Where the cemetery has not been lightly ploughed, and planted with grain crops and fodder for the nearby dairy, it is dominated by a light cover of scrub, especially thyme.

Marki Vounaros (30/XXIX 303764) (Figures 1.2 and 1.19) Hereafter 'Vounaros '. (Note that the cemetery identified as Vounaros by Karageorghis (1958) and Catling (1963), is the cemetery described below as Vounaros-Pappara). Vounaros is located approximately 75 m east of Marki Alonia and south of the Alykos River (Plate 11). However, it is separated from the settlement by a feeder stream (the Souvannik Dere). The tombs of the cemetery are concentrated on the lower northern slopes of Vounaros Hill. There are approximately thirty-eight tombs in all. About half of those tombs now form shallow depressions, implying that they were probably pit tombs. The remaining tombs are considerably deeper and may have been chamber tombs. A few large squared stones lying near these tombs are probably stomion blocks, which would confirm this identification. The tombs are dug in three to five roughly east-west rows, following the northern edge ofVounaros Hill. They are cut into havara. The western edge of the cemetery is defmed by a steep, short cliff cut by the Alykos River. The northern and eastern edges stop at ploughed fields. It is impossible to tell whether any tombs were lost to this agricultural activity, but it seems unlikely that the tombs would have extended any distance away from the base of the hillslope and damage to the tombs seems to have been minimal. The tombs do not extend southwards any distance up the slope of V ounaros Hill, where the ground becomes a harder layered limestone. A relatively sparse

Other sites in the vicinity of Marki Alonia

Although there were a number of prehistoric sites in the Alykos River Valley (Frankel and Webb 1996:6-8), Marki Alonia was the largest settlement in the inmiediate vicinity of the cemeteries and was their primary source. However, Marki Alonia need not have been the only settlement associated with the surrounding cemeteries. Marki is only one of a number of roughly contemporary sites in the region (Frankel and Webb 1996:6-7):

12

Chapter 2. The Cemeteries of Marki in Context

•

•

•

Marki Alonia and reflect similar phases of development in the Central Cyprus region:

Kotsiatis Ayia Varvara and Kotsiatis Asprokremmos - Early and Middle Cypriot sites reported as being 3 km south of Marki Alonia (Catling 1963:157; Frankel and Webb 1996:5, citing Swiny ). These could not be found by the ACE in its survey of the area in 1990. They are beyond the catchment of the cemeteries. Marki Palioklichia (30/XXVIII 285763-287764, CS 2657) - A Middle to Late Cypriot site located approximately 1.7 kilometres north-west of Marki Alonia, and a possible alternative source for the cemeteries at Davari and Kappara (Frankel and Webb 1996:7). It is represented now by a sparse though extensive surface scatter. It appears from the surface ceramics to belong to only the latest phases of the cemeteries' use. Marki Reximon (30/XXVIII 287761) - a small cemetery of about twenty-five tombs and a nearby surface scatter suggestive of Middle Cypriot habitation, approximately 1.2 km west of Marki Alonia. Nothing remains of these tombs since damage caused by modem construction after 1990. They post-date the cemeteries of Marki Alonia, being mainly MC II/LC I.

•

Marki Pappara (30/XXIX 305759, CS2656) - a scatter of sherds at the eastern end of VounarosPappara that may indicate EC-MC habitation. However, modem construction and agriculture have severely damaged or obliterated the few surviving remains.

•

Marki Laxidia (30/XXIX 302766) - a light surface scatter 1 km north of Marki Alonia indicating an EC-MC site of some indeterminate kind.

A number of other Prehistoric Bronze Age sites lie a greater distance from Marki Alonia than the above sites, and made no apparent contribution to Marki's cemeteries. However, they lie within 1-2 days' walk (often less) of

13

•

Alambra Asproyi and Alambra Mouttes - Early and Middle Cypriot sites located 8 km southeast of Kotsiatis, showing architectural and ceramic similarities with Marki Alonia (Frankel and Webb 1996:54; Gjerstad 1926; Coleman et al. 1983, 1996). The settlements at Alambra are well beyond the catchment of the cemeteries around Marki.

•

Nicosia Ayia Paraskevi - a Prehistoric Bronze Age cemetery approximately 17 km north of Marki Alonia, in modem Nicosia. It contains numerous Prehistoric Bronze Age tombs, including several Philia tombs whose architecture (mostly pit tombs) and grave goods bear a close resemblance to those of Marki (Gjerstad 1926; Kromholz 1982; Hennessy, Eriksson and Kehrberg 1988; Flourentzos 1988; Hadjicosti 1992; Davies 1995:56).

•

Politiko - there is evidence of early Prehistoric habitation around Politiko, approximately 9 km west of Marki Alonia. There is also evidence of later settlement in this area. Fifty Early and Middle Bronze Age tombs were excavated at Politiko-Lambertis by Ohnefalsch-Richter in the nineteenth century (Gjerstad 1926). Other Middle and Late Bronze Age activity, largely post-dating the settlement at Marki, is also recorded in the region of Politiko (Knapp 1997:42).

•

The Ayios Sozomenos Region - an area south of Nicosia, encompassing Potamia, Dhali and Nisou, and incorporating several recorded late Middle Cypriot and Late Bronze Age sites. Most of these sites post-date the cemeteries of Marki Alonia, and represent a shift in the focus of settlements in the region after the abandonment of Marki Alonia (Catling 1963; Rowe 1995).

Chapter 3. Survey Theory and Methodology

chamber. The entrance was sealed with a limestone stomion block that had since collapsed into the chamber. It was chipped smooth and worked into a rectangular shape (95 x 85 x 16 cm). The chamber was roughly circular (c. 2.8 m diameter), with a flat floor and domed roof.

CHAPTER3 SURVEY THEORY AND METHODOLOGY The visitor to the Prehistoric Bronze Age cemeteries of Marki is immediately confronted with a number of archaeological features, the most prominent being the hundreds of vegetation- filled depressions ( each one being the remains of a looted tomb), and the sizable surface scatter of pottery deposited by looters in recent decades. At Davari and Kappara in particular, the scatters are both widespread and dense, and noticeably larger than ones from roughly contemporary looted cemeteries elsewhere (e.g. Alambra and Kalavasos). Any archaeologist contemplating fieldwork in Marki's cemeteries would therefore consider at least two alternative (though not mutually exclusive) approaches: surface survey and excavation.

The tomb architecture, and the pottery (insofar as it was associated with the tomb), placed Tomb 5 in the EC IIIMC I period. The excavation of Tomb 6 provided more positive results, producing at least 47 fragmentary vessels of RP I (Philia) and WP IA (Philia) wares, and a single copper spiral earring. In all, Tomb 6 contained 1262 sherds (18.5 kg). There are fewer tombs in the upper tier, and they are therefore spaced further apart. Thus, it seems likely that the fill of Tomb 6 derived mainly from that tomb, enhancing the integrity of the assemblage. However, no vessels could be fully reconstructed, and the sherds were generally in very poor condition. Excavations exposed a roughly circular pit tomb with vertical sides (c. 2.5 m diameter, 0.45 - 0.75 m in depth). However, the excavated shape primarily reflects the point at which the looters stopped digging, and probably only approximates the shape of the original tomb.

Previous excavations at Davari and the decision to survey In 1996-7 the Australian Cyprus Expedition undertook a test excavation of two tombs at Davari, partly to establish whether future excavations of the cemetery by a small team would produce meaningful quantities of data (Frankel and Webb 1997:91ff). A chamber tomb from the middle tier (Tomb 5) (Plate 14 and Figure 1.21) was excavated along with a pit tomb from the upper tier (Tomb 6) (Plate 15 and Figure 1.22). The excavations occupied a team of six to eight people for several days. In 1999, another tomb in the upper tier (Tomb 7) was excavated by two people over a couple of days (Frankel and Webb 2000).

Tomb 7 was similar in form to Tomb 6. However, it contained substantially less pottery in its fill (Frankel and Webb 2000), suggesting that the looting of some tombs was more thorough than of others. Alternatively, the greater quantity of sherds in Tomb 6 might be a result of spoil from a number of tombs being dumped into its hollow (though there is no clear proof of this having occurred). The excavation of Tombs 5, 6 and 7 at Davari established that although some useful data might be obtained through excavation it would be time-consuming for a small team, and the rewards might not justify the time, money and energy expended. In a two-month period, a team of (for example) three people could only hope to excavate and process the finds of a handful of the smaller tombs. This might produce some pottery, but little of it would be in situ, and much of it would be in poor condition. Additionally, this would be only a small and possibly unrepresentative sample of the cemetery assemblage. In summary, excavation was not practicable given the constraints on time, personnel and finances.

Tomb 5 was almost entirely filled with soil that evidently derived from a combination of roof collapse, spoil from the tomb itself, and spoil from adjacent tombs. Although the soil was fairly loose (though more compact towards the floor and walls), it was awkward to excavate within the confines of the chamber. Additionally, as the deeper recesses of the tomb were excavated some concerns were raised with respect to safety. Although few sherds and no whole or fully restorable vessels were recovered, the sherd material excavated from the tomb did provide the ACE with some useful information (Frankel and Webb 1997). However, the fill was generally disturbed with only a few partly preserved vessels located near the floor, none giving the impression of being in situ. Only a few degraded fragments of human bone were found.

As an alternative, it was decided to conduct an intensive surface survey of the cemeteries. A survey of the cemeteries was immediately attractive for a number of reasons: •

Tomb 5's architecture conformed to the practices of the period as evidenced elsewhere on the island. The entrance to the tomb was probably a shallow vertical shaft (c. 1.5 x 1.5 m) leading to a step of 1.4 m down to the floor of the

14

A survey would be relatively inexpensive and efficient, with only a small team needed for maximum results.

Chapter 3. Survey Theory and Methodology

•

•

circumstances, reflect the cultural behaviour underlying the deposition of those assemblages. Thus, settlement patterns across regions and patterns across sites have come to be regarded as useful in making inferences about the socio-political and religious organization of cultures (e.g. Knapp 1997 on Late Bronze Age Cyprus). This approach regards space as more than an abstract entity (Knapp 1997:1). Space becomes something with which humans interact. It shapes human behaviour as much as human behaviour shapes it (Knapp 1997: 17).

The excavation of Tomb 5 had demonstrated that the fill within at least the chamber tombs was largely mixed, probably deriving from the tombs themselves but also incorporating sherds from the spoil from immediately adjacent tombs. Therefore, the mixed ceramic assemblage collected in excavation would be not unlike the surface assemblages anyway. In short, the mixed surface assemblage seemed an accurate reflection of the existing, disturbed subsurface assemblage. This was later demonstrated by a comparison of the surface and subsurface assemblages (see below p. 33).

The application of these general principles has led to many debates as to the best methods of firstly identifying these patterns, and secondly interpreting them (e.g. Hietala and Stevens 1977; Jermann 1981; Kintigh and Ammerman 1982; Hietala 1984; Simek 1989; Blankholm 1991). Even the more statistics-oriented archaeologists accept that simple visual inspection of a site or region will be useful as a first step in recognising patterns in surface data derived from survey (Rigaud and Simek 1991:217; Blankholm 1991:25). However, quantitative teclmiques are almost universally accepted as a better way of recognising "fmer scale patterns within largescale configurations" (Rigaud and Simek 1991:217), given the limits on the capacity of the human mind to process data (Blankholm 1991:25). Additionally, these quantitative methods introduce objectivity into the process, which allows for a statistical definition of archaeological features (Jolmson 1984:77).

By confining fieldwork to the surface scatter alone, entire cemeteries could be covered, allowing intra-site spatial analysis.

The value of surface assemblages

Surface assemblages have been dismissed in the past by some as being inaccurate reflections of subsurface remains, largely due to their vulnerability to postdepositional processes. However, in recent decades it has been more commonly accepted that to dismiss surface assemblages for this reason is to neglect the fact that very few artefacts are ever found in situ or in their contexts of primary discard, and that most subsurface artefacts were probably once part of a surface assemblage in any case (Lewarch and O'Brien 1981:312ff).

Many surveys demonstrate how this approach to surface assemblages has worked. In the 1970s archaeologists began in earnest to investigate the relationship between surface and subsurface archaeology in an effort to establish whether "a description of the first will allow prediction of the second" (Redman and Watson 1970:280). These early surveys recorded the precise locations of artefacts ( often using a grid-system, but also by point provenancing) (Redman and Watson 1970; Davis 1975) with an eye to inferring both temporal units and activity areas within sites. This marriage of surface survey and spatial analysis involved an interpretation of artefact densities across the site with particular emphasis on associations between relevant artefact categories (Watson and Le Blanc 1990:8ff). Such approaches often replaced or supplemented the traditional typologies with the recording of attributes that represented certain activities or time periods. In this way, concentrations of surface material in one survey were linked to buildings and activity areas unearthed during excavation (Redman and Watson 1970; Watson and Le Blanc 1990:5-19), while concentrations of Palaeolithic tool types in another survey were used to identify kill sites (Davis 1975). In fact the identification of activity areas has become a major area of study for survey archaeologists, though not without its detractors. Many have looked at variations in the dimensions of lithics and lithic types within clusters in an effort to identify particular activities at sites (Munday 1984) and to study manufacturing processes

As a new understanding of post-depositional processes has developed, studies of surface materials have proliferated, generally working on the premise that if post-depositional processes are adequately documented and their impacts quantified then the underlying cultural systems can be isolated (e.g. Davis 1975; Gifford 1978). Complex models have been developed to assist in this regard (e.g. Wainwright 1994; Wainwright and Thomes 1990). With the right approach, significant relationships between surface assemblages and subsurface archaeology can be identified (e.g. Redman and Watson 1970; Hesse 1971; Watson and Le Blanc 1990:19). With this change in attitude to surface assemblages, they have come to fulfil an expanding role in archaeology. Provided due caution is exercised, surface materials can be used to predict the likely location of subsurface archaeology, to identify site boundaries and activity areas, to determine growth patterns within sites, and to clarify the functions of settlements (Lewarch and O'Brien 1981:320). Thus, although the cemeteries of Marki have been seriously disturbed, their surface archaeology should not be dismissed out of hand as having no meaningful research potential. Rather, the questions asked of that assemblage should be tailored to reflect that potential. At the heart of much recent survey work lies the belief that patterns within surface assemblages will, in certain

15

Chapter 3. Survey Theory and Methodology

across sites (Holdaway et al. 1998). Even where specific activity areas within sites cannot be established due to post-depositional disturbance, survey can at the least be used to identify some of the activities themselves (Stem 1993). Of course, this technique is not restricted to lithics (Boismier 1991 on pottery), or to activity areas (Gregg, Kintigh and Whallon 1991 on social units within encampments).

This situation can be contrasted with that of a surface assemblage deriving from a settlement abandoned in prehistory ( e.g. Marki Alonia). Such a surface assemblage has been brought to the surface in a far more haphazard manner (for example, by ploughs and erosion), over a much longer period of time, and in ways that the archaeologist can usually only speculate about. Another positive aspect of the surface assemblages from Marki's cemeteries is that the precise boundaries of most of the cemeteries are known. For example, on the ridge at Davari all tombs have been identified and located in plan with some confidence. Therefore, although it might not be possible to assign artefacts to particular tombs, it is possible to define the precise boundaries of the burial area on the ridge. This places the surveyor in a strong position to assess the levels of surface movement that have occurred since deposition (by studying the distances between the edges of the burial area and the sherds beyond it). This is not always the case in other surface surveys where the precise boundaries of sites are not so well or easily defined (as is usually the case with prehistoric settlement sites).

Potential uses for the surface assemblages from the cemeteries of Marki

The surface scatters at Marki's cemeteries display a number of unique characteristics that make them particularly attractive as the subjects of a surface survey. For example, any finds from the mortuary domain of Marki represent a particular subset of artefacts, selected by the prehistoric inhabitants of Marki with specific criteria in mind, and deliberately excised from the living community for burial with the dead. Therefore, at Marki's cemeteries, the archaeologist of Prehistoric Bronze Age Cyprus is in the rare position of being able to compare a mortuary assemblage (albeit one depleted by looting) with the parent settlement's assemblage, and to isolate the differences, and speculate as to the selection criteria for funerary objects.

In summary, the surface scatters in the cemeteries of

Marki are evidence of considerable damage to the archaeological record. Nevertheless, they remain valuable archaeological resources. In order to harness this potential, the research design underpinning any survey should take into account:

The rare co-occurrence of cemetery and parent settlement has other advantages. For example, having access to the assemblage deriving from the settlement at Marki Alonia makes certain chronological analysis possible. Whereas in other cemeteries of the period ( even unlooted ones) chronological investigations have sometimes proved difficult due to the absence of stratigraphy, the settlement at Marki Alonia provides a kind of stratigraphic reference point that would otherwise be missing. Additionally, this has the potential of allowing the archaeologist to link particular parts of the cemetery with particular contemporary areas of the settlement. Another unique aspect of the surface assemblage from Marki's cemeteries is the relationship that it shares with the original subsurface remains. The surface scatters visible today are the result of an 'unscientific', but nonetheless thorough, excavation (namely, looting). The bulk of what was once interred in the tombs has been systematically brought to the surface, sorted by looters with particular 'target' artefacts in mind, and then abandoned to the elements. Many sherds were returned to the looted tombs with the spoil after looting. However, those remaining on the surface can be treated as not only representative of those others that are now subsurface, but also broadly representative of the original unlooted assemblage. A surface survey of what remains would therefore tum the otherwise damaging activities of looters to best advantage. Although the scatters have been depleted of certain artefacts, the primary process responsible for this (the looting) is known, and its effects are quantifiable to a degree that is rare in archaeology.

•

The opportunity to compare the cemetery assemblage with the settlement assemblage.

•

The opportunity to identify and quantify (to a relatively high degree) the cultural and natural processes that have affected the surface assemblage.

•

The opportunity to analyse the spatial distribution of the surface assemblage should it be demonstrated that minimal disturbance had occurred.

The best way of achieving these goals is through a multivariate approach to the collection and interpretation of survey data. The multivariate approach to surface survey In recent decades, debate has raged over the most

effective quantitative methods that should be used in surface surveys. There is general agreement now that layers of data should be recorded during survey, using exact measurements of space and artefact dimensions (Blankholm 1991). In fact, as early as 1978 surveyors were being urged to see surface material as not just artefacts but as a vast array of interpretable information (Schiffer, Sullivan and Klinger 1978: 15). Further, there is

16

Chapter 3. Survey Theory and Methodology

wide agreement that the survey itself should proceed out of a problem-oriented research design that specifies the issues to be addressed and the data to be used in doing so (e.g. Boismier 1991; Redman 1987:257). In this way, survey becomes more than simply a tool for identifying and dating sites. It becomes a means by which hypotheses relating to deeper culture issues might be tested.

do so by analysing patterns evident in the distribution of (for example) different forms of tomb architecture or types of pottery. Although the precise data required will differ according to the research goals, the basic principle is the same. In both cases, the researcher is seeking to identify significant relationships between elements of the archaeological record, and this is best achieved by collecting multiple layers of data. This is reflected in the methodology employed in the survey of Marki's cemeteries, where a wide range of data was recorded, relating to both the location and form of tombs and artefacts.

A number of early, groundbreaking, regional surveys demonstrated how the multivariate approach to data collection and analysis could work. For example, the Minnesota Messenia Expedition (McDonald and Rapp 1972) involved a multi-disciplinary team in the gathering of layers of data pertaining to the region's mineral resources, vegetation, geomorphology, water resources, access routes, topography and landuse (Fant and Loy 1972:21; McDonald and Simpson 1972:125ff). The data gathered were then used to analyse settlement patterns and hierarchies, and interactions between settlements, and to reconstruct ancient landscapes. At around the same time, surveyors on the island of Melos (Renfrew and Wagstaff 1982; Cherry 1982) were accumulating a wide range of data pertaining to geomorphology, geology, topography, hydrology, vegetation and modem landuse. By analysing relationships between these layers of data, theories were generated with respect to human settlement over time, especially the exploitation of mineral resources, changing landscape patterns, and increasing population densities. By the early 1980s these surveyors were very positive about the potential of surface survey (e.g. Cherry 1983).

Another important layer of information that the surface surveyor should record relates to those natural and cultural formation processes that might have had an impact on the assemblage under study. Where an archaeologist aims to conduct spatial analysis using survey data, the survey must proceed with a detailed understanding of taphonomic processes. This requirement is regularly reiterated in discussions of surveys and surface assemblages (Schiffer 1987; Schofield 1991; Boismier 1991; Allen 1991; Rolland 1983; Gifford 1978). It has prompted several studies since the 1970s designed to establish the impact of such things as ploughing, erosion, artefact size and trampling (e.g. Ammerman and Feldman 1978; O'Brien and Lewarch 1981; Gregg, Kintigh and Whallon 1991). It is only after post-depositional processes have been

detailed and their likely effects studied that spatial analysis can proceed with some confidence that the survey data accurately reflect the behaviour underlying the assemblage. Most researchers now insist that it is essential to incorporate a geomorphological survey in the broader survey project so that areas where (for example) artefact visibility is reduced by alluvial deposits can be identified, and removed from statistical analysis (Holdaway et al. 1998). Although some predict that such taphonomic processes can be identified, and corrections made to compensate for them ( e.g. Bintliff, Howard and Snodgrass 1999 and 2000, cf. Schon 2000 and Thompson 2000), others assert that for some types of site the surface material can only ever be a "palimpsest of debris" that cannot be understood no matter how "elegant the actualistic data brought to bear" on it (Stem 1993:202). Naturally, this will vary according to the nature of the site, the processes in operation, and the time over which they operated. However, at the very least, a well designed survey will be able to establish that post-depositional processes have so severely disturbed the surface assemblage that no further spatial analysis should be conducted.

Since these early surveys, others have used similar approaches in an attempt to explain distributions of sites and artefacts in terms of (for example) resource availability (Chapman 1981), social complexity ( Charles 1995), physiography (Goldstein 1995), chronology (Jones and Beck 1992), and other elements of the 'landscape' (Rossignol and Wandsnider 1992). Perhaps the most adventurous uses to which survey has been put derive from those 'landscape archaeologists' who use surveys to analyse relationships within not just physical, but also political, economic, ideological and spiritual landscapes ( e.g. Tilley 1994; Zvelebil, Green and Macklin 1992). In the case of the surface assemblages at Marki's

cemeteries, some of the aims of regional surveys will not be directly relevant. However, many of the general principles developed for regional surveys, can be easily adapted to fit the site-specific survey. The differences are usually ones of scale. For example, where a survey of a region might aim to identify those areas of land fertile enough to sustain agriculture, a survey of the ridge at Davari might seek to isolate those areas with geology suitable for the construction of chamber tombs. Although the scales are different, both surveys would be examining issues of landuse. Similarly, where a regional survey might address the issue of social complexity by establishing settlement patterns, a cemetery survey might

The survey of Marki's cemeteries also proceeded with a desire to investigate the taphonomic processes acting on the surface assemblages there. This required that certain data be recorded, most particularly, data pertaining to the movement of potsherds across a site due to such things as

17

Chapter 3. Survey Theory and Methodology

slopewash, erosion and trampling. In order to study the impacts of these processes on a surface assemblage it is necessary to consider such things as size sorting, evidence of erosion, conjoin studies and the relationship between sherd accumulations and vegetation. Thus, at Marki's cemeteries it was necessary to gather layers of data pertaining to the geology and topography of the sites, vegetation type and densities, sherd weights and joins. Visibility was also recorded to eliminate poor visibility as a 'filter' that might affect the results. These matters will be discussed in more detail below (p.25).

landscape and between artefacts (e.g. Dunnell 1992; Rossignol and Wandsnider 1992; Zvelebil, Green and Macklin 1992). These objections commonly derive from the archaeology of hunter-gatherer societies and their relevance will therefore vary according to the context. For example, it is easier to define a Prehistoric Bronze Age cemetery like Davari by reference to its internal homogeneity and the spatial boundedness of the tombs and artefacts, than it is to define a hunter-gatherer campsite (see Pardoe 1988:1-2). 'Non-site' archaeologists argue that the artefact should replace the site as the primary unit of analysis (Dunnell 1992). Recent surveys have embraced this view as the most effective means of understanding how the archaeological record might have formed within a region (e.g. Holdaway et al. 1998). Although the 'non-site' approach is often depicted as a radical shift in the surveyor's emphasis, it is in fact implicit in many surveys conducted over the last thirty years. It forms a basic part of any multivariate spatial analysis. In fact, it has been argued that the emphasis on the 'artefact' over the 'site' involves no fundamental change in perspective at all, and that the concept of a 'site', where it is "operationally defmed as a spatially clustered concentration of artefacts", still has its place in archaeology (Binford 1992:50). It is in this operational sense that each cemetery around Marki Alonia will continue to be referred to as a site. This does not detract from the wider survey aims of the project.

Even where some natural post-depositional processes can be identified, and their likely impacts demonstrated, the surveyor must accept that there will often be cultural activities impacting on surface assemblages which will be impossible to identify. For example, cultural activities such as site maintenance behaviour (e.g. rubbish disposal) can significantly affect surface assemblages (Johnson 1984; Walker 1985). This problem can be particularly relevant in the case of a cemetery (like at Marki), where a host of cultural acts (many of them likely to be symbolic and irrecoverable from the archaeological record) are likely to have been performed. One cultural process that is likely to have affected the Marki mortuary surface assemblage is tomb re-use over generations. Without a greater understanding of this form of behaviour, the effects of it on the distribution and composition of the surface assemblage (if any) cannot be established. It is partly for these reasons that some have argued that

although quantitative methods are useful in identifying patterns, they are not necessarily good at explaining them. Thus, in recent years a "more relaxed" attitude to significance tests has prevailed (Blankholm 1991:43) because relationships identified as statistically significant by quantitative methods will not necessarily be behaviourally meaningful, and behaviourally meaningful relationships might not be statistically significant (Blankholm 1991:43). This need to gain a better understanding of the possible behaviour underlying a surface assemblage has seen a rise in the use of ethnographic data in spatial analysis (e.g. Gifford 1978; Deal 1998).

In spite of the many great advances in survey archaeology

over recent decades, surveying (particularly as a tool for identifying meaningful spatial patterns) has not been without its critics. Some have argued that it is so difficult to extrapolate from survey finds to the systemic context that "survey material alone can never provide a secure basis for interpretation", and should never be an end in itself(Simpson 1983). At Marki itself, the directors of the ACE, although advocates of survey, have warned that the structure of surveyed surface scatters there differ from the excavated assemblages in a number of respects, and survey should therefore be conducted in combination with excavation where possible (Webb and Frankel, in press). Others show concern for the generally degraded nature of the surface material, especially ceramics (Rutter 1983; see also Bintliff, Howard and Snodgrass 1999). Nevertheless, the surface survey has come to be recognised as a valuable tool of the archaeologist and an enormous body of literature on the subject has been generated.

As survey techniques have become more sophisticated, and as the multivariate approach to spatial analysis has developed towards recording data well beyond those confined to the site itself, many survey archaeologists have come to question the value of retaining the 'site' concept at all. A different approach (largely advocated by 'landscape archaeologists') has emerged, known variously as 'off-site', 'non-site', 'siteless', and 'distributional' archaeology. Many of these archaeologists regard the traditional definition of a 'site' ( as a place where artefacts are concentrated, an empirical unit of association) as misleading, even "deleterious to archaeology" (Dunnell 1992:21), because it distracts the archaeologist from other relevant relationships within the

The practical application of survey methodologies, with reference to survey on Cyprus At times there appear to be as many valid ways to conduct a survey, as there are surveys. Thus, the researcher will encounter in the literature both point

18

Chapter 3. Survey Theory and Methodology

provenance and bulk provenance surveys ( e.g. Davis 1975; Johnson 1984); square and round survey units (e.g. Redman 1987; Boismier 1991), and transects (e.g. Flannery 1976c:68-72); random and systematic sampling (e.g. Redman 1987, cf Cayonii and Shoofly Village), or total surface coverage (e.g. Hodder 1995; Baker et al.1995); and both collection and non-collection policies (e.g. Flannery 1976b; Manning et al. 1994a; Knapp et al. 1992). The various in-field techniques have formed the basis of several articles and papers (e.g. Whallon 1983). For some, survey has become a goal in itself while others still regard it solely as a preliminary to excavation. Ultimately, the form that a survey takes will depend on the nature of the site/region under consideration, the resources at the surveyor's disposal, and the research goals of the project. All surveys will require a preliminary research design, and all interpretation must be based on a proper understanding of the taphonomic processes affecting the site or region.

Similarly, the single site, surface surveys conducted by Cornell University in 1980 and 1984 at Alambra (Coleman et al. 1996:13ff) involved the collection of a broad range of data including surface artefact densities, the location of tombs, geological and topographic details, and current landuse patterns. This data was subjected to statistical analysis and significant artefact clusters were isolated. Patterns in the surface assemblage caused by taphonomic processes ( e.g. downslope movement caused by erosion) were distinguished from those attributable to cultural factors, while relationships between surface and subsurface finds were studied, demonstrating considerable surface disturbance in parts of the site. Finally, qualitative comparisons between the surface finds in the mortuary areas and those in the settlement areas were made with the result that no significant differences between the assemblages were found. In the late 1980s and early 1990s the Lemba Archaeological Project was also making innovative use of survey data in the analysis of the site of Kissonerga. A specially designed system of collecting mortuary data was used in conjunction with GIS techniques to analyse the combined survey and excavation data generated by the project. This technique was used to find associations between different classes of mortuary evidence. For example, the site could be spatially differentiated according to chronology of the graves, types of burial architecture, grave typology, methods of disposal of the dead, and grave goods (Baxevani and Papailiopoulos 1992). Similarly, the Lemba Archaeological Project's director has used a combination of excavation and survey data to consider settlement plans, site hierarchies and settlement fission in the context of increasing social complexity in Prehistoric Cyprus (Peltenburg 1993).

Any archaeologist contemplating survey work on Cyprus is fortunate to have at his or her disposal a large body of literature on the subject that he or she can use as a guide for the design of their own research project (for reviews of survey on Cyprus see Knapp 1997; Sevketoglu 2000. For more recent survey work on Cyprus, including papers on some of the surveys discussed below, see Iacovou, in press). A long tradition of archaeological survey exists in Cyprus, stretching back to Gjerstad's early surveys on donkey and bicycle in the 1920s (Gjerstad 1926). Many of these early surveys were regional surveys concerned with locating and dating sites, and identifying settlement patterns (e.g. Catling 1963; Adovasio et al. 1978; Swiny 1981; Rupp and King 1983; S0rensen and Guldager 1987). They are only indirectly relevant to a site-specific survey such as the one at Marki's cemeteries.

The aims and methodologies of these surveys have played a key role in the design of the survey of Marki's cemeteries. This is reflected in the type and range of data gathered there, particularly in the emphasis on recording environmental data, and on recording artefact attributes that would allow the identification of clusters of particular vessel types.

Regional surveys remained common into the 1980s ( e.g. Todd 1986, 1988, 1989; see also Keller and Rupp 1983 for a collection of papers at this time on survey in Cyprus). However, smaller surveys with a more concentrated single-site focus (like the one at Marki's cemeteries) were also being conducted. For example, Watkins's work at Kataliontas-Kourvellos (Watkins 1979 and 1983) is an excellent example of how a site survey might be conducted. His study proceeds with a full appreciation of the need to understand the site formation processes leading to the creation of his site. He uses statistical analysis, spatial analysis and artefact analysis to identify activity areas at Kataliontas-Kourvellos, and the types of activities represented, and to characterise the site as one likely to have been occupied permanently through the year rather than as a seasonally occupied settlement. Watkins's study makes full use of a wide range of environmental data including the proximity of the site to agricultural and stone resources (Watkins 1983:15-16).

A number of more recent regional surveys on Cyprus have also provided useful guides as to the types of data that an archaeological surveyor should gather. The Canadian Palaipaphos Survey Project/Western Cyprus Project (CPSP/WCP), the Maroni Valley Archaeological Survey Project (MVASP), and the Sydney Cyprus Survey Project (SCSP) are all primarily regional surveys. However, the CPSP/WCP also subjected some individual sites to more intensive surface survey (Rupp et al. 1992:287ff; Rupp et al. 1994; Rupp and D' Annibale 1995). Similarly, although the MVASP was primarily concerned with the survey of a 14.5 square kilometre area, it also incorporated the "intensive collection of archaeological data from tightly controlled spatial units" (Manning and Conwell 1992:272; Manning et al. 1994a).

19

Chapter 3. Survey Theory and Methodology

These smaller spatial units were often natural features similar to those comprising Marki's cemeteries. Also, the SCSP was based on 'quadrats' of 100 x 100 m, and irregularly shaped 'plots', which were environmentally well-defined areas such as river valleys and spurs. These plots are analogous to, for example, the ridge at Marki Davari (Knapp et al. 1992; Knapp et al. 1994; Knapp and Given et al. 1996).

analyse the spatial distribution of artefacts across sites in terms of activity areas and taphonomic processes (Manning and Conwell 1992, Manning et al. 1994a, Manning et al. 1994b; Manning 1998). Perhaps the survey project that has most whole-heartedly embraced the view that surveys can be used for sophisticated research into culture change, taphonomy and spatial analysis is the Sydney Cyprus Survey Project. The stated aims of this project include a desire to "examine site location and settlement hierarchy through time, in relation to both metallurgical (primarily copper) and agricultural resources" (Knapp et al. 1992:319). Other related issues investigated by the project include the reconstruction of past landscapes, population estimates, a determination of relations between industrial and agricultural centres, and an examination of the socioeconomic impact of mining (Knapp et al. 1992:321; see also Knapp, Kassianidou and Donnelly 1999 for a mining site located by the survey). This survey also asserts the value of predictive modelling (Knapp et al. 1992:321), and explanatory models (Knapp et al. 1992:329). The range of data recorded during the survey reflects these broad aims (Knapp et al. 1994:335; see also Knapp 1997). All interpretation proceeded on an understanding of the need to establish taphonomic processes (Knapp and Given et al. 1996:297).

These surveys shared a number of the aims of the Marki cemeteries survey (for example, the dating of sites, the identification of site boundaries and spatial relationships within them, the reconstruction of taphonomic processes, and the reconstruction of past landscapes). The data that they collected in pursuing these aims conformed to the advice of Held (1990:13) in that they recorded such things as "archaeological impressions, vegetation, ground visibility, wind, soil, and current landuse" (Manning and Conwell 1992:275), as well as elevations, springs, drainage, geobotanical cover, roads, geology, and topography (Knapp et al. 1992:327; Knapp et al. 1994:335). Where these surveys differed from the Marki survey is in certain methodological respects, largely related to the different scales of survey. For example, sampling was not used at Marki (for reasons discussed below), and total coverage using the bulk provenance technique was favoured over transects (also discussed below).

Thus, the survey of the cemeteries at Marki conformed to recent trends in survey on Cyprus in that it aimed to move beyond spatio-temporal interpretations to (where possible) analyses of social complexity, symbolic mortuary behaviour and taphonomy. Other surveys carried out on Cyprus in the 1990s, usually at the regional level, are not as well resourced as those outlined above. However, they demonstrate a similar desire to collect layers of data and investigate significant relationships between them (e.g. Maliszewski 1994, 1997). The 1990s have generally seen a rise in sophistication in the uses to which survey data have been put. For example, provenience studies (that draw on spatial analysis techniques developed by surveys, and incorporate survey data) have been used to explain power strategies, wealth, and social relations in Bronze Age Cyprus (Knapp and Cherry 1994). Similarly, regional survey studies have been incorporated into debates concerning the rise of social complexity on Cyprus (e.g. Peltenburg 1993; Held 1993; Manning 1993; Knapp 1993), an issue that will be discussed in greater detail in Chapter 6 below). The general trend is one away from merely descriptive presentation of data acquired by survey to an interpretative one with broader processualist and postprocessualist aims.

The CPSP/WCP, MVASP and SCSP have influenced the surveys at Marki's cemeteries at another level also. For example, notwithstanding the advances made in surveys on Cyprus in the decades since Catling's work, by 1990 Held considered that surveyors on Cyprus could still be criticised for a preoccupation with the "spatiotemporal distribution of artefact types" (Held 1990:6), and for failing to "utilize the quantitative methodology of spatial archaeology ... middle range research and ethnographic analogy ... and the concepts of formation processes ... "(Held 1990:9; see also Knapp 1997:28ft). Instead, more recent surveys have placed greater emphasis on "an empiric correlative approach" and predictive-explanatory models (e.g. Knapp et al. 1992:295, 321; Knapp 1997:38ft). Although Held's criticisms may be a little ungenerous with respect to many of the surveys discussed above (Stanley-Price's gazetteer of prehistoric sites (1979) should be an obvious exception), his advice to extend the surveyor's goals beyond spatio-temporal interpretation is important. Thus, the CPSP/WCP used regional and site survey not only to date sites but also to investigate activity areas within them, to identify site boundaries, to reconstruct taphonomic processes impacting on the archaeological record, and to reconstruct the prehistoric landscape (Rupp et al. 1992, 1993, 1994). Similarly, the Maroni Valley Archaeological Survey Project and associated fieldwork conducted both regional and site surveys to generate data that not only assisted in determining dates for sites and areas suitable for excavation, but which were also used to

Why not sample?

Once the decision was taken in favour of survey over excavation, the question of intensity of survey arose. Given a team of three people and an eight-week season it

20

Chapter 3. Survey Theory and Methodology

was impossible to do a total coverage of all five cemeteries in meaningful detail. A choice had to be made between sampling all of the cemeteries on the one hand, and doing a total coverage of only one or several of the cemeteries on the other. Ultimately it was decided to take the latter choice, and to avoid sampling.

universe. This assists in determining the appropriate size of a survey unit (see Holdaway et al. 1998 on using a known survey universe to experiment with different scales of spatial patterning based on unit size). Nevertheless, even after a pilot study some argue that deciding on a sampling fraction remains ultimately a matter of making a sensible guess (Haselgrove 1985:13). A properly conducted pilot study would require total coverage of an area similar to the one to be sampled. Thus, it was decided that a total coverage of (for example) Davari could serve a dual purpose by also acting as a pilot study for a sample of Kappara, should one later be possible or desirable.

This decision was taken for a number of reasons: •

•

•

It was calculated that a three-person team in eight weeks could do a total coverage of one large cemetery ( either Davari, Kappara or VounarosPappara) and the two small cemeteries ( Vounaros and Davari-Kappara). Of the three large cemeteries Vounaros-Pappara did not appear likely to provide the study with a great deal of data. It has been extensively disturbed, not only by looters but also by building and farming activities. Little data additional to that already gained by survey in 1994 by the Australian Cyprus Expedition seemed likely to be derived from further fieldwork there. Thus, the decision not to sample all of the cemeteries in effect meant that only one cemetery with notable potential ( either Davari or Kappara) would be excluded from the study.

•

Although some argue that the right sampling strategy in the right circumstances will result in no meaningful loss of interpretable data (Johnson 1984:75), it is more commonly accepted that a total coverage is the most statistically reliable approach, and should be favoured over sampling where that is reasonably possible (e.g. Flannery 1976a:132). Of course, this is a question of scale and practicability, and Flannery himself is an advocate of sampling in the proper circumstances (Flannery 1976b and 1976c). However, sampling an assemblage of artefacts (like a surface scatter) always carries with it certain unavoidable difficulties. For example, the aim of sampling is to work backwards from a sample to the target population of a site, where the target population is "that totality of elements which are under discussion and about which information is desired" (Chenhall 1975:5). This will always involve the use of considerable subjectivity, or "archaeological inference" (Haselgrove 1985:9), based on a detailed study of the post-depositional processes intervening between the target population and the sampled population (for example, Read 1975; Walker 1985:89; Collins 1975:29; Schiffer 1987). However, this must involve a subjective judgment which is difficult to quantify in statistical terms (Chenhall 1975: 10). Thus, a total coverage survey (unlike sampling) takes out one additional level of subjectivity in the drawing of archaeological inferences.

Sampling strategies must be applied carefully where the researcher hopes to identify spatial patterns ( as was the case at the cemeteries at Marki). A sampling strategy devised to conduct population studies will emphasise the need for randomness because a random sample is well suited to finding proportions of an estimated total (Redman 1987:251; Flannery 1976a:135). However, a random sample will be unsuited to a study seeking to establish spatial patterns across a site because a random distribution of sample units might, by chance, exclude large and important areas of the site from the study. This may obscure or totally distort spatial patterns (Plog, Plog and Wait 1978:407; Redman 1987:251). This problem can be reduced, but not totally eliminated, by employing stratified, systematic, unaligned sampling strategies (or modifications of such strategies, e.g. Cherry 1982:17-18). However, a total coverage survey avoids the problem completely.

The sites selected for survey

As already noted, the Vounaros-Pappara cemetery is particularly badly disturbed, and unlikely to provide survey data of as high a quality as Davari and Kappara. Additionally, a survey of Vounaros-Pappara would be difficult because parts of it are now within the private property of the nearby dairy complex and covered by various structures and refuse. Other parts of the cemetery are patrolled by particularly ferocious local dogs. For these reasons, it was decided that no surveys should be conducted at Vounaros-Pappara beyond those already performed by the Australian Cyprus Expedition in 1994. Because Vounaros and Davari-Kappara are small cemeteries with relatively sparse surface scatters, it was decided that both should be surveyed given that it could be done quickly, and would provide the project with two complete additional assemblages for intersite comparison. This left Davari and Kappara. As the team only had the time and resources to do a total coverage of one of these sites a decision had to be made between them. Davari

One method of minimising the problems noted above is to first conduct a pilot study to establish the survey

21

Chapter 3. Survey Theory and Methodology

was selected for the survey over Kappara for the following reasons: •

Davari has been thoroughly plundered by looters resulting in a great deal of artefactual material on the surface. These artefacts did not give the impression of having been substantially affected by taphonomic processes like downslope movement and erosion.

•

Davari is geologically well defined.

•

The cemetery at Davari is culturally well defined. The boundaries of the cemetery are easy to establish, and cross-cemetery contamination is unlikely.

•

Davari' s internal spatial organization implied significant differentiation worthy of further analysis, with chamber tombs clustered within one tier and pit tombs on the other two tiers.

•

•

O'Brien 1981:8). The bulk provenance technique is preferred for sites with a high density of surface material, like Davari's middle tier. Although this approach can place some limitations on the fineness of resolution of spatial analysis, it is still suitable for spatial analysis where indices of aggregation are used (Jermann 1981:98; Lewarch and O'Brien 1981:8). Preparatory fieldwalking at Davari established that the surface scatter on the upper tier was relatively sparse, and suitable for point provenancing. In addition to the data that this might provide with respect to taphonomic processes, it was hoped that this might also act as an effective pilot study of the feasibility of point provenancing on the lower tiers at Davari, and elsewhere (for the procedures see below). In fact, work on the upper tier established that it would be

impossible to use the point provenance technique on the middle and lower tiers, which are far larger and characterised by a denser surface scatter. The bulk provenance technique was the obvious alternative on the middle and lower tiers.

Limited excavation of tombs in the upper and middle tiers at Davari implied some chronological development within the cemetery. The upper tier appeared to date to the earliest phases of the Early Bronze Age and has produced considerable quantities of Philia material (Frankel and Webb 1997). By contrast, the middle and lower tiers seemed to date to the later periods of the Early Bronze Age and early in the Middle Bronze Age.

Where the bulk provenance technique is used, smaller and more numerous units of study should be preferred (Nance and Ball 1981:65; Boismier 1991:20; Redman 1975:151). The smaller the unit, the more likely it is that the artefacts within it are chronologically and functionally associated. On these grounds, study units of 2 x 2 m were decided on at Davari as being the smallest manageable size that could be used with the time and resources available (see Rupp et al.1992 and Hodder 1994 and 1995 for a similar grid).

In addition to the abundant ceramic assemblage on the surface, other artefacts (some of which were imported from up to 10 km away) were also visible, including pieces of calcarenite, gypsum and igneous rock.

Collection policy and in-field recording

In summary, the cemetery at Davari comprised a well-

Surveyors on Cyprus have been admonished in recent years for 'excising' artefacts from the archaeological record during survey, thereby harming the site's integrity, only to place those collected artefacts into already overcrowded storage facilities (Held 1990:13). This view reflects a long held attitude amongst surveyors in the Mediterranean (e.g. Cherry 1982:19). As an alternative to collection and storage, some archaeologists have encouraged no-collection policies and a system of in-field recording.

defined and manageable surface assemblage suitable for a comparative study with the assemblages from the settlement at Marki Alonia and the other nearby cemeteries. Furthermore, the tomb architecture and ceramic material visible on the surface suggested significant internal spatial differentiation worthy of investigation. Point provenance and bulk provenance techniques

The no-collection strategy has been harshly criticised in the past, particularly by those opposed to cost-cutting measures implemented by profit-driven private contractors (Butler 1979). These criticisms largely rest on the concern that the failure to collect artefacts for storage may irrevocably damage a set of data for future archaeologists. Additionally, they argue that the level of analysis achieved by in-field recording is lower than that which can be attained in the laboratory or museum where the researcher has access to equipment and relative comfort (Butler 1979:795). Others dispute these claims

Total coverage of a surface scatter can be achieved by either point provenancing each artefact (that is, by locating each artefact precisely in space, usually using electronic surveying equipment), or by using the 'bulk provenance' or 'aggregate provenance' technique. The bulk provenance technique involves recording the total number of artefacts within a study/sample unit. Scatter configurations are determined by calculating diversity from whole study unit to whole study unit (Jermann 1981:98; Warren and Miskell 1981:127; Lewarch and

22

Chapter 3. Survey Theory and Methodology

arguing that a properly designed research project involving no collection of artefacts for storage, and infield recording, is an inexpensive, accurate and effective method of fieldwork (Beck and Jones 1994).

A team of three to five people carried out the fieldwork on the upper tier at Davari over three days from the 13th to the 15th November, 1998. Firstly, the edge of the upper tier was established using the EDM. This was a relatively simple procedure as the division between the layered limestone of the upper tier contrasted clearly with the softer havara of the middle tier.

At Davari, Davari-Kappara and Vounaros, the project sought to find the middle ground. On the upper tier at Davari, where the surface scatter was less dense, all artefacts were recorded in the field over three days as a means of testing the feasibility of in-field recording on the lower tiers. Although this proved a relatively efficient means of data recording on the three fine, sunny days of the test, it was clear that on the lower tiers, where there was considerably more pottery and where the work would be done in far less clement weather, it would not be possible.

Then, two to three workers systematically walked the tier in a series of 3 m wide transects. These transects were defined by 50 m tapes stretched down the slope. All artefacts located within each transect were flagged with fluorescent tape. Visibility was excellent given the sparse vegetation cover on Davari's upper tier. Fieldwalkers found that walking upslope improved visibility because of the nature of the tilt of the layered limestone on the upper tier.

Therefore, the surface artefacts on the lower tiers at Davari, and at Davari-Kappara and Vounaros, were collected and taken back to base to be analysed, before being returned to the grid square on site from which they were collected. This system allowed for pottery analysis to take place in 'laboratory conditions', while not overcrowding any storage facilities. It also ensured that minimum damage was done to the integrity of the site. After survey the sites were in substantially the same condition that they were in before the survey was conducted.

Very small non-diagnostic sherds (less than c. 10 x 10 mm) were not recorded. Where a large concentration of such small sherds from the one vessel was encountered, it was flagged and recorded as a single fmd. This may have had a small impact on the analysis of the fmer wares, mean weights across the site, and the proportional representation of vessel sizes. However, in reality very few sherds less than 10 x 10 mm were observed.

The cemeteries of Marki are not under any immediate threat from agricultural development or building activities. If they were, this might constitute an argument for artefact collection and storage.

As artefacts were flagged they were also numbered consecutively in order of discovery. Once a transect had been completely walked, two team members working together recorded the details for each flagged artefact. The details recorded were as follows:

The upper tier at Davari

The upper tier at Davari was treated as a distinct and separate area for the purposes of analysis for several reasons: •

The tier is geologically distinct, being defined by tilted layered limestone with very little overburden.

•

Preparatory field walking and excavation, and earlier surveys (Frankel and Webb 1996, 1997; Held 1992:82-3; Swiny 1985b:14) suggested that this tier has a high proportion of Philia pottery which predates the bulk of the pottery on the middle and lower tiers.

•

The tomb architecture (pit tombs) 1s distinct from that downslope ( chamber tombs).

•

The surface scatter on the upper tier was much less dense than elsewhere at Davari. This made it a suitable area for testing proposed field procedures, especially the practicability of in-field recording and point provenancing.

23

•

An EDM reading was taken in order to locate the artefact in space.

•

Non-diagnostic sherds were measured (but not weighed for practical reasons), and identified by ware, and as being from either an open or closed vessel.

•

Diagnostic sherds were described using the same recording sheets as those used by the ACE at Marki Alonia, and for the middle and lower tiers at Davari (see below for a full description). Also, all diagnostic artefacts were drawn in the field by a trained illustrator. No artefacts were collected or taken from the field. Stone artefacts were also described using the recording sheets used by the ACE at Marki Alonia, and were drawn in the field.

Chapter 3. Survey Theory and Methodology

The middle and lower tiers at Davari

reading corresponded to the south-east comer of a context. Because only two tapes were used, at the end of each row one tape would be simply leap-frogged over the next.

A team of three people was available to conduct the main period of fieldwork at Davari. The fieldwork commenced on the 3rd February 1999 and was completed by 28th March 1999.

As EDM readings were taken along each tape, another team-member followed the person with the survey staff recording the context's vegetation, geology and visibility. Usually, this information was recorded in the time that it took the worker at the EDM to transcribe the co-ordinates into a survey book (no electronic data logger was used). One person performed the same task for the entire season to ensure consistency of results. These data were recorded in the following manner:

The first stage of fieldwork involved establishing a master-grid of20 x 20 m squares on the middle and lower tiers at Davari. This grid was oriented on a roughly north-south axis along the length of the ridge. The grid was set up using an EDM, and was pegged out with metal pegs. Each 20 x 20 m square was then used later as the framework for establishing one hundred 2 x 2 m research squares (i.e. ten rows often squares).

The geology (Figures 1.23 and 1.24) Each 20 x 20 m square was called a 'unit', and was given a number.

As no excavation took place during the fieldwork, all observations pertaining to geology had to be based on surface observation. Occasionally, this could be misleading. For example, sections cut into Davari's slopes by local farmers and the military demonstrated that some parts of Davari that appeared on the surface to be stony fanglomerate were in fact soft limestone with a thin layer of stones on top. However, more usually, surface observations tallied with the sections and therefore they should be regarded as largely reliable.

Each 2 x 2 m square was called a 'context', and was also given its own number, from 1 to 100, starting at the top left hand ( or NW) comer of the 20 x 20 m unit and finishing in the bottom right hand (or SE) comer of the unit. The 2 x 2 m contexts were measured out and recorded in the following manner: While the first member of the team set up the EDM on a convenient datum point at the start of the day's work, the other two team members set about dividing the units into the smaller contexts using two soft 50 m tapes, and thin metal pegs marked with fluorescent tape for ease of visibility. The long tapes were stretched along opposite sides of the unit under study, and metal pegs pushed into the ground at 2 metre intervals using the tapes to measure. On level ground this was a simple and accurate technique. However, on sloping ground it was necessary to 'step' down the slope, keeping the tapes horizontal with survey staffs and plumb bobs. On the most difficult terrain the EDM was used to find the correct point each 2 metres.

Each context was described as being in one of the following categories, or as combinations of them:

Once opposite sides of the unit had been pegged out at 2 m intervals, the 50 m tapes were stretched across the unit from one peg to the corresponding peg on the other side of the unit. The surveying then commenced with two aims: • •

•

Tilted limestone: a hard white sedimentary deposit with bedding planes running in a number of directions.

•

Soft limestone: known locally as havara. A soft, white, secondary limestone.

•

Fine wash: a fine buff-brown soil deposited by the eroding limestone on the upper and middle tier at Davari.

•

Stony: the local fanglomerate, being a heterogeneous collection of igneous rocks and cherts of varying size (from a few centimetres across to 30 cm across), displaying considerable cementation in places (being bonded by secondary limestone).

The angle of the slope was not recorded for any contexts because this could be ascertained later from the elevations recorded with the EDM.

To record the co-ordinates and elevation of the south-east comer of each context. To describe the vegetation, geology and visibility within each context.

The vegetation (Figures 1.8, 1. 9 and 1.10) One worker would proceed along the first tape with the survey staff and prism so that a reading could be taken every two metres (Plates 7 and 16). The same thing would then be done along the next tape, and so on. Each

The density and type of vegetation was recorded for each context according to the following categories:

24

Chapter 3. Survey Theory and Methodology

• • • • • •

Short grass: a short and relatively sparse grass. Long grass: tufts of grass up to one metre tall. Thyme: the hardy thyme of Cyprus dominated the slopes at Davari. Asphodel: grew in small clumps in well-watered areas. Tree: a few spiny trees were found on the less exposed edges of the ridge. Combinations of the above.

•

Visibility was recorded so that any bias in the data caused by poor visibility could be identified and possibly corrected for (see, for example, Bintliff, Howard and Snodgrass 1999). Thus, at the end of the project it was possible to say that 70% of Davari was characterised as being of good visibility, 14% of medium visibility and the balance of poor visibility (see Figure 1.25). In those contexts described as having good visibility, an average of 3.8 sherds was recovered. In those contexts described as being of poor visibility an average of 1.7 sherds was recovered. This might imply that areas characterised by poor visibility are under-represented in the ceramics analysis. However, it is important to note that in those contexts described as being of good visibility the average sherd weighed 30.2 g, while in poor visibility contexts the average sherd weighed 33.6 g. In other words, sherds of much the same size were recovered in both types of context, which would suggest that smaller sherds were not being missed in poor visibility areas. The lower number of sherds collected in poor visibility areas is more likely due to the fact that vegetation grew most thickly (and visibility was poorest) in fringe areas of Davari where few tombs were located (the correlation between vegetation, tomb location and visibility is clear in a comparison of Figures 1.10, 1.14 and 1.25). Furthermore, we can assume that ceramic recovery from all areas was therefore relatively complete and even, with no areas being particularly under-represented due to differences in visibility.

As the fieldwork was conducted in the wet winter months, the vegetation on Davari was at its thickest. In the drier months Davari's vegetation cover is greatly ~educed. Therefore, for each context a subjective Judgement, based on the worker's experience of Cyprus in the drier months, was made as to the likely vegetation cover in summer. Generally, it was assumed that in summer only the thyme and hardier vegetation would survive. The density of vegetation within each context was recorded as follows: • • •

Light: < 15 % coverage of the context. Medium: 15 to 50 % coverage of the context. Heavy: > 50 % coverage of the context.

This involved a simple estimation on the part of the recorder. Vegetation was recorded so that the data could be utilised in a consideration of taphonomic processes (such as downslope movement of artefacts by the flow of water). These are discussed in greater detail in Chapter 4.

Visibility (Figure 1.25)

The next phase of fieldwork involved the systematic collection of the surface artefacts within each 2 x 2 m context. Once again each of the two long tapes was stretched across the unit from one peg to its corresponding peg on the other side, forming a 2 m wide transect. Ten thin, bamboo sticks 1.5 to 2 m long were then placed across the transect at 2 m intervals so that the tapes and sticks formed the edges of the 2 x 2 m contexts.

Each context was also described according to the quality of artefact visibility. This involved a subjective j~d_g~~ent on the part of the data recorder. Generally, v1S1b1htyon Davari was very good. However, in some areas the vegetation was very thick, making artefacts difficult to see. The quality of visibility depended mainly on the type, rather than the amount, of vegetation. For example, although a context might be described as having heavy vegetation (i.e. >50% coverage), that vegetation might only have been short grass, which had little effect on visibility. In determining visibility, the data recorder to?k into account the ability of the collectors to push aside bushes and clumps of grass to improve visibility. A context'.s visibility was described using the following categones:

•

•

smaller sherds and may have to be pushed aside to gain full visibility; Poor: vegetation obscures significant parts of the context and is too thick to see through or push aside in places.

All larger artefactual material within a 2 x 2 m context was collected and placed in a plastic bag, marked with its unit and context number. Once a transect (a row of ten contexts) was completed, the process was repeated for the next nine transects (ninety contexts) within the unit. Very small non-diagnostic sherds (< 10 x 10 mm) were not collected. Again, this might have a small impact on the analysis of such things as mean weights across the site, finer wares and proportions of large and small vessels. However, given the very small quantities of sherds under 10 x 10 mm in size, this impact is likely to have been minimal.

Good: surface artefacts are clearly visible, without being obscured by any vegetation; Medium: surface artefacts are visible without much effort but some vegetation may obscure

25

Chapter 3. Survey Theory and Methodology

If an artefact straddled two contexts it was collected as belonging to the context in which most of it lay. If the artefact evenly straddled the two contexts a subjective judgement was made as to which context it should be collected in. Generally, an effort was made to keep sherds of pottery that clearly came from the one vessel together in the one context in these situations. In practice, this situation rarely, if ever, arose.

The 20 x 20 m units on the edges of Davari cemetery often overlapped with fields under cultivation. Visibility in these fields at the time of the fieldwork was very poor and no effort was made to collect artefacts in them. However, it is unlikely that a great deal of valuable data was lost. Fieldwalking undertaken in the summer months, when the fields lay fallow, had established that little or no pottery lay in them. Additionally, on the western side of Davari, where the crops were not as thick, survey was extended several metres into the fields. Virtually no pottery was located here.

A judgement sometimes had to be made as to whether an artefact was in fact 'surface' material. The team adhered to the rule that if a significant portion of the artefact (usually a pot sherd) was visible but apparently partially buried, an attempt should be made to pick it up. If it proved to be relatively loose and could be collected with only a small amount of soil adhering to it, then it was treated as a surface artefact. However, if it became clear (upon trying to pick it up), that the artefact was in fact in large part buried, and could not be lifted without displacing a substantial amount of soil, it was not collected.

An initial test was applied to all bone and stone artefacts before they were collected. If a piece of bone was obviously of modem origin it was not collected. These bones were easy to identify by their condition. Unfortunately, no bone other than modem bone was found on the surface at Davari. This came as no surprise given the degraded condition of the bone excavated from the looted tombs in previous years.

The times taken to complete the two phases of fieldwork (survey and collection) varied markedly depending on the nature of the unit, and weather conditions. The team also became more proficient as the fieldwork progressed. A steep slope with thick vegetation took much longer to complete, as did units with a large amount of pottery. On windy days the long tapes also became difficult to handle which added to the time taken. Generally, a difficult unit (mostly on the middle tier) took the team 55 to 80 minutes to survey and 40 minutes to collect, while an easier unit (usually on the lower tier) could take as little as 45 minutes to survey, and 15 minutes to collect. As a general rule, the team surveyed and collected one unit per morning, two per morning on the lower tier.

Chert that had fractured naturally to resemble chipped stone was evident on the surface at Davari in quantities too great to allow collection of it all. Only stone clearly worked into tools was collected for analysis. Large stone artefacts (for example, stomion blocks) were left in situ, and their locations were recorded with the EDM. Stone was recorded on the same recording sheets as those used by the ACE at Marki Alonia. Each day, artefacts collected from the site were taken back to the team's accommodation in Alambra village, where a room had been converted into a simple work area. Analysis of the artefacts ( almost invariably pottery) took place in the afternoons and evenings. Each 2 x 2 m context was treated as a separate unit of analysis and care was taken to ensure that no mixing of contexts occurred. Firstly, all the pottery from a context was analysed at a 'bulk' level i.e. the pottery was divided according to ware and nature of vessel (open or closed). Body sherds were sometimes difficult to classify as being open or closed. If it was impossible to tell from the shape and slip of the sherd, slip on the interior of the sherd was treated as decisive of an open vessel. As a result, the 'open' category will be somewhat over-represented because some closed vessels also have interior slip.

The military has cut a number of trenches into the sides of the ridge at Davari (see Figure 1.6). They are large enough to accommodate artillery or tanks. When one of these trenches fell within a unit a decision was made as to whether it was a profitable use of time to divide it into contexts and survey it with the EDM. Usually, these trenches were largely devoid of artefacts, and when artefacts were found inside them they were clearly in a disturbed context of little value to the research goals. Each trench was therefore treated as a large context in its own right, and the artefacts inside it were collected together, given only a unit number. The edges of the trenches were defined by EDM but not otherwise surveyed. Similarly, in unit 85 a large area c. 30 x 10 m had been disturbed by bulldozing and this unit was therefore not divided into contexts, all finds being recorded as coming from 'unit 85' only. Partial units (e.g. those extending outside the cemetery into the ploughed fields or, in some cases, partly in the middle tier but mainly in the upper tier) were also not divided into contexts. Finds were given unit numbers only ( e.g. unit 17).

Each category was then counted and weighed on a set of electronic scales. Diagnostic pottery was then separated from the non-diagnostic pottery and counted. The nondiagnostic pottery was then returned to its labelled bag in preparation for its return to the site. Two members of the team would then analyse the diagnostic sherds using the same recording sheets as those used by the Australian Cyprus Expedition at Marki Alonia (for more detailed discussion of the recording

26

Chapter 3. Survey Theory and Methodology

methodology see below p. 39). This was done for several reasons: •

This would allow for the most efficient means of direct comparison between the assemblage from Davari and its parent settlement, and the other cemeteries.

•

The recording sheets used at Marki Alonia have been steadily refined over several seasons of excavation and therefore provide a ready-made and purpose-designed means of recording.

•

The fieldwork conducted at Davari forms part of the wider project conducted by the Australian Cyprus Expedition at Marki Alonia. Using the same recording system would assist in unifying the presentation and analysis of results.

•

Using the new and innovative system employed at Marki Alonia at another (though related) site would facilitate an assessment of the value and transferability of the system generally.

detected. However, because adjacent units were not necessarily processed one after the other, some joins between units may have been missed. This approach placed some limitations on any refitting or cross-mending analyses that might be undertaken. It is likely to result in an underestimate of the surface disturbance which might have been identified by more thorough approaches (e.g. Bollong 1994). Generally, very few joins were found from 2 x 2 m contexts that were not directly adjacent to each other, suggesting minimum disturbance of the surface scatter over great distances (for a more detailed discussion on this issue seep. 37 below). After the diagnostic pottery had been drawn it was placed in a bag with all the other pottery from the same unit in readiness for its return to the site. Some pottery was temporarily set aside for basic photography. However, no formal photography for the purposes of publication took place due to financial constraints, and lack of facilities. In the early weeks of the fieldwork (in February), Davari experienced several mornings of heavy dew, and some rain, which had a potential impact on the pottery, particularly in colour readings. Therefore, on these occasions the collected pottery was set aside to dry before it was analysed, or collection of the pottery was delayed for a couple of hours, by which time the wind and sun had usually dried it. As a result, dew and rain proved to be only a minor inconvenience.

Recording was done under similar conditions to those experienced by the recorders of the ACE at Marki. Recording was done indoors under a fluorescent light. Work was performed in the afternoons when the workroom was also well lit with natural light. Work sometimes continued after sundown, solely under fluorescent lighting. In these circumstances there was a very slight tendency to see the surface of the pottery as more lustrous than under natural light conditions, but no significant variation in the colours recorded was observed. Only two people were responsible for the data recording. This minimised the likelihood of individual bias and false variations within the results. These two recorders sat side by side and frequently consulted each other in an effort to further reduce the possibility of individual observer bias.

The time taken to process the pottery from a unit from Davari varied considerably from unit to unit. The units from the lower tier, which had very little pottery in them, could be processed in as little as 30 minutes. However, the pottery from the more densely populated units (especially those from the east slope of the middle tier) could take 8 to 10 hours to work through. Once analysis of the pottery was completed it was returned to its unit of origin (i.e. the 20 x 20 m square from which it was collected). Conceivably, a sherd returned to the site might therefore be placed a maximum of 20 m from its point of collection. However, to be more precise in this matter (for example, returning the pottery to its 2 x 2 m context of origin) would have been extremely time consuming, and the decision was made that the effort expended would not have been justified.

As the recording for each diagnostic sherd was completed, the sherd was passed to the third member of the team - a trained illustrator - for drawing. As a result, all diagnostic sherds from the middle and lower tiers at Davari were both described and drawn. All diagnostic sherds were given a number and letter designating their units and contexts of origin. For example, a sherd labelled 20.13C is sherd C from context 13 in unit 20.

Although all prehistoric artefacts were collected and recorded, the obviously modem contaminants were not. However, general observations could be made from the observable material on the surface at Davari. Spent shotgun cartridges were scattered evenly across the site, and weekend hunters were regularly seen walking across the site in search of prey. Additionally, what looked like the remains of a picnic (charcoal, cooked bones, some empty drinks cans and other rubbish) were left on the lower tier. Goat droppings were also scattered widely across the site, and the local goat herders were observed

Joining diagnostic pieces were noted where possible, with two or more joining diagnostics (and non-joining diagnostic pieces from the same vessel) being treated as one sherd for statistical purposes. Time constraints made it impossible to record joining pieces that were not diagnostic. Within each 20 x 20 m unit the recorders were confident that most or all joining diagnostic pieces were

27

Chapter 3. Survey Theory and Methodology

from time to time running their herds across the middle and lower tiers at Davari.

The tombs on the middle and lower tiers at Davari

Davari-Kappara

No effort was made to document the tombs on the upper tier at Davari because they all fit the same general description (shallow depressions of c. 1-1.5 m across, with some in-fill and vegetation in them), and because their locations have already been established by the Australian Cyprus Expedition's 1994 survey,

This small cemetery is located on a small knoll to the west of Davari, and separated from it by fields under cultivation. Only seven tombs have been identified there. The surface scatter of pottery associated with these tombs extends over an area of approximately 30 x 30 m. Because such a small area was involved it was decided that no meaningful spatial analysis could be undertaken here. Therefore, the cemetery's surface assemblage was treated as a single context and was collected in bulk.

For the same reasons no further effort was made to document the pit tombs on the lower tier, except for a handful of unusual tombs. However, Davari's middle tier was surveyed and documented in February 1999 in greater detail than was the case in the ACE's 1994 survey. This was done for a number of reasons:

A team of three people systematically walked across the site with each walker scrutinising a transect 3 m wide. All artefacts were collected as the field walking progressed. Once the field walking was completed, Davari-Kappara was walked a second time, this time with the walkers swapping transects.

•

Frankel and Webb (1996:13) state that the middle tier at Davari is "occupied by at least 150 large, well preserved chamber tombs". However, this might have been a misleading generalisation. Certainly, many of the tombs on the middle tier are chamber tombs. Their chambers are still often clearly visible. However, although many of the other tombs give the impression of being chamber tombs, they often only survive as deep holes or depressions that might also be the remains of pit tombs. It was hoped that a more detailed survey of the middle tier would clarify some of these ambiguities.

•

The bulk of Davari' s surface scatter of pottery is concentrated on the middle tier, inviting more detailed investigation.

•

The concentration of large tombs on the middle tier, coupled with a concentration of imported calcarenite blocks, suggested that the burials here involved considerable energy expenditure that was worthy of further investigation.

•

It was hoped that the relationship between tomb

Non-diagnostic sherds under c. 10 x 10 mm in size were not collected. The artefacts were returned to the work base and processed in the manner described for the middle and lower tiers at Davari, except that each diagnostic piece was designated the initials DK (Davari-Kappara) and numbered consecutively from 1. Once the processing was completed the artefacts were returned to the site and scattered evenly across it.

Vounaros The tombs and surface scatter at Vounaros cover an area of approximately 35 x 15 m. Once again, the decision was taken that spatial analysis of such a small and disturbed area would not be meaningful. Therefore, the cemetery's surface scatter was treated as a single context, and was collected in bulk. A team of three systematically walked from west to east across the site, with each wall(er scrutinising a transect 3 4 m wide. Artefacts were collected as they went. Once this was complete, Vounaros was walked a second time, with each person walking a different transect.

architecture and Davari' s geology might be clarified. A team of two people used the EDM to record the location of each tomb on the middle tier, in part duplicating the work of the ACE in 1994. Each tomb was then placed in one of the following categories, based solely on those elements of tomb architecture visible without excavation:

Non-diagnostic sherds under c. 10 x 10 mm in size were not collected. The artefacts were processed in the same manner described for the middle and lower tier at Davari, except that each diagnostic piece was designated the initial V (Vounaros) and numbered consecutively from 1. Once the processing was completed, the artefacts were returned to the site and scattered evenly across it.

•

28

Chamber tomb: where the actual chamber was visible.

Chapter 3. Survey Theory and Methodology

•

Probable chamber tomb: where some features of a chamber tomb were visible (e.g. a stomion block, or a particularly large or deep hole) but where the actual chamber was not visible. Proximity to other chamber tombs alone was not considered enough to place a tomb in this category.

•

Pit tomb: where the surviving architecture was clearly incompatible with the chamber tomb designation, and compatible with a pit tomb designation.

•

Uncertain: where only a depression or hole survived which could be the remains of either a pit tomb or a looted and collapsed chamber tomb.

It is certain that chamber tombs are under-represented in the results (see Figure 1.23 for the results). Many of the robbed chamber tombs have no doubt collapsed after the looting, leaving a depression that could easily be mistaken for a pit tomb, and which would probably be placed in the 'uncertain' category during survey. If nothing else, this exercise established that without excavation it is almost impossible to be more precise in identifying many of the looted tombs. Other notable features were also recorded, especially the location of worked stone blocks and imported calcarenite (see Figure 1.26).

For each tomb, a note was also made as to whether the settlement at Marki was visible from it, in the hope that this might reveal patterns of inter-visibility.

29

Chapter 4. Taphonomic Processes Affecting the Cemeteries of Marki

During the Early and Middle Bronze Age, tombs were commonly used for multiple burials. This was particularly common in the chamber tombs, like those in Davari' s middle tier. Such tombs could contain several bodies, though chamber tombs of the period more usually contained no more than two or three bodies (Keswani 1989:229). Where multiple successive burials took place it was customary for the earlier burials (both the skeleton and grave goods) to be pushed aside to make room for the later burial (e.g. Todd 1986). As a result, even in unlooted tombs the grave goods are often disturbed. This problem has been compounded in some instances on the island by natural flooding which has also had the effect of mixing the grave goods of burials separated by many generations.

CHAPTER4 TAPHONOMIC PROCESSES AFFECTING THE CEMETERIES OF MARKI The surface scatters presently observable at Marki's cemeteries are separated from their systemic contexts by numerous natural and cultural post-depositional processes. They should not be regarded as a kind of 'fossil record' of the society that produced them (Binford 1981; Schiffer 1976, 1985, 1987; Hassan 1987:2). Therefore, the likely effects of these processes ( on both the configuration of the surface scatters and the composition of the assemblages) must be studied, before any spatial analysis or cross-assemblage comparisons can be made. Once those effects have been established the research questions to be asked of the cemeteries (and of looted cemeteries generally) can be tailored to suit their potential (Nash and Petraglia 1987: 193). Although there have been, at times, heated debates on theoretical issues (e.g. Binford 1981 and Schiffer 1985 on the 'Pompeii Premise'), most archaeologists now agree that although archaeological remains are often a distorted reflection of past behavioural systems, taphonomic processes can often be shown to be regular and quantifiable so that one can identify meaningful relationships between archaeological remains and the past cultural systems ultimately responsible for them (Schiffer 1976:12).

These difficulties will be less evident in the pit tombs which are not susceptible to flooding and which were less commonly used for multiple burials. It is almost certain that many of the burials in the

chamber tombs around Marki were disturbed by successive burials in prehistory so that even if they had not been looted some difficulties of interpretation would have arisen. Flooding is unlikely to have caused any senous disturbance of the chamber tomb assemblages. Taphonomic processes affecting the cemeteries after Marki Alonia was abandoned and before the cemeteries were looted

Four distinct phases can be isolated as the main periods in which transforming activities occurred at Marki's cemeteries. They may be summarised in chronological order as follows: •

The cemeteries as part of the systemic context i.e. when the cemeteries of Marki were still being used.

•

The cemeteries after site abandonment but before any tomb looting took place.

•

The looting of the tombs and the deposition of the surface assemblage.

•

The excavation of many EC-MC chamber tombs on Cyprus has established that a large number of them suffered roof collapse and flooding after they fell into disuse, with the result that the grave goods inside suffered damage (e.g. Carpenter 1981; Swiny 1985a:122; Swiny 1985b: 19). It is difficult to establish whether these natural processes had an effect at Marki. However, many of the chamber tombs appear to have been filled with considerable quantities of soil (the excavation of Tomb 5 by the ACE also confirmed this). It is likely that this is due to a combination of roof collapse and looters in-fill. Additionally, natural processes will have acted upon the ceramic and bone assemblages. For example, the finer wares excavated from Davari ( especially the softer-fired Philia ceramics from Davari's upper tier) display considerable natural wear and breakage (Frankel and Webb 1997:94ff). Similarly, the small quantity of skeletal remains excavated from Davari's limestone soils were very badly abraded (Frankel and Webb 1997:91).

Changes to the surface assemblage since its deposition.

This chapter will consider each of the four phases outlined above in an effort to establish the effects that taphonomic processes have had on the surface assemblages at Marki's cemeteries.

Furthermore, it is possible that scavengers robbed some of the tombs at the time that the settlement at Marki Alonia was abandoned. It is unlikely that this occurred to any great degree (if it happened at all) given that so many

Taphonomic processes affecting the cemeteries at the time that they formed part of the systemic context

30

Chapter 4. Taphonomic Processes Affecting the Cemeteries of Marki

tombs remained unlooted as recently as the 1960s (probably later). However, if scavenging did occur, the tomb assemblages would be depleted of smaller portable objects (Baker 1978:290), more valuable goods (e.g. bronze artefacts), and the undamaged pieces.

Additionally, all of the ceramic artefacts listed for sale are relatively small. The largest pieces are three bowls/basins (maximum dimensions 66 cm, 53 cm and 39.4 cm) (the only three large/bowls basins listed), followed by eight 'jugs' and 'pitchers' 30-36 cm tall. However, ahnost all of the other pieces are c. 15-20 cm maximum dimension or less. No pithoi are listed. Small jugs and amphorae were most popular (thirty-seven pieces), followed by small hemispherical bowls (twentynine pieces).

The effects of looting and the deposition of the surface assemblage The looting processes have already been described in Chapter 1. Unfortunately, the looting was both systematic and thorough. However, it is of great importance to more precisely establish the ways in which the looters have depleted the mortuary assemblage if meaningful comparisons between the settlement and surface assemblages ( as a sample of the mortuary assemblage) are to be made.

At about the same time, another leading British dealer in antiquities (Folio Fine Art/ Charles Ede Ltd) also offered a quantity of Cypriot antiquities for sale (again, no suggestion of any illegal activity is made here). Between November 1969 and June 1975, seventeen Prehistoric Bronze Age vessels were listed in this dealer's general catalogues. Another 52 EC-MC pieces were listed in a series of catalogues between 1976 and 1980 devoted solely to Cypriot artefacts (Folio Fine Art 1969-1971; Charles Ede Ltd 1971-1975; Charles Ede Ltd 1976, 1977, 1979, 1980). Of these 69 vessels, 49 were decorated and a further 13 otherwise distinctive (for example, unusual handles or shapes). As with the Sotheby's catalogues, only a handful could be described as 'plain'. Although a number had chipped parts (usually described as 'inoffensive' or 'small') or cracks, and some had worn surfaces, the bulk of the vessels were in very good condition. However, two were described as "recomposed from fragments". About a dozen had minor restoration on rims, handles etc. Almost all of the pieces listed in the Folio Fine Art/Ede catalogues were small (less than 2025 cm maximum dimension), like those in the Sotheby's catalogues. The largest pieces were a jug 40.6 cm tall (Lot 9, May 1976), a jug 38.4 cm tall (Lot 9, October 1977), and an amphora 33.6 cm tall (Lot 10, May 1976). Bowls and small jugs were most common.

The looters who plundered Marki's cemeteries were responding to a particular demand; namely, that of the antiquities market. Therefore, it is likely that they targeted certain artefacts, especially those that were likely to fetch the highest price. Thus, one might expect the cemetery assemblages to first be robbed of intact or repairable artefacts, highly decorated or 'eye-catching' artefacts and metal artefacts. Unfortunately, these artefacts tend also to be the chronologically sensitive pieces, or those likely to carry social or religious meaning. This observation is supported by a brief review of the sales catalogues from a major British auction house (Sotheby's) from the years 1970 to 1972. (Naturally, no suggestion of complicity in the trade of illegally acquired antiquities is made here. These catalogues are cited solely as a means of establishing general consumer demand at this time). Between 22nd December, 1969 and 21st December, 1970, Sotheby & Co. listed fifty-seven ECMC artefacts for auction (Sotheby & Co. 1970a-g). In 1971 and 1972 a further twenty and twenty-nine pieces respectively were listed (Sotheby & Co. 1971a-c and 1972a-f)). Of these 106 artefacts, ninety-nine were pottery artefacts (mainly apparently RP, though the pieces are variously described as "orange pottery", "burnished orange pottery", "red and black pottery", and "orange and black pottery"). The remaining Prehistoric Bronze Age artefacts listed were five spearheads and two stone "maceheads".

Sotheby's and Ede tend to cater to the 'boutique' end of the market so this brief review is unlikely to account for the sale of less exotic, less expensive artefacts. However, it does demonstrate that at the time that Marki's cemeteries were being looted, certain licit buyers of Prehistoric Bronze Age antiquities preferred decorated and unbroken pieces, especially those with other noteworthy morphological features. Larger vessels seem to have been passed over in favour of smaller jugs and bowls.

Of the ninety-nine ceramic artefacts, forty-six were decorated, usually with elaborate incisions. Of the undecorated artefacts listed for sale, twenty-six were otherwise noteworthy (e.g. for their unusual shapes, handles, spouts, pierced lugs or deliberate differential firing). Only twenty-seven artefacts could be described as 'plain' or 'unadorned' (mainly small hemispherical bowls and dishes). Significantly, only seven pieces are described in the catalogues as broken, damaged or repaired.

Similar trends emerge from a study of the contents of known looted tombs. Stewart recorded a number of looted tombs in his excavations of Vounous A and Vounous B in the late 1930s (Stewart and Stewart 1950), and the artefacts left behind by looters are therefore instructive. For example, looters apparently had no interest in the skeletal remains which were usually left in the looted chamber. Although the impression is generally of thoroughness, looters sometimes missed rare and

31

Chapter 4. Taphonomic Processes Affecting the Cemeteries of Marki

important artefacts such as a spindle whorl of pale green stone (Tomb 80, Vounous A), an axe (Tomb 96, Vounous A), and copper/bronze tweezers, daggers and scrapers (Tomb 148, Vounous B). Complete vessels were also sometimes missed. Stewart records a small number of them, but he does not always note whether they were broken ( and therefore later restored) or not. However, at least some of them appear from the photos to have been undamaged and simply not taken by the looters (e.g. Tombs 89, 96, 99, 127, 152 at Vounous A). Most chambers were thoroughly looted, with little but sherds (if anything) remaining for Stewart to recover ( e.g. Tombs 80, 85, 94, 95, 97, 98, 108, 117, 135, 158, 159 at Vounous A). However, it is significant that in some robbed tombs, a number of complete but broken vessels (some of which could be fully or largely restored, and which were elaborately decorated) were simply left behind by the looters (e.g. Tombs 89, 96, 97, 152, Vounous A). Additionally, a number of highly decorated sherds were disregarded by the looters (including fragmentary spindle whorls, broken large jugs, broken but incised vessels of all shapes and sizes, and broken 'cult vessels' incorporating animal head plastic attachments) ( e.g. Tombs 95, 96, 98, 117, 127 135, 158, Vounous A). Again, this suggests a preference shown by looters for complete vessels, and a lack of interest in vessels that were complete but broken, or in fragments, even when they were decorated.

No bone was present in the surface assemblages at Marki's cemeteries. This came as no surprise given that bone is likely to be under-represented in all surface assemblages because of its rapid rate of decay when exposed to the elements (Gifford 1978:81). In recent decades, the cemeteries around Marki Alonia have been used by picnickers ( especially visiting archaeologists). This has almost certainly resulted in some souvenir hunting, possibly further contributed to by curious hunters and shepherds. Other archaeologists have removed study material from the sites ( e.g. surface sherds from Marki' s cemeteries are in the Cyprus Survey, CAARI and Episkopi Museum) (Frankel and Webb 1996:13). Souveniring is a form of unsystematic collection which has certain predictable results (following Boismier 1991:19-23):

The fact that the mortuary assemblages of Marki have been depleted of many artefacts does not render them valueless as archaeological resources. Very few sites have not experienced similar disturbances. Assemblages from abandoned sites are often affected in this way. For example, when a settlement is abandoned, those tools and utensils that are still of use or value to the departing inhabitants will be taken with them to their new homes (Gifford 1980:97-9). Such 'curate behaviour' is particularly evident where the abandonment process is slow and planned (Cameron 1991:157; Tomka 1993), as was the case at Marki Alonia (Webb 1995). Thus, we might expect that the archaeological record from (for example) Marki Alonia will have been depleted of undamaged pots and utensils, pieces of religious or prestige value (especially metal) and easily transported things (Webb 1995:65); that is, precisely those things targeted by the looters in the cemeteries. Thus, to argue that the mortuary assemblage from Marki's cemeteries is of little value because certain types of artefact have been taken from them is to disregard the fact that many settlement assemblages (which are widely accepted as being of great value) have suffered the same or a similar fate.

to

the

composition

of

the

Temporally diagnostic artefacts ( e.g. decorated pieces, rims and bases) are over-represented in unsystematic collections.

•

Conversely, those diagnostic pieces will be under-represented in the surface scatter.

•

Through time, as these diagnostic pieces become more rare on the surface, the more common artefact classes will more commonly be collected from the site.

•

In unsystematic collections the larger, more visible pieces will be collected before smaller pieces ( especially those under 30 mm in maximum dimension).

Therefore, it is likely that the surface assemblages at Marki's cemeteries will have been depleted of some of the diagnostic artefacts, especially the larger, more visible ones. The surface pottery at the cemeteries has also been exposed to the elements for a number of decades. Not surprisingly, thermal fracture was observed in some of the pottery, which may account for some of the joins noted in the conjoin studies discussed below (p. 37). Where thermal fracture occurs it results in a reduction in the average size of sherds across a site. Because the cemeteries have experienced some pedestrian activity (by hunters and shepherds and goats), trampling will also have had an effect on the composition of the assemblage. Trampling is the simple act of treading on elements of a surface assemblage. It can cause the subsurface migration of artefacts, especially the smaller ones, with the result that larger artefacts become overrepresented on the surface. However, such migration is unlikely to have occurred in the consolidated secondary limestone and fanglomerate of Marki's cemeteries (see

Taphonomic processes operating on the surface scatters left behind by the looters

Disturbance assemblages

•

surface

32

Chapter 4. Taphonomic Processes Affecting the Cemeteries of Marki

Hughes and Lampert 1977; Gifford 1978:81; Baker 1978; Wandsnider 1987:160-162).

In both the surface assemblage and Tomb 5's subsurface

assemblage, RP was the most common ware, with much smaller quantities of RP (Philia) and DP being the next most represented wares. Further, they occur in comparable proportions (RP: 97% of the surface assemblage and 98.3% in Tomb 5; RP(P): 2.2% of the surface assemblage and 1.2% in Tomb 5; DP: 0.4% of the surface assemblage and 0.3% in Tomb 5).

Further, trampling can break larger artefacts into smaller pieces with the result that a site that may have been dominated by larger sherds upon abandonment, may be dominated by numerous small sherds by the time the archaeologist studies it (Kirkby and Kirkby 1976:237). Additionally, once a large artefact has been trampled into smaller pieces, those pieces are more vulnerable to movement by overland flow and subsurface migration. Also, trampling can contribute to the downslope movement of artefacts by disturbing pieces otherwise consolidated in a stable position on a slope (see below page 34).

Similarly, proportions of open and closed vessels are broadly alike (some allowance must be made for the small sample size). For example, 55% of the sherds in the surface assemblage derived from closed vessels and 45% from open vessels. In Tomb 5 69% were from closed vessels and 31% open. However, some significant differences in composition emerge in the subsurface assemblage from Tombs 6 and 7. 91% of sherds from these Philia tombs were from closed vessels, the balance from open ones. By contrast, the sherds from closed vessels on the surface of Davari's upper tier amounted to only 41% of the sherds that could be identified as being open or closed. 59% came from open vessels ( excluding from calculations finds from an EC III-MC I tomb on the upper tier's fringes). This discrepancy implies some misidentification of Philia sherds in the highly fragmented surface assemblage, and again demonstrates the difficulties attaching to identifying Philia material in a surface survey. However, it may also be a product of the small sample. Other differences between the surface and subsurface Philia finds are discussed below (p. 88).

As is the case with thermal fracture, it is difficult to estimate the effects of trampling at Marki's cemeteries. Davari, Davari-Kappara and Vounaros are all relatively isolated sites. They are not subjected to regular or intensive pedestrian activity. Goats regularly graze on Davari's lower slopes. However, Davari's upper tier, Davari-Kappara and Vounaros experience little grazing activity. Only a small number of hunters cross these sites in the hunting season. It is unlikely that breakage caused by trampling will have greatly affected the surface assemblage at these sites. Significantly, however, it can be said that the average sherd in the surface assemblage in Marki's surveyed cemeteries weighed 3.5 g. This is substantially less than the average weight of those sherds recovered during excavation by the Australian Cyprus Expedition of looted Tomb 5 (on Davari's middle tier) (i.e. 5.3 g) and looted Tombs 6 and 7 (on Davari's upper tier) (i.e. 6.2 g). These figures might imply that sherds left inside looted tombs ( and therefore not exposed to the elements on the surface for decades) were not subject to the effects of thermal fracture and trampling, which combine to break down the surface assemblage into smaller pieces. However, given the very small sample provided by Tombs 5, 6 and 7, and the wide variation in sherd sizes across the various parts of Davari, too much should not be made of these figures.

In other respects, the surface and subsurface assemblages

are broadly similar, though with a few small differences. In Tomb 5 the RP diagnostics are evenly divided between those with high, medium and slight lustre, while in the surface assemblage a smaller proportion had high lustre, and more were matt on the exterior. This suggests that some sun bleaching of the surface sherds may have occurred. However, we are dealing with very small samples in this regard. In terms of fabric hardness, the Tomb 5 assemblage and surface assemblage were also similar, being in both cases predominantly soft-tomedium.

Other comparisons between the surveyed surface assemblages and the subsurface assemblages recovered during the ACE's excavation of Tombs 5, 6 and 7 are instructive. Although based on small samples, they generally support the expectation held at the start of the survey, that the composition of the surface assemblage would be largely the same as the composition of the assemblage left inside tombs after looting was completed. This lends support to the decision to survey rather than excavate. For most purposes, the subsurface assemblage of the chronologically mixed Tomb 5 is the most suitable for comparisons with the surface assemblage. Tombs 6 and 7, being exclusively Philia, misleadingly exaggerate the differences between the surface and subsurface assemblages.

One possible point of difference between the surface and subsurface assemblage in Tomb 5 relates to the proportion of total sherds that has decoration, or is diagnostic. For example, 11.3% of the surface assemblage comprised diagnostic sherds, compared to just 2.1 % (26 out of 1220) in Tomb 5. Similarly, while 2.2% of sherds in the surface assemblage displayed decoration, only 0.8% of Tomb 5's sherds had decoration. This was not the result of decorated sherds being missed during excavation because the contents of Tomb 5 were sieved. Although it is a small sample, these figures suggest especially thorough looting of Tomb 5, with broken but decorated sherds being removed from the fill, and then left on the surface, as the spoil was then returned to the tomb.

33

Chapter 4. Taphonomic Processes Affecting the Cemeteries of Marki

and stable points down slope (Wainwright and Thomes 1990:183-4), and the shape of the sherd (Rick 1976:140). However, most studies generally agree that smaller sherds ( especially those less than 2 cm) are moved greater distances down slope than larger ones by overland flow (a phenomenon termed 'size sorting'), though in some unusual circumstances this trend is actually reversed (Kirkby and Kirkby 1976:241; Wainwright and Thomes 1990: 188; Schick 1987; Greenwood 1997). Although size sorting is therefore a useful indicator of downslope movement due to the overland flow of water, it will not always be an accurate one (Petraglia and Nash 1987).

Disturbance to the spatial patterning of the suiface assemblages Given that the soils in the cemeteries of Marki are stable, consolidated and compact, the vertical displacement of artefacts since the cemeteries were looted is likely to be minimal (e.g. Wood and Johnson 1978:317ff). However, natural processes may have had a considerable impact on the horizontal displacement of artefacts across the surface of the cemeteries, particularly on the hillslope site of Davari. Studies have demonstrated that there are three main ways in which surface scatters on hillslopes can be reconfigured by natural processes: •

•

Surface scatters on hillslopes tend to experience the most downslope movement soon after deposition, especially in the first ten years (Wainwright 1994:191ff; Wainwright and Thomes 1990:187). Then surface assemblages stabilise and will not move again unless overland flow increases, the slope is modified or the artefacts are otherwise disturbed (Wainwright 1994:191ff; Wainwright and Thomes 1990:195).

Erosion and slope degradation result in the overall downslope movement of surface artefacts, so that the upper slopes tend to become denuded of them (Allen 1991:47), while the artefacts downslope become buried by the translocating soils (Wood and Johnson 1978:346; Wainwright and Thomes 1990:188). Furthermore, because smaller artefacts are more likely to be moved by erosive forces, they start to dominate the lower slopes (Kirkby and Kirkby 1976:240-241). The rate of downslope movement occasioned by erosion depends on the nature of the soils involved, the frequency and intensity of rain events, the shape and aspect of the slope, and the amount of vegetation cover (Wainwright and Thomes 1990:183; Allen 1991 :4 lff; Wainwright 1994; Kirkby and Kirkby 1976; Kirkby, Atkinson and Lockwood 1990; Faulkner 1990; Wildesen 1982).

•

The overland flow of water can affect the distribution of a surface scatter. Low intensity rainfall has only a small impact on surface assemblages. However, high intensity rainfall can cause significant entrainment of artefacts. Overland flow can take a number of forms including laminar sheet flows (a film of water moving across the soil surface), and turbulent flows (such as in rills and gullies) (Julien and Simons 1985:755; Allen 1991:43). Laminar flows cause less surface movement of artefacts than turbulent flows. Heavy rainfall observed at Davari from November to February established that it is affected mainly by laminar sheet flow. However, rills created by turbulent flow are evident in places, especially on the steep slopes of the east and west faces of Davari's upper and middle tiers.

Gravitational forces will, in some circumstances, cause the smaller, lighter and less dense artefacts in a surface scatter to become concentrated on the upper slopes while the larger, heavier and denser artefacts cluster downslope (Rick 1976). This is the exact opposite of the results of erosion and overland flow discussed above. This occurs when an artefact on a slope is disturbed, causing it to tumble downslope. Larger and heavier pieces will gain more momentum and bound greater distances down slope than smaller lighter pieces (Rick 1976: 139ft).

Horizontal movement on the upper tier at Davari

A number of observations can be made with respect to Davari's upper tier which are relevant to the assessment of artefact movement there. The upper tier is a hard, layered limestone largely devoid of vegetation. This limestone is noticeably less permeable than the geomorphology elsewhere on Davari. These factors would suggest that laminar sheet flows of water would be more common on the upper tier, and more disruptive of surface artefacts there, than on Davari' s lower two tiers. If this is the case, a correspondingly higher degree of artefact movement down the upper tier's slope might be expected. All the sherds and tombs on Davari' s upper tier were located in space using an EDM, allowing some assessment of the amount of sherd movement that has occurred. Figure 1.7 illustrates that many of the sherds on

Sherds can be moved vastly different distances by overland flow even within the one site, depending on the chance location of obstructions

34

Chapter 4. Taphonomic Processes Affecting the Cemeteries of Marki

Davari's upper tier have moved considerable distances from their likely tombs of origin, sometimes as much as 25 metres.

the slope. As a result, the surface sherds are most thickly spread in the immediate vicinity of the tombs on that tier (see Figure 1.14). The limestone soil here is particularly agglutinative, and many sherds on the surface were in fact stuck in place by the adhering soils. This might suggest that a short time after the surface assemblage was deposited by looters, many sherds within it ceased movement downslope.

However, it would be an error to dismiss the upper tier assemblage as being too badly disturbed to be of use to serious spatial analysis. Firstly, although it is possible that some of the sherds from the upper tier have been transported there from downslope by looters and souvenir hunters (and therefore too much should not be made of single finds), it seems relatively safe to assume that the bulk of them derived from the handful of tombs on that tier. Thus, although clear downslope movement has occurred, it has done limited damage to the integrity of the upper tier assemblage. In broad terms, we may treat those sherds as belonging to a spatially and possibly chronologically discrete set of burials within Davari cemetery.

Parts of Davari's middle tier have clearly experienced large amounts of downslope movement. Some clear movement of individual sherds has occurred on the western slope (Figure 1.14). However, the worst affected area is the very steep eastern slope of the middle tier where large quantities of sherd material have slipped and bounded up to 30 m downslope. In the c. 1600 m 2 comprising this slope, 1542 sherds were recovered (Figure 1.14).

The sherds plotted on the upper tier of Davari were also the subjects of a practical experiment. The ground next to each sherd was marked with tape before being left untouched for three weeks, during which time Davari experienced two episodes of light overnight rain and a heavy thunderstorm. When the sherds were checked for downslope movement only five out of 234 had moved (the greatest movement being c. 20 cm). This somewhat rudimentary test might support the in-field observation that many of the sherds at Davari have settled into consolidated positions on the slope, and might imply that the main period of downslope movement at Davari occurred soon after the looters deposited the surface assemblage.

However, although considerable movement of sherds has occurred on this part of the middle tier, the damage done to the integrity of the middle tier assemblage is limited because the tombs from which these sherds derived can be identified with some confidence. A string of chamber tombs stretches along the lip overlooking the steep eastern slope. It seems likely that the pottery on this slope came largely from these tombs only. The only possible alternative sources for this pottery are the chamber tombs further away from the edge that overlooks the slope. However, there is no evidence to suggest that the looters of these tombs made the effort to cart their spoil several metres in order to tip it down the steep eastern slope. In fact, the presence of spoil heaps adjacent to the looted tombs elsewhere on the middle tier confirm that it was more usual for the looters to simply dump their spoil next to the opening of the tomb being looted. Of course, some sherds on this slope are likely to have been thrown over the edge by picnickers or looters. This merely means that caution must be exercised with single finds from this part of the cemetery.

Davari's middle tier

Davari's middle tier is a softer and more degraded limestone than that on the upper tier. It is also more heavily vegetated. This limestone is more permeable and therefore less prone to rapid laminar sheet flow than the upper tier. No rills or gullies suggestive of rapid water movement are observable, except a few on the very steep eastern slope of the middle tier, and some on the somewhat less steep western slope. Observations made in a number of heavy downpours during the survey of Davari confirmed that the overland flow of water on Davari's middle tier is neither rapid nor severely erosive. Significantly, the surface of Davari's middle tier is very uneven, with hollows and small mounds created by looters spoil. Such 'structures' can trap artefacts being moved downslope by water (Wainwright 1994:194ff). So closely spaced are the tombs in some parts of this tier that it would be impossible for a sherd to be washed any more than a few metres without being trapped by these hollows and mounds.

The amount of downslope movement that occurred elsewhere on the middle tier (around the tombs themselves, where the ground is uneven, and where the angle of slope is in a north-south direction) appears to be smaller than that on the upper tier. There is no obvious accumulation of ceramics at the southern base of the middle tier, where the ground levels out and becomes the lower tier. Also, the upper part of the middle tier displays no denudation of artefacts suggestive of downslope movement. However, there is one large concentration of pottery on the south-east edge of the middle tier, downslope of a number of tombs, that appears to be accumulation from further up slope (Figure 1.14). This cluster serves as a reminder that although many sherds may not have moved far from their likely tombs of origin, enough movement has occurred for fine-scale spatial analysis to be unreliable.

Observations made during the surface collection on Davari's middle tier confirm that a great many of the sherds there have settled into consolidated positions on

35

Chapter 4. Taphonomic Processes Affecting the Cemeteries of Marki

A number of practical experiments partly confirm these observations. They also allow for an assessment to be made of the tests commonly used by archaeological surveys to estimate downslope movement and disturbance to surface assemblages generally. These tests are often relied on heavily by archaeological surveyors, who treat them as having a certain 'scientific' accuracy (e.g. Allen 1991; Wainwright and Thomes 1990; Wainwright 1994; Kirkby, Atkinson and Lockwood 1990). The results of the survey at Davari do not entirely support such confidence in the standard tests. However, they also provide some reassuring evidence of less movement within the surface scatter than might otherwise have been expected.

However, some minor unquantifiable skewing of the data is likely to have occurred. Figure 1.27 illustrates the results of the study. The number of sherds recorded within each row of contexts is superimposed over the ( exaggerated) slope profile of the 80 x 20 m study area so that it is possible to follow the trends from the top to the bottom of the slope. The bottom of the middle tier and the beginning of the lower tier is visible as the 'trough' in the profile. Counts from the lower tier were not included in the study. At first glance, there appears to be a clear increase in the number of sherds in a row of contexts, as one approaches the base of the middle tier's slope. However, three high peaks exaggerate this trend. Too much should not be made of these three very high peaks because the sherds in the count largely derive from just a handful of vessels confined to a very small area. They are somewhat anomalous. Additionally, a number of large chamber tombs (presumably the source of large quantities of pottery) are located towards the bottom of the slope, which may exaggerate the sherd count here. Generally, the sherd counts in the study area fluctuate considerably as one progresses down the slope. Discounting the anomalous peaks, there is no clear trend towards increasing numbers of sherds the further down the slope of the middle tier one goes. In fact, in the first 12 m of the middle tier's slope there are 418 sherds. In the last 12 m (which excludes the three anomalous peaks) there were 501 sherds. This is not a marked difference. However, this test was generally inconclusive.

It has already been noted that where there has been

significant disturbance to a surface assemblage by downslope movement, the upper parts of the slope will be denuded of artefacts while the lower parts of the slope will have a greater number of artefacts because they will wash down and accumulate there. To establish whether this has occurred on Davari's middle tier, a strip of four contiguous units (i.e. a strip 80 m long from north to south and 20 m wide from west to east) was selected for study. This study area extended from the upper parts of the slope of the middle tier to the upper parts of the lower tier. It covered 60 m of the middle tier and the first 20 m of the lower tier. The study area was representative of the middle tier, containing an average amount of vegetation and an average mix of chamber and pit tombs. There was no significant east-west slope to the study area: if downslope movement occurred within it, then all such movement would be from the north to the south (i.e. top to bottom).

Another similar test was conducted in the same 80 x 20 m study area to establish or quantify disturbance of the surface scatter by downslope movement. The tendency of downslope movement to result in size sorting has already been discussed. In short, the smaller artefacts will be washed further downslope than the larger artefacts. In this test the average weight for a sherd was calculated for each row of ten contexts so that a comparison of average weights (and therefore of size, though the correlation is not always perfect) for sherds from the top of the slope could be made with those from the bottom.

The study area was divided into rows of ten 2 x 2 m contexts (i.e. strips running 20 m west to east and 2 m north to south). The number of sherds within each row of contexts was then calculated to establish whether those at the top of the slope had significantly fewer sherds than those at the bottom of the slope. This is a question of density of sherds. In this regard, it must be noted that the grid plan that formed the basis of this experiment was established on a horizontal plane. This creates no problems where the ground under study is level because a 20 x 2 m strip on the notional horizontal plane will have the same area as a 20 x 2 m strip on the real ground. However, where the ground under study undulates or slopes, the actual area on the ground being studied may be far in excess of the 20 x 2 m on the horizontal plane. Different strips may have different areas depending on the slope and undulation of the ground. In such circumstances you must expect some strips to have more sherds in them than others. No correction was made for this problem in this experiment because the study area sloped at a relatively constant rate and the undulations in the study area were relatively shallow and evenly spaced.

The results are illustrated in Figure 1.28 where the average weight for a sherd in each row of contexts is superimposed over the slope profile. The one very high peak on the middle tier can be discounted as being the result of a couple of very large sherd fragments in this row. There is no obvious trend towards lighter artefacts down the slope. Weights fluctuate from row to row with an increase in the first 12 m of the slope, followed by a reduction in average weights mid slope. The lower third of the slope, on average, does have comparatively lighter sherds than those from the parts of the study area further up the slope. This might suggest some downslope

36

Chapter 4. Taphonomic Processes Affecting the Cemeteries of Marki

movement of the smaller pieces. However, sherd weights in this part of the slope actually increase in weight over the lower 12 m of the slope. This pattern is incompatible with a model of downslope movement due to water flow. Once again the standard tests were therefore inconclusive.

A more precise test was used to establish whether sherds had accumulated in and around vegetation on Davari's middle tier. A representative 20 x 20 m unit (Unit 36) was selected for study. This unit contained 1076 sherds. 15% of its area had heavy vegetation, 27% medium vegetation cover and the rest light or no vegetation cover. On average, each 2 x 2 m context in Unit 36 had 9.66 sherds in it (excluding a single anomalous context from the calculations). On average, the heavily vegetated contexts contained only 7.9 sherds while those with medium vegetation cover had 8.19 sherds each. By contrast those contexts with little or no vegetation had an average of 10.65 sherds. These results would suggest that vegetation on this part of Davari' s slope has not collected artefacts being washed downslope by the overland flow of water.

Another test for size sorting was conducted. This test assumes that if the surface movement of water, and the effects of gravity, have had any significant impact on the surface assemblage at Davari's middle tier, then size sorting of artefacts will have occurred, and this size sorting will be most evident at those places where the effects of erosion are most obvious. For example, smaller and lighter sherds would be deposited in those places where waterborne sediments have settled (see Holdaway et al. 1998). During the survey of Davari the geology of all 2 x 2 m contexts was noted so that all those contexts characterised by erosion sediments could be recorded. Of the 518 contexts so described, there was no significant difference in the size and weight of the sherds within them when compared to those from elsewhere on Davari. Thus, the average sherd from Davari weighed 30 g. The average sherd recovered from contexts containing slope wash was 26.5 g, a difference of just 3.5 g. This difference in weight is made to appear all the smaller when it is noted that the average weight is inflated by a great many large basin sherds deriving from the middle tier's chamber tombs. These chamber tombs are not found on the lower slopes where erosion sediments are most evident. Furthermore, a visual examination of Figure 1.24 demonstrates that there was no concentration of pottery in those squares characterised by slopewash, as one would expect if downslope movement were operating on the surface scatters.

Simple conjoin studies, modelled on other such experiments (e.g. Bollong 1994; Kroll and Isaac 1984:21; Greenwood 1997), were also conducted at Davari. All joins between diagnostic sherds were recorded, as were all non-joining diagnostics clearly deriving from the same vessel. This approach was less rigorous than others in that joins between non-diagnostic pieces were not recorded, thereby reducing the chances of finding some conjoins across large areas. Also, although joins within 20 x 20 m units were noted, those between units were not (because adjacent units were not always analysed one after the other). This also reduced the chances of identifying joins across large distances. Notwithstanding these limitations 169 joins were identified at Davari (Figure 1.30). The dispersion of these joins implies limited surface movement at Davari. For example, where joining sherds were identified, they were almost always very close together, usually within the same 2 x 2 m context. Only twelve joins were located more than 2 m apart. Ten joins were identified in adjoining contexts (i.e. a maximum of 4 m apart, and usually less than that), while two joins were between sherds in non-adjacent contexts (a maximum of approximately 8 m apart). So, of 169 joins, only two implied surface movement of sherds across a distance of more than 4 metres.

Another characteristic of a surface assemblage affected by downslope movement caused by the overland flow of water is that sherds will accumulate in and immediately upslope of vegetation. As noted in Chapter 3, the density and type of vegetation in every context at Davari was described and recorded during survey, making it possible to analyse the association of pottery density and vegetation (though it must assume that the vegetation has not changed greatly over the last few decades). Figure 1.29 illustrates that contexts with heavy vegetation actually contained very little pottery, and there is no clear evidence of accumulations upslope of them. In fact, on average four sherds (average weight for each being 30 g) were found in every context described as having only light vegetation, 3.4 sherds (average weight 29 g) in those described as having medium vegetation, and 1.4 sherds ( average weight 34 g) in those with heavy vegetation. This pattern is not consistent with a scenario in which pottery is being caught upslope of and in vegetated areas. Rather, less pottery on average was found in contexts with vegetation in them. This is unlikely to be a result of differences in visibility ( see p. 25 above).

summary, the standard experiments used by archaeological surveys generally suggest that Davari' s surface assemblage has experienced relatively little disturbance since it was deposited. However, it is also clear from a simple observation of the scatter's configuration, relative to the tombs from which the artefacts are likely to have originated, that considerable movement has occurred in places. Clearly the standard tests must therefore be used with some caution. They can clearly provide the archaeologist with misleading confidence in his or her data. In

Nevertheless, these studies do provide some justification for broad level spatial analysis at the site. For example, it is possible to speak of a middle tier assemblage. This assemblage is spatially and possibly chronologically

37

Chapter 4. Taphonomic Processes Affecting the Cemeteries of Marki

discrete. Some contamination of this assemblage has occurred as material from the upper tier has washed down onto the middle tier's upper areas. Contamination from the lower tier is possible in small quantities, but generally unlikely as this would require transportation upslope, by human agency. Finer level spatial analysis within the middle tier would be more difficult. Enough surface movement has occurred to make it impossible to make anything of single finds or small clusters of fmds that may have been deposited in places far removed from their places of origin. However, broader spatial trends on Davari's middle tier (for example, concentrations of particular types of vessels, or ceramics of a particular date) may be discemable in the right circumstances. These will be discussed in more detail in Chapter 6. In short, the disturbance to the surface assemblage at Davari' s middle tier has been substantial but it does not render the site entirely useless for spatial and other analysis.

broad level spatial and ceramics analysis can be conducted with some confidence. Conclusions

The studies outlined above allow for a tentative reconstruction of the taphonomic processes that have affected the Davari mortuary assemblage. During the period that the tombs were in use, the ceramic assemblages inside many of them were variously disturbed by successive burials and some tomb collapse. Later, when the settlement had been abandoned, more tomb collapse is likely to have occurred, causing more damage to the ceramics inside. When the tombs were looted, certain artefacts were selectively removed. Thus, the mortuary assemblage will have been depleted of decorated, complete and repairable artefacts. Broken artefacts were scattered around the tombs by the looters. At first, these scattered ceramics were moved short distances by water flow downslope. However, many then halted in consolidated positions. On the upper tier, many ceramics have moved considerable distances from their likely tombs of origin. The problem is less severe on the middle tier ( except the steep eastern side of it, and to a lesser extent, the western side), and least severe on the more level lower tier. Visiting archaeologists, souvenir hunters, goatherds, and picnickers will have disturbed and depleted the surface assemblage since the looting to some unquantifiable degree.

Davari's lower tier

Davari's lower tier is almost level ground except on its east and west edges where it slopes down to ploughed fields (Figure 1.5). The lower tier is characterised by stony fanglomerate and thicker vegetation than elsewhere on the slope. Given the minimal north-south slope on the lower tier movement of sherds in this direction due to water movement and gravity would be unlikely. There is no visible accumulation of sherds at the base of the east and west slopes of the lower tier suggestive of sherd displacement (however, a small quantity of individual sherds have clearly been displaced to the east and west of the lower tier tombs (Figure 1.14)). Also, the tops of these slopes have not been denuded of sherds. The conjoin studies and size sorting analyses discussed above (which included contexts from the lower tier) confirm these observations.

However, the surface assemblage is not entirely useless for the purposes of archaeological analysis. Although a number of the tests discussed above lack some of the thoroughness and scientific rigour of larger and betterfunded studies (e.g. Wainwright 1994; Wainwright and Thornes 1990; Rick 1976) they do generally support the view that the surface assemblages at Davari have not been as badly disturbed by natural taphonomic processes since their deposition as might have been expected. Certainly, they have suffered too much disturbance to be of much assistance in fine-scale spatial analysis. For example, sherds cannot be assigned to particular tombs. However, some broader spatial analysis will still be possible. Similarly, the disturbance to the composition of the ceramic assemblage is not so severe that ceramic analysis is precluded. When compared to ceramic assemblages from other sites (for example, the settlement at Marki Alonia, where the assemblage has also been depleted by various phenomena) the surface assemblage from the cemeteries of Marki seems particularly useful as an archaeological resource.

The contamination of the lower tier by sherds moving down from the middle tier is also unlikely given the nature of the ridge's geology. Where the base of the middle tier meets the lower tier, the ground levels out markedly (Figure 1.5). Any sherds washed down from the middle tier would be unlikely to move any further than the northernmost part of the lower tier. Additionally, there is an area of 12 - 15 m separating the tombs on the lowest reaches of the middle tier and those on the lower tier. It is possible to say that although the lower tier has experienced considerable disturbance due to the activities of looters, since the looting occurred there has been less disturbance than might be expected. Movement downslope has been limited, and contamination from further upslope is also likely to have been small. Therefore, the lower tier assemblage can be regarded as a largely discrete one. Provided that caution is exercised,

38

Chapter 5. Artefact Analysis

CHAPTERS

•

It prejudices some elements of a vessel's form over others in defining wares (Frankel 1974:6).

ARTEFACT ANALYSIS

•

It over-emphasises shape as a defming criterion for wares, which can obscure relationships between function, manufacturing techniques and form (e.g. Miller 1985:34; Frankel 1974:5; Rice 1996a:140; Deal 1998:53ff on these relationships).

•

It derives mainly from north coast remains, and incorrectly presumes uniform ceramic development across the island, thereby confusing regional studies (Frankel 1991:246; MacLaurin 1985; Barlow 1989:51; Herscher 1991; Barlow and Vaughan 1992).

•

It defines wares according to often inconsistent criteria (e.g. shape, date, geographic location, technique of manufacture), and therefore dangerously confuses 'function' and 'style' (things which can change entirely independently of each other) (Brown 1982:180; Binford 1989:51).

•

It obscures ceramic heterogeneity by placing a diverse range of ceramics under one all embracing label. In other circumstances it can obscure similarities between ceramics which have been placed into different categories on erroneous grounds (Frankel 1991:241; Peltenburg 1991: 11-13).

•

It is excessively subjective/intuitive. This is not of itself a bad thing because such systems can be sensitive, accurate and flexible (Read 1989:1645; Adams and Adams 1991:4, 19, 188; Cowgill 1989: 132; Whallon 1982: 128). However, where the researcher envisages analysis demanding scientific replicability, such intuitive typologies are commonly inadequate (Read 1989: 164). Additionally, the traditional system is geared more towards description than to analysis or explanation, and is therefore not as problemoriented as modem ceramic theory might require.

•

It implicitly makes the unwarranted assumption that the intuitively derived types bear some meaningful relationship with the "prehistoric reality" (Baird 1991 :21), or to correspond somehow with prehistoric intentions (Merrillees 1991:238). Often this attitude derives from the typologist's belief that variability between certain artefacts is due to the fact that the artisan has made a specific choice (consciously or otherwise) from a range of equally viable alternatives. They then assume that the reasons

The pottery recording system The pottery recording system employed at Davari, Davari-Kappara and Vounaros is the same as the one that has been used at Marki Alonia by the Australian Cyprus Expedition since 1991. This system marks a partial departure from the traditional typologies common to Cypriot archaeology, with the addition of an attributebased recording system. The course of the development of the traditional typologies has been described in detail by a number of authors (e.g. Frankel 1974; Merrillees 1978a; Merrillees 1991; Frankel 1991; Samuelson 1993), and will not be rehearsed at length here. The first typologies were developed in the late nineteenth century by J.L. Myres, with the original wares being distinguished on the basis of shape, colour and decoration. These typologies were augmented and refined over the succeeding decades, with ~ew ~ares being identified on a variety of grounds, mcludmg technique of manufacture, shape and decoration, chronology and regional styles (e.g. Gjerstad 1926; Astrom 1972; see also Merrillees 1978a: 17ff and Frankel 1991:246). The development of EC-MC typologies cuhninated in the later twentieth century with Stewart's detailed and highly idiosyncratic classificatory system, which is based largely on shape, but also chronology, fabric and regional styles (Stewart 1962, 1988, 1992). The traditional typological system has proved to be a valuable framework for ceramicists on Cyprus for a century, and has its supporters (though the support is sometimes qualified) (Merrillees 1978a, 1991). However, in recent decades the weaknesses within the system have become increasingly evident: •

•

It is based on largely complete ceramic vessels deriving from mortuary contexts, and sometimes translates awkwardly to settlement archaeology, where broken sherds predominate and different research questions arise (Barlow 1989:51 and 1991:51, 52; Barlow and Vaughan 1992; Merrillees 1978a:25). It makes inadequate use of clays and fabrics and therefore masks certain regional and chronological variations/continuities in manufacture and technology (MacLaurin 1985; Barlow 1989 and 1991; Bolger 1991:29).

39

Chapter 5. Artefact Analysis

for that choice are (in certain circumstances) recoverable (e.g. Sackett 1977). However, to take the view that typologies somehow reflect such a choice is a bold stance given our imperfect knowledge of the technology and range of choices available to that artisan (Binford 1989:52), and wrongly assumes direct correlations between form and function (Miller 1985:161ff with examples of the dangers in this). In recent decades there has been a strong trend amongst

ceramicists generally, to abandon traditional typologies where their theory-based research questions require finer levels of analysis based on particular attributes ( e.g. Rice 1989:111; Rice 1996a:153; Deal 1998:59; Read 1982; Whallon 1982:129; Vierra 1982:167-8; Brown 1982:180; Adams and Adams 1991; Jones and Leonard 1989:1-3). Ceramicists in Cyprus have also advocated the attributebased approach where appropriate (e.g. Frankel 1974:6, 1991, 1993; Barlow, Bolger and Kling 1991:6). A number of different attributes have been targeted with a view to identifying technologically and socio-ethnically relevant associations, e.g., decorative motifs (Frankel 1973 and 1974); shape and fabric (MacLaurin 1985; Baird 1991:21-2); colour (Frankel 1993 and 1994); vessel shape (Frankel 1994); fabric and surface decoration (Barlow 1989, 1991 and 1994); lime paste in-fill in incisions (Barlow 1994); clays and fabric (Barlow and Vaughan 1992).

•

To provide data that can be used to characterize assemblages in terms of proportional occurrence (or co-occurrence) of independently recorded attributes.

•

To identify co-occurring sets of attributes that have chronological or spatial significance.

•

To assess the degree of variability in different aspects of vessel form, technique, and appearance.

In other words, the ACE's

aims (and those of the cemetery survey) require objectively acquired data amenable to computer and statistics-based analysis, and data that pertain to a wider range of attributes than those commonly recorded for traditional typologies.

The ACE's system retains the broader ceramic categories. Thus, the recording sheets ( see Figure 1.31) retain the designations Red Polished, Black Polished, Drab Polished and so on. Other, in many cases questionable, subdivisions within these wares have been abandoned. However, where possible, cross-references to relevant ceramic parallels (using established typologies and nomenclature) are made. The basic shapes are also defined using the established nomenclature (e.g. jug, amphora). However, a cruder level designation (open vessel, closed vessel) is also used to define shape with none of the assumptions with respect to function that attach to the old nomenclature. This also allows for a sherd to be characterised where not enough of it survives to assign it to a specific type of vessel.

In some ways the system adopted by the Australian

Cyprus Expedition at Marki Alonia takes the middle ground in the debate regarding the merits of the old typologies and attribute-based recording. However, it is unapologetically an attribute-based system. The directors of the ACE have acknowledged that the traditional typologies provide a good starting point in ceramics analysis, and continue to be useful at the coarser level of analysis (Frankel 1991:246), a view echoed by others (Barlow, Bolger and Kling 1991:5). However, they reject the total support lent by others to the established system (e.g. Merrillees 1978a and 1991).

The rest of the recording sheet allows for the recording of a number of objectively defined attributes (see Figure 1.31). Ceramics analysis General comments

The ACE's approach implicitly accepts that "(t)here is no right way or wrong way to classify anything, but there are better and worse ways of achieving specific purposes" (Adams and Adams 1991:4-5; see also Miller 1985:11). Thus, the recording of attributes allows for the reformulation of 'types' with each changing research question, by concentrating on the relevant, consistently occurring attribute combinations (e.g. Adams and Adams 1991: 183). However, because some of the traditional typological designations are still useful for certain purposes, reference is also still made to them in this text where appropriate.

In the discussion that follows, whenever a comparison is

made between the cemeteries and settlement, the figures given for the settlement assemblage derive from Frankel and Webb (1996), unless otherwise stated. Reference is also made to the more general, later preliminary reports published by the ACE since 1996. However, the less specific data they contain is often of less value in making certain fine-level comparisons. This carries with it certain limitations because the data in Frankel and Webb (1996) derives primarily from their 'Phase B' which dates to EC III-MC I (discussed in more detail below). When comparisons are made with proportions of vessels from Lapithos and Vounous, the figures used derive from my own review of the relevant site reports (Gjerstad et al. 1934; Schaeffer 1936; Dikaios 1940; Grace 1940; Stewart

The aims of the ACE's system are (quoting Frankel 1993:62):

40

Chapter 5. Artefact Analysis

and Stewart 1950; Herscher 1978; but excluding the very general detail in Gjerstad 1926, Myres 1940-45 and Stewart 1962), together with the work of Davies (1995, especially Appendix II). Chambers from Lapithos and Vounous are divided into 'early' (Philia/EC I-EC IIIA) and 'late' (EC IIIB-MC III). The counts exclude chambers of 'low' quality (i.e. looted and badly eroded tombs) and mixed 'early/late' chambers.

few WP, DP, BP (?) and BS (?) pieces (Frankel and Webb 1996:14). Some wares were entirely unrepresented in the mortuary assemblage (for example, CW and BSC), while other wares were represented by just a handful of sherds (for example, one sherd of BP and two BS). Only four devices were recorded ( all modified sherds), and a single fragmentary plank idol (?). Sherds from closed vessels were a little more common than those from open vessels in the bulk sherd counts (55% closed and 45% open). The distribution of sherds from open vessels and closed vessels at Davari reflected the overall pattern, with the greatest concentrations of both on the middle tier, a smaller, even distribution on the lower tier. The spatial patterning of both open and closed vessel sherds was similar. There was no indication of divisions within Davari based on whether sherds were from open or closed vessels (see Figures 1.34 and 1.35). Although there is some variation in the ratio of open to closed vessels in other Prehistoric Bronze Age cemeteries on the island, the bulk sherd counts at Marki's cemeteries fall within the range set by Vounous A and B and Lapithos (Figure 1.36).

Comparisons use sherd numbers rather than weights, unless otherwise specified. A small number of ceramic vessels from looted tombs at Kappara, Davari and Vounaros-Pappara are held in the Cyprus Museum and described in Frankel and Webb (1996:227-230). They are not reproduced in this chapter. At the broadest level of analysis, the ceramics from all of the cemeteries were simply combined, and called the 'mortuary assemblage'. This gave a total of 12 852 sherds, weighing 377 420 g. A finer level of analysis was achieved by dividing the mortuary assemblage according to cemetery, unit and context, or by shape, size or ware. Over 90% of the mortuary assemblage is derived from Davari' s middle and lower tiers, especially from the middle tier, in the vicinity of the chamber tombs (Figure 1.14). Vounaros contributed 5.5% of the mortuary assemblage by number, while Davari's upper tier and Davari-Kappara contributed 2% and 1.8% of the assemblage respectively.

No complete vessels were recorded, and no sherd or sherd group representing more than one-third of a complete vessel, was recovered. There was little evidence of modem contamination at the cemeteries. Only one modem sherd was found, on the fringes of the Davari cemetery, in a ploughed field. However, four pieces of post-Prehistoric Bronze Age tile were recorded on the lower tier at Davari, next to the remains of a small rectangular structure. Additionally, a single sherd of Iron Age(?) pottery was recorded.

As Table 1 indicates, RP ware was the most common ware, accounting for around 97% of the mortuary assemblage. This is a figure somewhat higher than that calculated for the settlement at Marki Alonia (92.71 %)(Frankel and Webb 1996:276). Significantly, the proportion of RP recorded by the ACE in the 1999-2000 season at Marki Alonia was considerably lower (77% RP), because excavations in that season took place in lower strata with greater quantities of RP (Philia) in them. Additionally, the ACE's understanding of the distinguishing features of RP and RP (Philia) has steadily increased with the result that a greater quantity of RP (Philia) can now be recorded with confidence (Frankel and Webb 2000 and 2001).

Diagnostic sherds were the main units of analysis at Marki's cemeteries. Following the Australian Cyprus Expedition, a diagnostic piece was taken to comprise "complete or near complete vessels, sherds with some specific attribute ( e.g. rim, base, handle, decoration) and other artefacts such as spindle whorls, modified sherds and figurines" (Frankel and Webb 1996:112). 1626 diagnostic sherds were collected (12.6% of the mortuary assemblage). Many of these sherds joined with others. Two joining sherds were treated as a single diagnostic for the purpose of analysis, as were two or more non-joining pieces which were clearly from the same vessel. Thus, after joins were amalgamated there was a total of 1455 diagnostics. When corrected to take account of joins, this amounts to 11.5% of the mortuary assemblage. This figure is considerably higher than the 7% recorded by the ACE at Marki Alonia (Frankel and Webb 1996:112). This may be partly due to the fact that the ACE did not record rim sherds as diagnostics ( after the first year of excavation) if they were too small to establish a rim diameter (Frankel and Webb 1996:112), whereas small rim sherds from the cemeteries were

The next most common ware in the mortuary assemblage was RP (Philia), which contributed just over 2% of the mortuary assemblage, and which derived entirely from Davari (especially Davari's upper tier and middle tier) (Figures 1.32 and 1.33). This figure is likely to underestimate the quantity of RP (Philia) at the cemeteries for reasons discussed below (p. 87ff). No wares other than RP were recovered from Vounaros or Davari-Kappara (see Tables 5 and 6). However, a single WP II sherd was identified by the ACE, in its brief survey of Vounaros in 1991, and the pottery trays at the CyprusAmerican Archaeological Research Institute contain a

41

Chapter 5. Artefact Analysis

treated as diagnostics even though a rim diameter was not necessarily obtainable from them (only sherds with a maximum dimension of less than 10 x 10 mm were excluded). However, the effects of this are likely to be very small.

figures, Davari, Davari-Kappara and Vounaros together would have contained approximately 11 712 ceramic artefacts (i.e. 366 tombs x 32 artefacts on average) ( assuming each tomb at these cemeteries had one chamber).

Table 2 shows that 96.5% of the diagnostics were RP ware, while 2.2% were identifiable as RP (Philia). Table 3 illustrates that most diagnostic sherds (58%) derived from large open vessels. The next most common vessel shape was the small open vessel (22%) and then large closed vessels (15.7%). Small closed vessels were the least common (3.9%). A similar pattern exists when the RP assemblage is broken down cemetery by cemetery. The major shape classes appear in all the cemeteries in similar proportions (see Table 4. See also Tables 5, 6 and 7). These figures generally reflect the bulk pottery percentages for the cemeteries, as do those for just RP (Table 8).

However, this estimate can be further refined. For example, whereas the cemeteries at Marki fell into disuse in EC III-MC I, the average number of ceramic vessels per tomb noted above was calculated using tombs from the Philia facies through to as late as MC III. This may artificially inflate the average in relation to the earlier Marki cemeteries because in some sites (especially on the north coast) the average number of vessels per chamber increased significantly over time, peaking after MC I (Davies 1995:73-4). Earlier tombs like those around Marki may have had a substantially smaller number of vessels interred within them. Furthermore, Davies identified certain regional differences in numbers of ceramics per chamber. Although his figures are unavoidably biased by the Vounous and Lapithos finds, Davies calculates that central and south coast sites (like Davari, Davari-Kappara and Vounaros) have fewer vessels per chamber than those on the north coast of the island (Davies 1995: Tables 7-8).

Almost 20% of the diagnostics in the mortuary assemblage were decorated. This figure is low when compared to the 46% at Vounous A and 53% in the late tombs at Lapithos, and will in part be due to the preference for decorated vessels shown by looters. However, the Vounous A figures are exaggerated by a large quantity of incised hemispherical and 'tulip' bowls, while the Lapithos figures are inflated by the appearance of WP. The proportion of diagnostics with decoration in the Marki mortuary assemblage falls within the range set by the chambers at Vounous Band the early chambers at Lapithos (Figure 1.37).

In calculating a corrected figure for the estimated total of vessels likely to have been interred at Davari, DavariKappara and Vounaros at the time that the settlement was abandoned I have used Davies' central region averages (Davies 1995: 107, Table 7). Where tombs in these cemeteries could be identified as 'early' (Philia-EC IIIA) (e.g. Davari's upper tier and Davari-Kappara) I have used the appropriate averages calculated by Davies for this period. In all other cases I have used the average figures calculated by Davies for the 'Early/Late' period (which unfortunately for our purposes incorporates some MC II-III tombs) (Davies 1995:107, Table 7). The results are presented in Table 10.

Issues of quantification Given that there were a finite number of tombs identified at Marki's cemeteries, it is possible to estimate the total number of ceramic vessels likely to have been interred there by the time the settlement at Marki Alonia was abandoned. It is then possible to calculate the percentage of that total assemblage represented by the surface scatter.

Clearly, when adjusting for chronological and regional differences a substantially lower number of vessels is achieved (9212 against 11 712). This figure is still unsatisfactory in some respects. For example, Davies' figures were calculated on the basis of a large number of chamber tombs relative to pit tombs. This may give rise to some difficulties at Davari where pit tombs dominate the lower tier and account for over half ofMarki's tombs, because pit tombs usually contained fewer ceramic vessels than chamber tombs. Also, given the very low number of surface sherds recovered from Davari's lower tier, the total estimated figure of 4064 seems a little too high (though the low number of sherds recovered from the surface in this part of the cemetery may merely be due to particularly thorough looting here).

Approximately 366 tombs were identified at Davari, Davari-Kappara and Vounaros. The type and number of tombs in each cemetery are reproduced in Table 9. It should be noted here that the number of chamber tombs

(49 out of 366) recorded in Table 9 underestimates the true number because some collapsed chamber tombs resembled pit tombs, and many will therefore have been assigned to the latter category or called 'uncertain'. Also, a small number of unsuccessful looters' holes may have been wrongly identified as pit tombs. In a comprehensive study of all tombs published from the Early and Middle Cypriot Periods, Davies calculated that on average, across the island, thirty-two ceramic artefacts were interred per chamber (Davies 1995:73). On these

The figures achieved in this exercise must be regarded as only rough estimates of the total number of vessels likely to have been interred at Davari, Davari-Kappara and

42

Chapter 5. Artefact Analysis

Vounaros at the time of Marki Alonia 's abandonment. However, it seems likely that at that time those cemeteries contained something in the order of 9000 to 12 000 vessels.

and in the later period around three (Davies 1995:75), we can say, on these figures, that each tomb would contain, on average, twenty to thirty vessels. This fits neatly with those averages calculated by Davies (1995) and discussed above.

As already noted, 1626 diagnostic sherds were recorded at Davari, Davari-Kappara and Vounaros. After joins were made there was a total of 1455 diagnostics. Each of these diagnostics represents a different vessel. This is a surprisingly high sample of the postulated total assemblage: 16.2% of 9000 vessels and 12.1% of 12 000 vessels.

Clearly, these figures are very imprecise and are built upon a series of assumptions that might be challenged on a number of grounds. Also, because they deal in averages over the life of the site, they tend to disguise the fact that the population ( and therefore the number of burials and vessels interred) fluctuated over time i.e. there would have been fewer burials early in the life of the settlement, and more later when the population was greater. Thus Frankel and Webb (in press) estimate that "the total number of vessels deposited in tombs each year increased from a dozen or so in the first years of the settlement to over 100 at its peak when there were many households". However, even if many more vessels were interred in the cemeteries than those calculated here, the cemeteries would not have been a great drain on the ceramic resources of the settlement as a whole.

The percentage of vessels represented by the diagnostics varies from cemetery to cemetery, as demonstrated by Table 11. Clearly, Vounaros is the most poorly represented (only 6% of the estimated total number of vessels being recovered, as against the 17-24% at the other cemeteries). This may be because this cemetery has been more thoroughly looted, or may relate to different breakage rates in the pit tombs here. However, the total number of vessels estimated for this cemetery (965) may also be too high given that many of the tombs in this cemetery are pit tombs likely to have held fewer vessels than the average (cf. Frankel and Webb 1996:14, who say that Vounaros is dominated by chamber tombs).

It is more difficult to determine how burdensome a death

in a household (in ceramic terms) might have been (assuming that it was the household of the deceased that furnished his or her tomb with grave goods. Of course, it is possible that some other form of social unit was called upon in this regard). Frankel and Webb (in press) estimate that an average household at Marki Alonia would have replaced up to a dozen broken vessels per year. A death in an average sized household might have therefore required the interment of a high proportion of its yearly pottery production (though the burden may have been shared with other mourning households). However, in real terms it might equate to a couple of days of pot making in that household. For a smaller household, the burden might have been greater given that fewer skilled potters (if any at all) might have been available. The burden for all would have been greater in the winter months which were unsuitable for pottery production (see Frankel and Webb, in press). Consequently, some variation in quantities of pottery interred in tombs might be expected, depending on the size and skills of the deceased's household, and possibly even the time of year at which he or she died.

The estimated total number of vessels to have been interred at Davari, Davari-Kappara and Vounaros is surprisingly low, and invites a re-evaluation of attitudes to the production and consumption of ceramics in Prehistoric Bronze Age Cyprus. It suggests that the cemeteries were not a great drain on the ceramic resources of the settlement. For example, assuming that Davari, Davari-Kappara and Vounaros contained the higher figure of 12 000 vessels at the time Marki Alonia was abandoned, and that these accumulated over 400 years, this is still only thirty vessels interred in these cemeteries each year for the life of the site. If we say that the cemeteries were used for a longer period ( 500 years) this number is reduced further to just twenty-four vessels. At first glance, these figures seem remarkably low. However, they broadly accord with population estimates for Marki Alonia. It is likely that Marki Alonia 's population increased from around 50 to 400 over the lifetime of the settlement (Franl(el and Webb, in press. See also Adams and Simmons 1996:24 on the carrying capacity of Marki Alonia' s land). Therefore the settlement would have seen an average of around six deaths a year over the life of the site (Frankel and Webb, in press). If three of these deceased were buried in Davari, Davari-Kappara or Vounaros ( assuming at least some would have been buried in the other cemeteries of Pappara and Kappara), that amounts to approximately ten vessels per burial. Given that in the early period, tombs contained around two dead people,

Estimating the total number of vessels interred at Davari, Davari-Kappara and Vounaros using the method outlined above allowed us to sidestep many of the usual difficulties involved in the quantification of whole vessels based on an excavated assemblage of broken pottery (some argue that it would be otherwise impossible (Orton 1993:178)). It will be more difficult to determine the different proportions of the various types of pottery likely to have been in the original, undisturbed mortuary assemblage (the 'parent assemblage') by extrapolating from the surface assemblage (a 'sample'). This is an issue of assemblage composition, and is important because it is

43

Chapter 5. Artefact Analysis

always preferable to compare 'parent' assemblages rather than excavated 'sample' assemblages, because the parent assemblages represent past activities better than sample assemblages which have been distorted by taphonomic processes after deposition (Orton 1993:177; Orton 1982; Orton and Tyers 1992).

other cemeteries, where certain trends have been identified. For example, RP dominates the earlier tomb assemblages on Cyprus (98.1 % at Lapithos, 95.6% at Vounous Site A and 99% at Vounous Site B) (Davies 1995:76). Later mortuary assemblages contain slightly less RP relative to WP. Bowls and jugs are the most common shapes, accounting for approximately 76% of vessels per tomb across the island (Davies 1995:76-77). At Lapithos and Vounous site A, large vessels (i.e. those open vessels with a maximum rim diameter over 20 cm and those closed vessels over 20 cm tall) account for c. 45% of vessels (though the percentage of large vessels is significantly lower at Vounous site B (29.2%)) (Davies 1995:79). In later tombs the proportion of large vessels declines to a little under 30% as small WP vessels increase in popularity. Proportions of decorated vessels can vary significantly from site to site in early periods. Thus, at Vounous Site A 46.3% of ceramics in early tombs were decorated compared with 30.5% and 16.6% at Lapithos and Vounous Site B respectively. Similar variations are evident in later tombs (e.g. 33.1% at Vounous Site B and 53.3% at Lapithos) (Davies 1995:80).

Many tests have been proposed to determine the composition (i.e. proportions of different types of ceramics) of a parent population from sample assemblages obtained in the field. Simple sherd counts and weights are commonly used, but they can be misleading (Chase 1985 on differential breakage rates and weight/shape relationships). Others have favoured a measure of the surface area of recovered sherdage (Byrd and Owens 1997:316), or 'estimated vessel equivalents', which treat sherds as quantifiable fractions of whole vessels ( Orton 1993: 173; see also Orton 1982; Orton and Tyers 1992; Orton, Tyers and Vince 1993). However, these tests are often very time-consuming and complex, their accuracy has been challenged and they are not widely used. This text accepts that it is desirable to compare parent assemblages where that is possible, and therefore some effort will be made to reconstruct the likely composition of the original mortuary assemblage, by attempting to calculate the number of whole vessels represented by the sherds recorded in the surface scatters. However, for most purposes, the assemblages that will be compared in this thesis will be the ones from the settlement at Marki Alonia and the mortuary assemblage from the surfaces of the cemeteries i.e. mere 'samples' of the parent assemblages.

Other issues relating to the data In addition to those issues outlined above some other

matters regarding the data must also be borne in mind: •

Vessels characterised as 'open' will be somewhat over-represented. This is because body sherds were sometimes difficult to classify as belonging to open or closed vessels. If it was impossible to tell from the shape and other attributes of such sherds whether they derived from open or closed vessels, slip on the interior of the sherd was treated as evidence of an open vessel. However, some closed vessels also have slip on the interior, sometimes to a considerable depth. Hence the bias towards an open vessel classification. Also, open vessels will be overrepresented because when they break they tend to produce many diagnostic rim sherds, while small and large closed vessels produce relatively few diagnostic rim sherds when they break.

•

Some of the mortuary assemblages are very small, making statistical analysis difficult (see Tables 5, 6 and 7). The small cemeteries of Vounaros and Davari-Kappara provided just 710 and 237 sherds respectively, and a proportionately small number of diagnostics. Similarly, Davari's upper tier yielded just 257 sherds. As a result, some comments on the composition of the assemblages from these cemeteries must be treated with some caution. Additionally, even the relatively large assemblage from Davari generated only very small numbers of the minor wares (i.e. those

This involves a number of assumptions: •

That fragmentation rates between the settlement and the mortuary assemblages will be similar e.g. small open bowls at the settlement will break into approximately the same number of pieces as the small open bowls in the cemeteries.

•

That recovery rates at the sites are similar. For example, visibility at Marki's cemeteries was very good and the surveyors might therefore be confident that few sherds were missed in collections. However, at the settlement, where sieving was not commonly employed, it might be hypothesised that a larger number of sherds ( especially small ones from small, fine vessels) were missed during excavation.

•

That post-depositional processes will impact in a similar way on the condition and composition of the two ceramic assemblages generally.

Some idea of the likely composition of the original mortuary assemblage can be gained from excavations of

44

Chapter 5. Artefact Analysis

other than RP), with the same problems of analysis. •

•

characterised with confidence as RP (P), partly because excavations reached earlier levels with a higher proportion of Philia sherds, but also because with time the defining characteristics of RP (P) became clearer to the excavators (Frankel and Webb 1999:95, 2000 and 2001).

Large parts of the surface assemblage will be a mixture of centuries of artefacts. This is because the grave goods from a tomb can comprise an accumulation of several generations of ceramics. This means that except in parts of the cemetery which were used for only short periods, fmescale chronological analysis will be impossible. Also, this means that before comparisons can be made between the chronologically mixed mortuary assemblage and any other assemblage, we must ensure that 'like' assemblages are being compared. The ACE faced some of the same difficulties in the early years of excavation at Marki Alonia. It was also presented with a chronologically disturbed ceramic assemblage in many excavation contexts, and was therefore forced to treat such material as a single 'source' for many analytical purposes (Frankel and Webb 1996:113). This produced a ceramic assemblage suitable for comparisons with the mortuary assemblage. However, by treating the chronologically mixed mortuary assemblage as a whole for many analytical purposes, many of the problems noted by the ACE with respect to its mixed assemblage will also arise: "This homogenised data may mask variations and lead to a slightly false impression of the degree of variability of each ware and the similarities of different wares" (Frankel and Webb 1996:113).

Red Polished Ware

General The following discussion follows the order and layout of the ACE's principal site report (Frankel and Webb 1996) as closely as possible in an effort to assist in making cross-site comparisons. RP was clearly the most common ware within the mortuary assemblage, being 100% of the assemblages from Vounaros and Davari-Kappara (although there was one possible CPW sherd at Vounaros), and about 97% overall. As already noted earlier in this chapter, this figure is somewhat higher than that recorded in 1996 for the settlement (92.71 %) where more variety exists (Frankel and Webb 1996:271). The proportion of RP recorded at the Marki cemeteries is consistent with figures from other cemetery contexts (for example, 98.1 % at Lapithos, 95.6% at Vounous Site A and 99% at Vounous Site B) (though these figures are derived from whole pots instead of sherd counts) (Davies 1995:76). The RP of the mortuary assemblage conforms to the ECMC tradition. It is a red-brown ceramic ware distinguished primarily by surface treatment (red slip and even burnishing) and secondarily by shape and fabric. RP was popular on Cyprus for approximately 600 years and was used at the settlement of Marki Alonia for all of the time that it was occupied. The mortuary assemblage reflects this history, having some of the earlier RP (Philia) manifestations of RP through to many of its later MCI forms.

It was often impossible to identify the specific

shape of the vessels from which diagnostic sherds derived (for example, jug or amphora). As a result, analysis was usually conducted at a less refined level of classification, following the ACE's procedure (i.e. vessels were identified as large open, large closed, small open or small closed). •

The ACE weighed its bulk sherds (by context, not individually) to the nearest 100 g (Frankel and Webb 1996:111) while the bulk sherds of the mortuary assemblage were weighed (by context) to the nearest 5 g. This may mean a very slight difference in weights for the purposes of comparison.

•

RP (P) sherds will be somewhat underrepresented in the assemblage because a sherd was not characterised as this ware unless such a characterisation could be made with certainty. If doubt existed as to whether a sherd was RP (P) or not, that sherd was simply characterised as RP. The same approach was adopted by the ACE at the settlement. However, as excavations progressed there, more sherds were

Generally, until recently the ACE considered that RP could not be divided into any 'natural' groupings, except for RP(P). Therefore the ACE tended to avoid divisions like those employed by Stewart and Barlow (Frankel and Webb 1996:112). This attitude has changed to a degree over recent excavation seasons as chronologically significant groupings within the RP tradition can now be identified, in addition to the RP(P) group previously defined. For example, the excavation of a pit ( Context 1675) filled with rubble and EC I-II pottery, as well as several EC I-II rooms (Units CII and CV), has allowed the ACE to single out a number of ceramic features characteristic of this period including: •

45

A high proportion of flat-based vessels generally (both open and closed).

Chapter 5. Artefact Analysis

•

Small conical bowls with incurving walls and flat bases.

•

Large bowls (rim diameter of 30 to 50 cm) with flattened rims (horizontal or inward sloping) and horseshoe shaped handles positioned mid-body.

•

Vertical lugs on small bowls.

•

Harder fabrics than those of later periods with fine to medium sized inclusions and no core.

•

Exterior colours (at Marki Alonia, though not necessarily elsewhere e.g. Psematismenos Trelloukkas) in the 5YR 5/6 to 5/8 range, and medium to distinct mottling.

•

Even burnishing and slightly lustrous slips .

effort was made to place the sherds into a vessel-size category (for example, large open or small closed) by reference to such things as wall and rim thickness, because the ACE had already established the umeliability of such identifications (Frankel and Webb 1996: 112). Diagnostic sherds were assigned to broad size categories (i.e. small open, large open, small closed, large closed) . Putting diagnostics from closed vessels into a size category involved a degree of subjectivity, though generally juglets and pyxides were clearly 'small closed' while most other pieces fell into the 'large closed' category. For open vessels the assessment of size was more objective (at least where rims were concerned). If the rim diameter exceeded 200 mm then it was treated as 'large open'. If the rim diameter was 200 mm or less then it was called 'small open' (following Frankel and Webb 1996:114).

These findings have confirmed that a number of tombs from Psematismenos Trelloukkas were misdated to the MC period and should now be considered EC 1-11 (Frankel and Webb 1999:98ff with references. See also Frankel and Webb 2001 on features of ECl-11 pottery in the Marki 2000 excavation season). Furthermore, closer analysis of the EC 1-11assemblage at Marki Alonia and at other central and south coast sites, suggests that there was only intermittent contact between these regions and north coast sites ( such as Vounous) immediately after the Philia facies. A regionalism in pottery styles appears to have prevailed with these "central and south coast sites ( constituting) a largely independent interaction sphere" (Frankel and Webb 1999:99, and see Frankel and Webb 2001). The ACE has also identified several other attributes of shape and decoration that are distinctive of certain periods at Marki Alonia. These will be discussed m greater detail below, under the appropriate headings. Notwithstanding that RP at Marki Alonia can now be subdivided with increasing confidence into not only RP(P) but also its EC 1-11 forms, at the first stage of analysis RP is still treated as a broad but self-contained category of its own. It is analysed by reference to attributes such as colour, fabric and shape. It was this attribute-based approach that assisted in the identification of the developing EC 1-11subdivision. It has also proved useful in identifying other technological, chronological and morphological trends within the RP tradition (e.g. Frankel and Webb 1996:113; Frankel 1993 and 1994).

It often proved difficult to assign a RP diagnostic sherd to a more specific shape (e.g. jug or amphora). Where possible, specific shapes were noted for the diagnostics. However, if the designation was uncertain then only the broader categories noted above were used.

Table 1 shows that 45% of the total mortuary assemblage (i.e. all wares) derived from RP open vessels while about 52% were from RP closed vessels. Of the RP sherds within the mortuary assemblage, 46% were from open vessels and 54% from closed vessels. Clearly, there is a small majority of sherds from RP closed vessels. However, when broken down by cemetery and into diagnostics this trend was often actually reversed. Thus, in Vounaros c. 59% of the sherds were from RP open vessels and only 41% from RP closed (Table 5), while at Davari-Kappara 69% derived from RP open and the balance from RP closed (Table 6). The upper tier at Davari also had a majority of RP open vessels (c. 57% RP open and only 35% RP closed) (Table 7). (This can be contrasted with the upper tier RP (Philia) sherds, only 12.5% of which were from open vessels). Only Davari's lower two tiers contained more RP closed than open sherds (4995 RP open sherds and 6277 RP closed). Although pieces from closed vessels exceeded in number those from open vessels at the bulk sherd level, this is not reflected in the diagnostics breakdown which demonstrates that in all cases more diagnostics derived from open vessels than closed vessels. At all cemeteries diagnostics from large open vessels were the mos; common. Small open vessels are the next most common shape (except at Vounaros which has slightly more large closed than small open vessels). At all the cemeteries, diagnostics from small closed vessels are the least common. More elements of size and shape will be discussed in more detail below.

Vesselform SIZE AND SHAPE As already noted, all sherds (diagnostic and nondiagnostic) were recorded as being from either open or closed vessels. In the case of non-diagnostic sherds no

46

Chapter 5. Artefact Analysis

Figure 1.38 compares the mortuary assemblage and the settlement assemblage. The ratio of RP open to RP closed vessels is very similar in both the assemblages.

Small closed vessels (usually small jugs) always displayed everted or flaring rims, mainly with rounded ends. Large closed vessels followed the same trend, though a very small number (6.8%) had incurved or vertical rims.

Figure 1.39 breaks down the general shape classes as a percentage of diagnostics from the settlement and mortuary assemblages. At the settlement, a greater proportion of diagnostics derived from small open vessels than in the cemeteries (55.4% against 22.4%). In contrast, a far higher proportion of diagnostics at the cemeteries were from large open vessels (60% as opposed to just 12% at the settlement). While the proportion of large closed vessels in the two assemblages is comparable, the settlement assemblage had a higher proportion of small closed vessels (16.6% compared to 3.2% in the mortuary assemblage). The spatial distribution of some vessel shapes at Davari is discussed in more detail in Chapter 6 below.

The importance of flattened rim ends as a feature of EC III large open vessels has already been noted. Figure 1.40 compares rim courses for RP large open vessels from the mortuary and settlement assemblages. Clearly, the proportion of large open vessels with flattened rim ends at the cemeteries is significantly higher than it is at the settlement. However, this need not necessarily imply a large number of EC 1-11burials at Marki's cemeteries, because flattened rims also occur in some later periods. It is more likely due to the very high incidence of large basins in the cemeteries compared to in the settlement. These basins tend to have a higher proportion of flattened rim ends than large bowls.

RIM SHAPE

HANDLES AND LUGS

The characteristics of a vessel's rim shape are relevant for a number of reasons. Firstly, as noted above, flattened rims (horizontal or inward sloping), are one of the characteristics of certain shape classes of EC 1-11 RP pottery. Also, the ACE identified a slight trend "toward a higher proportion of thinning rims at the expense of constant rims for all four general shape classes" at Marki Alonia (Frankel and Webb 1996:114). Additionally, the documentation of such attributes as the rim course, rim end and rim thickness are of assistance in analyses of methods of manufacture, especially regarding the standardisation of production (e.g. Rice 1981; Rice 1984; Rice 1989; Rice 1996a and b; Deal 1998; Longacre 1999).

Changes in handles and lugs at Marki Alonia (especially with respect to small bowls) have been shown to be clear chronological markers, with a greater number of horizontal handles in later periods, and a steady increase in popularity of knob bed and homed ( as opposed to plain) loop handles over time (Frankel and Webb 1996:114). The importance of vertical lugs on small flatbottomed bowls as indicators of EC 1-11RP has already been noted. 220 RP handles or parts of handles were recorded in the mortuary assemblage. 206 of these were specifically identifiable by type. These 206 handles form the basis for the calculations and discussion that follows. Table 16 presents the 206 RP diagnostics that were handles/lugs, or incorporated handles/lugs. This number comprises c. 14% of the diagnostics. Of these handles, nearly 21 % belonged to small open vessels and 52% to large open vessels. Small closed vessel sherds very rarely had handles. This is not unusual. About 26% of the handles and lugs belonged to large closed vessels.

At the cemeteries the rim shape of small open vessels (which were most commonly hemispherical bowls) was almost exclusively incurved, thinning and rounded (see Tables 12-15). Very occasionally the rim end was flattened and the wall thickness constant rather than thinning. In rare instances the rim ends on small open vessels were decorated with incision ( e.g. Figure 2.4, Diag. Nos. 24.58A and 26.88A). Rims on small open vessels rarely flared.

Of the small open vessels with handles 41.8% had horizontal handles, 35% had pierced and unpierced knob lugs, and 11.6% had pierced or unpierced elongated vertical lugs.

The rim ends of large open vessels from the cemeteries showed more variety but the clear majority were still incurved, thinning and rounded. However, a substantial number (c. 41.6%) were incurved, thinning and flattened, and some (c. 2%) were incurved, constant and flattened. None of the large open vessels had a flaring or everted rim. However, 1.4% of the large open vessels are notable for having unusual indented rim ends (for examples see Figures 2.7 and 2.8, Diag. Nos. 17.95A, 26.95A, 28D, 28F, 43.76A, and 56.54A).

Where handles from large open vessels were identified, they were most commonly pierced ledges (37.4%) and unpierced ledges (14%), or ledges too badly damaged to identify as pierced or unpierced (13%). However, horizontal handles still accounted for a substantial proportion of handles on large open vessels (23%), though many of these vessels only just qualified as 'large'. 33.5% of all handles in the mortuary assemblage were pierced or unpierced ledges from large open vessels, while 12% of handles in the mortuary assemblage were

47

Chapter 5. Artefact Analysis

horizontal handles from large open vessels. Lugs (either elongated vertical or knob) on large open vessels accounted for 3% of handles in the mortuary assemblage (though once again, these vessels only just qualified as 'large'). The handles on large closed vessels exclusively vertical (92%).

particles by slaking, sieving and levigation). Fabric texture is an important attribute used in distinguishing RP (P) from the standard RP. Similarly, the grittiness of EC 1-11RP fabrics is one of its distinguishing features. Table 17 illustrates that the texture of the fabric of diagnostics from small open and small closed RP vessels was predominantly very fine to fine, with about 72% of small open and about 82% of small closed vessels falling into those categories. However, a substantial number of small open vessels also had fabric of medium texture (28.3%). The larger vessels (both open and closed) tend to be less fine. About 70% of diagnostics from large open vessels had 'medium' fabric, another 28.5% were still characterised as fine to very fine. Very few RP diagnostics were characterised as being of coarse fabric (c. 1%). All of those that were recorded as coarse were from large closed vessels.

are almost

Figure 1.41 summarises proportions of the three main types of handle in the 'small open' shape class. Diagnostic handles are expressed as a percentage of all diagnostics in that shape class. Within the mortuary assemblage, 5.6% of all the diagnostics from small open vessels were horizontal handles, 4. 7% were knob lugs ( either pierced or unpierced) and 1.6% were elongated vertical lugs (either pierced or unpierced). Comparisons between the mortuary and settlement assemblages establish that although the settlement had slightly higher proportions of all three main handle types, the two assemblages were not significantly different in this regard. In other words, the three main handle types for small open vessels appeared in similar proportions in both the settlement and mortuary assemblages. This provides support for the view that the cemeteries were in use for the duration of habitation at Marki Alonia. If they were used for only one period of the settlement's occupation, handle types indicative of that period would be expected to predominate. For example, recent excavations of largely EC I-II deposits at the settlement have produced a significantly greater number of elongated vertical lugs than other types of handle (Frankel and Webb 1999:97-99).

Figures 1.42-45 demonstrate that the small open and large closed vessels at the cemeteries and settlement had almost identical proportions of the five categories of fabric texture. Those for the small closed category are also comparable, although a higher proportion of small closed vessels at the cemeteries had very fme fabric (24.4% against 15.2%), while a lower proportion had fabric of medium texture (17.8% against 24.4% at the settlement). However, more significant differences are evident in the large open shape class where mediumtextured fabrics are substantially more common (70.5% compared to 55.6%), and fme fabric is substantially less common (28.5% compared to 41.6%), at the cemeteries than the settlement. These differences may be related to the very high proportion of large open bowls and basins recorded at the cemeteries compared to the settlement.

Handles and lugs will be discussed in more detail below in a consideration of more specific shapes. The spatial distribution of certain handle types is also discussed in detail in Chapter 6.

The spatial distribution of vessels with fine fabrics 1s discussed in Chapter 6.

Fabric

HARDNESS

Details relating to the fabric of a vessel can be useful in reconstructing levels of ceramic technology and methods of manufacture, especially in relation to the clay types selected and how they vary from vessel type to vessel type (e.g. see below p. 91 on Cooking Pot Ware), the presence of non-plastic additives in the clay, clay preparation and firing conditions (see Rye 1981:29ff).

Hardness can be used to reconstruct some of the techniques of production. Generally, the higher the firing temperature, the harder the pottery (Rye 1981:121). Fabric hardness is also important in analysing RP ware given that RP(P) can sometimes be distinguished (in conjunction with other attributes) by the softness of the fabric, while EC 1-11RP fabrics tend to be noticeably harder than the standard RP.

TEXTURE 'Texture' refers to the smoothness/grittiness of the paste. Measuring the texture of the fabric of each diagnostic sherd involved a somewhat subjective judgment. Clippers were used to break off a piece of each diagnostic sherd in order to expose a clean area of fabric at the point of the break, which was used to make the assessment. Fabric texture can reflect the amount of energy expended in the preparation of the clay used in the vessel (see Rye 1981:36ff on the time-consuming task ofremoving coarse

Measuring the hardness of each diagnostic piece involved the scratching of the fabric with the blade of a knife, along the edge of a clean break. Grading the hardness involved a degree of subjectivity. Each diagnostic piece was given a number designating hardness along the lines of the Mohs Scale of Hardness (following the ACE) (Frankel and Webb 1998:33).

48

Chapter 5. Artefact Analysis

The fabric of most RP diagnostic sherds, in all shape categories, was characterised as soft to medium in hardness (see Table 18). Small closed vessels in particular tended towards softness (c. 75% being soft to very soft). Larger vessels tended to be slightly harder though diagnostics from such vessels are still rarely more than of medium hardness.

•

Some differences in fabric hardness between the settlement and mortuary assemblages are evident in Figures 1.46-1.49. For example, a much higher proportion of small open vessels at the settlement had soft fabric (82.2% compared to 50% at the cemeteries), while many more small open vessels at the cemeteries were recorded as having fabric of medium hardness (44.2% compared to 12.1% at the settlement). Significantly higher proportions of large open and large closed vessels were also recorded as having soft fabric at the settlement when compared to the mortuary assemblage. These differences in hardness seem somewhat unusual given the similarities in fabric texture noted above. There are a number of possible explanations: •

Alternatively, if the discrepancies are not due to observer bias then it is possible that the sherds recovered from the cemeteries really were generally harder in the fabric than the settlement sherds. If so, this may be explained as a result of the different composition of the two assemblages (for example, there were few pans or figurines at the cemeteries), or it may be due to the different post-depositional processes working on the sherds from the two contexts. Alternatively, higher firing temperatures may have been achieved for the mortuary vessels. It may also be significant that the fabrics of RP EC 1-11vessels tend to be harder than the standard RP ones. The results from the mortuary assemblage may therefore indicate a high proportion of these earlier vessels (though the relatively low incidence of EC 1-11shapes does not support this).

INCLUSIONS The number of inclusions in the fabric of each diagnostic was determined by reference to the fabric exposed along a clean break. The assessment was semi-subjective. Establishing the number and presence of inclusions in a vessel's fabric can be useful in reconstructing certain teclmiques of manufacture, and vessel function. The number of inclusions might be deliberately reduced by the potter, or increased, depending on the desired result (Rye 1981:31ff). Also, the number of inclusions has some relevance to distinguishing RP (P) and EC 1-11RP pottery from the standard RP.

'Hardness' was one of the more subjective measures in the analysis of the two assemblages (see Rye 1981:121 on disagreement between ceramicists using the Mohs scale). It is possible that the analysts of the mortuary assemblage simply 'felt' the fabrics there as generally harder than the analysts of the settlement assemblage. Thus, in almost all shape classes at the cemeteries fewer 'very soft' and 'soft' measurements were recorded, while more 'hard' and 'very hard' were recorded. If the analysts were consistent in their recording, comparisons between the mortuary and settlement assemblages will still be instructive. Thus, while a concentration on specific readings will emphasise differences between the two assemblages, an analysis of general trends will emphasise the similarities. In almost all cases the trends for each are the same i.e. increasing in number from very soft to soft, and declining thereafter. There is one noteworthy exception in this regard: many more large open vessels at the cemeteries were recorded as being of medium hardness than soft (i.e. the trend line rises from soft to medium in the mortuary assemblage where it falls in the settlement assemblage). This may be related to the different composition of the two assemblages in the broad 'large open' category. For example, the large open vessels at the cemeteries were almost all bowls and basins which tend towards harder fabrics, whereas the large open vessels at the settlement show more variety, including pans, which tend to be soft in fabric.

Almost all RP diagnostics in the mortuary assemblage contained inclusions. Less than 1% contained none at all (see Table 19). Most had a few inclusions (56.4%) while many (38.5%) had a medium number of inclusions in the fabric. The diagnostics of larger vessels (both open and closed) tended to contain more inclusions in the fabric. Thus, while c. 20% of small open vessels contained a medium number of inclusions, c. 50% of large open vessels did. Table 20 demonstrates that the inclusions were predominantly a combination of black and white (usually around 80-90% in all shape classes). Less often, the fabric contained some red inclusions in addition to the black and white ones, especially in the larger vessels (22.8% and 19.6% of large open and large closed vessels respectively). Black and red inclusions almost never occurred in isolation. An exception (a sherd with distinctive large red inclusions) was identified as an import solely on the basis of its fabric. A measure of inclusion size was also made for each diagnostic by viewing the fabric along a clean break with a magnifying glass. The measure was somewhat

49

Chapter 5. Artefact Analysis

subjective. The inclusions were usually small (see Table 21). Between c. 70% and c. 90% of all shape classes contained only small inclusions, with the smaller, finer vessels having a higher proportion of small inclusions. Sherds with both small and medium sized inclusions form the second largest group, with the larger open and closed vessels displaying a higher percentage of the larger inclusions than the small vessels (27.3% of large open vessels and 21 % of large closed ones as compared to 0.7% of small open and 2.3% of small closed vessels).

mortuary ceramics than the settlement ceramics to have no inclusions (which was not the case). FABRIC COLOUR The colour of the fabric of the diagnostic sherds was measured using Munsell colour charts. Colours were read at the point of a clean break only. The colours tables discussed below include only those readings over 1%.

Figures 1.50-1.53 compare the number of inclusions within the fabric of vessels from each shape class at the settlement and in the cemeteries. Very few of the mortuary ceramics were recorded as having no inclusions, while at the settlement slightly larger numbers of ceramics with no inclusions were recorded. A similar pattern is evident for vessels with 'many' inclusions. Furthermore, significant differences exist between the mortuary and settlement assemblages in relation to the number of large open and large closed vessels recorded as having a 'few', 'medium' or 'many' inclusions. In short, for all shape classes the settlement assemblage is recorded as being grittier (i.e. more inclusions) than the mortuary assemblage. There are two discrepancies: •

•

possible

explanations

for

Tables 22-24 show that m ahnost all cases the most common fabric colours in the mortuary assemblage were 7.5YR 5/4 to 6/6 (dull brown) and 2.5YR 4/6 to 5/8 (reddish-brown). The finer fabrics had a tendency towards the lighter (yellower) colours. Thus 7.5YR accounted for 69% of very fine fabrics and 54% of the fine fabrics. 10YR (also at the yellower end of the scale) made up 18% of very fine fabrics. Nevertheless, the redder 2.5YR category also made up a fairly high proportion of the fme fabrics (23%). Very few diagnostics with coarse fabric were recorded in the mortuary assemblage. However, of those that were classed as being of medium texture, the redder 2.5YR was considerably more common than it was for the finer wares (58%).

these

Tables 25-28 break down fabric colours in the mortuary assemblage by vessel shape. In most shape classes the fabric is most commonly the yellower 7.5YR 4/4 to 6/6. Over 49% of small open vessels, over 40% of small closed vessels and over 62% of large closed vessels had fabric colours falling within the 7.5YR range. However, the fabric of diagnostics from large open vessels is often redder in colour, with a high proportion being 2.5YR 4/6 to 5/8 ( over 52%). In all shape classes a smaller percentage (9% to 18%) have fabric colours of 5YR (usually 4/6 to 6/6). Fabrics in the lOYR range are less common. 1OR is very rare in all shape classes.

Measuring the number of inclusions within the fabric of a sherd involves a degree of subjectivity and is therefore vulnerable to observer bias. Thus, it is possible that the analysts of the mortuary assemblage simply 'saw' fewer inclusions than the analysts of the settlement assemblage. Provided the analysts of both assemblages were consistent in their measurements the trends evident within the results will still be of value in analysing the similarities between the two assemblages. Thus, although the mortuary ceramics were consistently recorded as having fewer inclusions than the settlement assemblage, the trend for both is for a rise in the number of inclusions from 'none' to a 'few' (in all shape classes except 'large open'), then a steady fall thereafter. The discrepancy relating to the large open category may relate to the high proportion of large bowls and basins at the cemeteries.

Tables 22-28 also incorporate the equivalent readings taken at the settlement at Marki Alonia. There is clearly a wider range of colours recorded at the settlement, partly because the sample there is much larger. However, the most common colour readings at both the settlement and cemeteries are usually clustered within the same narrow range, and in broadly similar proportions, demonstrating the general similarities between the two assemblages. There are some differences between colour readings at the fmest levels of analysis. However, given the subjectivity inherent in the reading of colours, and the fineness of the distinction between colour values, this might be expected.

Alternatively, the different results may not be the result of observer bias and there may be an actual difference in the fabric of vessels from the two assemblages; that is, the mortuary assemblage is less gritty (has fewer inclusions). This might be an indication of a desire for higher quality ceramics for tombs. However, if this were the case one would expect more of the

Figures 1.54 and 1.55 also analyse fabric colours by texture, and compare the results from the mortuary assemblage with those from the settlement assemblage.

50

Chapter 5. Artefact Analysis

These graphs provide relatively general data for the purposes of comparison, grouping colours by hue only. More precise readings are given in Tables 22-24 discussed above. Figures 1.54 and 1.55 suffice for the purposes of comparing broader trends. Finer textured vessels have the same high proportion of7.5YR fabrics in both assemblages. However, a significantly higher proportion of finer-textured mortuary ceramics had fabric in the 2.5YR range (21 % against just 1%). Although the proportions of both assemblages with fmer fabrics falling in the 5YR and lOYR range was similar, the settlement had higher proportions falling within the 5YR category (18% compared to 13%) and the lOYR category (16% compared to 8% ).

the finer levels of analysis. The recorders of the mortuary assemblage saw a generally similar proportion of 'redder' fabrics to the pottery recorders of the settlement assemblage. However, within this category they tended to prefer the 2.5YR hue to the 5YR hue. Similarly, the analysts of the mortuary assemblage and those of the settlement assemblage recorded similar proportions of 'yellower' fabrics, but within this broader category the mortuary analysts preferred the 7.5YR hue to lOYR. CORES Table 29 demonstrates that most vessels in all shape sizes had no core, which is usually indicative of the vessels being fired under fully oxidising conditions, and an absence of organic matter in the clay (Rye 1981:115). Open vessels had no core more frequently than closed vessels. Large closed vessels had a much higher percentage of thick dark cores than all other shape classes. Where such cores exist it usually indicates that the vessel was fired under oxidising conditions, and some organic matter was present in the clay (Rye 1981: 115).

Significant differences also exist between the mortuary and settlement assemblages with respect to the colour of the medium-textured fabrics. The majority of medium fabrics in the mortuary assemblage (57%) were the redder 2.5YR hue. By contrast, this hue accounts for only 19% of the medium-textured fabrics in the settlement assemblage, where far higher numbers of 5\'R, 7.5YR and 10YR fabrics were recorded.

Surface treatment Figures 1.56-1.59 also analyse fabric colours from the settlement and mortuary assemblages, breaking down fabric colour by shape. Some general similarities between the two assemblages are immediately evident. For example, the most common fabric colour in all shape classes was 7.5YR, except for large open vessels at the cemeteries ( a discrepancy that can be explained as being partly a result of the large quantity of large bowls and basins in the cemeteries, which tend to the redder hues). Similarly, in both assemblages the least common reading in all shape classes was l0R.

Most RP diagnostic sherds in the mortuary assemblage were given the same surface treatments. 99% were evenly burnished and 95% had slip of a medium thickness (see Tables 30 and 31). Although this is largely consistent with trends in the settlement assemblage, some noteworthy differences exist. Figures 1.66-1.69 and 1.701.73 illustrate different attributes of exterior slip quality (thickness and lustre respectively) for the mortuary and settlement assemblages. The thickness of the exterior slip at both the settlement and cemeteries was very similar for small open, large open and large closed vessels. However, small closed vessels at the settlement record a significantly higher proportion of vessels with a thin slip and a correspondingly lower number with a slip of medium thickness. This may be an anomaly arising from the small sample size of small closed vessels in the mortuary assemblage (just forty-five diagnostics). Figures 1.70-1. 73 show that a higher proportion of vessels in all shape classes of the mortuary assemblage fell within the 'matt' lustre category, with the exception of small closed vessels. In the 'slight', 'medium' and 'high' categories the figures are comparable for all shape classes. However, the greatest differences are again within the small closed shape class (again, this may be related to the small sample size for this category). Although some differences are evident between the mortuary assemblage and settlement assemblage with respect to lustre (possibly due to observer bias in making this subjective judgement), trends for small open, large open and large closed vessels are the same (i.e. an increase in number from matt to slight followed by a steady decline thereafter).

However, some significant differences are also evident between the mortuary and settlement assemblages. For example, in all shape classes, fabrics in the mortuary assemblage were more likely to register in the 2.5YR range. Conversely, fabrics in the settlement assemblage in all shape classes tended towards higher 7.5YR and lOYR readings. These differences in fabric colours at first glance hint at the conscious selection of different clays by potters producing mortuary ceramics. However, the determination of colours is sometimes an imprecise matter. Fine distinctions between colours can be difficult, varying according to light conditions and the perceptions of the analyst. Expressing the fabric colours discussed above in more general terms is therefore instructive. Figures 1.60-1.65 break down RP fabric colours by texture and shape, with the colours being divided into only the two broad categories of 'redder' and 'yellower'. When this is done, the proportions of each within the mortuary and settlement assemblages are broadly similar (though some differences are still evident). These results imply a level of observer bias in the colour recording at

51

Chapter 5. Artefact Analysis

Within the mortuary assemblage itself, the best way that diagnostic sherds could be distinguished from each other with respect to surface treatment was by reference to surface colour. Colours were measured using Munsell colour charts. Sherds with worn surfaces were not measured. Therefore, in the discussion that follows, all percentage figures refer only to the percentage of diagnostics for which colour readings were possible (a total of 1280 diagnostic pieces). Where possible, a reading was taken of the diagnostic sherd's predominant colour, and if applicable, of any secondary colour. Interior surface colours were only taken for open vessels.

fall within the same narrow range, demonstrating the broad similarities between the two assemblages. Comparisons between the mortuary and settlement assemblages with respect to exterior colours are useful in establishing the similarities in trends for this attribute. Figures 1.74-1.77 look at exterior surface colours by shape, for both the settlement and mortuary assemblages. Once again, only the more general division into hues is used. In all shape classes, in both assemblages, 2.5YR is the most common colour, while lOYR is generally the least common. In most shape classes in both assemblages 5YR is a slightly more common reading than 7.5YR (this is not the case for small closed vessels in the mortuary assemblage, though this may be related to the very small sample size for this shape class in the cemeteries).

EXTERIOR SURFACE The tables discussed below in relation to exterior surface colours include only those readings over 1%.

However, some notable differences can also be seen between the mortuary and settlement assemblages. Generally, a greater proportion of 2.5YR exteriors were recorded for all shape classes in the mortuary assemblage. Conversely, higher proportions of all other colours were recorded at the settlement. These results support the suggestion noted above that some observer bias has influenced the results (though sun-bleaching of the surface assemblage may also have played a role). The analysts of the mortuary assemblage appear to have favoured the 2.5YR hue over other red-brown hues (5YR and lOR). Similarly, they were generally less likely to record a 7.5YR reading.

The most common colour values in all vessel shapes in the mortuary assemblage were 2.5YR 4/6 (35%) and 2.5YR 4/4 (19%) (see Tables 32-35). All shapes displayed a similar range of surface colours, with the same three colours dominating (i.e. 2.5YR 4/4, 2.5YR 4/6 and 2.5 YR 5/6). These colours accounted for 71% of small open vessels and 67% of large open vessels. Similarly, they made up 70% of small closed vessels and 74% oflarge closed vessels. Tables 36-39 divide exterior surface colours in the mortuary assemblage by lustre. The higher the lustre of a RP vessel, the more consistently red the surface colours were. Thus, while around 65% of vessels with a matt lustre fell within the 2.5YR range, that percentage increased to 75% of vessels with a slight lustre, 85% of those with a medium lustre, and 88% of those with a high lustre. This is generally in accord with the situation at the settlement where vessels with better quality slips "tend to be slightly more consistently 2.5YR 5/6 and 2.5YR 4/6" (Frankel and Webb 1996:115). In all cases (whether the vessel displayed matt, slight, medium or high lustre) the most common exterior surface colours were 2.5YR 4/4 and 4/6. 2.5YR 5/6 was also a common reading.

An analysis of the general trends within Figures 1.741.77 compensates for potential observer bias by emphasising broader similarities, while avoiding finelevel discrepancies. When analysing these trends very similar patterns emerge, implying that although some observer bias existed in the recording of colours, the analysts were consistent in their recording. In most shape classes in both the mortuary and settlement assemblages, the percentages increase from a low at the 1OR range to a peak at 2.5YR, followed by a steady decline thereafter to a low at 10YR. The small closed shape class does not quite fit this pattern, but this is likely to be related to the small sample size for this shape class at the cemeteries (just forty-five diagnostics).

Tables 40-42 break down the mortuary assemblage according to exterior surface colours by fabric texture. Around 80% of vessels with very fine, fine and medium fabric textures had exterior surface colours in the 2.5YR range. There was no notable surface colour change with an increase or decrease in the coarseness of fabrics (unlike the settlement where "the surfaces of vessels with finer fabrics have higher values than those with coarser fabrics" (Frankel and Webb 1996:115)).

A similar pattern emerges when exterior surface colours are broken down by lustre (see Figures 1.78-1.81). At all levels of lustre, 2.5YR was the most commonly recorded colour, while l0YR was the least common colour. Although significantly greater quantities of 2.5YR were recorded in the mortuary assemblage, and significantly greater quantities of lOR, 5YR and 7.5YR were recorded in the settlement assemblage, the broader trends for both assemblages were very similar i.e. a steep rise in number from lOR to 2.5YR, then a steady fall in numbers thereafter from 5YR to the yellower hues.

These tables also incorporate the equivalent readings taken at the settlement. As with fabric colour discussed above, the settlement had a wider range of readings than the cemeteries (likely to be partly because the sample there was so much larger). The most commonly recorded colours at both the settlement and cemeteries tended to

52

Chapter 5. Artefact Analysis

In both the mortuary assemblage and the settlement assemblage, similar results are obtained when exterior surface colours are broken down by fabric (see Figures 1.82-1.83). Exterior surfaces on vessels with both finer and medium-textured fabrics were predominantly 2.5YR with smaller and broadly comparable quantities of lOR, 5YR and 7.5YR. lOYR was the least common exterior surface colour for vessels with both finer and medium fabrics. Once again, although significant differences exist at finer levels of analysis, the same general trends prevail at both the settlement and the cemeteries.

Figures 1.86 and 1.87, which break down interior surface colours by fabric texture. Decoration A sherd was called 'decorated' (following the ACE's criteria) where there had been "any distinct modification to the surface (other than general surface treatment, deliberate colour variation or burnishing) by incision, applied relief or impression" (Frankel and Webb 1996:116). The term 'decorated' is imprecise in so far as it fails to make distinctions with respect to the quality or complexity of the decoration or size of the decorative motif.

3.1% of exterior surfaces had mottling (see Table 43). Where mottling was present it was usually only slight.

It is likely that motifs from larger vessels will be somewhat over-represented in the data. This is because smaller, finer vessels tend to break into smaller pieces making specific motifs harder to identify.

Relatively few RP vessels had highly lustrous exterior surfaces. Rather, most had a slight to medium lustre (see Table 44). INTERIOR SURF ACE

Some diagnostic sherds displayed more than one type of decorative technique. For example, one diagnostic might display both incision and impression. Where that occurred (unless otherwise noted) the diagnostic was recorded as an incised sherd and an impressed sherd (i.e. two different sherds). As a result, in some tables the number of sherds with particular decorative techniques might exceed the total number of decorated sherds. One exception is the 'relief chain' motif which is technically often both 'relief and 'impressed'. For the purposes of analysis relief chains were treated as being relief only.

Interior surface colours were only recorded for open vessels. The tables discussed below in relation to interior colours include only those readings over 1%. The most common colours for the interiors of open RP vessels within the mortuary assemblage were within the redder 2.5YR range (most commonly 2.5YR 4/4, 4/6, and 5/6) (see Tables 45-46). Over 79% of small open vessels and over 78% of large open vessels were 2.5YR on the interior surface. The balance of the vessels were lOR, 5YR or 7.5YR on the interior surface (with a slight dominance of these less common values by 5YR).

Similarly, some sherds displayed two or more specific motifs. Where this occurred each motif was recorded separately. Thus, a single sherd with two motifs could be counted twice. As a result, some tables will show more motifs than decorated diagnostics. Naturally, when calculating certain total percentage figures these tables were not used.

Tables 47-49 break down the mortuary assemblage according to interior surface colours by fabric texture. Over 85% of vessels with very fine fabric, over 74% of those with fine fabric and over 79% of those with medium fabric fall within the 2.5YR range on the interior surface.

The value of decoration to spatial and social analysis is discussed in more detail in Chapter 6. The discussion that follows largely confines itself to a presentation and discussion of the data.

These tables also incorporate the equivalent readings taken at the settlement, allowing fine level comparison. Again, a wider range is observable at the settlement. However, the most common readings in both assemblages tend to fall within the same narrow range.

282 decorated sherds (being 2.2% of the mortuary assemblage) were recorded. 262 of these were RP (being 2.03% of the mortuary assemblage) (see Tables 50-51). This is ahnost double the percentage of decorated RP sherds from the settlement (1.1 %) (Frankel and Webb 1996:116). The decorated RP sherds from the cemeteries represent 18% of the diagnostics.

Figures 1.84-1.87 compare data pertaining to interior surface colours from the mortuary and settlement assemblages. They do so at only the broad 'hue' level of analysis. Figures 1.84 and 1.85 break down interior colours by shape. In both the mortuary and settlement assemblages 2.5YR was the most commonly recorded colour, while lOYR failed to register in both. In both assemblages, 5YR was the next most common colour, followed by 7.5YR then lOR. Clear differences in the percentages recorded for each colour exist between the two assemblages. However, the trends mirror each other very closely. An almost identical pattern emerges from

The lower two tiers at Davari (especially the middle tier) produced the bulk of the decorated sherds. These tiers contained c. 89% of the sherds with relief decoration, 84.5% of those with incision and c. 66% of those with impressions (see Table 52). Vounaros was the next most productive cemetery, closely followed by Davari's upper

53

Chapter 5. Artefact Analysis

tier. Davari-Kappara produced just one decorated sherd. However, expressed as a percentage of the total sherd count from each cemetery, Davari's upper tier and Vounaros were the areas with most decoration (4.6% and 3.2% respectively), followed by Davari's lower two tiers (2.1%) and Davari-Kappara (0.4%) (Table 53).

diagnostics. This is apparently due to the large number of decorated large bowls and basins recorded at Davari. Also, the likelihood that looters singled out smaller decorated items there will have contributed to these results. Finally, the number of decorated large closed diagnostics ( as a percentage of all the decorated diagnostics) from the cemeteries is comparable to that of the settlement.

DECORATION AND SHAPE

The proportion of large bowls/basins in other Prehistoric Bronze Age cemeteries on Cyprus that was decorated varies considerably from site to site (for example, none of the large bowls/basins in the early chambers at Lapithos was decorated, but as many as 4 7% were decorated in the late chambers at Vounous B). In the Marki mortuary assemblage, 20% of the large bowl/basin diagnostics were decorated. This figure falls within the middle of the range set by the other cemeteries (see Figure 1.90). Similarly, the proportion of RP small open diagnostics in the Marki mortuary assemblage with decoration, falls within the range set by Vounous B and Lapithos, particularly given that the figure is probably an underestimate due to the selective looting of small decorated bowls by tomb robbers, and relatively high breakage rates for small bowls (Figure 1.90).

Table 54 illustrates that RP diagnostics from large open vessels were more likely to be decorated than those from any other shape class, with diagnostics from these vessels representing over 85% of all relief decoration, 59% of all impressions and 34% of incised decoration. Large closed vessels were the next most decorated shape class, accounting for c. 30% of incised decoration, c. 32% of impressions and 7.4% of relief decoration. Similarly, where decorative techniques were combined on the one sherd, sherds from large open vessels accounted for the highest number of combined techniques (see Table 55). A very high proportion of decorated RP sherds derived from large open vessels (66% ). Only 18% of decorated sherds came from large closed vessels. Relatively few decorated sherds came from small open or small closed vessels (8.8% and 6.9% respectively).

The proportion of RP large jug diagnostics that was decorated in the Marki mortuary assemblage is low when compared to the proportions at Vounous A and B, and Lapithos, across both the early and late periods (Figure 1.90). Again, this is likely to be partly due to the selective looting of decorated vessels. Also this figure will be affected by the fact that body sherds from large jugs were less often assigned to that specific shape class, because they resemble body sherds from other types of large closed vessels. Therefore, it is likely that such sherds were more often simply called 'large closed', and decorated body sherds from large jugs therefore went unrecorded for that specific shape class. Additionally, it should be noted that the high count of decorated large jugs at Vounous A is exaggerated by the fact that ahnost half of the recorded decoration on jugs there was only a simple potter's mark (which was not scored as decoration at Marki). Thus, allowing for some underestimate of the figures for the Marki mortuary assemblage's decorated jugs, it can be said that the proportion of decorated RP jugs there does not fall far below the range set by the other cemeteries. Where large jugs were decorated in the Marki mortuary assemblage, they were predominantly incised, and less commonly relief decorated. This pattern is similar to that evident at Vounous A but the opposite of that at Vounous B and Lapithos. However, too much should not be made of this given that the sample from Marki is very small (Figure 1.91).

The preponderance of decorated sherds from large open vessels is due to the large number of sherds deriving from large bowls and basins on Davari' s lower two tiers. Notably, this pattern does not conform to the one prevailing at the settlement where "( d)iagnostic sherds from closed vessels are far more likely to have some decoration than those from open vessels" (Frankel and Webb 1996:116). Figures 1.88-1.94 illustrate a number of other differences regarding decoration from the settlement and the cemeteries. Figure 1.88 shows the proportion of all diagnostics within each shape class that was decorated. At both the settlement and cemeteries identical proportions of small open vessels were decorated. However, higher proportions of small closed and large open vessels were decorated at the cemeteries. By contrast, a much greater proportion of large closed vessels was decorated at the settlement. Figure 1.89 also analyses decoration by shape class but illustrates the number of decorated sherds for each shape class as a percentage of all decorated diagnostics. Some significant differences between the two assemblages are evident. A much smaller percentage of the decorated diagnostics at the cemeteries came from small open vessels (8.5% of the mortuary assemblage compared to 24.2% at the settlement). The same applies for small closed vessels (6.9% compared to 32.8%). However, the most radical difference appears in the large open shape class. Well over half of the decorated diagnostics from the cemeteries came from large open vessels ( 66%) compared to just 11.1% of the settlement's decorated

Certain relationships between techniques of decoration and size classes exist in the mortuary assemblage (see Table 56). For example, 67.6% of all decoration on large open vessels was relief decoration. By contrast, all other

54

Chapter 5. Artefact Analysis

shape classes most commonly displayed incision (c. 77% of small open vessels, 72. 7% of small closed vessels and 55.4% of large closed vessels). Only 18.6% of the decoration on large open vessels was incision.

lines together made up 22.1 % of incised motifs, while single zigzag lines, or sets of such zigzags ( e.g. Figures 2.31 and 2.32, Diag. Nos. 56.55A, 27.lA and 37.29B), comprised 31. 8% of the incised motifs. In the settlement the situation is reversed with single lines and sets of lines being more common than zigzags (Frankel and Webb 1996:116). However, the settlement and mortuary assemblages are generally similar.

Significant differences between the settlement and mortuary assemblages are evident in the relationship of vessel shape and techniques of decoration. Figure 1.92 illustrates the percentage of each technique of decoration found on each category of shape. In the mortuary assemblage markedly lower proportions of all types of decorative technique were recorded for small open and small closed vessels. In other words, relief, incision and impressed decoration were found much more often on small open and closed vessels in the settlement. In contrast, these three decorative techniques were found much more frequently on large open vessels from the cemeteries. Relief and impressed decoration occurred far less frequently on large closed vessels from the cemeteries than from the settlement (7.4% compared to 20.5%). However, a higher proportion of incised decoration was recorded on large closed vessels from the cemeteries than the settlement (30.1 % compared to 20.4%).

When incised motifs are divided according to cemetery some very small samples are produced. However, the results are reproduced here for completeness. At Vounaros, straight lines (single ones and in sets) dominate. Zigzag motifs are considerably less common (see Table 59). Davari's upper tier provided only tiny numbers of identifiable incised motifs, while DavariKappara had none (Table 60). Davari's lower two tiers produced ninety-two diagnostic sherds with incised decoration. Eighty-one identifiable motifs were recorded, being twenty-six separate motifs. Once again, straight lines or sets of straight lines were common accounting for 17.3% of the incised motifs. Zigzags ( single or multiple) make up another 35.7% of incised motifs at Davari's lower tiers (Table 61 ).

Figure 1.93 analyses shape and technique of decoration differently. It shows the proportion of each shape class decorated by each decorative technique. When expressed in this way it is clear that the settlement and mortuary assemblages were very similar, with some exceptions in the large open shape class. Large open vessels from the cemeteries have less incisions and more impressed decoration (though a similar amount of relief).

150 RP diagnostic sherds with relief decoration were recorded in the mortuary assemblage. These produced 132 with identifiable motifs, being twelve different motifs. The most common relief motifs are relief chains and lines of relief terminating in a boss (see Table 62). These two motifs are listed separately in Table 62. However, they are often indistinguishable from each other on fragmentary sherds. A relief chain is essentially a line of relief with a series of regular circular or oval impressions in it (e.g. Figure 2.25, Diag. No. 37.70A). Those impressions (the 'links' in the relief chain) often take the form of a slightly raised boss with a shallow fingertip impression in it. A relief chain can therefore terminate in a boss. By contrast, a 'line of relief terminating in a boss' has not got the 'links' in it. Rather, the line of relief is longer and unbroken until its termination in a boss (e.g. Figure 2.24, Diag. No. 35.99F). They are similar forms of decoration and might easily be placed in the same category of motif. Together, these two relief motifs comprised 40% of all the diagnostics decorated with relief and 45.5% of the specific identified motifs.

DECORATION AND FABRIC QUALITY The relationship between techniques of decoration and fabric quality in the RP mortuary assemblage conforms to the pattern in the settlement assemblage (see Table 57). Diagnostics in the RP mortuary assemblage from vessels with very fine fabric were decorated exclusively with incision. Similarly, those with fine textured fabric displayed a high proportion of incision (48.4%) although relief decoration in this category was also fairly popular (31.2% of decorated fine-textured diagnostics). As fabric texture becomes coarser, relief decoration becomes more common, as does impressed decoration, while the incidence of incised decoration decreases markedly.

The next most common group of RP relief motifs in the mortuary assemblage was straight lines of relief (usually single lines but occasionally in sets of two), comprising 28.7% of identified motifs and 25.3% of all reliefdecorated diagnostics ( e.g. Figure 2.26, Diag. No. 45.61A). Isolated bosses were the next most common relief motif (8. 7% of relief-decorated sherds) (e.g. Figure 2.26, Diag. No. 55.25A).

DECORATIVE MOTIFS 113 RP diagnostic sherds with incised motifs were recorded in the mortuary assemblage. 100 of these had identifiable incised motifs (Table 58). Single zigzag lines (12.4% of motifs) and framed hatched bands (9.7% of motifs) were the two most common incised motifs (for examples see Figures 2.28 and 2.30, Diag. Nos. V15 and 25.78B). Generally, line and zigzag motifs dominated the incised pieces. Single straight lines and sets of straight

Dividing relief motifs by cemetery again produces some very small samples for the smaller cemeteries. They are

55

Chapter 5. Artefact Analysis

reproduced for completeness. Tables 63-65 illustrate relief motifs by cemetery. Davari's lower two tiers were the most productive. They provided 133 diagnostic sherds with relief. These yielded 121 with identifiable motifs. Single lines of relief were a common motif, accounting for 28% of the identified motifs and 25.5% of all diagnostics decorated with relief. Some of these lines of relief were elaborated with a row of dashes along the top (5.2% of the relief-decorated sherds). However, relief chains and lines ofrelief terminating in a boss were easily the most common RP relief motif at Davari' s lower tiers. They made up 41.3 % of relief-decorated diagnostics and 45.5% of Davari's identified relief motifs.

than other shape classes. Incised straight lines (singly or in sets) and zigzags (single and multiple) are the most common incised motifs in both these shape classes.

Impressed motifs were less common in the RP mortuary assemblage than incised and relief motifs. Forty-seven RP diagnostic sherds had impressed decoration. These yielded forty-four identifiable motifs being only eight different motifs (see Table 66). The most common impressed motif was the circle, either isolated (34% of the impressed diagnostics) or in a row (12.8% of the impressed diagnostics) (e.g. Figures 2.18 (Diag. No. 36.17B), 2.22 (Diag. No. 17.74A), 2.23 (Diag. No. 26.28A) and 2.27 (Diag. No. D.UT 34). Impressed dots (isolated or in rows and sets) were the next most common impressed motif (being 38.3% of impressed diagnostics) ( e.g. Figures 2.29 (Diag. No. DK 31) and 2.31 (Diag Nos. 37.91A and 56.55A)).

Tables 71-82 illustrate the distribution of motifs across the various shape classes in the mortuary assemblage, divided according to technique of decoration. When treated in this manner very small samples result. However, the following broad observations can be made: The most common incised motif on small open vessels was the single zigzag line (being 35% of motifs in this shape class). However, this incised motif is not recorded once on small closed vessels where straight lines (singly or in sets) predominate (35.3% of motifs in this shape class).

•

The large open and large closed vessels demonstrate a wider variety of incised motifs

Impressed decoration is very uncommon on small open and small closed vessels, and only marginally more common on large closed vessels, where impressed circles and dots appear. Large open vessels are more commonly decorated with impressions. Circles (in isolation or rows) are easily the most common impressed motifs in the large open shape class (54.8% of motifs in this category).

•

Relief decoration is very uncommon on small open and small closed vessels. It is only a little more common on large closed vessels where it is used for a variety of motifs.

•

Relief decoration is most common on large open vessels where the most common relief motifs are relief chains and lines of relief terminating in a boss (together being 44.2% of motifs), and single lines ofrelief(25.5% of motifs).

Comparing the identifiable motifs from the settlement and mortuary assemblages yields some interesting results. Although a greater proportion of the mortuary assemblage was decorated, the settlement assemblage had a much greater variety of decoration. This is most evident with respect to incised motifs. Table 83 lists all the identifiable incised motifs that are present in the settlement assemblage but absent in the mortuary assemblage. Figures as a percentage of the identifiable incised motifs at the settlement are also given. In all, there are twenty-seven motifs in the settlement assemblage not present at the cemeteries (though many of these appear in only small quantities at the settlement too). In contrast, only three incised motifs from the mortuary assemblage are not also found in the settlement assemblage (i.e. row of parallel vertical dashes, row of circles, and an isolated dot), though similar motifs are recorded at the settlement.

When broken down by cemetery Vounaros, Davari' s upper tier and Davari-Kappara produced only tiny samples. They are reproduced in Tables 67-69. Once again, it was Davari's lower two tiers that yielded the bulk of the impressed decoration (see Table 70). Thirtyseven impressed sherds were recorded. They yielded thirty-four identifiable motifs, being just eight different motifs. The most common motif was the circle, either isolated (24.4% of the impressed motifs) or in rows and sets (16.2% of the impressed motifs). Dots (in sets and rows, or in isolation) were the next most common impressed motifs at Davari's lower tiers (together comprising 40.5% of identified motifs).

•

•

Table 84 gives a list of the relief motifs present in the settlement assemblage but absent in the mortuary assemblage. There is far less variety with respect to relief motifs at both the settlement and cemeteries. Three motifs are present at the settlement but absent in the mortuary assemblage. One of these (a ring of relief) is quite common in the settlement, comprising 6.7% of the identifiable relief motifs there. Conversely, two relief motifs are present in the mortuary assemblage but not present in the settlement assemblage (i.e. row of rings, and a small isolated 's'). However, these motifs are each represented in the mortuary assemblage by single examples.

56

Chapter 5. Artefact Analysis

The diagnostics listed and illustrated are a representative sample of the mortuary assemblage.

Figures 1.94 and 1.95 compare proportions of identifiable incised and relief motifs in the settlement and mortuary assemblages. Figure 1.94 illustrates the ten most common incised motifs at the cemeteries (as a percentage of the incised motifs there), and shows the proportion of the corresponding settlement assemblage represented by that same motif. Many of the ten most common incised motifs in the mortuary assemblage appear in the settlement assemblage in comparable proportions. However, some notable differences exist. For example, framed hatched bands are considerably more common in the mortuary assemblage, while single straight lines are far more common in the settlement assemblage. Six of the ten most common incised motifs in the settlement assemblage also appear in the list of the ten most common incised motifs in the mortuary assemblage. In other words, the two assemblages share six of their most common incised motifs in common. The four incised motifs present in a list of the settlement's ten most common incised motifs, but absent in the mortuary assemblage's ten most common motifs are: set of three straight lines (12.1 % of the settlement's incised motifs), set of four or more straight lines (11.9%), row of dashes, including on a relief band (3.2%), and a series of opposed divided pairs of angled dashes forming an open zigzag (3.1%).

As already noted, diagnostics were numbered according to the units and contexts in which they were found. Thus, 'Diagnostic No. 37.16A' is diagnostic sherd A from context 16 in unit 37.

Small bowls Most vessels described above as 'small open' vessels were, in fact, small bowls. Therefore, many of the figures and details provided for the two categories are very similar. However, not all small open vessels were bowls. A small number (just thirteen) were classified as small basins (the difference being in the degree of incurve and angle of the vessel wall). A bowl was classified as 'small' if the internal nm diameter was 200 mm or less. 267 diagnostics deriving from small bowls were recorded in the cemeteries. 238 of these (89.1%) came from Davari's middle and lower tiers. Vounaros yielded twelve small bowl diagnostics (c. 4.5%), DavariKappara eleven (c. 4.1 %) and Davari's upper tier just six (c. 2.2%). At the settlement, small bowls comprised "55% of registered RP diagnostics and are the most common RP vessel type in all phases" (Frankel and Webb 1996:117). However, in the mortuary assemblage they are substantially outnumbered by diagnostics from large open vessels, especially the large basins characteristic of Davari's middle tier. For example, 415 diagnostics from large basins were recorded at the cemeteries compared to the 267 from small bowls (though these figures will be affected to a degree by differential recovery, preservation and breakage rates). When compared to the quantities of small open vessels present at other Prehistoric Bronze Age cemeteries (Vounous A and B and Lapithos), Marki's cemeteries had slightly lower counts (Figure 1.96). However, this will be partly due to the fact that looters preferred smaller vessels, thereby depleting the Marki mortuary assemblage of them to some unquantifiable degree. Relatively high breakage rates for small bowls may also have had an impact on these figures.

The five most common relief motifs at the settlement are also the five most common relief motifs in the mortuary assemblage. However, these motifs sometimes appear in significantly different quantities (see Figure 1.95). For example, relief chains and lines of relief terminating in a boss are the most common decorative motif in the mortuary assemblage (39.9%). In the settlement assemblage, these motifs occur much less frequently (9.1%). The difference is largely due to the very large quantities of large open bowls and basins in the mortuary assemblage, which are often decorated with relief chains. A significant difference between the proportions of dashes on relief bands at the settlement (39.6%) as opposed to the mortuary assemblage (just 4.7%) also exists. No figures for quantities of impressed motifs are available from the settlement. However, in the mortuary assemblage the only motifs recorded are straight lines, angled dashes, circles, and dots in rows or sets. Almost all of these motifs occur in the 'incised' repertoire in the settlement assemblage.

The small bowls recorded at the cemeteries at Marki were predominantly the standard RP II-ill hemispherical bowl. However, a small number of deeper small bowls, with incurving sides and small flat bases (e.g. 26.88D, 37.39A) belong to earlier RP I-II types (see Frankel and Webb 1996:117, citing Stewart 1962:333, Type XIIIF. See also Frankel and Webb 2001).

Red Polished ware - description and discussion of specific vessel types The discussion below follows, as closely as possible, the format of the ACE's principal site report (Frankel and Webb 1996), to facilitate comparisons between the sites.

RP small bowls are almost entirely represented in the diagnostics by rim sherds (c. 95%). Very few bases were

57

Chapter 5. Artefact Analysis

recorded (just seven, being 2.6%). This is probably because most small bowls had round bases that can be difficult to distinguish from non-diagnostic body sherds. In other words, this low number is indicative of a predominance of round bases. Handles, and rims with handles, from small bowls accounted for 38 (14.2%) of the RP small bowl diagnostics (a number comparable to the 15.3% at the settlement) (Frankel and Webb 1996:117).

The RP small bowls usually had an exterior slip of medium thickness (92.5% of those recorded). Similarly, the interior slip was usually of medium thickness (89.7%). In most cases, there was no mottling on the exterior surface (85.3% of cases) or the interior surface (96.4% of cases). Where mottling occurred on the exterior surface it was usually slight (10% of small bowls). Distinct mottling was rare (on just 2% of small bowls). No black top, black interior small bowls were recorded, in contrast to the 3.6% of small bowls at the settlement (Frankel and Webb 1996:118). This is surprising, and may indicate that looters favoured these distinctive vessels over the plainer standard RP. A small number of diagnostic sherds displayed colour or lustre changes below the rim, indicative of stacking of the vessels during firing (a phenomenon also noted at the settlement) (Frankel and Webb 1996:118) (see 36.43C, 37.39A and 26.88D).

The overwhelming majority of small bowls (c. 89%) had incurved and thinning walls with rounded rims i.e. most were hemispherical bowls, consistent with the pattern at the settlement (Frankel and Webb 1996:117). Four had a slightly flaring rim (e.g. 36.16B and D.UT 3). An insufficient number of diagnostic bases were recovered to establish whether correlations between handle types and base types existed (as they did at the settlement) (Frankel and Webb 1996:117). Of the seven bases recorded, five were flat, one was rounded, and one had a 'dimple' (a fingertip impression) for a base (44.21A). Two of the diagnostics with flattened bases also had handles. One was a vertical handle and the other was a pierced vertical lug.

All diagnostics from RP small bowls were evenly burnished. Like the small bowls at the settlement, their exterior surfaces were predominantly monochrome redbrown in colour. 82.3% of exterior surface colours fell within the 2.5YR range. The most common colours were 2.5YR 4/6 (36.2%), 2.5YR 4/4 (19.7%) and 2.5YR 5/6 (17.6%). The exterior surface of most small bowls was usually slightly lustrous (51.5%) or of a medium lustre (34%).

The most common types of handle on RP small bowls were lugs in various forms (7.8% of small bowl diagnostics), but most commonly pierced knob lugs (4.8%). Horizontal handles (4.8% of small bowl diagnostics) were the next most common type of handle. Only one horizontal lug was recorded (87.90A) and just one vertical handle. These figures are comparable to those recorded at the settlement from excavations prior to 1996 (Frankel and Webb 1996:117). However, the percentage figures from the settlement will have changed somewhat since recent seasons have concentrated more on earlier deposits, with a predominance of the earlier handle types. No horn lugs (Stewart 1962:332, Type XIIIDc) were recorded (a single example having been recorded at Marki Alonia by 1996 (Frankel and Webb 1996:120)). However, two lugs (37.5C and 37.6A) might be considered less pronounced examples of horn lugs (probably EC I-II), comparable to ones commonly found on black top, black interior small bowls.

7 .1% of diagnostics from small bowls were decorated, a substantially higher proportion than at the settlement where only 2.1% were decorated (Frankel and Webb 1996:118). Most of the decorated diagnostics from small bowls are incised. In fact, 6% of all small bowl diagnostics display incision. This figure can be contrasted with those from the settlement where only 1.7% of small bowls are incised. Only four diagnostic sherds from small bowls were relief decorated, and just one was impressed. The most common decorative motif on small bowls was the incised single zigzag line. 2.6% of all small bowl diagnostics (seven sherds) displayed this motif. The fabric of RP small bowls was always very fine/fme (73.5% of small bowls) or medium (26.5%) in texture. It usually contained only small inclusions (89% of small bowls), and those inclusions were usually a mixture of black and white (84.7% of small bowls). The fabric was almost always of a soft-medium hardness (93% of small bowls). Small bowls most often had no core within the fabric (73.3% of small bowls). When a core existed it could be either thin (15% of small bowls) or thick (11.7%).

The types of handles represented at the cemeteries are important because the ACE has identified certain "chronological implications" for handle types on small bowls. With time, "horizontal and elongated vertical lugs decline in frequency" at the settlement (Franl-:el and Webb 1996:114, 117). Horizontal loop handles become more common over time, with a late increase in the popularity of those with knob bed or homed ends (Frankel and Webb 1996:114, 117).

Figure 1.97 illustrates the distribution of small bowl diagnostics across Davari. There are a greater number of them on the middle tier (proportional to the greater number of overall sherds there), but they are generally evenly spread across the site. There is a hint of clustering

The mortuary assemblage yielded one small bowl that probably formed part of a ladle (44.99A). Only one spouted small bowl was recorded (75.28B).

58

Chapter 5. Artefact Analysis

body 7mm. Exterior slip medium thiclmess. Interior slip medium thickness. Exterior lustre medium. Interior lustre slight. No interior mottling. Slight mottling on the exterior. Exterior colour 2.5YR5/6 and 2.5YR4/6. Interior colour 2.5YR4/6. Fabric colour 2.5YR5/8. A thin light core. Burnishing even. Fabric texture medium with a few small black and white inclusions. Fabric hardness medium. Refer Figure 2.1.

in places but, once again, greater numbers of sherds in these areas simply reflect higher sherd counts there generally. UNDECORATED. WITHOUT HANDLE OR WITH HANDLE OF INDETERMINATE TYPE.

36.43C. Fragment.