Death in Mycenaean Lakonia (17th to 11th c. BC): A Silent Place

By Chrysanthi Gallou

A Silent Place: Death in Mycenaean Lakonia is the first book-length systematic study of the Late Bronze Age (LBA) burial tradition in south-eastern Peloponnese, Greece, and the first to comprehensively present and discuss all Mycenaean tombs and funerary contexts excavated and/or simply reported in the region from the 19th century to present day. The book will discuss and reconstruct the emergence and development of the Mycenaean mortuary tradition in Lakonia by examining the landscape of death, the burial architecture, the funerary and post-funerary customs and rituals, and offering patterns over a longue durée. The author proposes patterns of continuity from the Middle Bronze Age (even the Early Bronze Age in terms of burial architecture) to the LBA and, equally important, from the Late Bronze Age to the Early Iron Age,and reconstructs diachronic processes of invention of tradition and identity in Mycenaean communities, on the basis of tomb types and their material culture. The text highlights the social, political and economic history of Late Bronze Age Lakonia from the evolution of the Mycenaean civilisation and the establishment of palatial administration in the Spartan vale, to the demise of Mycenaean culture and the turbulent post–collapse centuries, as reflected by the burial offerings.

The book also brings to publication the chamber tombs at Epidavros Limera that remained largely unpublished since their excavation in the 1930s and 1950s. Epidavros Limera was one of the most important prehistoric coastal sites in prehistoric southern Greece (early 3rd–late 4th millennium BC), and one of the main harbour towns of the Mycenaean administrative centres of central Lakonia. It is one of very few Mycenaean sites that flourished uninterruptedly from the emergence of the Mycenaean civilisation until after the collapse of the palatial administration and into the transition to the Early Iron Age. The present study of the funerary architecture and of the pottery from the tombs suggests that the site was responsible for the introduction of the chamber tomb type on the Greek mainland in the latest phase of the Middle Bronze Age (definitely no later than the transitional Middle Bronze Age/Late Bronze Age period), and not in the early phase of the Late Bronze Age (Late Helladic I) as previously assumed.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Oxbow Books
• Release date: Dec 27, 2019
• ISBN: 9781789252439

Chrysanthi Gallou

Dr Chrysanthi Gallou is Assistant Professor in Aegean Archaeology and Director of the Centre for Spartan & Peloponnesian Studies, University of Nottingham

Book preview

Introduction

‘Bronze Age Laconia has a peculiar capacity to frustrate expectations,’ wrote Oliver Dickinson in Philolakon (1992, 109), and his ‘rueful comment’ has provided one of the main stimuli for this book. Death in Mycenaean Laconia aims at giving a voice to Mycenaean Laconia by producing the first book-length study of the LBA burial tradition in south-eastern Peloponnese and at systematically presenting and discussing the Mycenaean tombs and funerary contexts excavated in and/or simply reported from the region since Tsountas’s first explorations in the late 19th century. It also brings to publication the chamber tombs at Epidavros Limera that remained largely unpublished since their excavation by senior members of the Greek Archaeological Society and of the Greek Ministry of Culture in the 1930s and 1950s.

The book discusses the emergence and development of the Mycenaean mortuary tradition in Laconia by exploring the landscape of death, the burial architecture, the funerary and post-funerary customs and rites, and offering patterns over a longue durée. It proposes patterns of continuity from the MBA (even the EBA in terms of burial architecture) to the LBA and, equally important, from the LBA to the EIA, and attempts to reconstruct diachronic processes of invention of tradition and identity in local Mycenaean communities based on tomb types and the associated material culture. It combines mortuary evidence with the data from the excavation and survey of settlement contexts to highlight the social, political and economic history of LBA Laconia, from the evolution of the Mycenaean culture and the subsequent establishment of palatial administration in the Spartan vale, to its demise and the turbulent post-collapse centuries.

The study is organised as follows. Following a discussion of the topographical and geological setting of Laconia and the introduction to the site of Epidavros Limera in the Introduction, Chapter 1 provides a narrative of the explorations and excavations of LBA funerary contexts in Laconia from the 19th to the 21st century, and includes a full catalogue of all tombs (excavated and reported) and other funerary deposits. Chapter 2 presents an overview of the funerary architectural forms in Mycenaean Laconia and tackles the ideational funerary architectures and landscapes, in particular the chamber tomb type, from the perspectives of innovation, memory and tradition. In Chapter 3, the burial customs and the funerary/post-funerary rites in Mycenaean Laconia are treated, with the aim to fill the considerable gap in our knowledge of funerary customs in the region, reported by Bill Cavanagh and Chris Mee, the two other scholars whose studies have provided the inspiration for this book, in 1998; ‘Few tombs in Laconia and Messenia have been reported in detail and no firm conclusions can be drawn about the treatment of the dead’ (Cavanagh and Mee 1998, 73). Chapter 4 is a detailed presentation of the pottery deposited in the tombs at Epidavros Limera, and contributes in advancing the study of pottery traditions in the local funerary contexts by bringing to publication a uniquely extensive corpus of ceramic material ranging from the transitional MH III/LH I times to the Submycenaean/EPG period. Having established in Chapters 2–4 that Mycenaean Laconia exhibits a wealth of important mortuary evidence, Chapter 5 attempts to reconstruct political and cultural developments in the region from the transitional MH III/LH I period to the end of the post-palatial era and the dawn of the EIA.

‘Κοίλη Λακεδαίμονα κητώεσσαν’: the topographical and geological setting

The Catalogue of Ships introduces Lakedaimon, the kingdom of Menelaos, with a formulaic description at the end of a hexameter line (Hom. Il. 2.581–583; Morris 1984, 1; Cartledge 2002, 290):

οἳ δ᾽ εἶχον κοίλην Λακεδαίμονα κητώεσσαν, …

The same description appears in the Odyssey when Telemachos and Peisistratos arrive at Sparta (Hom. Od. 4.1):

οἱ δ᾽ ἷξον κοίλην Λακεδαίμονα κητώεσσαν, …

This description has inspired comment since antiquity and, according to Morris’s comprehensive discussion of the formula, the word Λακεδαίμονα seems to indicate a territory, enclosed by two epithets relevant to its natural landscape (in particular the sea) and accompanied by a list of its towns (Morris 1984 with earlier bibliography; Chapin and Hitchcock 2007; Hope Simpson 2009, 323–331). Corroborating evidence for the identification of Λακεδαίμονα as a territory may emanate from the ethnic Lakedaimnios/Lakedaimnios recorded on the Linear B tablets Fq 229 (ra–ke–da–mi–ni–jo–*65/Lakedaimnios) and Gp 227.2 (ra–]ke–da–mi–ni–jo–u–jo/Lakedaimnio:i hiyui/son of Lakedaimon or Lakedaimnios, son) from Thebes (Aravantinos et al. 2001, 395: ‘il s’agit indubitablement de l’ethnique Λακεδαιμόνιος’; Palaima 2000–2001, 484), alluding to the toponym used in later times for Sparta and its territory (cf. Cartledge 2002, 4).

A basic source for the geology and general geography of Laconia is Alfred Philippson’s Die Griechischen Landschaften (1959, 371–523), cited frequently with minor additions in Bölte’s lengthy articles in Pauly–Wissowa Real Encyklopädie der klassichen Altertumswissenschaften (Bintliff 1977, 372; 2008, 528). Another source that describes the entire region in significant detail is the Admiralty Naval Intelligence Division’s Geographical Handbook of Greece, edited by H.C. Darby (1944–1945). Further, important site-and area-specific studies on the topic include Curtius (1852, 203–332), Bursian (1868, 102–157), Symeonides (1969), Bintliff (1977, 371–497 and 2008, 527–550), Pe-Piper et al. (1982), Koukis (1990), Mourtzas (1990), Higgins and Higgins (1996, 51–58), Cartledge (2002, 11–20), Rackham (1996, 73–74), Tavitian (1997), Doutsos et al. (2000), Pope at al. (2003), Wilkinson and Pope (2003), Papanastassiou et al. (2005), Pope and Wilkinson (2005), among many others. Useful studies on the complex coastal evolution and development of the region, (neo)tectonics, eustatic sea-level changes, climate change and the impact of extreme events on coastal infrastructure in antiquity and the preservation of archaeological remains on coastal zones and under water, with geo-archaeological methods and historical sources, include Flemming (1968 and 1978), Kraft (1972, 97–102), Kraft et al. (1977), Kowalczyk et al. (1992), Gaki-Papanastassiou et al. (2001), Tsartsidou et al. (2002), Scheffers et al. (2008), Ntageretzis (2014), Ntageretzis et al. (2015a and b), and others. The brief description of the region that follows draws information from the sources cited above, unless otherwise cited.

Laconia’s upper geographical boundaries are defined by the two great mountain ranges of Taygetos and Parnon. It is surrounded by the Myrtöon Sea to the east and by the Laconian Gulf and the Mediterranean Sea to the south. Geologically, the region belongs to the West Hellenic Nappe, which was incorporated into the Hellenic orogenetic complex during the Miocene (Jacobshagen 1986). It is dominated by rocks of the ‘external’ isopic zones of the Hellenides, the Ionian, Gavrovo and Pindos zones: quartz-sericit schists, glimmer schists, quartzites and evaporites as main rock types; also Jurassic-Eocene carbonatic rocks of the Gavrovo-Tripolitsa zone and Eocene-Miocene flysch units. The importance of its mineral resources comes only second after those of Lavrion in Attica and Siphnos and Kythnos in the Cyclades (for a detailed discussion, Kiskyras 1988). Iron deposits, dominated mainly by a lamellar variety of haematite, lie around the Bay of Vatika (ancient Boiae), in the phyllites or associated with the overlying thrust fault (Bassiakos 1988; Bassiakos et al. 1989). Further iron deposits have been identified at Kollines in the Skiritis and Porto Kagio (ancient Psamathous) in south Mani (Cartledge 2002, 155–156). A lead, zinc and silver deposit is known from Molaoi (Aggelopoulos and Konstantinidis 1998), copper from near the Spartan valley, copper and lead near Sykea and Molaoi, copper from near Krokeai, native copper from around Apidia; there was alluvial gold and possibly silver in the Evrotas south of Sparta (Janko 2008, 555. Native copper is also found around the chapel of Agios Georgios in the small homonymous bay, just to the south-east of Velanidia on the eastern Maleatic coast – pers. obs. during my visit to the chapel in March 2008).

The chief feature of the geology of Laconia is the existence of a rift valley which runs due south-east from the centre of the Peloponnese to the Laconian Gulf. Tectonically the region falls into six sections (from east to west): the east Parnon foreland; Parnon; the west Parnon foreland (including the Malea peninsula); the Evrotas furrow; Taygetos; and the west Taygetos foreland. The Taygetos Massif, known locally also as Pendedaktylo (‘Five Fingered’) or Makrynas (‘Far-off One’), extends from the Megalopolis basin in neighbouring Arcadia and stretches without a break for a distance of around 110 km before ending on Cape Tainaron (or Cape Matapan) at the tip of the Mani peninsula. It forms the natural boundary between Laconia in the east and Messenia in the west. The range rises very abruptly and reaches a height of 2,407 m, making it the highest point and one of the most inaccessible mountains of the Peloponnese. Structurally, its mountains rise in two stages: a lower range of cliffs rises to a terrace-like plateau at about 1,000 m, with the upper slopes behind them. All the higher peaks are hard limestone, but the lower and middle elevations (up to about 1,500 m) are characterised by metamorphic rocks and flysch. The southern 50 km of the range form the Mani peninsula, from opposite Gytheion to Cape Tainaron (Cape Matapan). The rugged peninsula is mostly underlain by Late Cretaceous to Late Eocene limestones, parts of which have been metamorphosed to produce marbles highly appreciated for their colour and qualities since the Late Bronze Age: rosso antico (also known as marmor Taenarium in Roman times), a fine-grained, red to purple red marble, sometimes streaked with white veins and patches, and white, black, grey and green cipollino marbles (Higgins and Higgins 1996, 56, 57; Moschou et al. 1998; Lazzarini 2007; Warren 2012 and 2014). Within these limestones and marbles, layers of clastic sediments have been metamorphosed into schists. Most of the arable land lies on small plains (up to 220 m) along the west coast.

The mountain range of Parnon constitutes the continuation of the easterly range of the Arcadian mountains, but it is distinguished from them by its substrate of schist. The range is divided into several distinct belts and consists of a mass of foothills and valleys with much metamorphic rock, although most of the higher peaks are limestone. It runs south-east and terminates in the Malea peninsula (which it divides into two distinct territories) between the Aegean Sea and the Laconian Gulf. The geomorphology of the Malea peninsula is dominated by Triassic dolomites and phyllites and is largely occupied by peaks of rather low altitude (the Chavalas 520 m to the east of the Molaoi plain, Lyra in the centre c. 500–600 m, Krithina 772 m that terminates at the Cape). Topographically, the western Maleatic coast largely indents by sedimentary gulfs that were occupied throughout or in intervals in prehistoric times, whereas the eastern slope falls abruptly into the sea with shelter provided only by few natural harbours and anchorages, e.g. Zarax, Epidavros Limera and Agios Phokas. The complex geomorphological formation of the Parnon range causes the extremely violent encounter of winds, especially those blowing from north to north-west across the Aegean Sea, known as the Etesian winds or meltemia, and currents off Cape Malea. The rapid change of winds and currents rendered the circumnavigation of the cape, an extremely treacherous enterprise in antiquity, as implied by Strabo’s (8.6.20) account of the nautical adage ‘Μαλέας δὲ κάμψας ἐπιλάθου τῶν οἴκαδε’ (‘When you double Malea, forget your home’) (Morris 1984, 8). The fundamental danger of Cape Malea is this: moving from east to west, one must sail 37 km of unsheltered, steep coastline from the anchorage at Epidavros Limera to the tip of the cape. This distance could take between 5.6 and 8.2 hours to sail depending on time of year. Moving in the opposite direction, from west to east, the closest good anchorage at Pavlopetri sits 22.2 km from the southernmost extent of the peninsula and this distance would take between 4.3 and 6.3 hours to sail (in aggregate) (pers. comm. with Sarantos Minopetros, merchant marine engineer). The toponym ‘την μαύρη καρδιά του Μαλέα’ (‘the black heart of Malea’) attached by present-day sailors to the prominent arc of darkened limestone at its tip, offers a dramatic indication of its malevolent nature in the minds of local mariners who also believe that it was in fact this area where Odysseus encountered the sea monsters, Scylla and Charybdis. The dangers associated with the rounding of one of most notorious Mediterranean capes forms a dramatic background for the adventures of Odysseus, Menelaus and Agamemnon in the Odyssey (Hom. Od. 4.514–18, 9.76–81, 19.185–7) and of Jason and the Argonauts. The fleet of Corcyra, sent to aid the Greek forces at the battle of Salamis in 480 BC, was delayed by contrary winds around Malea and arrived after the fighting was over (Herodotus, Hist. 7.168). A funerary epigram of the 1st century AD in the Palatine Anthology recounts a Cretan sailor’s drowning off Maleas:

I, Brotachus of Gortyna, a Cretan, lie here, not having come hither for this, but for traffic.

Such was the cape’s notoriety that a 6th century AD merchant from Phrygia, Flavius Zeuxis, noted proudly in his epitaph that he had sailed around the Cape seventy-two times (SEG³ III 1229):

Flavius Zeuxis, merchant who travelled round Cape Malea seventy-two times to Italy, built this.

The Elaphonisos Strait that once connected Elaphonisos (ancient Onou Gnathos, ‘Donkey’s Jawbone’) with the adjacent mainland, and the presence of several submerged (wholly or partly) ancient sites along the coast of the Laconian Gulf (e.g. Gytheion, Plytra, Pavlopetri and Epidavros Limera – to name but a few of the most prominent ones) and of Elaphonisos, is clear evidence of the devastating impact of extreme natural events on the geomorphology of the region (cf. Henderson et al. 2011, 216). The eustatic rise of sea level after the Last Glacial Maximum terminated at c. 6800–5700 cal BP (Flemming 1978; Lambeck and Chappell 2001; Lambeck 2004; Lambeck et al. 2004) and regional sea level in the Mediterranean has fluctuated by less than 0.5–1.0 m since that date (Flemming and Webb 1986; Morhange et al. 2006; Marriner and Morhange 2007). With reference to Agios Stephanos, Helos and changes in sea-level, Bintliff (2008, 542) estimates that the rate of sea rise for the south Aegean is –1.5 m for 2000 BP. The submergence of Pavlopetri may be due largely to tectonic factors associated with the plate convergence and subduction in the Cretan Arc and the related local and regional faulting. Despite the well-documented high seismicity in the area, it is not possible at present to attribute the subsidence to a particular fault or seismic event(s) (Galanopoulos 1964; Angelier et al. 1982; Pirazzoli et al. 1982; Stiros 2009; Henderson et al. 2011). The archaeological site of Plytra, 26 km to the north of Pavlopetri, and Epidavros Limera on the eastern Maleatic coast are partly submerged by several metres (Flemming 1973; Hadjidaki et al. 1980; Spondylis 1999).

The Laconian Gulf forms a huge asymmetric graben between Mt Parnon and Mt Taygetos. The most conspicuous feature of this graben, the huge Taygetos fault, is located in the central part of the Laconian Gulf and is run by Evrotas, a perennial river which flows from the Arcadian mountains in a southerly direction for the entire length of Laconia. Beside this and its major tributary, the Kelephina, all the other streams in the region are winter torrent beds. The valley includes the fertile alluvial plain of Sparta to the north, a continuously cultivated area about 10 km by 4 km, and to the south the plain of Helos, until recently an area of swamp. The rest of the surrounding lowlands in this area consists of Pliocene conglomerates and marls, Older Fill, and – especially in the north – tracts of hard limestone. There are frequently small plains and pockets of cultivable soil (Bintliff 1977 and 2008; Rackham 2002; van Bergen and Fiselier 2002). The ancient quarries of lapis lacedaemonius (or Spartan basalt), a green-flecked porphyry much appreciated, like rosso antico, since prehistory are located at Psephi near Krokeai (Waterhouse and Hope Simpson 1960, 105–106; Warren 1992; Higgins and Higgins 1996, 54–55) whereas deposits of the stone have been recorded near Agios Stephanos too (Bintliff 1977, 477 note 6; Janko 2008, 581–583). Important are also the findings of the research project on the ancient Laconian quarries directed by G. Kokkorou-Alevra (Kokkorou-Alevra et al. 2006, 2009, 2010. A brief introduction to Laconian quarries is also provided in Christien 2018, 626–636).

Epidavros Limera: introducing a case study

The ancient ruins of Epidavros Limera (also known as Palaia Monemvasia, Palaia Emvasia, Pal(a)iokastro or Voula) lie on the Palaiokastro hill, a limestone outcrop (about 400 m north–south by 250 m) just 5 km north of a small coastal plain and just few metres ashore, on the eastern side of the Palaia Monemvasia bay, on the Malea peninsula (see Fig. 1.1 no. 36). The bay is located within the zone of contact between Cape Maleas and the limestone range of Parnon. It is bordered by Cape Kremmydhi on the north and Cape Kamili to the south, creating a well-protected harbour site (Wace and Hasluck 1907–1908, 179–182; Katsoris 1938, 83–86; Oikonomakos 1957). Pausanias (III, 23, 11) admired the site’s beach: ‘αἰγιαλὸς δὲ ὁ ταύτῃ παρέχεται ψηφῖδας σχῆμα εὐπρεπεστέρας καὶ χρόας παντοδαπῆς’ (‘but the beach here contains pebbles of prettier form and of all colours’).

To the north of the Palaiokastro hill, Boblaye mentions two large caves (probably the Lykouras and Vri Caves) at a short distance from the sea: ‘On voit de la nord de la ville deux grottes peu éloignées de la mer; de petits trous creusés dans le rocher, au-dessus de leurs entrées, annoncent qu’elles étaient recouvertes d’un toit’ (‘From the north of the town we see two caves not far from the sea; small holes dug in the rock, above their entrances, announce that they were covered with a roof’) (Boblaye 1835, 100). In 2004–2005 the Ephorate of Palaeoanthropology and Speleology of Southern Greece explored the Lykouras, Vri and Pavle Caves in the area of the Kremmydhi Bay with very interesting findings (cf. Efstathiou-Manolakou 2009).

To the west the acropolis hill is connected to the fringes of the Parnon range by a high ridge of rock, while to the south the streams of Agia Triada (also known as Tassou) and Vamvakia (also known as Potamia) flow into a considerable valley. Around 2 km to the west of the Palaiokastro hill the small, steep and much eroded hill of Flomos (top surface 60 m × 50 m), near the modern village of Agios Ioannis, possesses a strategic position, overseeing the ancient land route network from central Laconia to Epidavros Limera, the adjacent fertile cultivable valley, the rich watercourses and a spring to the west.

The ruins of the ancient acropolis on the Palaiokastro hill were originally reported by Cyriacus of Ancona (Ciriaco di Filippo de Pizzecolli) (d’ Ancône and Renier 1747, xxxvii). In 1797 they were described and illustrated by A.L. Castellan (1808, 47–53, 72–74, plan 7. Also Gioberti 1846, 250 note 3); ‘Cette chasse peu fatigante m’a conduit jusqu’ à un plateau élevé, situé au fond de la rade, où j’ai fait la découverte de ruines (…) qui n’avaient pas encore été remarquées, et qui sont un des monuments les plus curieux de la haute antiquité’ (‘This little tiring hunt led me to a high plateau, located at the bottom of the harbour, where I discovered ruins (…) which had not yet been noticed, and which are one of the most curious monuments of antiquity’) (Castellan 1808, 47, fig. 7). In 1907 Hasluck published the first detailed plan of the citadel with emphasis on its fortification walls (Wace and Hasluck 1907–1908, 179–182, fig. 3).

The ancient inhabitants of Epidavros Limera alleged that they were not Lakedaimonians, but rather descendants of Epidaurians from the Argolid, who on their way to Cos to honour Asklepios landed here and founded the town (Pausanias III, 23, 6). According to the tradition, a snake crept ashore from their ship and found shelter in a hole, not far from the sea. The incident was interpreted as a good omen, and as a consequence the crew settled the site. The site’s epithet Limera distinguishes the Laconian town from Epidavros in the Argolid and has been of debatable meaning since antiquity. Thus, the epithet has been taken to be a tribute to its well-havened harbour, λιμήν. For Apollodorus, ‘εὐλίμενον οὖσαν βραχέως καὶ ἐπιτετμημένως λιμηρὰ εἰρῆσθαι ὡς ἂν λιμενηράν’ (‘and because it has a convenient harbour, it was called Limenera, which was altered by abbreviation and contraction to Limera’) (quoted in Strabo 8.6.1). A Scholiast of Thucydides wrote that ‘διά τὸ πολλούς έχειν λιμένας αντί λιμενηρά’ (‘for furnishing many harbours in place of limenera’) (Schol. Thuc. 7.26; Huxley 1976, 314). In Artemidorus, ‘Λιμηρά δέ οἰωνεὶ λιμενηρά τις οὖσα. Τινὲς δὲ Λιμηρὰν Λακωνικήν λέγουσι μίαν τῶν ἑκατόν διὰ τὸ πολλοὺς ἒχειν λιμένας’ (‘Limera as any [site] furnished with a good harbour. Some call one of the hundred [sites] Lakonian Limera because it has many harbours’). Strabo (8.6.1) quotes ‘Εὐλίμενον δ’ οὖσαν, βραχέως καὶ ἐπιτετμημένην λιμηρὰν εἰρῆσθαι, ὡς ἂν λιμενηράν, μεταβεβλημὲνην δὲ τοὒνομα’ (‘for having a good harbour, it was called Limenera, which was abbreviated and contracted to Limera, so that its name has been changed’) (Strabo 8.6.1. Also Tozer 1873, 361). Herodian (Ι 201, 10) cited the same interpretation; ‘τινὲς δὲ αὐτὴν φασὶ Λειμήρη διὰ διφθόγγου ὡς λειμῶνας ἒχουσαν’ (‘Some call it Leimere with a diphthong because it has meadows’) and Αἱμαρὰ καὶ Λιμηρὰ ἐπιθετικὰ ἐστι· οὓτω γὰρ ἐκαλεῖτο Ἐπίδαυρος, αἱμαρὰ μὲν διὰ τὸ συνεχῶς αἱμάσσεσθαι τόν βωμὸν τοῦ Ἀσκληπιοῦ ὑπὸ τῶν θυσιῶν’ (‘Aimara and Limera are epithets; so it is called Epidavros, aimara for continuously staining with blood Asclepius’ altar from the sacrifices’) (cited in Stephanus Byzantius’ Ethnika in association with Epidavros in the Argolid. In the Ethnika the epithet Λιμηρὰ was replaced by Μειλισσία). For Hesychius, the site was named ‘Λιμηρὰ διὰ τὸ λιμένας ἒχειν εὐφυεῖς· οἷον λιμενηρὰ λιμναγενές’ (‘Limera for having natural harbours; Limenera as if born at Limnai’). The Μείζον Ελληνικόν Λεξικόν (1848) cites ‘Λιμήρη = Ἐπίδαυρος. Τοῦτον δισσὸν ἐστιν· ὁπότε παρὰ τοῦ λιμένος λιμενήρη, ἢ παρὰ τοῦ λειμῶνος, λειμενήρη – λειμήρη. οὓτως Ἠρωδιανός’ (‘Limere = Epidavros. This [epithet] is twofold; when Limenere from λιμήν (harbour), or Leimenere – Leimere from λειμών (meadow)’) (cf. Herodian Ι 201, 10). The town’s well-harboured bay was much later appraised by A.G. Guillet (1679, 326): ‘cette vieille Malvezia est déserte; Mais les Galères & les Vaisseaux y vont ordinairement jeter l’Anchre; parce que le Port est bon, & le fond de bonne tenüe. Aussi c’est à cause de cela que les Anciens le surnommerent Limera’ (‘that old Malvazia is deserted. But the galleys and vessels usually go there to anchor, because the port is good, and the bottom of good holding. It is because of this that the ancients called it Limera’).

Others have attributed the meaning of ‘parched’ and ‘deficient’ to the epithet; ‘τῆς Ἐπιδαύρου τῆς λιμηρᾶς, ἤγουν τῆς καταξήρου, τῆς ἐνδεοῦς’ (Schol. Thuc. 7, 26). In Suda (10th century AD), ‘Λιμηρά. ἀπὸ Μεθώνης ἐν Ἐπιδαύρῳ τῇ Λιμηρᾷ προσσχών. ἀντὶ τοῦ πενιχρᾷ’ (lambda 546) and ‘Λιμηράν: λιμώττουσαν. ἔνθεν τοι καὶ λιμηρὰν τὴν Ἐπιδαυρίαν συκοφαντοῦντες ἐκάλουν’ (lambda 547). The same view is shared by K.N. Dargoumis against an ancient source (quoted in Katsoris 1972, 38–39):

… τὴν 18 (Ἰουνίου 1828) τὸ ἑσπέρας ἐρρίψαμεν τὴν ἂγκυραν εἰς τὸ ἐπίνειον τῆς Ἐπιδαύρου Λιμηρᾶς. Ἀλλὰ πόθεν τὸ ἐπίνειον τοῦτο; Ὁ Στράβων λέγει ὠνομάσθη Λιμηρὰ ἀντί λημενηρὰ διὰ τὸ εὐλίμενον αὐτῆς. Ἑγώ πειθόμενος μᾶλλον εἰς ὅ, τι εἶδον δὲν πολυπιστεύω τὴν ἑρμηνείαν τοῦ σοφοῦ γεωγρὰφου, ἀποδίδω τὴν ἐπίκλησιν εἰς τὸ ἂγονον καὶ πειναλέον τῆς χώρας καὶ λόγῳ πλεῖον ἀσπάζομαι τὴν ὑπόθεσιν, καθ’ ὅτι ἐάν δὲν ἐφέρομεν μεθ’ ἡμῶν ἂφθονα ἐφόδια, ἠθέλομεν πάθει βουλιμίαν, μετὰ τὸν ὁρμητικώτατον μάλιστα πανηγυρικόν, τὸν ὁποῖον κατεδικὰσθημεν νὰ ἀκούσωμεν μόλις ἀποβάντες, ἒν τινι νεοδμήτῳ ἐκκλησίᾳ τοῦ ἂστεως.

… in the evening of 18 (June 1828) we anchored in the harbour of Epidavros Limera. But from where this harbour? Starbo says that it was called Limera instead of Limenera for its good harbour. I believing more from what I saw and not being convinced by the wise geographer, I attribute the epithet to the bareness and hunger of the countryside, and I am more in favour of this hypothesis since we would have starved if we had not brought abundant supplies with us, especially after the passionate panegyric we were condemned to listen in a newly constructed church of the town, soon after we had disembarked.

A. Koutsilieris (cited in Katsoris 1972, 39) suggested that:

… ὠνομάσθη δὲ Λιμηρὰ πρὸς ἀποφυγὴν τῆς μοιραίας καὶ ἀναποφεύκτου συγχύσεως πρὸς τὴν ταχύτατα εἰς πᾶσαν συνείδησιν ἐμφανιζομένην Ἀργολικὴν Ἐπίδαυρον… ἀντιλαμβάνεται δέ τις πόσον ἀναγκαία ἦτο ἡ διάκρισις τῶν δύο Ἐπιδαύρων διὰ προσδιορισμοῦ δυναμένου νὰ διαστέλλῃ ταύτας … Τὸ παρὰ Θουκυδίδῃ ἐπίθετον Λιμηρὰ εἶναι τὸ γνωστὸν εἰς τὴν ἑλληνικὴν γλῶσσαν λιμηρὸς – λιμός, τὸ ὁποῖον βοηθούσης ἲσως καὶ τῆς σκωπτικῆς διαθέσεως τῶν Ἑλλήνων, συνεδέθη ποτὲ μετὰ τῆς Λακωνικῆς Ἐπιδαύρου, ἵνα διαστέλλῃ ταύτην τῆς ἐν Ἀργολίδι ὁμωνύμου πόλεως, ἥτις διαφέρει ἀληθῶς τῆς θυγατρὸς Ἐπιδαύρου κατὰ τὸν πλοῦτον καὶ τὴν εὐφορίαν: ὣστε Ἐπίδαυρος ἡ πλουσία καὶ Ἐπίδαυρος ἡ πτωχὴ–λιμηρά.

… it was called Limera in order to avoid the fatal and inevitable confusion with the Argolic Epidavros that immediately springs to mind … One understands how important the distinction was for the two Epidavroi through a definition capable of separating them … The epithet Limera attributed by Thucydides is known in Greek as hungry-famine, which, possibly also aided by the frivolous mood of the Greeks, was connected to the Laconian Epidavros in order to distinguish it from the homonymous Argolic town, as the former truly differs form the latter in terms of wealth and abudance; therefore Epidavros the wealthy and Epidavros the poor-limera.¹

The published material culture (admittedly limited for the prehistoric period) from the area, though, shows that Epidavros Limera was a thriving harbour site in this inhospitable coast of the Peloponnese since the 3rd millennium BC, if not earlier. The earliest (scanty) evidence of occupation is attributable to the FN period. Waterhouse and Hope Simpson (1961, 136 note 151, fig. 15) published a sherd from a FN red burnished bowl with a horizontal lug handle and a notch in the rim (it is not clear why Janko (2008, 556–57) proposes a possible EH I date) from the Palaiokastro hill. A few more FN sherds of coarse and semi-coarse pottery, mainly medium to large closed vessels, mixed with EH pottery, were identified (but not collected) by the author in spring 2006 on the western slope of the hill. In the vicinity of Epidavros Limera, the Lykouras, Vri and Pavle (or Cyclop’s) caves in the area of the Kremmydi Bay were occupied in Neolithic times too – the Vri Cave in MN or early LN (evidenced by Urfirnis sherds), the Lykouras and Pavle Caves in FN (Efstathiou-Manolakou 2009, 12–13, figs 2.1, 2.12–2.14; Cavanagh 2011–2012, 54). What certainly calls for attention is the increasing use of cave shelters on the Malea peninsula during this period (cf. Cavanagh 2009, 57; 2011–2012, 56). In addition to the caves in the area of Epidavros Limera, LN/FN pottery has been reported from caves in the Vatika region (the territory of ancient Boiae) on the western Maleatic coast, in particular Stena: Agioi Anargyroi, Apsiphi, Agia Aikaterini and Mavri Spilia, and from the Igoumenou Cave at Niata (Efstathiou-Manolakou 2009, 13–15).

Overall, the Neolithic period on the Malea peninsula is rather poorly documented mainly because of lack of systematic excavations and intensive surface surveys. To date, Neolithic pottery has been reported from Apidia: Kritsova and Agios Nikolaos (FN; Waterhouse and Hope Simpson 1960, 86–87; Zavvou 2011–2012, 12–13), Plytra: Goulas (FN; Waterhouse and Hope Simpson 1961, 140; Phelps 2004, 105), a few worn FN sherds were observed (not collected) by the author at Daimonia: Kastelli and Viglaphia: Ayios Andreas in spring 2006, and also possibly from Koutsoumbes in the Molaoi plain (Zavvou 2011–2012, 16 footnote 78). The sherds of FN open bowls, jar and pithos collected during the 2009–2010 underwater survey at Pavlopetri are also informative; two sherds of flat bases with mat-impressions may be FN or early EH I (–II), and PAV11–1043 (part of an askos?) could be FN–EH I (Gallou and Henderson 2011–12, 81).²

Like elsewhere in Laconia and the Peloponnese, continuation of occupation from the FN to EH I cannot be certain at all but a few sites (Cavanagh 2011–2012, 58). On the Malea peninsula few sherds of transitional FN/EH I and EH I–II pottery (body sherd from a large, heavy open bowl; part of the rolled thickened rim of a bowl; two fragmentary askos? handles – one of U-section with raised edges, the other of thick waisted type) were noticed (not collected) by the author in spring 2006 on the Palaiokastro hill at Epidavros Limera, and more material has been reported from Pavlopetri (FN/EH I and EH I; Gallou and Henderson 2011–2012, 90) and Megali Spelia (EH I; Zavvou 2011–2012, 21).

A climax in settlement expansion occurred in EH II. At Epidavros Limera pottery sherds, mostly from coarse and semi-coarse vessels with rope-and finger-impressed decoration, along with high percentages of flakes, blades and cores of obsidian and chert, abound on the western and south-western slopes of the Palaiokastro hill (Waterhouse and Hope Simpson 1961, 136 and note 150; pers. obs. spring 2006). Few EH II sherds and obsidian flakes and blades were reported on the Flomos hill (Waterhouse and Hope Simpson 1961, 137). The Palaia Monemvasia promontory, in particular its northern part, is strewn with fragments of EH II coarse and semi-coarse vessels, flakes and blades of obsidian and chert (pers. obs. 2006). EH II pottery and obsidian come from the Vri Cave and the plateau above it (Zavvou 1996–1997, 503; Efstathiou-Manolakou 2009, 12).

Occupation on the Malea peninsula was denser in EH II times as suggested by (mostly) pottery and obsidian from nearly fifty sites dispersed inland (Apidia, Agios Dimitrios: Kerasitsa, Agios Dimitrios: Kastelli Tsamanta), in the Molaoi plain (Gangania: Vigla and Tepes, Koutsoumbes, Chalasmata, the area around Metamorphosis, Sykea), along the western Maleatic coast (Elaia, Xyli: Pounta, Asopos: Bozas, Daimonia: Kastelli, Elika and Pantanassa, Stena: Agioi Anargyroi, Kambos: Kato Spiti, Agios Georgios: Kyla, Megali Spelia, Pavlopetri, Viglaphia: Pounta, Agios Andreas and Asproudia, Elaphonisos: Panagia (or Kato Nisi) and Lefki, Neapolis Voion: Avlospilo and Palaiokastro, Las: Kastelli, Tzoumala: Limnakia, Agios Nikolaos: Agousti (traces of a long wall, pottery, obsidian and chert – pers. obs. summer 2007), Korakas: Anthropos, Kleftavlako and Agia Marina), and along the south-eastern Laconian coast (Kyparissi, Zarax, Agios Pavlos (Arianna), Pavle Cave, Thynni (or Klissizes), Vri Cave, Trochalia, Psiphias: Kastella, Samara: Kryoneri, Agios Phokas, Agios Phokas: Lakkoudia, Kastania: Kastellia, Elleniko: Kryani (Waterhouse and Hope Simpson 1961, 136–148; Varoucha-Christodoulopoulou 1964, 14; Harding et al. 1969; Hope Simpson and Dickinson 1979, 116–119; Pikoulas 1988, 280; Spondylis 1988, 682; 1999, 1023–1025; Kyrou 1990, 61–62; 1996, 379, 385 note 14; Banou 1996, 65–66, 74–76; 1999, 69–70, 76–78; Zavvou 1996–7, 502–504; 2002, 212–213, 216, 219; 2007, 415–416, 418–421, 424; 2011–12, 12–30; 2012: 557; Themos and Zavvou 2007; Gallou 2008, 294–295; Efstathiou-Manolakou 2008 and 2009; Mee 2009; Zavvou and Themos 2009; Vasilogamvrou and Maltezou 2010, 552; Gallou and Henderson 2011–2012; Pikoulas 2012, 626, 627). Some of the cups from Pavlopetri (cf. Harding et al. 1969, 133–134, fig. 14, pl. 32) ‘look distinctively Minoan, and a link with Kythera seems likely’ (Mee 2009, 51). A strong link is also seen in the bowl/basin with a hooked rim, a shape particularly characteristic of Pavlopetri, also found at Ayios Stephanos, Kastri on Kythera and Nopigeia on Crete, but rarely on mainland Greece. The inland site of Agios Dimitrios: Kerasitsa was extensively fortified (Zavvou 2011–2012, 14–15; MacVeagh Thorne et al. 2013); traces of walls built of large stones and boulders at the coastal settlement at Agios Phokas might have also belonged to an EH II enceinte (Kyrou 1990, 62) but this suggestion has not been conclusively proven yet. Paired with the evidence for an EH II fortification wall from Zenio-Perdikoula at Krokeai (Tsouli 2012, 118), these fortified sites provide new insights into the social and political organisation of EH communities in Laconia.

Most sites in Laconia were abandoned at the end of EH II and in EH III. The question of how EH II occupation ended is difficult and part of the wider controversy about the transition from EH II to EH III in better studied regions of the mainland (Cavanagh 2011–2012, 61–71 with further references). Evidence for limited occupation on the Palaiokastro hill comes from few sherds of collar-necked jars and of pithoi with flattened rims noticed (not collected) on the lower south-western slope by the author in spring 2006. Of EH III/MH I date may be the fragments of a wheel-made vessel with black burnished paint from the nearby coastal Armakas Cave near Zarax (Efstathiou-Manolakou 2009, 11–12 and fig. 2.11). Elsewhere on the peninsula, fragments of a large EH III vessel come from Sykea: Megali Riza-Vrana (Vasilogamvrou and Maltezou 2010, 552), and sherds of EH II–III and EH III jars (narrow-necked, collar-necked, with flaring rim), jug, pithoi with flattened rims, pyxis with raised rim, bowls with hooked rim and with out-turned rim, and probably two fragments of Bass bowls, were collected during the recent underwater archaeological survey at Pavlopetri. Fragments of an askos(?) from the same site may belong to a Cycladic import (pers. comm. with W.G. Cavanagh. Also Gallou and Henderson 2011–2012, 95–96).

Occupation on the Palaiokastro hill continued in MH times as suggested by few sherds of coarse basins and conical bowls noticed (not collected) by the author on the lower western slopes of the Palaiokastro hill in spring 2006 (see also Hope Simpson and Dickinson 1979, 117). The Flomos hill has produced no evidence for MH occupation. Body sherds and horizontal handles with oval sections from MH unpainted vessels were found in the Vri and Pavle Caves (Efstathiou-Manolakou 2009, 12–13). As in other parts of Laconia, the general picture for the MH occupation on the Malea peninsula appears to be of relative abandonment and desertion (cf. Cavanagh and Crouwel 2002, 136–142; Gallou 2008, 295; Janko 2008, 566–576). Only few EH Maleatic sites continued to be occupied or were re-occupied in MH times, namely Akries, Apidia, Gangania: Vigla, Daimonia: Kastelli, Phoiniki, Plytra: Goulas, Asopos: Bozas, Neapolis Voion: Las, Agios Georgios: Gerantonia and Pavlopetri (Waterhouse and Hope Simpson 1961, 139, 140–141, 167; Harding et al. 1969; Hope Simpson and Dickinson 1979, 116–118; Spondylis 1999, 1024; Banou 2000, 185–188; Gallou 2008: 295–296; Henderson et al. 2011; Zavvou 2012: 1205).

From their extensive survey in 1957, H. Waterhouse and R. Hope Simpson reported LH IIIA–B sherds (including kylikes and deep bowls), strewn on the hill terraces of the Palaiokastro hill (Waterhouse and Hope Simpson 1961, 136, note 150), and proposed the existence of a Mycenaean centre, possibly fortified, on the summit (Waterhouse and Hope Simpson 1961, 146). The British archaeologists also reported that C.W. Blegen had found Mycenaean sherds and a ‘celt of brown stone’ (ANM 4030) at the village of Palaia Monemvasia (Waterhouse 1956, 170, note 12; Waterhouse and Hope Simpson 1961, 137). They erroneously, however, associated the ‘old village’ with the medieval town of Monemvasia (Waterhouse 1956, 170, note 12; Waterhouse and Hope Simpson 1961, 137, note 153). It is most probable that the Mycenaean pottery reported by Blegen comprises the twelve sherds, inventoried as from the ‘Mycenaean chamber tombs’ at Epidavros Limera in the Collection of the ASCSA (cf. Coulson 1992, 87). Such confusion of place-names may well explain Waterhouse and Hope Simpson’s note that ‘when questioned, he [Blegen] did not recall having found Mycenaean pottery at Monemvasia’ (Waterhouse and Hope Simpson 1961, 137, note 153). LH III sherds were also reported from the upper slope of Flomos (Waterhouse and Hope Simpson 1961, 146). As shall be discussed later on, the chamber tomb clusters near Palaiokastro, at Agia Triada and at Vamvakia have provided clear evidence for the continuous occupation at the site from the transitional MH/LH period to the Early Iron Age. Mycenaean pottery has been found in the nearby caves too. The Armakas Cave has produced few fragments of kylix bases and bowl rims and part of a LH IIIC Early deep bowl with linear decoration and a thin band inside the rim, with a parallel from Kanatakia on Salamis (Efstathiou-Manolakou 2009, 11, fig. 2.9). Sherds of LH IIIB–IIIC Early bowls have been published from the Apsiphi Cave in the Vatika region (Efstathiou-Manolakou 2009, 14, fig. 2.17).

The Malea peninsula was densely occupied throughout the Mycenaean period, as suggested by the numerous Mycenaean tombs and habitation sites identified mainly during fieldwalks and occasionally through archaeological excavation, e.g. Apidia, Gangania: Vigla, Elaia, Daimonia: Kastelli, Plytra: Goulas, Sykea and Sykea: Anemomylos, Angelona, Phoiniki: Rachi, Asopos: Bozas, the Vatika region (Stena Voion, Manolarianika, Kambos Voion, Agios Georgios Voion, Neapolis Voion: town and Palaiokastro, Pavlopetri) and Elaphonisos (Hope Simpson and Dickinson 1979, 116–119; Zavvou 2012, 557–558; Gallou 2008, 296–299). Individual funerary sites are systematically presented in Chapter 1.

Not much is known about the Early Iron Age occupation at Epidavros Limera, except for the chance discovery of ‘a fragmentary pot with incised decoration’ from outside one of the chamber tombs that were explored in 1955 (Vanderpool 1955, 226). Antonaccio identified the pot as a PG jug (Antonaccio 1998, 57). EPG sherds have been reported from Daimonia: Kastelli, Asopos: Bozas, Apidia, and possibly Phoiniki (Zavvou 2012, 558) and Pavlopetri. From the archaic period onwards Epidavros Limera and its chora held a leading role in the history of the Lakonike as one of the major perioikic towns of Sparta, having also established itself as one of the most important ancient harbour towns in southern Greece.

Notes

1The suggestion that the tradition mentioned by Pausanias (III, 23, 6) may be considered merely as an attempt to interpret the similarity shared between the name of the two towns, fails to take into account that behind the association of Epidavros Limera with its Argolic homonymous town stands the dissemination of the cult of Asklepios from the Argolid to the rest of the Peloponnese. The cult was established in the Argolid as early as the 6th century BC and was subsequently adopted by several towns in southern Laconia, namely Gytheion, Kyphanta, Epidavros Limera and Boiae, before reaching Lebena on Crete (cf. Nilsson 1947, 302; Meier 2003, 10; Melfi 2007). This rapid spread of the god’s cult may represent the initiative of individuals or groups (Melfi 2007), and should be considered in conjunction with the tradition of envoys from the Argolid that reached Epidavros Limera before heading to Cos.

2The study and publication of the archaeological material collected during the underwater survey (2009–2011) is in progress.

1

Graves and burial contexts

Professional archaeology in Laconia was initiated by the Laconian archaeologist Panagiotis Stamatakis, who in 1872 was tasked by the Archaeological Society at Athens with recording the antiquities that lay scattered in private residences in the town of Sparti and the wider region. His systematic, painstaking efforts resulted in the establishment of the Archaeological Museum of Sparta in 1875. The foundations for the prehistoric and classical archaeology of Laconia were subsequently laid by Christos Tsountas in 1888 through his archaeological campaigns at the tholos tomb at Vapheio, the tholos tomb at Arkynes and Amyklai (cf. Cavanagh et al. 2002, 31).

In 1905 the early British trial excavations at Geraki (ancient Geronthrai) brought to light three cist graves on the summit of the acropolis hill. In 1909 Georgios Soteriades explored one more tholos tomb at Arkynes. Sometime between 1909 and 1925 Konstantinos Romaios conducted the first excavations at Pellana where he brought to light one chamber tomb. In 1926, Themistocles Karachalios undertook to explore more chamber tombs at the site. He also explored one chamber tomb at Peristeri (f. Tsasi) in 1935 and four chamber tombs at Epidavros Limera in 1936.

Archaeological investigations in Laconia came to a halt during the Second World War, the only exception being von Vocano’s excavations at Kouphovouno and Tseramio: Ayios Ioannis in 1941, and his explorations in the LN Papagiannakou Cave at Goritsa in 1942. After the end of the Second World War, Nikolaos Drandakis excavated more tombs at Epidavros Limera in 1953, succeeded by Chrysanthos Christou who explored even more tombs at the site in 1956. Christou also excavated a built grave at Krokeai: Karneas and several chamber tombs at Kampos Voion in 1955, and two chamber tombs at Agios Georgios Voion in 1957. The chance discovery of Mycenaean pots at Melathria led to the excavation of a chamber tomb cemetery on the hill of Profitis Ilias by Katie Demakopoulou in 1966. In 1968 Anthony Harding, Gerald Cadogan and Roger Howell of the University of Cambridge, and Angelos Delivorrias, then Ephor of Antiquities in Laconia, surveyed the Bronze Age funerary monuments at Pavlopetri: an extensive rock-cut tomb cemetery on the Pounta shore, a submerged intramural cist grave cemetery and two (possibly three) submerged chamber tombs. In the course of the underwater survey exploration of the site, Delivorrias also carried out a preliminary investigation of the prehistoric cemetery on the shore but never published the results. A new survey of the tombs was undertaken in 2009–2011 by the Pavlopetri Underwater Archaeology Project, a collaboration between the University of Nottingham and the Ephorate of Underwater Antiquities of the Hellenic Ministry of Culture, under the auspices of the British School at Athens.

In 1972–1977 Lord William Taylour of the British School at Athens excavated sixty-two Late Bronze Age burials at Agios Stephanos. In 1973 George Steinhauer began excavations at the Mycenaean cemetery at Sykea and uncovered the first of the chamber tombs at the site, and in 1976–1977 he explored one of the two chamber tombs that were discovered by chance during road works at Peristeri. In the 1980s and 1990s Theodoros Spyropoulos excavated chamber tombs at Amyklai: Spelakia (1981), Pellana: Palaiokastro, Spelies/Pelekete and Tryporrachi (1981–1982, 2002), Peristeri (1981), Angelona (1981), and a tholos tomb at Arna, Arkynes (1982).

In 1998 Eleni Zavvou cleared one of the chamber tombs that Spyropoulos had already explored at Amyklai: Spelakia, and in 1999 she excavated a built chamber tomb at Sparti: Psychiko. In 1997 and 1998 Ioanna Efstathiou resumed Steinhauer’s excavations at the Mycenaean cemetery at Sykea and unearthed three more chamber tombs. In early 2002 Spyropoulos began excavations in a chamber tomb at Pellana. The excavations stopped abruptly a few weeks later because of the excavator’s retirement, and were continued a few days after Spyropoulos’ departure by Athanasios Themos and Eleni Zavvou who completed the excavation of part of the tomb’s dromos; no further excavation has been undertaken since. In spring 2004 Joost Crouwel’s team excavated a cist grave on the acropolis hill at Geraki, and later that year Themos excavated a chamber tomb at Peristeri, which came to light during public road works. In the Archaiologikon Deltion report for 2007–2010 Aphrodite Maltezou reports the excavation of two chamber tombs, a pit grave and two ossuaries at Daphni: Louria, and of a destroyed grave at Bozas: Kryani. In 2009 Adamantia Vasilogamvrou, Christina Kakourou and Georgios Tsiaggouris excavated part of a small mixed cemetery of tholos tombs and simple graves at Sparti: Polydendron. Last but not least, the systematic excavations at Agios Vasileios by Vasilogamvrou under the auspices of the Archaeological Society at Athens have brought to light the ‘North Cemetery’ of cist and pit graves and the remains of a collapsed chamber tomb in Sector II of the archaeological site (2008).

The corpus of Mycenaean graves in Laconia is continuously growing as a result of the extensive and intensive archaeological surveys, fieldwalks and routine archaeological reconnaissances carried out in the region that have included, among others, the extensive surveys carried out by Helen Waterhouse and Richard Hope Simpson of the British School at Athens (1936–1938, 1955, 1956–1958) and by Emilia Banou (early 1990s), and the intensive Laconia Survey in 1983–1989. The reports published by the local Ephorate of Antiquities (f. E’ Ephorate of Prehistoric & Classical Antiquities – E’ EPCA) and by the Ephorate for Paleoanthropology and Speleology of Southern Greece are of paramount significance. From spring 2005 to spring 2008 I travelled in Laconia specifically with a view to carrying out an autopsy of the excavated and reported Mycenaean graves and associated settlements, and gaining a better understanding of the funerary landscape of LH Laconia. These autopsies have resulted not only in the identification of previously known tombs but also in the discovery of more graves and associated settlements on the Malea pensinsula (see below).

Table 1 summarises the excavations of Mycenaean tombs and funerary contexts from the late 19th to the 21st century, drawing information from the Archaeologike Ephemeris, the Archaeologikon Deltion, the Praktika tes en Athenais Archaeologikes Etaireias, Anastasia Panagiotopoulou’s catalogue of the excavations carried out by the Greek Archaeological Service in Laconia from 1871/1872 to 1999 (Panagiotopoulou 2009) and the reports by members of foreign archaeological schools in Greece and by Greek archaeologists in sources other than those compiled by Panagiotopoulou, from 1999 to December 2018. Following Dickinson’s (1992, 109) lead for the creation of a more ‘natural’ Laconia, this study has omitted ‘outlying sites like those of the Lower Mani and Leonidhi region, Analipsis, which might more properly be grouped with Arcadia’. In this respect I have also excluded Vaskina and Palaiochori, and Kythera which was for most of the Bronze Age part of the Minoan cultural sphere. The evidence of the above sites is discussed as appropriate and whenever it is relevant to the Laconian evidence.

Table 1. List of Mycenaean cemeteries and graves in Laconia

The excavated tombs and funerary contexts (Fig. 1.1)

This section presents the evidence for excavated Mycenaean funerary contents in the region. The tombs are listed by tomb type and by area.

Tholos tombs

Vapheio and its vicinity

The tholos tomb was discovered in 1905 by G.C. Gropius (Curtius 1851, 319 note 48) and the same year Colonel Leake also made a reference to it (1805 III, 4). The monument was visited by many travellers during the 19th century. It is often assumed that the tholos was associated with an elite family that resided on the low hill of Palaiopyrgi, c. 300 m to the south-east of the tomb. Trial excavations on Palaiopyrgi have brought to light architectural remains and material culture of 15th–13th century BC date extending over an area of about 20–25 ha (Spyropoulos 1982, 112; 2013, 101; also Hope Simpson and Waterhouse 1960, 78; Coulson 1992, 91–92, 93–94; Banou 1996, 34–36. Occupation at the site began in the 3rd millennium BC). Chapin et al. (2014, 147) suggest that ‘Vapheio-Palaiopyrgi may belong to a greater habitation area extending almost 3 km along the chain of hills to Amyklai in the north’, as already implied by T.W. Allen in 1921 and by Banou’s preliminary survey work in the 1990s.

From between the Amyklaion and the hill of Paliopyrgi, Banou reported the partially visible traces of four Mycenaean chamber tombs, namely at the localities of Amyklai: Raches and Tsarkaleika, 500 m to the west of the Vapheio tholos (Banou 1996, 77; 1996–1997, 19). Furthermore, a conglomerate quarry lies about 200 m south-east of the tholos, which could have supplied conglomerate for the construction of the tholos tomb (Chapin et al. 2014, 146).

1. V

APHEIO

(FIG. 1.2 AND 1.3)

Description: Monumental tholos tomb

Publication: Detailed

Excavation: Tsountas 1888

Location and Setting: The tholos tomb occupied a prominent location high on a hill overlooking the Evrotas river valley, close to the Menelaion, 5 km to the north-east, Vouno Panagias, 4.5 km to the south-east, and Agios Vasileios, 4.5 km to the south-west.

Orientation: NE–SW

Architecture: The tholos classifies amongst the largest of its type in the Aegean (83.28 m²), and its construction introduces one of the earliest uses of ashlar masonry technique on the Greek mainland. The dromos, which is preserved as a mere outline in the earth due to excessive quarrying in later periods, was lined with small, roughly rectangular stones, and ran at an angle of about 30° from north along the side of the hill, thus along the side of the rise rather than into it as was customary (Boyd 2002, 202 – this unique feature was first noted by William Mure (1839, 247 ff.)). The dromos floor was covered with a thin layer of pebbles. The stomion was formed of large dressed stones with joints filled by lime or plaster, and the blocks of conglomerate, found in the dromos, perhaps belonged to the lintel. The north wall of the stomion appears bent or irregular to accommodate a large pit. No evidence of a blocking wall has survived, but Tsountas assumed that some of the stones uncovered in the dromos might have belonged to a blocking wall. The burial chamber was built mostly of small, roughly rectangular stones (similarly to the dromos), typical of early tholos tomb construction, but the lower courses incorporate hammer-dressed poros blocks. The floor was very uneven and covered, like that of the dromos, with a thin layer of pebbles. A cist grave was cut into the right side of the chamber; its sides were lined with slabs, its bottom lined with stones and the top covered with slabs.

Dimensions: dromos: l. 29.80 m, w. 3.18–3.45 m; stomion: l. 4.56 m, w. 1.93 m, h. 4.20 m; pit at the stomion: l. 1.93 m, w. 1.60–1.80 m, d. 1.90 m; chamber: ø 10.12–10.35 m, h. 3–3.50 m (preserved); cist: l. 2.25 m, w. 1.10 m, d. 1 m.

Burials: Few scattered bones (human or animal) and teeth of several dogs.

Finds: The tomb was disturbed but one cist had escaped the attention of the looters. Tsountas reported the finds from the excavation as follows: from the dromos – two pieces of gold foil; a broken amber bead; pottery fragments; evidence of burning; from the pit in the stomion – layer of ash, no other finds reported; on the chamber floor – charcoal; thirteen seals; one gold signet ring; an amethyst scarab without engraving; a gold miniature tube; gold buttons; gold foil ornaments with embossed decoration; one gold granulated bead; three (or four) silver pins capped with amethyst beads; three bronze pins; one glass ‘button’; beads of agate, amber and rock-crystal; c. 30 amethyst beads; bronze rivets; fragments of ivory; fragments of an inlaid dagger; fragments of stone vases including lamps and a spouted vessel; few sherds from Palace Style jars and other pottery including a bowl, two lamps and a one-handled cup; remains of a boar’s tusk helmet; from the cist – two gold Vapheio cups with repoussé decoration of bull capture scenes; a silver cup with relief decoration on a gold-plated rim; two silver Vapheio cups; two fragments of a silver vessel; two alabaster vases of which one contained a silver scoop; one bronze and two silver spoons; one bronze ladle; ten bronze scale pans; nine lead weights; one bronze rod; one bronze chain; one bronze pan/scoop; a quantity of small gold nails; one bronze mirror; one Type A sword; two (maybe three) spearheads; one tubular bronze object (originally identified as a spear-shaft, and later as a sceptre); a socketed bronze object bent at