The collapse of the mycenaean economy imports trade and institutions 1300 700 bce sarah c. murray -

The Collapse of the Mycenaean Economy Imports Trade and Institutions 1300 700 BCE Sarah C. Murray

Visit to download the full and correct content document: https://textbookfull.com/product/the-collapse-of-the-mycenaean-economy-imports-trad e-and-institutions-1300-700-bce-sarah-c-murray/

More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant download maybe you interests ...

The Political Economy of Normative Trade Power Europe

Arlo Poletti

https://textbookfull.com/product/the-political-economy-ofnormative-trade-power-europe-arlo-poletti/

Wretched Refuse The Political Economy Of Immigration And Institutions Alex Nowrasteh Benjamin Powell

https://textbookfull.com/product/wretched-refuse-the-politicaleconomy-of-immigration-and-institutions-alex-nowrasteh-benjaminpowell/

India the ancient past a history of the Indian subcontinent from c 7000 BCE to CE 1200 Avari

https://textbookfull.com/product/india-the-ancient-past-ahistory-of-the-indian-subcontinent-from-c-7000-bce-toce-1200-avari/

The Role and Place of Electronic Trade Systems in the Digital Economy 4th Edition Bobokhujaev Shukhrat Ismoilovich

https://textbookfull.com/product/the-role-and-place-ofelectronic-trade-systems-in-the-digital-economy-4th-editionbobokhujaev-shukhrat-ismoilovich/

The Origins Of Globalization World Trade In The Making Of The Global Economy 1500 1800

Pim De Zwart

https://textbookfull.com/product/the-origins-of-globalizationworld-trade-in-the-making-of-the-global-economy-1500-1800-pim-dezwart/

Methods in Premodern Economic History: Case studies from the Holy Roman Empire, c.1300-c.1600 Ulla Kypta

https://textbookfull.com/product/methods-in-premodern-economichistory-case-studies-from-the-holy-romanempire-c-1300-c-1600-ulla-kypta/

The social effects of global trade : quantifying impacts using multi-regional input-output analysis First Edition Joy Murray

https://textbookfull.com/product/the-social-effects-of-globaltrade-quantifying-impacts-using-multi-regional-input-outputanalysis-first-edition-joy-murray/

The Nigerian Rice Economy Policy Options for Transforming Production Marketing and Trade Kwabena Gyimah-Brempong

https://textbookfull.com/product/the-nigerian-rice-economypolicy-options-for-transforming-production-marketing-and-tradekwabena-gyimah-brempong/

Creativity and Psychotic States in Exceptional People

The work of Murray Jackson 1st Edition Murray Jackson

https://textbookfull.com/product/creativity-and-psychotic-statesin-exceptional-people-the-work-of-murray-jackson-1st-editionmurray-jackson/

Duringthelastseveraldecades,theextentandvarietyof movementsandrelationshipsbetweenpeoplesoftheMediterranean duringtheLateBronzeAgeandEarlyIronAgehavebeenthesubjectofmuch debate.1 Likewise,theintertwinednexusofproblemsconcerningthenature andcadenceofthenotional “collapse” oftheMycenaeanworldattheendof

1 Nolongercanitbesaid,asRenfrewdidin 1969,that “tradeisoneoftheactivitiesof prehistoricmanthathasreceivedmuchlessattentionthanitdeserves” (Renfrew 1969, 151). Alistofpublishedworkonthetopicsince 1990 (inchronologicalorder)includes,butisnot limitedtoKnapp 1990,Lambrou-Phillipson 1990;Liverani 1990;Gale 1991;Peltenburg 1991; SherrattandSherratt 1991;Crielaard 1992;Haldane 1993;Knapp 1993;Cline 1994;Popham 1994;Waldbaum 1994;Buddetal. 1995;DayandHaskell 1995;GaleandStos-Gale 1995; Palaima 1995;Popham 1995;Cline 1996;Hirschfeld 1996;Lebessi 1996;Artzy 1997;Bass 1997a;Bass 1997b;Hoffman 1997;Artzy 1998;ClineandHarris-Cline 1998;Crielaard 1998; Foxhall 1998;Gale 1998;Knapp 1998;Mountjoy 1998;Muhly 1998;Sherratt 1998;Crielaard 1999;Haskell 1999;Hirschfeld 1999;Karageorghis 1999;Parker 1999;Sherratt 1999; Hirschfeld 2000;Jones 2000;Liverani 2001;Matthaüs 2001;Sherratt 2001;vanWijngaarden 2002;Bryce 2003;Liverani 2003;Luke 2003;Sherratt 2003;Hirschfeld 2004;Maran 2004; Braun-HolzingerandRehm 2005;EderandJung 2005;Jonesetal. 2005;Laffineur&Greco 2005;ManningandHulin 2005;Vianello 2005;Bell 2006;Fletcher 2007;Kristiansenand Larsson 2007;Maggidis 2007;GillisandClayton 2008;Kopanias 2008;Pulak 2008;Jung 2009; Kelder 2009;Lolos 2009a;Maieretal. 2009;Monroe 2009;Muhly 2009;Routledgeand McGeough 2009;Vagnettietal. 2009;Burns 2010b;Cline 2010;Kardulias 2010;Schon 2010; Sherratt 2010;Cohen,Maran,andVetters 2010;Tomlinsonetal. 2010;Yasur-Landau 2010; Betelli 2011;Gates 2011;Haskell 2011;Hughes-Brock 2011;Vetters 2011;Vianello 2011;Bell 2012;GaleandStos-Gale 2012;vanWijngaarden 2012;BrysbaertandVetters 2013;Tartaron 2013;Rutter 2014;Vacek 2014;Crielaard 2015

theLateBronzeAge(LBA),itsrelationshipwiththefollowingEarlyIronAge (EIA),andthearticulationofbothperiodswithArchaicandClassicalhistory compriseasimilarlypopularareaofresearch.2 Thisbookisanhistoricalstudy, basedontextualandarchaeologicalevidence,thatliesattheintersectionof thesetopics.GeographicallythefocusisGreece,boththemainlandandCrete, butgiventhatthisisastudyoflong-distancetrade,abroadeningofspatialscope tothewiderMediterraneanwilloccasionallybeappropriate.

Ingeneral,thegoalistoanswerasimplequestionwithnosimplesolution: howandwhydidtheexchangeeconomy(andtheeconomyoverall)ofthe Greekworldchangeinscaleandstructurebetweenthethirteenthandthe eighthcentury?Specifically,thebookhasthreeaims:(1)topresentasynthesis oftheexistingevidenceforlong-distancetradethroughthetransitionfrom Greekprehistorytohistory,(2)toinvestigatewhetherthearchaeological evidencecanbereliedupontoprovideasenseofthecadenceofeconomic changethathassome fidelitytopastpatterns,and(3)toshowthattherewere major,far-reachingadjustmentstoboththescaleandthestructureoftheGreek tradeeconomy(andtheeconomyoverall)aftertheLBIIIBperiod.This processofadjustmentwascomplexandcanonlybeproperlyunderstood withtheaidofmethodologicaladvancesinthewaythatwestudythetotal archiveofthearchaeologicalrecordandresearchthatelidestraditionaldisciplinaryboundariesseparatingtheBronzefromtheIronAge.

1 .ANABBREVIATEDECONOMICANDPOLITICALBACKGROUND TOTHELATEBRONZEAGEANDEARLYIRONAGEINGREECE

Tobegin,Iprovideabriefintroductiontotheperiodandtheissuesatstakefor thereaderwhoisnotalreadyfamiliarwiththegeneralcharacteristicsofthe LBA–EIAtransitioninGreece,specificallyitseconomicaspectandthehistory oflong-distanceexchange.Thepurposeofthisintroductionistoprovidesome orientationandbackgroundforreadersnotversedinthedetailsoftheearly Greekworldwhomaybeinterestedinthegeneralmethodologicaland

2 Worksonsocial,political,architectural,andeconomicaspectsofGreeceduringthetransition betweentheLBAandEIAtoappearsince 1990 (inchronologicalorder)includeCarlier 1991; Negbi 1991;Powell 1991;Whitley 1991a;Whitley 1991b;S.Morris 1992;Rutter 1992; Deger-Jalkotzy 1994;Papadopoulos 1994;Foxhall 1995;dePolignac 1995;Morgan 1996; Osborne 1996a;Osborne 1996b;Langdon 1997;Mazarakis-Ainian 1997;Tandy 1997;DegerJalkotzy 1998a;Deger-Jalkotzy 1998b;Lemos 1998b;I.Morris 1999;Georganas 2000;Morris 2000;Wallace 2000;Eder 2001b;Mazarakis-Ainian 2001;Weiler 2001;Georganas 2002; Kyrieleis 2002;Wallace 2003;Eder 2004;Hatzaki 2004;Wallace 2005;Crielaard 2006;DegerJalkotzyandLemos 2006;Dickinson 2006;Rystedt 2006;Snodgrass 2006;Wallace 2006; Wedde 2006;Lemos 2007c;Georganas 2008;Giannopoulos 2008;Deger-Jalkotzy&Bächle 2009;Dickinson 2009;HeymansandvanWijngaarden 2009;Jung 2009;Wallace 2010; Crielaard 2011;Mazarakis-Ainian 2011 (2 vols.);Lantzas 2012;Knodell 2013;Feldman 2014; Rizza 2014;Kotsonas 2016

interpretiveaspectsofthebook,ratherthanthespecificregionalhistorical implicationsandcontexts.Thosealready fluentinthebasicdetailsoftheperiod andthehistoryofinterpretationsoftheLBA–EIAtransitionwillbebestserved byskippingaheadtoSection 2.Manyofthegeneralissuessurroundingthe period,itschronology,andrelatedeconomic,social,andpoliticaldevelopmentsremaincontroversial,soitisfairtohedgebystatingthatwhatfollows necessarilysmoothsovermanycomplexpointsinanattemptatconcisionand clarity.

Initsrelativechronologicalterminology,the fieldofAegeanprehistory dividestheBronzeAge(roughly 3000–1100 BCE)intoasequenceof Beginning,Middle,andLate.Traditionalnomenclaturealsointernallydivides thestudyoftheBronzeAgebyregion,withspecificdesignationsandceramic sequencesfortheGreekmainland(Early,Middle,andLateHelladic,aswellas thetransitionalSubmycenaean),Crete(Early,Middle,Late,andSub-Minoan), andtheCycladicislands(Early,Middle,andLateCycladic).OnCrete, aseparatephasingsystemhasbeendevelopedtodescribearchitecturaland politicaldevelopments(protopalatial,neopalatial, finalpalatial,and postpalatial).

FortheEIA(c. 1100–700 BCE),subphasesareusuallyreferredtoby designationsfromtheextensivelydocumentedceramicsequence.LikeLBA sequences,thesevaryinsomesignificantwaysbyregioninwaysthataretoo complextocoverinthecurrentcontext,butingeneralfollowtheusual tripartitedevelopmentfromEarly,Middle,andLateProtogeometric(c. 1100/ 1050–900 BCE)toEarly,Middle,andLateGeometric(c. 900–700 BCE).3

TheMiddleandLateBronzeAgesinmainlandGreeceandCretewitnessed whathasbeentraditionallyinterpretedasaclassicriseandfallofcomplex societies.BeginningonCreteintheMiddleBronzeAge(c. 2000–1600 BCE), theappearancelargecourt-centeredarchitecturalcomplexes,communalsanctuaries,andothersignsofincreasingsocialcomplexity,economicdevelopment,andpoliticalhierarchysignalthebeginningofwhatisknownas “palatial” Minoansociety.4 Thoughitwasonceassumedthatauthoritiesat Knossos,hometotheearliestexcavatedandmostwidelyknownofCrete’ s palaces,ruledovertheentireisland,workthroughoutthetwentiethand twenty-firstcenturieshasuncoveredsomanyadditionalbuildingswithcharacteristicsusuallyassociatedwithpalatialarchitecturethatarchaeologistsnow puzzleovertheexactnatureofMinoanauthorityandpoliticalstructure.5 Some

3 TheabsolutechronologyofGreekprehistoryishotlydebated.ThenumbersIprovidehereare meantonlytoorientanunfamiliarreadertothegeneraltimeframeinvolved,andareinexact. ForLBAchronologyseediscussioninKnappandManning 2016;tableatManning 2010, 23 FortheEIA,Dickinson 2006, 23;Coldstream[1977] 2003, 435.Papadopoulos 2003, 146 suggestedextendingtheGperioddownintotheseventhcentury.

4 Cherry 1986;Warren 1987;Branigan 1988;Catapoti 2005

5 Godart,Kanta,andTzigounaki 1996;Knappett 1999;Schoep 2006

cluesmightbecontainedinthewrittenrecordskeptbyCretanscribesduring thisperiod,butthescriptinwhichthoserecordsarewritten,LinearA,remains undeciphered.Howeverpowerwasorganized,evidencefrombothMinoan CreteandthegreaterMediterraneanshowsconvincinglythatanimportant characteristicofprotopalatialandneopalatialMinoansocietywasintegration intowiderMediterraneanmaritimenetworks(withaculturalcorrelateoften termeda koiné).6 Thediscoveryofmanyimportedexoticainpalatialdeposits onCretesuggeststhattherewerestrongtiesbindingCretetothewiderworld andthatpalatialMinoansocietywasgenerallycosmopolitaninnature.

Onthemainland,signsofpoliticalandeconomiccomplexityarelargely absentfromtheMiddleBronzeAge,butintensifyduringtheLateHelladic (c. 1600–1100 BCE),roughlycontemporarywiththeneopalatialperiodon Crete.Atthebeginningofthisperiod,somethinglikeaMycenaeanstate systemseemstohavesolidifiedeconomicandpoliticalcapitalinthehandsof groupsoccupyingbuildingcomplexesthat – asonCrete – areknownaspalatial centers.7 AsonCrete,therearesomanyofthesecomplexes(atMycenae, Tiryns,Argos,Pylos,Thebes,Orchomenos,AgiosVasilios)thatcontrolfrom asinglecenterhasoftenbeenconsideredimprobable.SomeMycenaean documentaryevidence(unlikeLinearA,themainlandscriptcalledLinear Bhasbeendeciphered)8 suggeststhatpoliticalpowerrestedinregionalauthorities,butinleastoneregion(theArgolid)somany “palaces” areclustered togetherinasmallspacethatarchaeologistsremainatalosstoexplainthe relationshipsbetweenthem.9 Thearchitectureofthemainlandpalatialcenters, andthetastesandsocialorganizationofMycenaeanelitesingeneral,were probablylargelyinfluencedbyMinoanexemplars,althoughtheydifferedin anumberofimportantways.10

ComparedtoCrete,themainlandappearstohavehadfewertiestothe widerMediterraneanduringtheearlierMycenaeanperiod,butthischanged bythefourteenthcentury,whenmanyscholarsagreethatMycenaeans eitherconqueredorbecamepoliti callyandculturallydominantover Crete.11 AtitspinnacleintheLBA(especiallythefourteenthandthirteenth

6 Cline 1994;Watrous 1998;Knappett,Evans,andRivers 2008.

7 OnMycenaeanstateformation,seeDickinson 1977;Voutsaki 2001; 2010;Parkinsonand Galaty 2007;Wright 2008

8 SeeChapter 1

9 Kilian 1988;Bennet 2007, 186–187.Forevidenceofregionalorganizationintheformof variationinmaterialculture,seeMountjoy 1999;Mommsenetal. 2002;Darcque 2005

10 Forexample,conspicuousandformidablefortificationwallsarecharacteristicofMycenaean palacesbutnotCretanones(thoughseeAlusik 2007 foracorrectivetotheviewthatMinoans wereuninterestedindefensivearchitecture),andtheiconographicrepertoireofMycenaean arttendstofeaturemoremartialthemesthanthatoftheMinoans(catalogofdepictionsof warfareandcombatinVonhoff 2008).

11 ForsomediscussionofCreteandMycenaeanrelationsduringtheLBA,seePopham 1976; Bouzek 1996;Cline 1997;Haskell 1997

centuriesBCE),themainlandMycenaeanculturewasclearlyinvolvedin a ffairs – political,military,andeconomic – aroundtheMediterranean,aswe knowfromNearEasterncorrespondence(seeChapter 1 ),thewidespread distributionofMycenaeanorMycenaeanizingpotteryinEgypt,Cyprus, Anatolia,Syria-Palesti ne,andItaly(seeChapter 4),andtheincreasing (thoughstillrelativelymodest)appearanceofimportedexoticaatsitesin mainlandGreece.12

Beginninginthelatethirteenthandcomingtoaheadinthetwelfthcentury (lateHelladic/MinoanIIIC)aseriesofcomplexcrises,whichcontinueto challengescholars’ explanatorymodels,besettheworld-systemoftheLBA Mediterranean.13 ManyofthecharacteristicsthathaddefinedtheLBAworld, suchasthepalatialcomplexes,theeconomicorganizationsandstructures documentedintheLinearBtexts,andrelativesystem-wideuniformityof ceramicshapesanddecorativestylesdisappearedoverthecourseofthe latethirteenthandtwelfthcenturies.Onthemainland,palacesatPylosand Mycenaesmoldered,whileothercenterslikeTirynssuffereddestructions,but limpedon.Strongtraditionsinlarge-scalewall-painting,ivory-andgoldworking,andglypticseemtohavebeenabandonedaltogetheraspolitical andeconomicleadershipdevolvedtoalocallevel.Themajorengineering andinfrastructuralprojectsoftheMycenaeansprobablybegantofallinto disrepair,makingtravelandcommunicationmoredifficult.Theappearance ofanewclassof “warriorburials,” andtheprominenceof figuralscenes depictingwhatappeartobesearaidsorbattlesoncontemporarypottery suggesttheemergenceofjustthekindofmight-makes-rightHobbesian struggleforsurvivalthatiscommonlydepictedinpostapocalypticliterature. Atleastonthemainland,thepopulationappearstohavedecreaseddrastically, ifsettlementnumberscanbetakenasanyguidetothis.14 OnCreteandinthe islands,evidenceforadramaticdecreaseinpopulationisnotasconvincing. However,mostsettlementsfromtheIIICperiodarelocatedinhighlydefensiblepositions(themostextremeexamplebeingthecliffsidesettlementat MonastirakiKatalimata)suggestingthatinhabitantswhoremainedonthe islandharboredrealfearsaboutsecurityandstability,eitherduetothethreat ofinvadersfromtheseaorattacksfromtheirneighbors.15 Itisnosurprise,then, thatmostscholarshaveenvisionedacollapsenotonlyofpalatialsocietybutalso ofthedensenetworkoflong-distanceinteractionsthatcharacterizedtheLBA koiné,andagradualcessationofcross-Mediterraneanexchange.16

12 DatafortheentireBAcollectedinCline 1994

13 ForageneraltreatmentoftheLBAcollapse,Cline 2014;seealsoKnappandManning 2016 for adenserbutselectivereviewofrelatedevidence.

14 SeedemographicevidenceinChapter 5

15 Nowicki 2000; 2008;Wallace 2000; 2006; 2010;ontheislands,Deger-Jalkotzy 1998b.

16 Deger-Jalkotzy 1991;Bell 2009;RoutledgeandMcGeough 2009

Overall,theIIICperiodinGreeceappearstohavebeenonecharacterizedby alackofclearlydefinedorstandardizedauthoritiesorinstitutions,either politicaloreconomic,andwecanberelativelyconfidentthatthiswasatime ofgeneraldisarray,uncertainty,and flux.This fluxclearlycreatedchaos,but alsoopenedchasmsofopportunityinthesociopoliticalandeconomichierarchy.Regionsoutsideoftheformerpalatialcentersseemtohavebenefited fromthedemiseoftheerstwhileeconomicprominenceofplaceslikeMycenae, Thebes,andPylos.Formerperipheralsettlements,likeMitrou,Elateia,and EleonincentralGreece(perhapstheregionsofPhokisandLokrisingeneral) andTychosDymaioninAchaea flourished.17 AtPeratiineastAttica,tombs werefurnishedwithexoticobjectssuggestingthatsomekindoflong-distance trademayhavecarriedonthroughthecollapseofthepalatialinstitutions.18 OnCrete,therearesignsofcontinuingprosperityatafewcoastalsiteslike Chania,despitethegeneralmoveuptorefugesettlements,andcontactswith ItalyandwesternGreeceremainedintact.19

Bytheeleventhandtenthcenturies(ProtogeometricPeriod/EarlyIron Age),however,mostofthesepostpalatialpointsoflightonthemainland hadbeenextinguished,andthearchaeologicalrecordbecomesrathersparse indeed.20 Allindicationsarethatthepopulationmusthaveremainedlow throughoutthisperiod,unlessthematerialrecordisseriouslymisleading. Excavatedsettlements,likeNichoriainMessenia,AsineintheArgolid,and MitrouinLokrisarecharacterizedbysimplearchitecture,mostlymud-brick onastonesocleorbase,andlackingmuchdecorativeelaboration.21 OnCrete manyrefugesiteswereabandonedformoreconvenientlocations,butthe persistenceofsettlementsthroughouttheislandtohewtodefensiblelocations (theGortynacropolisandthesettlementatKavousiVronda)maypointto acontinuingperiodoftroubledintra-orinterislandinstability.22 Crafttraditionsseemlimitedtosmall-scalemetalworking(simplepinsand fibulae),textile

17 OnCentralGreece,seeDeger-Jalkotzy 1983;Kramer-Hajos 2008;Knodell 2013;forAchaea, Giannopoulos 2008 isagoodrecentreviewoftheevidence.Latacz 2004 ontheprimacyof ThebesinMycenaeantimesisrelevant.

18 Iakovidis 1980, 111;Desborough 1964, 69–70;Dickinson 2006, 185;Muhly 2003, 26; Thomatos 2006, 178;Lewartowksi 1989, 75;Dickinson 2006, 58; 2010.Shortconsiderations atDickinson 2006, 179–180;Thomatos 2006, 157–158;on “warriorgraves,” Deger-Jalkotzy 2006, 155–157

19 HallagerandHallager 2000

20 ThenumberofsitesfromGreecedatingtotheEPGperiodissufficientlysmalltohave promptedscholarstoseekoutexplanationsforitspaucityotherthanactualpaucityofremains inantiquity.SeeDietz 1982, 102;Rutter 1983;Snodgrass 1993, 30;Foxhall 1995; Papadopoulos 1996, 254;MazarakisAinian 1997, 100;Morgan 2006, 237,n. 25;Morris 2007, 213.

21 NichoriainMessenia(MacDonaldetal. 1983);Asine(Wells 1983a);Mitrou(Rückl 2008).

22 ForgeneraldiscussionofthetransitionfromIIIC–PGonCrete,Ksipharas 2004, 324–328; cf.Nowicki 2000; 2002;Wallace 2006; 2010

manufacture,andtheceramicproductionof figurinesand finewares,some ofhighquality.Signsofinteractionwiththewiderworldarerareandstyles developedseparatelyindifferentregions.23 ProtogeometricGreeceisusually consideredtohavebeenmostlyinward-lookingandisolated.

Nonetheless – asdidthetwelfthcentury – theeleventhandtenthcenturies inGreecesawtheirfairshareofexceptionsandinnovations.OnCretewe mayreconstructacertainstandardofcontinuousstabilityandconnectedness throughthecollapseandthelocalProtogeometric,asattestedbytheimpressive wealthandexoticainearlytombsatKnossos(thoughourresolutiononthe dataisproblematic)andthetrovesofimportedandlocalluxurygoodsdepositedincavesanctuariesonMts.IdaandDikte.24 RichburialsatLefkandiin Euboea,ontheislandofSkyros,andatAthensshowthatthestoryoftheGreek mainlandduringthisperiodislikewisemorecomplicatedthanasimplemodel ofdeclinewouldsuggest,andafewexportedobjectsinCyprusandtheSyroPalestinianlittoralpointtosomemodestsustainedcontacts(seeChapters 2 and 4).Anewfeatureofthematerialcultureisthereplacementofbronzewith ironastheprimarymetalusedformakingweapons.Debateaboutthenature andcausesoftheintroductionofirontoGreeceduringtheEIAhasnot producedacompletelyconvincingmodeltoexplainthistransition,but Cypruswasalmostcertainlyinvolved.25

FromtheGeometricperiod,andespeciallyintheeighthcentury,the archaeologicalevidenceismoreplentiful.26 Thenumberofsettlements appearstoincrease,whiletheurbanfabricatsiteslikeOropos27 andZagora28 becomesmorecomplex.Large “monumental” sacredbuildingsatsomesites (e.g.Eretria29 andAnoMazaraki)30 attesttotheincreasinginvestmentof communitiesincultsites,asdothevaluableofferings(includingimported materialsandartifacts)depositedinmajorlocalandregionalsanctuaries.31 After manycenturiesduringwhichwritingwasapparentlynotafeatureofthe culturallandscape,GreeksadaptedthePhoenicianalphabetandbeganto producewrittentexts,includingHomer’ s Iliad and Odyssey andHesiod’ s

23 Snodgrass 1971;Coldstream 1983;Desborough 1952;Morgan 1990; 2003

24 RutkowskiandNowicki 1996;Coldstream 2006;Sakellarakis 2013.

25 Waldbaum 1978; 1982;Snodgrass 1989;Sherratt 1994;Kayafa 2000.Giventheapparent emigrationofsomeGreekstoCyprusduringthetwelfthcentury,technologicalcommunicationbetweenthesetworegionswouldlikelynothavepresentedinsuperableobstacles. Iintendtoreturntothistopicinfuturework.

26 Antonaccio 1995, 3

27 MazarakisAinian 2002a; 2002b;essaysinMazarakisAinian 2007

28 MostrecentlyGounaris 2015

29 AubersonandSchefold 1972;Bérard 1982;Verdan 2012; 2015.Verdansuggeststhatthe Daphnephoreion mighthavebeenintendedasabanquethallinsteadofatemple.

30 Petropoulos 2002,cf.Kolia 2011 forasmallertemplenearAnoMazaraki.

31 Sourvinou-Inwood 1993;Morgan 1997; 2003;Kilian-Dirlmeier 1985;Muscarella 1992; Crielaard 2015

Theogony and WorksandDays.Thepopulationprobablygrewconsiderably, perhapscreatingnewtensionsineconomicclassrelationshipsbasedonchangingproportionsofavailablelaborandland,32 andpossiblyfeedingarashof landhungerthatpushedGreekstosendcolonizingpartiesfromcitieslike EretriaandCorinthtoItalyandtotheNorthandEast.33 Theeighthcentury haslongbeentermeda “renaissance” becauseitappearstohavebeenaperiod ofincreasingcomplexity,wealth,andinterconnectednessbetweenGreeceand thewiderMediterranean.

2 .THEESTABLISHEDNARRATIVEOFTRADEWITHINEARLY GREEKHISTORY

Theprevioussectionrepresentsanattempttobrieflysketchthecurrently acceptedmodeloftherise,fall,andregenerationofcomplexsocietiesover roughlyathousandyearsofearlyGreekhistory.Althoughithasnotbeen uncontroversial,asweshallsee,akeycomponentofthisnarrativecenterson theperceivedcadenceoflong-distanceexchangeandcontacts.Theworldof theGreekLBAwascharacterizedbyconsiderablecommercialandpolitical relationswithsocialgroupsandinstitutionsthroughouttheeasternandwestern Mediterranean,which(manyargue)helpedelitescreatesocialdifferenceand solidifypoliticalcapital.Theserelationshipswerejoltedandlargelyseveredat somepointinthelatethirteenthortwelfthcentury,aschaosgrippedthe complexsocietiesofSyria-Palestine,Egypt,Anatolia,andGreececollectively. DuringtheensuingEIA,Greecewaslargelyisolatedandlimpedalongthrough whathaslongbeenknownasaDarkAge,althoughafewcommunitiesretained contactswiththeEastandmaintainedrelativeprosperity.Eventually,inthelate tenthorninthcentury,theMediterraneannetworksthathadoncelinkedthe MycenaeanstotheNearEastbegantohumoncemoreandbytheeighth centuryGreekswerecrossingtheseasforprofitandto findnewhomesingreat numbersagain.

InwhatfollowsIwanttoexaminetheevidenceforthisstoryasfaras identifiablecommercialorreciprocaltradeisconcerned,34 andtestitsmajor plotpointsagainstavigorousanalysisoftherelevantmaterialremainsand textualrecordspertainingtolong-distancetradeoverthetransitionfromthe

32 Mosthaveinterpretedthisasaclashbetweenelitesandcommoners(e.g.St.deCroix 1981; Morris 1987;Donlan 1997).Forarecentinterpretationoftheevolutionofcommunitiesthat proposesamore fluidprocessseeDuplouy 2006 (reviewedinPower 2006).

33 Thoughthedesireformorelandprobablyplayedarole,thecolonizingmovementitself isatopicthatisfartoocomplex,multicausalandmultifacetedtotreatproperlyhere (seeCrielaard 1992, 239–242;recentsummaryinPapadopoulos 2014, 187–188).

34 ThroughouttheworkIusetheterms “trade” and “exchange” assynonyms,mostlyfor stylisticvariation,withspecifictermssuchasgiftexchange,commercialexchange,tramping, andsoforthusedtospecifyparticularsortsofrelationshipswhereappropriate.

LateBronzetoEarlyIronAge.For,despitethefrequencywithwhichinternationaltradeisdiscussedinliteratureontheLBA,andtheincreasingnumber ofworksappearingonthetransitionalperiodsbetweentheLBAandthe “rise ofthepolis” intheeighthcentury,nosyntheticworkonthistopicexists.Given thecentralityofthestudyofLBA/EIAtradeandinteractiontomuchfresh research,itthusseemsbothtimelyandprudenttocollecttherelevantevidence inoneplace,andtoassesshowfaritispossibletostretchthisevidenceto reconstructawell-groundedandlogicallyconsistenthistoryoftheGreektrade economybetween 1300 and 700 BCE.35

Idomybestheretoreviewthebasisonwhichargumentsaboutchangein theGreektradeeconomyhavebeenmade,tosummarizeboththedirectand thecorroboratingevidence,andtocontextualizethisevidenceinabroader pictureoftheeconomy.Thebookconfirmsafewlong-heldnotionsofearly Mediterraneantrade,confoundsafewothers,and,mostimportantly,gives otherscholarsausefulsummaryandbackgroundagainstwhichtoconfirmor confoundtheconclusionsIamabletoreachinmyownmodestway.

Theevidenceisattimesdifficulttoworkwith(aclassicsituationof “indirect tracesinbadsamples”),36 andpushesagainstaggregation,meaningfulcomparison,andsimpleresults.Despitethesedifficulties,itisclearthatthereisone majortakeawayfromaquantitatively-gearedapproachtothematerialcultural evidencefortheeconomictransitionunderstudy.Thereappearstohavebeen amajorandfar-reachingeconomicdeclineaftertheendofthethirteenth century.Thisdeclineinthescaleandcomplexityoftheeconomywasprobably associatedwithsomerelativelymajorpopulationmovements,andprobably tookeffectinfullforceby 1100 BCE.Thoughtherecenttrendhasbeento reconceptualizethisperiodinamorepositivelight,theeconomicdata,asfaras

35 Long-distancetradehasbeenamajorfocusofdebateinLBAstudies.Therecentbibliographylistedpreviously(n. 1)ishefty.ButtheEIAhasrarelybeenintegratedintothestory. ThefocusonLBAexchangeis,nodoubt,morethanaproductofdisciplinarycircumstance: thereisfarmoreevidencetoexamineforthisperiod,includingshipwrecks,relatedtexts frombothGreeceandtheNearEast,andampleMycenaeanpotteryinforeigncontexts. EarlyEIAtradeandcommercehavebeensubjectedtolessscrutiny(thoughGeometric colonizationhas fl ourishedasadisciplinaryfocus).Wehavemadegainsinassemblingthe relevantdatainthisareainrecentyears(seeTandy 1997;Foxhall 1998;Crielaard 1999; Jones 2000 ;Fletcher 2007 ;Maieretal. 2009 ;Knodell 2013 ;Nakassisforthcoming). Nonetheless,SherrattandSherratt’sobservationfrom 1993 (p. 361 ),that “[o]neofthe mostcrucialbutpoorlyunderstoodphasesinthedevelopmentoftheMediterranean economyisthetransitionfromtheBronzeAgetotheIronAge” continuestoringtrue. InlargepartthisisbecausetheEIAevidence,intermsofGreekproductsfoundabroad, shipwrecks,writtentestimony,andimportedobjectswithinGreece,isnotasplentiful. However,asPapadopouloshasrepeatedlyemphasized(i.e.Papadopoulos 1993 ; 1996 ; 2001; 2014 , 181 –184 )thebiggestobstaclemaybethe “ ironcurtain” thathaslongstoodbetween LBAandEIAstudies.Thiscurtainhasbeguntocomedownamongyoungerscholars(see recenthistoryofthedisciplineinKotsonas 2016 ).

36 Clarke 1973, 16.SeecommentsatMuhly 1973, 167: “ThestudyoftradeintheBronzeAgeis adifficultandoftenunrewardingendeavor.”

wecangatherthem,supportagloomierview,atleastonamacroscopicscale. Recoverywasslow,butbytheeighthcenturyBCEtherearesignsthatthe GreekeconomyhadoutstrippeditsLBApredecessor,andthatGreekswere interactingwiththewiderMediterraneaninthoroughgoingwaysonceagain. Thoughwemayonlybeabletomeasuretheinterveningeconomicdecline withtheroughtoolkitofarchaeology,itsscopeandscaleare,inbroad brushstrokes,soclearlymanifestinthematerialculturethatwedoagreat disservicetotheevidencetodismissitasunimportantorinsignificant. Economicdeclineisnotanabstractconcept;theevidenceshowsthatthe LBA–EIAtransitionalmostcertainlymusthavebeenatraumaticperiodfor peoplelivinginGreece,fullofdifficulty,uncertainty,andinsecurity(ifalso opportunity).Thereisclearevidencethatinstitutionsfortradeandexchange hadtoberebuiltentirelyfromscratchduringtheGeometricperiod,when recovery finallybegan.Howeverdifficultthehardtimesoftheeleventhand tenthcenturieswere,itisequallyclearthattheGreekswhostayedinGreece throughthecontractionsurvived,adapted,andeventuallybuiltsomethingnew inapparentlychallengingcircumstances.

That,insum,istheargumentIundertaketolayoutinwhatfollows.But whyisitamissionworthyofdispatch?Ultimately,whatisatstakeinabook interrogatingtheearlyhistoryoftheGreektradeeconomy?Whywillstoryof thetransitionbetweenGreekhistoryandprehistorybebroadlyandusefully enlightenedbythestudyoflong-distancecommercialandpoliticalrelationships?Thereasonisthattradehasalwaysbeencentraltothenarrativeofsocial andeconomicdevelopmentconcerningthetransformationofLBAsocietyto theEIA.Whyshouldthishavebeenso?Avarietyofnotionshanginthe balance.

3 .PREHISTORICECONOMIES,LONG-DISTANCECONTACTS ANDPOLITICALSTRUCTURE

Inaddressingthistopic,Icomefacetofacewithanoldanthropologicaland archaeologicaldebateaboutthefundamentalrelationshipbetweentrade,commerce,andrulership,and – ultimately – withquestionsaboutwhypeople engageinlong-distancetradeatall.Wecanthinkofsomeobviousreasonsthat tradeatacertaingeographicresolutionmightexistindependentlyofthe ambitionsandassertionsofsocialleaders,especiallyincasesthatrevolvearound theacquisitionofgoodsneededforsurvivalintheabsenceoflocalresources. However,theacquisitionofgoodsthatare “ unnecessary ” and/orperceivedas irrelevantfromasurvivalistpointofview,isusuallyconsideredaspartof asocial,political,oreconomicstrategy.

Intherelevantarchaeologicalliterature,itisgenerallyassumedthatthe acquisitionoflocallyunavailable,not-strictly-necessarygoodsfromafar

indicatesthedesireofsomelocalpopulationtocollectivelybetteritseconomic situation,throughdiversificationofresources,orofindividualstoelevate themselvesabovethegroupbypossessionofexoticmaterialsor finished products.37 Ithasevenbeenarguedthattheacquisitionandmanagementof goodsunavailablelocallymightbeaprimemovertowardsocialdifferentiation andthedevelopmentofcomplexstatesinthe firstplace,andthatlossoftrade routesmayoftenleadtocollapse.38 Ifthesepremisesaretrue,wewould imaginethatahistoryofGreektradewouldbearusefullyonourknowledge ofhowtheLBA–EIAtransitionprogressedfromapolitico-economicpointof view – changesinthescaleandnatureoftrademightbeinstrumentalin reconstructingpoliticalandeconomichistoryofearlyGreece.Butbefore proceedingitisagoodideatosetoutwithsomediligencethescholarly backgroundonrelationshipsbetweentradeandeconomy,tradeandpolitics.

Thisdiscussionbeganamonganthropologists,datingbacktoMalinowski’ s ArgonautsoftheWesternPacific in 1922 andMauss’srelatedworkonexchange andauthorityinearlysocieties.39 AccordingtoMaussandMalinowski,island chieftainsgainedprestigeandpowerbyvirtueoftheiraccesstospecialobjects acquiredfromdistantlands.However,theseexchangeswerenoteconomic innature;thegainsaccruedfromexchangeweresociallyembeddedand symbolic.Thissociallyembeddedviewoftrade(knownassubstantivismor primitivism)40 istraditionallyopposedtoformalistmodels,whichpresumethat industrialandpreindustrialhumansoperateandhavealwaysoperatedbased uponidenticalmodelsofrationaleconomicmaximization.41 Theprimitivist/ substantivistversusformalistdebatehasgrownstale,andrecentworkinthe fieldofeconomicshasshownemphaticallythatalmostalleconomiesshare aspectsofbothmodels:peopleactintheirownself-interest,butalwaysinways thatareuniquelymediatedbyinstitutionalandculturalframeworks.42 EvidencefromtheLBAMediterraneaneconomybearsoutnotionsofthis “newinstitutional” approachwithgreatclarity.Whileheadsofstatecertainly

37 Cf.Polanyi 1966;SchortmanandUrban 1987;Tainter 1988, 23–24;SherrattandSherratt 1991;Sherratt 1999;Helms 1979; 1988; 1993.Fortheimpactofimportedgoodsonlocal hierarchiesandpoliticsfortheAegeaninparticular,seeexamplesatRenfrew 1975;Voutsaki 1995; 1998; 1999; 2001;Kilian 1988b;I.Morris 1999.Summaryofrelevantevidenceand literatureatManningandHulin 2005, 273–274.Seealsoreviewofliteratureontrade,power, andelitesinOkaandKusimba 2008, 352–357

38 Fortheroleofexoticcommodityacquisitioninbuildingstates,seeRathje 1971.Foritsrolein theirdemise,Eckholm 1980;HodgesandWhitehouse 1983;Cipolla 1970

39 Malinowski 1922;Mauss 1923

40 ImportantstudiesincludeHasebroek 1928;Dalton 1975;Polanyi 1963;BohannonandDalton 1962;Brunton 1971;Rotstein 1972.Ontheancientworld:Finley 1970;Renfrew 1975; 1977; Snodgrass 1991

41 See,forexample,Earle 1982;Monroe 2000, 6;Earle 2002.

42 North 1990; 1991; 1996;forexamplesofuseinhistoricalstudyseeKowaleski 1995; Williamson 1985; 1996.IntheMycenaeaneconomy,Parkinson,Nakassis,andGalaty 2013, 415

exchangedgoodsviarelationshipsthatwereessentiallyandovertlypolitical, theseexchangesalsohadeconomicunderpinnings,andotherexchangesoutsideofthepolitical “symbolic” realmexistedalongsideofthoserelationshipsin waysthatlookquitemodern.43

Inwhatfollows,Ipresumethatwecannotnecessarilyrebuildentireeconomicsystemsorthemotivationsthatdroveindividualswithinthemfromthe meagerevidenceleftbehindinthearchaeologicalrecord.Thebottomlineis thatlong-distanceinteractionwascomplex,asareallaspectsoftheancient economy;theartifactswe findwillnevertellthewholestorythatlurksinthe shadowsbehindthem.44 Ingeneral,however,Ithinkthatourbestchanceat gettingadecentideaoftherelationshipbetweensurvivingartifactsandoverall economicsystemsliesin(1)beginningwithathoroughandsystematicassemblageofalloftherelevantevidencethatcouldbebroughttobearonthe discussionand(2)assessingpatternsofevidenceovertime,ratherthanstaring fixedlyatindividualperiods.

The firstpointisself-evident,andneedslittlejustification.Theonlyplausiblereason not tobeginanalysiswithacomprehensivegraspofrelevant evidenceisthatassemblingevidenceisoftenlogisticallydifficultandtime consuming.Butthisismoreofanexcusethanalogicalstepping-stone. Thesecondpointadherestotheoverallprinciplesofadiachronicandcomparativeapproachtohistory.45 Thatistosay,thecentralobjectiveofcomparativehistoryshouldbetodiscoverwhichvariablesprecipitateddifferent outcomesinvaryinghistoricalcircumstancesby “identifyingcriticaldifferences betweensimilarsituations” andtotraceprocessesinordertovalidateconclusions.AlongwithGoldstone,Iconsiderthesuccessorfailureofahistorical projectbyjudgingwhetherit “identifiesrelationshipsheretoforeunrecognized ormisunderstoodinparticularsequencesofhistoricaleventsthathave occurred.” Itisoftennotpossibletoachievetotalexplanatorysuccessthat coversallhistoricaldetails: “Elucidationofaprocessthatconnectsmanydetails

43 ForthediverseandmultilayerednatureofLBAtradesystems,Monroe 2009;Bell 2012; 2006; Whitelaw 2001b;SherrattandSherratt 1993;Nakassisforthcoming.Fordebatestouchingon thesesubjectsinthewiderarchaeologicalliterature,see,recently,McKllop 2005;Bellina 2003

44 Cf.commentsatFletcher 2007, 32.Ontheshadows,Sherratt 2011.Oneisremindedof Herodotus’sstoryofthejarsinEgypt(Hdt. 3 6): “EveryyearEgyptimportsfromallover Greece,andfromPhoeniciaaswell,clayjarsfullofwine,andyetitishardlyanexaggeration tosaythatthereisnotasingleemptywine-jartobeseenthere.Onemightwellask:wheredo theyalldisappearto?ThisisyetanotherissueIcanclarify.Everyheadmanhastocollectallthe jarsfromhiscommunityandtakethemtoMemphis,andthenthepeopleofMemphis fill themwithwaterandtakethemoutintothewaterlessregionsofSyriawehavebeentalking about.ThatishoweveryjarthatisimportedintoEgyptistaken,onceempty,intoSyriato joinalltheearlierjars” (trans.A.Purvis).

45 Goldstone 1991, 52

ofwhathappenedissufficienttoproduceaworkofgreatvalue.”46 Analysis herehasattemptedtosatisfyallofGoldstone’sconditionsinawaythatatleast “connectsmanydetailsofwhathappened” bycomparingtheevidencefor tradesystemsacrossascholarlydividethathasresistedporosity.Inotherwords, whenwelookattheoveralleconomicsceneoftradeinageographicallyand physicallystaticareaacrossdifferentperiodsthatpresentdifferentpolitical, social,economic,andmilitaryrealities,thecrucialfactorsshapingandshaped bytherealitiesoftradearerevealedinaclearerlight.

Somuchformygeneralapproachtothemovementofobjectsinthe archaeologicalrecord,andthewaythatthestudyoftheseobjectscanbe assessedinrelationtosocietymorebroadly.Intheparticularcontextofthe earlyAegean,tradehasbeencentraltodiscussionsofeliteself-fashioningand eventheconstructionandcementationofsocialandpoliticaldifference.

WithintheLBAworld,scholarshaveoftenseenaccesstotradenetworks, andtheluxurygoodsandcommoditiesthatmovedthroughthem,asakey underpinningfactorintheabilityofBronzeAgeelitestobothacquireand maintaincontroloversubordinategroups.Theseelitesusedimportstocreate andreifytheiridentitiesasprivilegedandspecialbywayofconspicuous consumption.Inaddition,theredistributionofexoticahelpedconsolidate powerandgarnerloyaltyamongstvassals.

47 Accordingtothisview,tradein theLBAwasnotonlyaneconomicinstitution,butalsoatoolusedto consolidatepower,maintainlong-distancecontactsandrelationships,and entrenchsocialdifferenceswithinGreeksociety.48

IftheacquisitionofexoticgoodsfromafarwascontrolledbytheMycenaean palacestatesduringtheLBA,andifpalatialelitesleveragedspecialrelationships withkingsintheNearEastinordertobothestablishandlegitimatepolitical poweraswellastoenrichthemselveseconomically,thecorollaryisthatany disruptionoftradewouldlikewisehavebroughtaboutpoliticaldisaster.49 Ifauthorityisbaseduponpreferentialaccesstogoodsfromabroad,andthat accessdisappears,authoritywillsoongowithit.Alternatively,wemight assumethat,iftheprimaryreasonthattheMycenaeanscultivatedlongdistancetraderelationshipswasforthepreservationofpoliticalpower,and thatthepoliticalsystemwithinwhichthismechanismoperatednolonger

46 Goldstone 1991, 60–61

47 Knapp 1990; 1998;Sherratt 2001;Burns 2010a; 2010b;Bennet 2008;Voutsaki 1997; 2001; 2010;Schon 2010;Monroe 2011

48 Similarformulationshavebeenmadeabouttherelationshipbetweenimportsandelitesinthe EIA:Tandy 1997, 113–127;I.Morris 2000, 195–257;Lemos 2002 (Appendix 2: “Atthesame timeitispossiblethatmembersoftheEuboean koiné couldhavereachedtheeastern Mediterraneanbythesecondhalfofthetenthcenturyastheirelitegroupswereeagerto acquireimportedgoodstoreinforcetheirstatus.”);Wallace 2010, 195–200

49 Bell 2012, 180;Singer 1999, 733;Singer 2000;Monroe 2009, 361–363;Bell 2006, 1;Cline 2014, 148–153

existed,tradewoulddisappear,havinglostitsraison-d’être.50 Ineithercase, exchangehasacentralrolewithincurrentunderstandingsofLBApolitical economy,bothasaprosperoussystemandafailedone.

Ifweaccept,whateverthepreciserelationshipbetweenpoliticalcollapseand long-distancetraderelations,thattradewasmeaningfulsocially,politically,and economicallyduringtheLBA,andthattradesystemsintheLBAwereclosely connectedtoentitieswhichheldpoliticalandsocialpower,thenwemight expectthematerialresiduesoftradeinthearchaeologicalrecordtoaccompany meaningfulchangesinpoliticalandeconomicreality.So,dramaticchangesin thematerialremainsoftradeaftertheendoftheMycenaeanperiodshouldbe strongindicatorsforchangeintradesystems,butalsoforchangeinthepolitical organizationofsociety.Ontheotherhand,iftheevidenceforlong-distance tradedoesnotchangemuchthroughtime,itmightsuggestthatthesocialand politicalrelationshipsandstructuresthatobtainedintheLBAremainedlargely intactrightonthroughthetraumaticeventsattheendoftheMycenaean period.

So,givenourunderstandingofhowlong-distancetradeandpoliticalstructurearticulatedintheLBA,wecanreasonablyexpectthatevidenceforthe evolutionoftradeshouldhavemeaningfulthingstosayaboutpoliticalrealities aswellaseconomicones.Inaddition,lookingatthenatureandextentoflongdistancetradeoverthecenturiesislikelytoprovidecluesrelevanttoreconstructingancienteconomiesandsocieties,andthewaytheygrewandchanged overtime.Thescaleoflong-distancetradeeconomiesdoesnotonlytellus abouttheeconomy,butalsoaboutculture.Fluxintradevolumesovertime willvaryaccordingtothewillingnessorreticencewithwhichgroupspursue relationshipswithpeopletheyseeasdifferent.Itcanshowevidenceofpeople’ s facilitywithculturallyembeddedidealssuchastrust,cooperation,andhonesty, andthedegreetowhichtheyextendtheseidealsoutwardtounknownparties. Tradecanalsoplayintothedevelopmentofnewtechnologies,oftheamount ofresistancetoouracceptanceoftraditionorinnovation,andtherelationship ofpeopletotheirpastandtotheirfuture.Weshouldnotunderestimatethe centralityoflong-distancerelationships,commercialorotherwise,inshaping adiversemenuofsocialconditions.

Thus,whileTartaron(2013, 10–11)hasrecentlyadvocated “areorientation ofourintellectualenergiesawayfrominternational-scalemaritimerelations” it remainstrue,Ithink,thatwestillhavemuchtolearnonthisfront,andshould notleaveitsstudyasidejustyet.Forallofthereasonsgivenpreviously,clarityin regardtothesystemsunderlyingthiskindofexchangeareuniquelyappropriate

50 Fortheroleoflong-distanceexchangeinthegrowthandbeginningsoflegitimationinthe palatialmainlandseeCavanaghandMee 1998, 41–60;Dickinson 1977;Voutsaki 1997; 2001; 2010;Bennet 2007, 186;Nakassis 2007, 133;Wright 2008

tocertainlinesofinquiryabouttheimportanteconomictransitionthatthe Greekworldexperiencedinthelatesecondandearly firstmillennium.

4 .DISCONTINUITYORCONTINUITY?THELBA TOEIATRANSITION

ThesecondareainwhichastudyoftradeinearlyGreekhistoryislikelyto makeanimpactisinthedebateoverwhetherweshouldseetheGreekLBAto EIAtransitionasastoryofdisruption,stagnation,andreinvention,oras acontinuousandunifiedspectrumofdevelopment.Theonlywaytoresolve thisdebateistoputthestudyoftheLBAandEIAinthesamescholarlyarena, anarenathathadnotattractedagreatdealofattentionuntilthepastfew decades.51

Astheperiodhasgainedtractioninscholarshipmorerecently,themost prominentdebateconcerningtheLBA–EIAtransitionhasconcernedwhether itshouldbeseenasaperiodofinstitutional,economic,andpoliticalrupture fromtheBronzeAgeoratimeofgradualdevelopmentduringwhichmany characteristicsofMycenaean/Minoanculturewereretained.52 Theterms ofthisdiscussionweremoreorlesssetbyDesborough,Coldstream,and Snodgrassinthe 1970s,whenthestudyoftheerabetweenthecollapseofthe BronzeAgepalacesandtheArchaic/ClassicalGreekcity-states firstunderwent intensivestudy.53 Thesyntheticworksofallthreescholarshavebeenhighly influential,butSnodgrass’sstudyhashadthemostlastingeffectontheshapeof currentdiscourseaboutthenatureoftheEIA.Snodgrassarguedthatthe AegeanregiondisengagedfromtherestoftheMediterraneanworldafterthe endofthepostpalatialperiodintheeleventhcentury,andthatthisperiodof disengagementonlyendedwiththeso-calledrenaissanceoftheeighthcentury. Basinghisnarrativeonthearchaeologicalevidenceavailableatthetime,he envisionedtheEIAasatimeofdepopulatedegalitariancommunities.This,he reasoned,representsabigchangefromthecomplex,highlystratified,urbanizedsocietyoftheLBA.

SinceSnodgrass’sworkinthe 1970s,scholarshavetakenavarietyof approachestotheEIA.Initially,mostarchaeologistsandhistoriansagreed withSnodgrass,maintaininganemphasisonsharpdiscontinuitiesmarking outtheEIAfromwhatcamebeforeandafter.I.Morrishassinceshownthat

51 Papadopoulos 2001, 444;historyofscholarshipinI.Morris 2000, 77–106 andmorerecently Kotsonas 2016;alsorelevantisWhitley 1991a, 5–8

52 Snodgrass 1971;I.Morris 1993; 2007;Papadopoulos 1993; 1994; 1996;Morgan 1993; Mazarakis-Ainian 1997;Marakas 2010;vanEffenterre 1985.Lemos 2002 gives acomprehensivebibliography,thoughitisnowabitoutofdate.

53 Coldstream[1977] 2003;Desborough 1952; 1972;Snodgrass 1971.Otherimportantearly workwasdonebySchachermeyr(1979; 1980; 1984)thoughthishasbeenlessinfluential.

qualityoflifeintheEIAwasinfactconsiderablyworsethanlifeintheperiods thatprecededandfollowedit,supportingthenotionthattheSnodgrassmodel wasmoreorlesscorrect.54 Others,however,havefocusedmoreoncontinuity andsoughttooverturntheviewthatmajorrupturesfollowedtheendofthe BronzeAge.Philologistshaveseensimilaritiesbetweentheusesandword formsofLinearBandGreek,55 andhavereadintothisalinkbetweeneighth centuryauthorsandtheirMycenaeanpredecessors.Religionhasalsobeen widelycitedasanareaofparticularcontinuitybetweenBronzeandIronages.56

Inthecontextofthecontinuity/discontinuitydebate,therelationship betweenGreeceandtheEasthasbeenaparticularlyrichareaofstudy. ThenotionthattherewaslittletradeintheProtogeometricperiod – that Greecewasisolatedfromthewiderworld,andespeciallyfromtheNearEast –atthetransitiontoGreekhistoryhasformedanimportantpartofthetraditional narrativeoftheformationofWesternSociety.InanoldermodelofClassical scholarship,partoftheappealoftheexistingnarrativeoftrade(withisolation intheDarkAge)isthatitconvenientlywipescleantheslatefromaperiod inwhichGreekandNearEasternculturesweretightlyintermingled.57 This severingofhistoricfromMycenaeanageGreecehasallowedadescription ofwesternheritageinwhichthingslikedemocracy,westernart,and philosophyaroseinanunsulliedEIAcruciblefreefromeasterninfluence.58 Thedemolitionofthisreductionistandno-longersustainablerhetoricalisolationofearlyGreecefromtheOrienthasbeensalutary.However,debate continuesoverwhetherandtowhatdegreeties(eliteorotherwise)lapsedor werelargelyretainedintheEIA.Therecenttrendhasshiftedfromemphasizing arupturetoshowingthebreadthanddepthoftheconnectionsthatGreece retainedthroughtheEIA,aspartofthewiderschoolofthoughtarguingthat therewasnotmuchthatfundamentallydistinguishedtheEIAGreekfromthe LBAMycenaeanworld.59

Ifaccepted,thispositionisquiteimportant,becauseitimpliestheneedfor amajoroverhaulofthewayscholarsreconstructearlyGreece.Ratherthanan instanceofthecollapseandregenerationofcomplexsociety,thisperiodwould ratherrepresentabeatinanaltogetherdifferentrhythmofsocialdevelopment,

54 Tandy 1997;Dickinson 2006, 88–103;I.Morris 2007;Papadopoulos 1993;Foxhall 1995; Papadopoulos 1996 forcontraryarguments.

55 Carlier 1984, 68;vanEffenterre 1985, 155

56 Marakas 2010;dePolignac 1995;Morgan 1996

57 G.Murray 1907, 50;Botsford 1922, 31;Botsford 1922, 52–55;Burn 1936, 1;Beazleyand Robertson 1926, 580;Nilsson 1933, 246;Starr 1961, 59

58 Politicalaspectsofnarrativesaboutthetransition:Kotsonas 2016

59 SeeThemelis 1976, 37;Luce 1975, 12;Wells 1983a, 17;Calligas 1987, 17;Calligas 1988, 229; S.Morris 1989, 48;Whitley 1991a, 5;Papadopoulos 1993, 195;Papadopoulos 1996, 255; Papadopoulos 1997, 192;Lemos 1998;Papadopoulos 2001;Nakassis 2013;Papadopoulos 2014, 181;Nakassisforthcoming.

demandingarevisionofourmostbasicnarrativeofearlyGreekhistory. Unfortunately,despitemanyyearsofdebate,scholarsremainatastalemate abouttheunderlyingbasisuponwhichtheancientGreeksdeveloped acomplexandexceptionalsocialandeconomicsystemafteraperiodof remarkablestagnation – whetheritwasduemostlytothepreservationof afundamentallyMycenaeanideology,toinfluencefromtheeast,toentirely independentdevelopments,orsomecombinationoftheabove.60 Thestudy undertakenhere,acarefulexaminationoftherelevantevidencethatmight weighonourultimatejudgmentinthiscontext,aimstoanswerthisquestion withgreaterprecisionthanexistingqualitativestudieshavemanagedtodo.

5 .THEQUANTITATIVEARCHAEOLOGICALRECORD

The finalcontributionthatIwanttomakeinthisbookistovigorously investigatehowmuchquantitativeanalysiscantellusaboutprehistory,in astraightforwardandtransparentwaythattakesseriouslytwokeynotions thatmightat firstseematoddswithoneanother,butwhichIseeasultimately complementary.First,Icontendthattherecenttackawayfromquantitative analysisinarchaeology61 isamajorproblem,becausewhenwedismissquantitativechangeinthearchaeologicalrecordwesimultaneouslydiscardouronly chanceofobtainingaclearpictureof fluxinancienteconomies.Second, despiteitspotentialtoclarifybigpatternsinpasteconomies,wemustproceed withquantitativeanalysisasextremeskeptics,andprovebeyondpossibledoubt thatthepatternsweseeintheevidencearelikelytoreflectmeaningfulancient realities.

Ofcourse,thequantitativeanalysisofevidenceforprehistorictrade,and ofarchaeologicalmaterialingeneral,isfraughtwithdifficulties.62 Sincethe

60 WhilemanyauthorshavesidedwiththegradualistviewoftheEIArepresentingatimeof smoothdevelopmentfromtheLBA,manycontinuetocalltheperiodaDarkAgeandto retaintheoldernotionthattherewasamajorepisodeofcollapseandregeneration.See I.Morris 2007;Tandy 1997;Bouzek 1997, 24;Coldstream 1998, 1.Mostgeneralworksand textbooksonGreekhistorymaintainthisview(seeS.Murrayforthcomingb).

61 Formallyquantitativeapproachesgainedtractioninarchaeologyrelativelyrecentlyinthe historyofthediscipline(Spaulding 1953, 93;Ammerman 1992, 233).Spaulding’sinnovation wasanearlyexampleoftheapplicationofquantitativemethodstoarchaeologicalmaterial.He arguedthatexistingstatisticalmethodscouldmakepatternsinthearchaeologicalrecordclear inwaysthattraditionalhumanisticanalysiscouldnot.Duringthe 1960sand 1970sarchaeologistsbecamemoreinterestedinquantitativeanalysis(HeizerandCook 1960;Binfordand Binford 1966;Clarke 1968;PapersinHodson,Kendall,andTauta 1971).Thoughgreat enthusiasmhasoftensurroundedtheadoptionofscientificmethodsinarchaeology,most agreethatquantificationhasnotliveduptotheexpectationsthatarchaeologistsofthe 1970s and 1980shadforit.Postprocessualarchaeologistshavecriticizedthesemiscientificmethods ofquantitativearchaeologyformaskingsubjectiveinterpretationswithnumbersandcharts andforlosingsightofhistoricalcontextandoftheindividual(Hodder 1985).

62 ManningandHulin 2005, 283;Dickinson 2006, 201;Cherry 2010, 111–112;cf.Cline 2010, 164–165;Tartaron 2013, 34

postprocessualturnofarchaeologyinthe 1980s,quantitativeanalysishasfrequentlycomeunder fireforpresentinganartificiallyscientificandbeguilingly systematicviewofanancientworldthatwasascomplexandfullofchanging meaningsasourown.63 Inaddition,archaeologistshavebecomeincreasingly awarethatthepatternsapparentinthearchaeologicalrecordoftenreflectthe activities,researchpriorities,andmethodologicalproclivitiesofarchaeologists morethanancientrealities.64

RegardingancientpatternsinMediterraneantradetheinfluenceofquantitativearchaeologyhasnotbeenpervasive65 andscholarsremaindividedabout howmuchcountingupimportedgoodsfromsitescantellusaboutthenature ofAegeantrade.Cline’soeuvrestillrepresentsthemostthoroughattemptto quantifytheevidenceforlong-distancetradeintheLBAAegean.66 Parkinson (2010)andSchon(2010)havemadeuseofCline’scatalogsofBronzeAge importstodrawsometentativeconclusionsaboutthescaleandcharacteristics ofearlyGreektrade.Onaless “global” scale,othershavemadesignificant stridesinthequantitativestudyofsingleartifacttypes67 orofimportsfoundin individualexcavationsorregions.68

Manyscholarsarenotconvincedoftheutilityofsuchefforts.DiscussingEIA trade,Dickinsonstatesthat “basinganydetailedconclusionsonthequantities actuallyfoundinvolveshighlyquestionableassumptions.”69 Accordingto Dickinson,exoticashowonlythatasitewasconnectedinsomewaywith “theoutsideworld.” Nofurtherconclusionscanbedrawnfromimported artifacts,sincetheseitemscouldindicateavarietyofthingsincludingbutnotin anywaylimitedtotradeandforeignexchange.70 Likewise,ManningandHulin havecriticizedCline’sdataasan “inadequate,ifnotmisleading,basisonwhich toanalyzetrade,” andCherryassertsthatthefactthat “mostscholarsimagine avigoroustradeinawidevarietyofmaterialstakingplacethroughoutthe entireEasternMediterranean” shouldtakeprecedenceoverthequantitative evidence,i.e.thesurprisinglysmallnumberofartifacts(1,118 items,working outtoabout 0.5/yearovertheentireLBA)talliedupbyCline.71

63 SeeHodder 1982; 1984; 1985;MillerandTilley 1984;Spriggs 1984.

64 HelpfulrecentdiscussioninLucas 2013;seealsoCollins 1975.

65 Althoughworld-systemstheory(usuallycategorizedasatenetofprocessualarchaeology)has playedasignificantroleinframingthedebate.ThereareusefulreviewsinKardulias 2010; Sherratt 2010

66 Cline 1994;ClineandYasur-Landau 2007;Cline 2010

67 Haskell 2011;alsoworthnotingareGaleandStos-Gale 1986 (ingots);MangouandIoannou 2000 (ingots);Kayafa 2000 (metals);Ingram 2005 (beads);Rutter 2014 (CanaaniteJars).

68 Hoffman 1997 (Crete);Bikai 2000 (Kommos);Lemos 2003 (Lefkandi);Rutter 2006 (Kommos);Rahmstorf 2008 (Tiryns);Tomlinsonetal. 2010 (Kommos).

69 Dickinson 2006, 201;cf.Tartaron 2013, 34

70 Dickinson 2006, 201

71 Cherry 2010, 112

Accordingtothiscritique,thescholarlyconsensus – formedoutofgeneral impressionsgleanedfromanecdotalevidence,literarysources,andeducated hypotheses – ispreferabletothearchaeologicaldataasabasisfordrawing conclusions.Suchastandpointontheevidencecallsintoquestiontheentire projectofarchaeology – howarereconstructionsofthepastmadebyindividual scholarstobeevaluatedifnotinreferencetotheevidence?Clinehasrightly madethecounterargumentthattheevidenceexists,andtodismissitsvalueout ofhandwithoutgivingcarefulcriticalthoughttothereasonsbehinddisparities betweenscholarlyopinionandarchaeologicaldataisunhelpful.72

Fewwouldarguethatimportcountstellthewholestory,butasClinepoints out, “[i]tdoesnogoodtodisparagetheonlymaterialevidencewecurrently possess. ” Clinearguesthatthisevidencemustbetakenintoaccountinany discussioninvolvingpossibletradeandcontactbetweentheAegean,Egypt, andtheNearEast.73 Fantalkinsummarizesthemiddle-of-the-roadviewthat “[t]heaccumulationofdata,anessentialbeginning,shouldleadtocontextualizationinvolvingtheunderstandingthatdifferentchronologicalsettings mayrepresentdifferentgeopoliticaldynamics.”74 Whilegatheringtheevidenceiskey,puttingthisinformationintoahistorical/chronologicalcontext isanecessaryfollow-up.Accordingtothisview,thebestwayforwardisto neitherdisparagenordismissthematerialremainsoftradebuttogetthe evidencetogetherandthenhaveacontextuallyinformeddiscussionabout whatitmightmean.75

RegardingtheeconomictransitionbetweentheLBAandtheEIA,neither ofthesegoalshavebeenaccomplishedyet.Here,Iaimtotacklethem,butnot onlyinthesensethatIhavegatheredtheevidence.Despitethebroadly stated,almostsuperstitiousskepticismaboutnumbersthathasbeenexpressed inexistingscholarshiponMediterran eantrade,fewhavearticulatedwith muchclarityhowwemightdistinguishmeaningfulquantitativechangefrom changethatcanbediscountedasaproductofpostdepositionalfactors,orasso insigni fi cantthatitcanreasonablybedismissed.InregardtoLBAandEIA trade,wehavelongbeenvaguelyawarethatweknowof “fewer” imported andexportedobjectsfromEIA,butlittlee ff orthasbeenmadetodistinguish levelsofmagnitudeand/orstatisticalsigni fi canceofthesetrends,letalone howtheycomparetootherquantitativeeconomicmeasuressuchasdemography,orhowtheyre fl ectarchaeologicalresearchprioritiesratherthan changeintheancientpast.

72 Cline 2010, 165

73 Cline 2010, 165

74 Fantalkin 2006, 199.

75 Ammerman 1992, 239: “Thisisessentiallyaproblemofformalism;mostpracticingarchaeologistswhohavespentyearsassemblingadatasetarelikelytohaveadensenetworkofideas, albeitimperfectandincomplete,abouttheirdata.”

Inordertogetasenseofallthesefactors,andinorderforanalysistobe meaningful,theevidencefortradeneedsnecessarilytobecontextualized withintheoverallhuman-generateddatasetofarchaeologicalknowledgefor therelevantperiods.Prehistoricarchaeologistsreconstructthepastbyweaving togethernarrativesthatunifyscatteredpiecesofinformationintoacoherent whole.Sinceonlyasmall,oftenrandomlypreserved,fractionofwritten sourcesandmaterialevidencefromtheprehistoricworldsurvivesandisthus alreadypartialandcontingent,itisoftheutmostimportancethatthismaterial beconsideredwithinamatrixofalltheinformationthatwehavemanagedto assembleintothearchaeologicalrecord.Here,Iattempttoprojecttheevidencefortradeagainstasystematicallyconstructedbackgroundofthearchaeologicalrecordaswehaveit,sothatitispossibletoputitinperspective. Thehopeisthatthiswillputusinamuchbetterpositiontodistinguishrandom patternsfrommeaningfulchange.

6 .APPROACHESTOANCIENTTRADEFROMTHEMATERIAL EVIDENCE

Ihopethatitwillnotbecontroversialtoassertwithouttoomuchfurther pleadingthatsortingoutallofthesetopicsiscrucialtoourabilitytoclearlytell thestoryofGreece’shistoricaleconomicdevelopment.Inaddition,Ihopethat itwillbecomeclearthroughouttheprogressoftheargumentthatevidencefor tradecanbeafruitfulsourceofanswerstobiggerquestionsabouttherealitiesof socialandpoliticaldevelopmentsovertime.

Abitoffurtherarticulationisappropriateinregardtotheintellectual orientationofmuchofwhatfollows.Fortheprehistoricperiod,theonly evidencewehavetorelyuponwhenexaminingtheexternalconnectionsof anygrouparearchaeologicalartifacts.Aswehavealreadyseen,theseobjects areunlikelytohaveastraightforwardrelationshipwithancienttradeorthe ancienteconomy.76 AsBennetstates, “[t]hecoreproblemwithunderstanding pastexchangepatternsisthatobjectstendnottoberecoveredarchaeologically incontextswheretheywereconsumed,notintheprocessofdistribution,or evenattheirpointofarrival.”77 Therearemanydifficultiesthatgoalongwith tryingtoreadthenatureof “trade” intothenumberandtypeofsurviving objectsfoundlyingaroundarchaeologicalsites.Tradedgoodsmaynotbewell representedbythe finished,recognizablyimportedobjectsthatendupgetting depositedandexcavatedinarchaeologicalsites.Whilethepresenceofnonlocal potteryandotherforeigngoodstendstoindicatesomekindofculturalcontact, itdoesnotnecessarilyindicatedirectparticipationintradebythecommunity

Jones 2000, 50;Cherry 2010, 111–112;ParkinsonandGalaty 2010, 16–25;Tartaron 2013, 34

orindividualsthatpossessedthem.Likewise,theabsenceofimportedgoodsat asitedoesnotnecessarilyindicatethetotaldisengagementofthatsitefrom exchangenetworks,butcouldbeindicativeofanythingfromtaphonomic/ postdepositionalprocessestothearchaeologicalinvisibilityoftradedgoods,to culturalchoicesaboutwhattodowithimports.

Despitetheoft-statedmaximthatitisimpossibletoexcavatetradenetworks, manyscholarshaveattemptedtocreateeconomicmodelsbasedonthearchaeologicalevidenceoftradedgoods.Avarietyoftheoreticalapproacheshave beenusedinthestudyofancienttrade,andsomehavecontributedtoour understandingofexchangenetworksandmechanismsintheprehistoricpast.78 Itwillbeusefultodefinetheframeworkwhichunderliesthisbook,especially inrelationtothesetheoreticalapproaches.

Existinganalysesoftradeinthearchaeologicalrecordhavemostoftentaken amodel-basedapproach.Whilesomeofthesemodelsoftradenetworkshave analyticalvalue,archaeologicalmodelsofartifactdistributionshavebeen extensivelycriticizedandproblematizedandshouldthereforebeapproached withcaution.Inwhatfollows,Ireviewthewayinwhicharchaeologistshave interpretedthemeaningofimportandexportdistributions,andassesstheir valueforthecurrentstudy.Ithenarticulatemyownapproachtotheevidence, whichlargelyeschewsexistingtheoreticalmodelsinordertocreatespacefor amorerigorousinterrogationofthebasicfactsunderlyingourideasabout ancienttrade.

Historiansandarchaeologistshaveidentifiednumerouscategoriesoftrade systems,whichsomebelievecanbetracedinthedistributionofmaterialinthe archaeologicalrecord.Polanyiisolatedthreemainmodesofexchange:reciprocity,redistribution,andmarketexchange.79 Inherenttothesemodelsisthe presumptionthatgeographicalpatternsintheevidencewouldbeshapedbyand thereforereflectthenatureofthetradesystem.80 Renfrewlaterelaborated onthesethreebasictypes,diagrammingtenmodelsoftrade:directaccess, home-basereciprocity,boundaryreciprocity,down-the-line,central-place redistribution,central-placemarketexchange,freelance(middleman)trading, emissarytrading,colonialenclaves,andport-of-trade.Renfrewexplicitly linkedthesedifferentsystemstodifferentspatialpatternsinartifactdistribution thatcouldberecognizedarchaeologically.81 Hetheorizedthatwecould distinguishdifferentkindsoftradebylookingatthedistributionoftraded goods.82 Giftexchangebetweenelites,forexample,wouldresultinadifferent

78 Forexample,discussionoftheevidenceofimportsfromAlMina(andtoalesserextent Pithekussai)inLuke 2003

79 Polanyi 1957.

80 PolanyiinDalton 1968, 163

81 Renfrew 1975

82 Renfrew 1975, 46

patternofimportdepositionthanindependent,freelancemarkettrade.83 RenfrewappliedthisframeworktoobsidianintheNearEast.Hearguedthat thismaterialwastradedina “down-the-line” fashion,apparentfromthe changingdensityof findsrelativetodistancefromtheirsource.84 Inturn, associatingdifferenttradesystemswithspecificsocialandculturalrelationships allowedRenfrewtolinkthespatialpatternoftradedobjectstosocialand politicalstructures.

Othershaveproposedalternativeinterpretativeframeworksforthespatial distributionpatternsofcommoditiesandartifacts.IntheWorldSystemsmodel, firstdevelopedbyWallersteinfortheearlymodernworld,butmodifiedby archaeologiststosuittheconditionsofarchaicstates,85 finishedproductsfrom well-developed “ core ” statesareexchangedfornecessarybulkcommodities fromoutlying,less-developed “peripheries.”86 Becauseofthediverseinterests ofthepartiesinaWorldSystem,andthemodel’sassumptionsregarding asymmetricexchangerelationships,itisexpectedthatcertainpatternsinthe depositionofartifactsshouldbeevidentinthespatialdata.InaCore/Periphery WorldSystem,wewouldexpect finishedvalue-addedimportedproductsto accumulateinareaswithstrongcontrolovercommoditiesthatwouldhave beenofinteresttotheirtradingpartners.87 Forexample,iftimberwereof interesttoacorestate,wewouldexpectimportsfromthatcorestateto accumulateinareaswithgoodaccesstotimberresources,andsoon.Most AegeanistsusingaWorldSystemsperspectiveseeGreeceasaperipheralstate, subsidiary(thoughnotsubordinate)topowerful,morematureNearEastern states,althoughtheexplicittenetsoftheworldsystemsmodeldonotseemto havewonovermanyadherentsinthiscontext.88 Otherscholarshave attemptedtomakesenseoftradesystemsusingdifferentspatialmodels,often atleastlooselyrelatedtotheideasofRenfrewandPolanyi.89 Forexample, Hirth,workingonancientMesoamerica,developedthenotionof “gateway communities.”90 Thegatewaycommunitymodelisavariationofaportof trademodelthatpredictsadendriticdistributionofgoodsthroughoutasite hierarchyratherthanadistributioninwhichgoodsareaccumulatedinareas thatareashortdistancefroma “centralplace.”91

83 Renfrew 1975, 48–50

84 Renfrew,Dixon,andCann 1968

85 Wallerstein 1974;HopkinsandWallerstein 1982;Chase-DunnandHall 1991

86 Stein 2002, 904

87 Kristiansen 1998

88 SherrattandSherratt 1991;Kardulias 2010;Burns 2011

89 Smith 2004, 84–85

90 Hirth 1978.

91 Hirth 1978 , 38 .Inthismodel,onepowerfulcommunitymonopolizesmostofaregion ’ s marketactivity,whilea “gatewaycommunity” islocatedataregionalboundaryand operatesasacommercialmiddleman.Imports andeconomicactivityarefunneledthrough

Theideathatpatternsinthedistributionofimportsmightbeagood indicatorofthemechanismsoftrade,ortheorganizationalstructuresthrough whichgoodsmovedaround,isthereforewell-establishedinthearchaeological literature.92 Accordingtothisapproach,changeindistributionsofimported objectsovertime,fedthroughthelensofamodelsuchasWorldSystems Theoryorgatewaycommunities,shouldindicateofadjustmentsinprevailing tradesystemsand,byextension,politicalandsocialinstitutions.Ontheother hand,thenotionthatarchaeologicallyevidentpatternsofartifactconsumption, production,orcirculation – evenwhenconsideredsynthetically – haveanythingtotellusaboutexchangesystemshasbeencriticizedinrecentyears. CriticshavearguedthatmodificationsarchaeologistsapplytoWallerstein’ s WorldSystemsmodelrobthisheuristictoolofanyexplanatoryvalue,effectivelyrenderingitsobroadandamorphousthatitisunsuitablefordistinguishingbetweendifferentlyfunctioningsystems.93 Perhapsmoreimportantly,even thecomponentsoftheWorldSystemsmodelthatarchaeologicalapplications preserverestontheassumptionthatexternalforcesanddynamicsarethe primarydriversoftradeandexchange.94 Recentstudiesoftradeargueinstead thatindividualswithinsystems,ratherthanimposedeconomicforces,determinethematerialcharacteristicsofsocieties.Thus,studiesoftradeand exchangenowtendtofocusmoreonthesocialaspectsofinterculturalinteractionsratherthaneconomicorstructuralones.95

Accordingtothesestudies,approachingtradefromthepointofviewofthe internaldynamicsofconsumptionnotonlyexplainssocialdevelopmentbetter, butalsotreatsthearchaeologicalevidenceinamannerthatismoreappropriate toitslimitations.96 Spatialstudiesofartifactdistributionsdependonanumber ofproblematicassumptions:forinstance,thatthearchaeologicalevidencefor tradeaccuratelyrepresentstheoriginalcirculationofgoods,thatdifferenttypes ofcirculationwillresultinarchaeologicallydistinguishablepatternsof deposition,97 andthatthenormalcoexistenceofmultipletypesandlevelsof thegatewaycommunitybecauseitisanimportantpointofculturalmediation,notbecause itisacenterofpower.

92 Galatyetal. 2010, 48.

93 ForexampleStein’scritiques(Stein 1999a; 1999b; 2002)aswellasmoregeneraldebatesabout thevalueofbroadandgeneralizingapproachesatKohl 2008;Hegmon 2003; 2005;Watkins 2003.Forrecentdefensesofthemodeleveninitsmostgeneralform,recentlyGalaty 2011; Hall,Kardulias,andChase-Dunn 2011

94 Forcessuchasgeographicrealitiesordeterminants,KnappandCherry 1994, 141 (“Bronze AgemaritimecentersintheeasternMediterraneanlikelyowedtheircommercialandsocial successtotheirlocationalongthemostcommonlyusedsea-lanes.”)

95 Stein 2002, 904–905.

96 HodderandOrton 1976;ManningandHulin 2005, 270–271;Cherry 2010, 111–112;Sherratt 2011

97 HodderandOrton 1976

exchangewillnotmuddleupthearchaeologicalfootprint.98 Forexample,if archaeologistsfocusonexcavatinglarge,importantsites,itislikelythatthey willhavemoreevidencefortradeatthesesites,andwillargueaccordingly.99 Iftherewastradeinorganicproducts,thiswillbelessapparentinthearchaeologicalrecordthantradeindurablegoods.Ifpeopletookimportedgoods withthemwhentheyabandonedonesite,andleftthembehindatanother,this willlikewiseaffectthespatialdistributionofevidencefortradeinwaysthatdo notreflectthedynamicsofthecirculationofgoodswith fidelity.

Byfocusingontheevidenceofexchangeinitsdepositionalcontext,archaeologistshopetosidesteptheseproblemswhilestillsayingsomethinguseful aboutthewayinwhichculturesinteracted.Somethingaboutthenatureof demandcanbeinferredfromthewaythatimportedproductsfunctionedin society.100 Peoplearelikelytoconsumeobjectsinwaysthataremeaningfulto them,inplacesthattheobjectsareconsideredappropriate,useful,ordesirable. Butevenifwefocusonimportconsumptioninstudyingtradedynamics,we stilldosoundertheassumptionthatthearchaeologicalrecordisnothopelessly distorted,andthatwecandrawmeaningfulconclusionsfromit.

Insum,althoughIdonotinanywaythinkthattheoreticalandmodel-based approachestothetradeeconomyoftheearlyAegeanarevalueless,itseemsto methatwearecurrentlynotinapositiontousethemtotheirfullestpotential, becausewedonotyetunderstandtheevidence:isthematerialresiduaoflongdistancetradehopelesslydistorted?Arethedifferencesweseeinthegeographicaldistributionsandquantitiesofimportsovertimesignificant,orrandom? Aretheyrelatedtotheoveralldistributionofsitesandapparentdemographic fluctuations?Ordocertainareasincertainperiodstrulyseemoreapparent tradeonapercapitaaswellasaggregatelevel?Wedonotyethaveanydecent answerstothesequestions.How,ifwedonotunderstandbasicaspectsofthe evidence,canwehopetousefullyapplygeneralizingmodelstoit?Alongthese lines,onepurposeofthisbookistoprovidescholarssometractiononthese issues,asaprecursortoopeningthedoorsformoreusefultheoreticalmodeling ofancienttrade.

Inlightofthisgoal,theprimarytenetsunderlyingthisworksurroundthe notionofformationprocesses:howdidthepatternsweseeinthearchaeologicalrecordgetthere,andhowca nweinterpretthemmeaningfully whileretainingastronggraspoftherelevanttaphonomiccomplications involved?Iholdthepositionthatmoreelaboratetheoreticalapproachesand modelsarebestappliedtodataatalaterstageofanalysis,oncethebasic

98 Vianello 2011, 411;cf.Lamberg-Karlovsky 1975, 348

99 ManningandHulin 2005, 287.

100 FortheMycenaeanworld,mostclearlyformulatedinBurns 2010b;BrysbaertandVetters 2013;cf.Kayafa 2008;Hoffman 1997 forearlyCrete;I.Morris 2000, 195–256;Crielaard 1999;Sherratt 1999 forearlyGreece.

mathematicalpatternsofquantitiesanddistributionshave beenestablished. Thearchaeologicalrecordishighlycontingent,incomplete,andtaphonomicallyrandom101 andapplyingsyntheticmode lstodatathathasnotyet beenfullysynthesizedsimplyexacerbates,insteadofhelpingtosolve,the intractableinterpretiveproblemsatstake,andfrequentlyobscuresmorethan itenlightens.Therefore,inwhatfollowsIlargelyeschewthemostpopular modelsandapproachestoancienttrade,includingnetworktheoryand worldsystemstheory,infavorofarelativelynaïveandhardheadedattempt tosortoutwhatthedatareallycandoinhelpingustoreconstructpast “systems.” Insteadofapplyingmodelstoevidence,Iprioritizediscussionof thebasicinterpretiveproblemswemustfacewhencomingtotermswith boththescaleanddistributionofevidencefortradeandthepeskyproblem ofhowmuchfaithtoputintothatdata.Thepurposeofthisapproachisto ensurethatfuturescholarswhowisht oshowthatmodelscanbehelpfulin evaluatingancientcommercialandpoli ticalrelationshipsatadistancecan easilykeeptheirappliedtheoryembeddedinthedata.

7 .DEFINITIONOFTERMSANDGEOGRAPHICALSCOPE OFTHEWORK

Afew finalpreliminaryremarksondefinitionsandthegeographicalscopeof theworkarenecessarybeforeproceedingwiththeargument.WhenIspeak abouttrade,Iusethisterminabasicsense,tobetakenaseffectivelysynonymouswithexchange,asanykindofmovementofmaterialsorobjectsfrom theirplaceoforiginormanufacturetoanotherplacewheretheycannothave originatedorwherethelocalmaterialculturecanbeclearlydistinguishedfrom them.Long-distanceexchangeisabittrickiertodefine,sincetheterm long carriesnoprecision.Inthiswork,Itakelong-distanceexchangetomean primarilymaritimeexchangethatwouldhavenecessitatedsignificantvoyaging toandfromregionswithsocial,cultural,political,and/oreconomicsystems thatwereclearlydistinctfromoneanother.Thus,thisbookcoversexchangeat adistancebothgeographicallyandsocially,ratherthansmall-scaleexchanges thattookplaceamongstneighborsoperatingwithinasimilarcultural framework.102

Asfordefiningimportsthemselves,thisisanotherproblemthatloomslarge overthestudy,andtheissueofhowrepresentativethesurvivingarchaeological materialsthatwerecognizeasimportsareofanoriginalbodyofcirculating

101 Earle 1982, 7;cf.Renfrew 1972, 441

102 NotbecauseIthinkthelatterkindofexchangeislessimportant;butthisisatopiccomplex andrichenoughtodemanditsownbook-lengthtreatmentsandcannotbecoveredinthe currentcontext.Forsmall-scalenetworksseeKnappett 2011;Tartaron 2013;Knodell 2013; Kramer-Hajos 2016

importsisatthecenterofmuchofthediscussionthatfollows.Ingeneralterms, Iuseaworkingdefinitionofa finishedimportasamanmadeobjectthatis recoveredinacontextthatisoutsideits “culturalunit” ofmanufacture. InGreececulturalboundarieshavealwaysbeen fluid,103 andfortheperiod understudytheyoftenseemarbitrary,sochoosingwhethertocallsomething animportornotundertheworkingdefinitionIhavegivenisnotbeyond criticism.However,foranalyticalpurposes,itseemsbothpracticalandnecessarytodefineacoarselyuniformareaofculturalpractice,whileacceptingthat itsboundariesarenot fixedlinesinthesand.Inadditiontoproblemsofdefining culturalboundaries,intheabsenceofscientificanalysisofthinsectionsorclay content,separatingimportsfromlocallymadeimitationscanbecomplex.104 Largely,weareatthemercyofindividual fieldprojectmembersandtheir bespokedefinitionsaboutorabilitytorecognizetheseobjects,aproblemthat Ireturntooccasionallyinwhatfollows.Commoditiesaresubjecttosomeof thesameissuesofrecoveryandfuzzyboundaries,buttheworkingdefinition ofanimportedcommodityIusehere,whichisanyobjectfoundinaregion thatismadefromamaterialthatdoesnotnaturallyoccurinthatregion, shouldbelesscontroversial.

Geographically,IlimitmyanalysistothepartofGreecethatisgenerally understoodtohavebeenculturallyMycenaeanduringtheBronzeAge,105 sincemyanalyticalgoalshavetodowith figuringouthowmuchtheGreek economychangedaftertheMycenaeancollapse.WithintheGreekworld,Ido notincludeMacedonia,Thrace,ortheCycladicandEastGreekislandsinmy analyses.Thisdecisionislikelytofrustratesome,especiallythosearchaeologists workingtobringtolightthemany,fascinating,andimportantnewsites fromtheLBAandEIAinnorthernGreeceandeasternGreece.Asidefrom thealreadycitedreasoning(thatnorthernGreecewasnotclearlypartofthe sameBronzeAgeculturaltrajectorythatseemstobeevidentinthesouthern Greekmainland)thislimitationisalsodrivenbysheerlogistics.Thelong timespancoveredandthedata-intensiveapproachItakeheremakethework difficulttoscalegeographically.Gatheringandsortingoutoverahundred years ’ worthofevidenceforimports,exports,systemsofproduction,and comprehensiveexcavationandsurveydataatacertainresolutionpresents seriousobstaclestotheresearcherinGreekarchaeology,especiallysince manysmallerexcavationreportsarescatteredthroughoutavarietyofperfunctorypolyglotpublicationswhicharenotavailableinmostlibraries.Anyone whohasheftedtheannual ArchDelt volumesonMacedoniaandThrace,and

103 AthemethatrunsthroughouttheinfluentialworksofHordenandPurcell 2000 and Broodbank 2013.

104 See,forinstance,thecollectedessaysinKerschnerandLemos 2014

105 Again,notanentirelyunproblematicnotion:seeFeuer 1983;ParkinsonandGalaty 2007, 8–9;Tartaron 2004, 165–167

seentheirbulgingspinesonthebookshelf,willperhapssympathizewithmy decisiontodrawalineofdatacollectionattheThessalianborder.Forsimilar reasons,IalsolargelysetasidetheevidencefromtheCycladesandEastGreece, thoughpartsofthecoastalregionsoftheseareasprobablyhadgreater-or-lesser culturalaffiliationswiththemainlandintheLBA.106 Irecognizethisas ashortcomingofthepresentwork,andexpectthatfutureendeavors,either myownorotherscholars’,willmoveinthedirectionoffullgeographic coverage.IdoincludeCreteinthediscussion,thoughthispresentscertain difficulties.AtmanypointsIwilltreatCretelargelyasaseparateentityfromthe Greekmainland,sinceitseconomichistoryandceramicchronologydiverge inimportantwaysthroughouttheperiodunderstudy,andIwilloftenhave occasiontocommentonthewaysIdealwiththesedivergences.

Finally,atermthatappearsinboththetitleofthebookandthroughout thediscussionthatfollowsis “institutions,” whichIbelievetoprovide aconvenientstructuringframefordiachroniccomparativeanalysis. Iunderstandinstitutionstobeconstitutedbythesocial,political,andlogistical scaffoldingswithinwhichexchangesandtransactionstookplace,andwhichin turnshapedthenatureandpossibilitiesofthoseexchangesandtransactions(in essence,theperformanceofexchangeeconomies).

107 While “formal” institutionsintheshapeofhierarchically,coercivelymandatedrulesandregulations areoccasionallyapparentintheevidencefromearlyGreece,108 Iammore interestedinwhatwecandiscoveraboutthehistoryof “informal” institutions, thatis,habitualandcustomarybehaviorsthataretheproductofcountless individualdecisionsthatarestructuredbyandstructurethewaythatpeople behave.109

8 .OUTLINEOFTHEBOOK

Thebookfallsintosixchapters,alongwiththisintroductionandabrief concludingsection.Thestructureoftheargumentisbothprogressiveand cumulative,withtheoverallaimtoworksystematicallythroughallavailable

106 The “true” limitsofaMycenaeanworldaredifficulttoestablish,andtheissuehaswrought muchdiscussion,datingbackatleasttoFeuer 1983.AccordingtoSnodgrass(2000,xxvi)the limitsshouldbedrawnsouthofThessaly,asMycenaeanculturebecomesdilutedand “fleeting” inPhokis,Lokris,andAetolia(seealsoWardleandWardle 2003;Kramer-Hajos 2008).However,duetothepresenceofmanychambertombswith findsintheMycenaean styleinLokris,Phokis,andsouthernAetolia,aswellastheMycenaeanpalaceatDimini,it seemsunwisetoexcludetheseregionsfromalooselydefined “Mycenaeanworld.” Seealso commentsatDickinson 2006, 24–25

107 Ontheroleofinstitutionsinshapingeconomicpracticeandperformancefrom acomparativistperspective,seeHarriss,Hunter,andLewis 1995.

108 Forexample,thesystemsoftaxationandallotment(ta-ra-si-ja)intheLinearBtexts.

109 DrawinggenerallyfromtheframeworklaidoutinGiddens 1984,butalsothetenetsofNew InstitutionalEconomics(seen. 42 above).

Another random document with no related content on Scribd:

possible, and in this they succeed gloriously, especially in denominational schools.

I was a delicate and dreamy boy, and was having great trouble with my ears, consequently my education was frequently interrupted by sickness, and even when comparatively well it was necessary to keep me continually interested or I would fall asleep. I was tired for nearly fifteen years, and until I was of age never enjoyed six consecutive months of even fair health. Meanwhile a small brother had arrived on the scene, who brought new life into the house. He was destined, as you shall hear, very few years.

As everything appertaining to my father had to be a credit to him, strenuous efforts were made to bring me up to the standard; but from the start I was a failure both physically and mentally. I was educated one way and another; system could not be applied to me. Schools made but little impression on me, with the exception of one particular boarding school, kept by a Church of England parson in a small village not far from Montreal. This parson, Canon Barr, was a crude, rough, wicked, ignorant, self-opinionated, hypocritical old man, more farmer than parson. His only aim seemed to be to make as much out of his boys as possible with the least trouble. He thrashed me cruelly on the slightest pretext, in fact he thrashed everybody in the school and on his farm; the boys, his sons and daughters, the servants, his horses and his dogs. I am not aware that he thrashed his wife, but as I have seen him beat a horse in the face with his fists, and kick it in the stomach with his long boots, it is highly probable that he laid violent hands on his wife. The Canon was a tall, lanky, rawboned individual with prominent nose and chin, and small eyes set very close together He suffered from some skin disease that made his complexion scaly and blotchy. This affliction, no doubt, affected his temper, for I noticed that when the disfiguring blotches were fiery looking, he was particularly touchy. As he sat at his desk in classroom, he was always pawing his bald head with a large bony hand, probing his ear with a lead pencil or pen handle, or investigating his nose. His black waistcoat, which buttoned behind, was always decorated with spots, and his odour was that of a stableman. His voice was harsh and loud, except when speaking from the pulpit;

then he subdued it to a monotonous sing-song drone involving four semitones in a chromatic scale; the kind of noise the bass string of a ’cello will make if it is plucked while the peg is turned up and let down again. I never saw him laugh heartily, but a joyless grin disclosing large yellow teeth sometimes wrinkled his displeasing face; and this generally occurred just before some one was beaten.

The Canon had a balky horse with a hairless tail which he really appeared to delight in belabouring. On one occasion his little daughter Mabel and several of the school boys were present while he thrashed this horse without mercy. The horse was harnessed to a heavily ladened stone-boat so that he could not bolt. Mabel screamed a little weak “Oh!”

“Go into the house, daughter,” said the Canon.

“But father,” she began. She got no further when slash came the whip about her poor little legs.

“Into the house,” the Canon shouted. A boy standing by with every expression of rooted horror upon his face was suddenly discovered.

“What are you gaping at, you silly little ass?” said the old man. At the same instant he struck him on the side of the head with his open hand a blow which nearly felled him. I was the stricken boy.

The rod was never spared in this school, with the result that every one lied and deceived systematically.

Sundays under the Canon were a horror. We rose at eight o’clock and went to prayers before breakfast. After breakfast we had time to dress and to go to Bible-class. Bible-class ended just in time for church, and immediately after church we dined. The Canon offered up a particularly long blessing before Sunday dinner. It always spoiled what little appetite I had. His voice at any time was not a pleasant one, but his hypocritical Sunday tone was exasperating. After dinner we sat in the schoolroom and studied the lesson and collect for the day. At three we went to Sunday School, which lasted till nearly five. From five to six we walked with a teacher—a pusillanimous wretch without a soul. We had tea at six and went to

church at seven. I doubt if a more perfect programme could be elaborated for the purpose of disgusting children with religion.

The Canon’s favourite hymn was “Abide with me.” Perhaps he was aware that the more foolish parents there were who would send poor, helpless children to abide with him the more satisfying would be his income.

It is not surprising that I heartily hated Church and all it implied; with a very special hatred for “Abide with me,” in which I had been forced to lift up my voice hundreds of times before I was fifteen years old.

I was so unhappy in the house of Canon Barr that I decided I must leave or die; it did not matter which. To effect my release I pretended to have gone violently insane. It is not certain if I deceived the Canon, but I think I did. When the foolish idea first came to me, I did not realise what a strain acting the madman would be, or how I could make an end of the comedy. I just played my little part and trusted to luck.

I started moderately by doing foolish things, grinning at every one one minute and being cross the next; striking and slapping all who approached me. This brought the Canon down on me with his favourite implement of torture—a nice, smooth flour barrel stave with a handle whittled at one end. He thought it was a case of ordinary rebellion. But one blow from the barrel stave was enough for me; and its effect, I fancy, startled the old brute. I flew at him like a wild cat, kicked his shins, bit him on the hand and on the calf of his leg, and tore his gown to ribbons. Of course I was no match for the Canon and his barrel stave, and received unmerciful punishment; but I played the game, throwing ink bottles, rulers, books, anything that came to hand, in the old fellow’s face, and overturning desks and chairs like a maniac. He called on the boys for assistance. I brandished a ruler and threatened dire vengeance in a loud hysterical voice against any one who dared approach me, and the boys held back. I was not subdued till the hired man came to the rescue, and bundled me into my room and locked me up. There I continued to howl aloud, and destroy every breakable thing. When I

had screamed myself hoarse and was tired out I lay down on my bed and cried till I fell asleep. When I awoke it was nearly dark. There were people in the room, so I remained quiet with closed eyes to discover if any conversation would give me a cue for my next move in the drama. I was rewarded for my cunning by hearing the voice of the village doctor telling the Canon to keep me very quiet and to send for my parents. In a minute they withdrew, and presently a lamp and my supper were brought me by a very nervous maid.

The next day I was in a raging fever. My mother arrived in the evening and to her I confessed. I was forgiven, taken home, and not sent to another boarding school.

Sending children to boarding schools is an admission of incapacity made by a great many parents who are too lazy or ignorant to superintend the early years of a child’s up-bringing; or else it is done in vanity as the proper thing.

There are possibly good boarding schools where children are better than they would be at home, but I never knew one. The only good reason for sending the young to be cared for by strangers is when the home for some reason is not a fit place. No doubt a good boarding school is better than a bad home; but no boarding school is as good as a good home and wise parents. Girls brought up in fashionable schools are notoriously ignorant and useless.

One pleasant memory remains to me of the Canon’s school. It is that of a little girl with blue eyes, golden hair, red pouty lips and blunt nose. She was a day scholar from the village, where her father kept a general store. I never had much opportunity to speak to her, and she was very shy when I did; yet it was a pleasure just to look at her. When the Canon frightened her by shouting and pounding his desk with his large hard hand I was maddened to the fury point. She was a gentle little creature, truthful, believing and good-hearted; a thing so little understood by the Canon that he called her “Little Blockhead.” When I was robbed of my meals, which frequently happened as punishment for some fault, “Little Blockhead” would bring me biscuits on the sly. Whether the Canon made me forego meals wholly as a punishment for my misdeeds, or partly in delight to

torture me and save victuals, I cannot say But for whatever cause it was, I really did not mind it, and sometimes even looked forward to it so that “Little Blockhead” could feed me from her pocket.

During the miserable days at the Canon’s my little brother died suddenly without giving me a last sweet hug and kiss. He was ten years younger than me to a day, having been born on my tenth birthday. This was the first real sorrow to leave its mark upon me. I loved that brother more than anything or anybody. I had taught him his first words, mended his playthings, and been his play-horse, his cow, his dog—anything he desired me to be. When I was at home, it was to me he always came first thing in the early morning, crawling into my bed to start the day’s play, and every word of his lisping, indistinct prattle stuck in my mind.

I was brought home by an old friend of my father’s, who came for me with the message that my little brother was seriously ill. On looking into the old man’s face, I was not deceived, and knew at once that my little friend was dead. But I said nothing. I did not weep or wail. I could not.

When we were seated beside each other on the train, and I said to him, “Chuckie is dead!” he did not reply. He merely nodded his head, and I rode silently home without a word or a tear I wished to weep, but could not. Even when I arrived home and my mother kissed me I remained dry-eyed, but my misery was very real. It hurt me so much my breath came short and painful.

Then we went through the ghastly meaningless mummery and pomp of the funeral. Even then I disliked our foolish display in burying our dead. Since that day I have buried my own dead; but it was always done silently, privately, quickly, without display, without pomp and without advertisement. To me death is a thing to be put behind you. When loved ones die, there is nothing to be done or said. It is over. First bury them, then get occupied with the affairs of the living, being careful in your conduct that you make as few mistakes as may be; so that when another goes away you may have no memories of actions or words to cause self-reproach.

I had no remorse for any unkindness to my baby brother; for I had always loved him much, even from the time when he had newly arrived; a helpless, unseeing, unthinking bit of life. I like to dwell on this, for it is at least one instance where humanly I did my whole duty. My duty to him was such a simple uncomplicated thing—just to love him and be kind. As I grew up I found duty rather a difficult and complicated thing to see and do.

Other deaths happened as they must in a large family. In quick succession several of our older relatives died. In those young days I never felt very keenly the loss of old people. It seemed so natural for the aged to die that I took it as a matter of course. I do not know that I have changed much in this respect even now, especially when people are both old and useless.

I lost my paternal grandparents, and my great-grandfather about this time. I felt a genuine sorrow about grandfather’s death because he was a dear old chap—hale, hearty, and jovial. He was suddenly, and it may seem ruthlessly, killed by having his head crushed by a runaway horse; but sudden death is not, despite the Prayer Book, the worst kind of exit. He was a most cheerful old optimist, caring nothing for the day after to-morrow, or any other day but the one he was living; and his end was in keeping with his life. He was a third husband of my grandmother, who had been a very beautiful Quakeress, and my father was their only son.

CHAPTER III

Both my grandmothers were very religious, one more ostentatiously than the other. When a young child I distinguished them by calling one the grandmother who said prayers, and the other the grandmother who made cakes. I had a strong preference for the one who made cakes. Her plain fruit cake, undefiled by messy icing of chocolate or sugar, was a production worthy of remembrance.

My great-grandfather was to me just an old man, very old and blind, who sat by the fire all day long, and spoke little, and then in a harsh cold voice, with a strong Scotch accent. He lived in a large house on a dingy, but a highly respectable street, with four old daughters and one son, who I discovered did not love him very much.

Visiting my great-grandfather’s house was like passing suddenly into old-fashioned long-passed times. My ancient great-aunts were very prim and very properly made-up ladies, looking as much alike and as smooth and shiny as four silk hats just out of bandboxes.

“Here’s Jack,” Aunt Elizabeth would say when I arrived, and I would be gently pushed towards my great-grandfather who sat in the hall in a big high-backed arm-chair, combing his long white beard with his fingers. “Weel, laddie?” the old fellow would growl, and he would reach out to feel me and pat my head with his large hand.

My great-aunts were very proud of their descent, which they claimed from the Duke of Argyle. I never was interested enough to ask how far they had descended from the noble duke. They helped out a meagre fortune by keeping a genteel dressmaking establishment patronised by a few select people. In their house I played Blind Man’s Buff, Puss in the Corner, and other dead and gone games; drank raspberry vinegar and ate plum cake.

My great-uncle was a curiosity. He did not drink, smoke nor work. He was a little wizened, dried-up fellow with a much wrinkled face

the colour of a potato. He lived on his sisters, who made everything he wore but his hat and boots, and his clothes were certainly remarkable.

After his death I heard my father say to some card-playing cronies, “We planted Uncle Allan to-day.” Everybody laughed, but I thought it was hard-hearted. Nothing about my great-uncle seemed, however, to matter, or to be serious, not even his death. He inspired neither dislike nor fondness. He was just one of those who do not count—a human vegetable.

A pack of cards was a thing never seen in the houses of my greatgrandfather or either of my grandmothers, but in our house they were the main source of amusement. Father could not see the harm in cards that the older branches of our family saw. My earliest memories are associated with cards. Father played nearly nightly except on Sundays. Every one who came to our house was a cardplayer. The neighbours with whom we associated were card players. Possibly cards are a safe amusement for a certain type of character. They are like everything else—used with discretion they are good; without discretion, and in league with drink and gambling, they are bad.

Thus it came about quite naturally that while still young I learned many games of cards. If father and I were left alone together of an evening we played cribbage. If we were three—mother, he and I— we played bezique. If we were four it was whist. If others dropped in, or were invited, we played draw-poker for a small stake. Draw-poker never got disreputable or blood-thirsty in our house, as a very low stake was the rule.

Through cards I came to distrust my father’s judgment. He played games of cards the way he felt, sometimes playing with rare skill, at other times madly and feverishly, without thought or judgment. He was a man of impulse. If I had wholly distrusted his wisdom, instead of allowing myself to be dominated by his high-handedness, his life and mine might have been very different. But I was brought up in the days when authority of whatever kind was worshipped. To-day authority must “show cause.” I see now that my father played the

game of life the same as he played cards—by impulse, by intuition. I was taught to believe that what he said was sound and wise; and if I continued in this belief for many years, it is not to be wondered at. I had better card-sense than he; but it does not follow that my sense was better in other things.

CHAPTER IV

When I left the Canon’s school, my father declared that every boy ought to go to a public school. So to public school I went, where I made but little progress. Of course I was backward for my age, and, being shy, never plucked up enough courage to ask for help when I should have done so. Even the dullest boys left me behind, and the masters considered me lazy. Perhaps I was, but I do not believe it was so much that as lack of energy. One either generates energy or one does not. I was delicate and growing at a great rate, getting my full height, six feet, before I was sixteen years old. It took all the energy I had to live and grow.

What disposition to make of me, what calling to put me to, must have been a difficult problem to my parents, for I had no great inclination in any direction. I wanted to be let alone and not bothered. A book, a comfortable chair, and a fire in the winter, or a shady spot in the summer, were all I asked for. I could read books for days together, but could not study without falling asleep. At a minute’s notice I could sleep anywhere.

While at public school I made a few friends of my own age, but not many. The hard playing and the big boys who were in the majority were never drawn to me. Weaklings and cripples came to me freely. Among these friends, many of whom I kept all my life, John stands out particularly. Like myself, he had a delicate constitution to nurse, and his eyesight was so poor that he wore glasses of great thickness. He was nervous, quiet and shy. It was through him that I became interested in music. He was an inspired musician and a poet by nature. I had had lessons on the piano for some years, and liked music, but I had not been musically awakened until I met John. One of a very musical family, he played several instruments even when a young boy, and gave me my first valuable knowledge and insight into music. I had been taught by sundry ancient maiden ladies, who only aimed to make a genteel living, not to make musicians. John had

been taught by his family with whom music was a religion. When I was considered worthy to play accompaniments in the mystic circle of his family I was very proud. I gave a great deal of time to music both with John and alone. Many afternoons he, his two brothers, and I, would play quartettes for hours. Generally these afternoons passed like a charm. Sometimes they were broken by discussions of time, style and interpretation, when some one of us would lose patience, but they were very mild disagreements. John and I became as brothers. His was a restful house, full of quiet peaceful people, where father, mother, brothers and sisters all united with a common interest in music and books. Their house was nearly a country house, being situated in a sparsely populated suburb; and the weekends I often spent there gave me my happiest days.

While I was the most unsophisticated of youths when first sent to public school, John was world-wise for his age, knowing many things that were closed to me. His family took their religion like business— as a part of life only. My family took religion like a disease—as a matter of life and death—as the whole of life. Perhaps we were not as strenuous in our devotions as the Canon, but sufficiently so to make Sunday uncomfortable for a boy. Consequently I highly appreciated Sundays at John’s home, where Church once was considered full Sunday duty, the balance of the day being given over to music, books, walks or whatever one felt like doing.

Up to this time girls had not received any attention from me. I despised them, and was ill at ease in their company, while John was fond of their sex, and perfectly at home among them. From him I learned much relative to these mysterious creatures, whose influence is so far-reaching. That I did not consider girls worth while was probably to be accounted for by my lack of the usual health and strength of boys of my age. After chumming with John for a year or more girls began to interest me. But girls never liked me as a boy; nor, for that matter, have women liked me as a man. I see now one of the reasons for this. I thought there were only two kinds of girls— the entirely good and the entirely bad. If, in my opinion, a girl was an angel, I worshipped her so foolishly that I made her ill. If I thought one was bad, I took the worst for granted, thus overshooting the

mark, and getting myself very seriously disliked. Consequently some girls thought I was an ass, while others thought I was an abandoned and vicious young man. In fact I was neither. Like most shy people I used badness as a bluff, and the more nervous I was about an advance, the more brazenly I went forward.

No girl or woman likes to be understood as entirely good or entirely bad, which is quite natural; for none are altogether one way or the other, but, like all humanity, are of every shade and every colour, both good and bad.

My mistake about girls happened to be a safe mistake to make, thereby I never got a girl into trouble, and no girl ever got me into trouble. This, of course, does not include the case of my wife and me, who, God knows, have given each other no end of trouble. But in that experience was one involving good, useful, necessary trouble, whereby we really learned things, as you shall hear later.

I have noticed that when two young people get each other into trouble, they are seldom to blame. The blame attaches to the parents who kept them blind, and allowed them to get the allimportant knowledge of sex by chance. The enlightment of the young on this vital subject is still a matter little understood.

During my public school days I organised a drum and fife band. My mother thought it was beautiful. As she was Scotch, and liked the bagpipes, this is perhaps not remarkable. The neighbours hardly had as much admiration for my genius, although many of them had subscribed to the fund which armed my men with their instruments of torture. The boy who played the bass drum was the proudest chap in ten blocks, and could swing the sticks splendidly. The rehearsals of this band took place in our basement dining-room, and the din we made was no ordinary noise.

With my musicians I started a dramatic venture. I wished to be an actor. Another subscription list was passed amongst neighbours and friends who were always very kind and forgiving to me. I must have had a way with me that appealed to the grown-ups. I was tall and thin with a big head and big hands. My eyes were small and deep set, my face pale but for a red spot on either cheek. Possibly I

appealed to people because I looked as if I did not have long to live. Two faithful aiders and abettors in my scheme for a boys’ theatre were Jews—Joey and Philly. They accompanied me and my subscription list, and their fathers were my first backers. I have always liked Jews; they are such a gentle people. “Little Blockhead” at the Canon’s school was a Jewess; at least, her father was a Jew.

Boards, nails, and other things having been bought, we erected a stage in a large unused coach-house. Sundry plays were examined, and a very amusing sketch called “Bumps” was finally chosen and put into rehearsal. Very wisely, or because of the impossibility of getting girls, we chose a playlet with an entirely male cast.

The great wooden doors of the coach-house were splendidly posted with the legend:

W’ T.

This sign was a real work of art. In the coach-house we found a barrel of bright-coloured labels for beer that never was made, because the company which intended to make beer, for some business reason, never got much further than labels. We laboriously pasted these labels on the coach-house doors, to form the large letters, which informed the few who passed down the lane that “Wesblock’s Theatre” was within.

My theatrical company embraced the “high brows” of the neighbourhood. Of course we were laughed at, and scoffed at, and sometimes one of us was walloped by some envious and strong boy, but many of the lacrosse playing crowd would have given their eyes to be of us.

These things happened in the East End—the French end of Montreal—and fights between French school boys and English school boys were of nearly daily occurrence; but we gentlemen of the stage never took part in these brawls, unless we were forced to, or were specially called upon as reserves in a crisis by the boys of our neighbourhood. The English were the better fighters at close quarters, but at long range, with stones, the French had the best of us, being expert throwers.

A small but sympathetic crowd witnessed my first theatrical venture. The coach-house was decorated with flags and for a coachhouse looked very fine. Of course it still smelled like a coach-house, except in so far as that smell was diluted by the odour of coal-oil lamps, which lighted the place. The programme was short. It consisted of the one-act play “Bumps,” a flute solo by a talented sot, a clog dance by a stable-boy, and a comic song warbled by myself to banjo accompaniment. Our listeners said what a friendly audience always says. We spent the proceeds of our show in giving a complimentary supper to a young actor whom we admired and who was playing at the Theatre Royal.

CHAPTER V

Before I had the fever described in the earlier pages, while still a mere baby, I was sent to a ladies’ school among little girls. There was only one other boy in the school besides myself, and for him I formed an attachment. He was a French child, a delicate little chap with large dreamy eyes and a huge nose, which looked as if it did not belong to him. He enjoyed the possession of a very beautiful and euphonious name—Paul de la Croix. Paul and I knew each other as children only during a few months but we liked each other and played together. We were the only boys who enjoyed the very special privilege of attending the ladies’ seminary. We nearly always spent our lunch hours among the big girls, who were very fond of us, because we were small enough to mother and protect.

My illness separated me from my little French friend and I did not see him again until we were nearly men. I met him once more when I was eighteen and was studying under a tutor for my matriculation at M’Gill University. My father had decided that I should be a civil engineer. The reasons for this decision are not very plain to me. Certainly I had very little inclination towards engineering, but as I showed little talent in any particular direction, and many spasmodic tendencies in all directions, his decision was perhaps as wise as any. Possibly he was influenced by the thought that the life of a civil engineer would give me an outdoor existence.

I worked with my tutor daily, learning things which I have long since forgotten, with the exception of Euclid. Euclid always had a particular charm for me, not so much for the value of the information I received but for its keen and irresistible reasoning, so clear, plain and irrefragable.

The mere fact that the angles at the base of an isosceles triangle are equal, and if the sides are produced the angles on the other side of the base will be equal, is nothing to me, but the being able to prove the fact is a great pleasure.

I am a born unbeliever, and facts are not facts to me because they are recorded as facts by some one else, or everybody else for that matter. Like the unbelieving Thomas I want to examine the evidence. So Euclid appealed to me.

I had, and still have, a great sympathy with many of the Bible characters who have been held up to opprobrium like Thomas, Baalam, Ananias and the Pharisee who thanked the Lord he was different from other people. If there is anything for which a man ought to be thankful it is that he is different from other people. The story of Ananias I always found a very thin tale for a greedy moneygrabbing church to tell; it is so transparent.

I liked my tutor very much. He was a very human young man and handled me with great wisdom. In the winter we skated daily. It was during the winter of the year Eighteen that I met once more the friend of my childhood, Paul de la Croix. It was at the skating rink, and I knew him at once by his nose, which was a more pronounced, protuberant horn than ever. He had the looks of a hawk and the character of a goose. I was anything but a manly youth, but Paul was actually effeminate. I saw him often now for several years, after which he dropped out of my life entirely. He left an indelible mark upon my character, both musically and otherwise. It was through him, in fact, that I met the woman who became my wife, and for this and other things he has my gratitude.

Paul was before all a musician. He sang beautifully, easily and naturally in a great baritone voice, playing his own accompaniments with ease, a certain dash, and unerring taste. Such talents as his are rare and are generally given, I have observed, to effeminate creatures like Paul. He loved the women, loved particular ones in a particular way for a short time; but generally he loved them all. He was a wholesale lover and his affairs were numerous, sometimes interesting and exciting, and always amusing as told by himself to me, his confidant. I enjoyed his confidences not so much for themselves as for the music they led up to. When he was loved by a married woman much older than himself he always sang particularly well and gave me oceans of pleasure listening to his prattle and his

songs. I would spend night after night with him, and allow him to babble till he was tired.

“Oh, my dear Jack,” he would say, “it was tragic, I assure you. ‘I could weep. When will I see you again?’ she asked me. I did not reply; but went to the piano and sang this.”

Then suiting the action to the word he would go to the piano and sing Tosti’s “Good-bye” so beautifully that I would nearly weep, although much inclined to laugh at his mannerisms and his vanity. Many of his love affairs ended as I have described in a song, after which he would walk sadly away to flutter about some other flame.

The Toreador song from Carmen always reminds me of Paul. I have heard it often, but never I think with such soul-stirring vim and gusto behind it as when he sang it.

In the year Nineteen of my era I matriculated in a kind of way; I passed, and that is all.

In the same year the religious incubus was lifted from my home. This had been coming for some time, and at last our house was free. It was no sudden happening, like the conversion some people seem to experience; but came about quite logically. Some people take religion like a disease, and it runs a similar course. They get sick, sicker, sickest; and then die or recover. With religion they get religious, more religious, most religious or fanatic, and then they go mad or suddenly become free-thinkers. People whose emotions are well-balanced and thoroughly under the control of intellect never go mad over a religious idea.

About three years prior to the year Nineteen my father had undertaken, in a burst of religious zeal, to teach a Bible-class in a church which is to-day a theatre of varieties. He was very successful in this. His teaching was both attractive and convincing and readily drew young men and women. For years he had an average attendance at this class of from fifty to sixty young people. He became so enthusiastic in this enterprise that it became his one hobby, and the only social life our family knew was bounded on the North, South, East and West by the Bible-class. As the Bible-class

was made up of plumbers, gasfitters, counter-jumpers and the like, this did not elevate our social standing as social standing is gauged by the world. Father devoted all his leisure time to reading and study for the discourses he delivered to his young Band of Hope. As a rule he was not a man to do things very thoroughly; but this work possessed a great fascination for him, and he pursued it tirelessly and faithfully, with perfect confidence in himself.

As he read he widened in view, and as he widened, his interest in the search for truth increased; but truth seemed to elude him. In his final struggle he floundered about in a bog of statement and authority that bewildered him. His fall from grace came suddenly when he began the study of religions in general and other than Christianity. He was a quick, alert, understanding reader, and he had enormous energy. He consumed in a comparatively short time a veritable library of literature on every religion known, both ancient and modern. He delved into everything—philosophy, metaphysics and natural science. I only sketch a process which took several years to complete, years of the hardest work my father ever did.

As his views widened, his discourses to his flock were, of course, coloured by the change of idea. I do not believe that he realised the road he was travelling until the parson and the pillars of the church called upon him for an explanation of certain of his teachings. He explained, but his elucidation of his position on matters that were considered vital was not found satisfactory to the narrow-minded jury which sat upon him. A few weeks later he was driven from the church, branded with the brand of the infidel—an epithet which all churches have delighted to use towards those who dare to be faithful to themselves.

Father’s class followed him in a body, and for some months he lectured every Sunday afternoon at our home. Through this incident some of his young men were made uncomfortable in their families, others even in their business. For this reason father discontinued spreading what he considered to be the true light.

Whether his faith was founded on fact or fiction, he was true to what his reason dictated; but he felt that he could not allow himself to

be an injury in any way to young people who had life’s fight to make in a world that was ready to persecute those who did not toe a line laid down by some church.

I have always noticed that it has ever been the system of organised religion to persecute in mean and small ways all those who disagree with it. All the willingness to go even farther and use the faggot, the stake and the rack still remains in our midst, among a very large class who are enthusiastic and ignorant, but full of faith in some fetish. They only lack the power. I have yet to learn that any man branded as an unbeliever has ever in the smallest way persecuted anybody. Nearly all religions foster fear in man’s heart, and fear always fights, which explains the bloody history of Christian peoples.

CHAPTER VI

My life was now a double struggle; a struggle for health and a struggle for knowledge. I was always miserable and very often ill. The joy of being alive was a thing I never knew for many years. Naturally my progress in education was not great. Probably, on the whole, I put as much energy into my work as most boys; for I was not strong enough to take part in the athletic college life, and had no inclination toward the pleasures of the fast crowd.

My days passed in fits of tremendous energy lasting a very little while, followed by long periods of listlessness, when everything was an effort. I worked nearly to the limit of my strength, and fully expected to pass my first year examinations. I was still quite confident after having written my examination papers. The beautiful spring days between the last examination day and convocation, when the reading out of the results was given, I passed complacently wandering on country roads, afoot or on horseback. I was still satisfied that I had passed when I sat in the big hall among relations, friends and college companions. This egregious confidence made the blow all the harder. I was plucked; ignominiously plucked. I had failed in three subjects. It was too much; I could not bear it, and could not bear either to look any of my friends in the face. I felt disgraced; and ran away accordingly.

I decided to be a tramp, a free vagabond, wandering “hither and thither,” living as best I might. Perhaps my health would benefit by the outdoor life? If not, I would die far away somewhere in a strange land, alone and unwept, and it would perhaps be better so, for I had unfortunate elements in me which could lead to no real good.

It was early in spring, but warm; and the roads were not bad. I walked till sundown. The direction did not matter; but I liked the river, so followed it. I could not have wandered very far in the few hours between three o’clock and seven; but by that time I was tired, so stepped into a little country hotel which I found near by. I ate a little