GrCrGeo

From Seshat Data Browser
Revision as of 18:40, 13 December 2021 by Admin (talk | contribs) (1 revision imported)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Phase I Variables (polity-based)

General variables

♠ RA ♣ ♥

♠ Original name ♣Geometric Crete ♥

♠ Alternative names ♣Doric Crete; Early Iron Age Crete; Geometric Crete♥

♠ Peak Date ♣8th century BCE♥


Temporal bounds

♠ Duration ♣1000-710 BCE♥ The Geometric Crete (10th-8th centuries) is divided in the following periods: Sub-Minoan (1000-970 BCE), Protogeometric (970-850 BCE), Protogeometric B Knossian (840-810) and Geometric (810-710 BCE). The period starts with the arrival of Dorians and ends with the emergence of Cretan city-states.

♠ Degree of centralization ♣ quasi-polity♥

♠ Supra-polity relations ♣none♥

Supra-cultural relations

♠ preceding (quasi)polity ♣ Mycenaean Crete♥
♠ relationship to preceding (quasi)polity ♣ disruption/continuity♥
♠ succeeding (quasi)polity ♣ Archaic Crete♥
♠ Supracultural entity ♣ Early Iron Age Greece/Geometric Greece♥
♠ scale of supra-cultural interaction ♣ ♥ km squared.

♠ Capital ♣none♥

♠ Language ♣Doric Greek; Eteocretan♥

General Description

The eleventh century BCE marks the beginning of radical changes in southern Greece generally as well as Crete specifically, largely resulting from the invasion from the North of the Dorians[1] Overall, however, this period is relatively poorly understood, with no written sources and few archaeological finds. Most likely, Cretans mainly dedicated themselves to farming and pastoralism. Writing disappeared and artistic expression became more abstracted and geometrical. Things started to change in the eighth century, when trade routes were revitalized, and Cretans were able to capitalize on the island's premier location in the Eastern Mediterranean. And the trade in artefacts and products was accompanied by the exchange of new ideas and technologies. [2]

Population and political organization

Not much is known about either the island's population numbers at the time, or its political organization. In terms of population, very few settlements have been excavated, and none of these have yielded enough data for a credible estimate; in terms of political organization, it is likely that elite families were in charge but not much else could be said.[3]

Social Complexity variables

♠ RA ♣ ♥ The following were coded through pers. comm. with Kostis Christakis

Social Scale

♠ Polity territory ♣ suspected unknown ♥ Km2. Not much is known about either the island's population numbers at the time, or its political organization. In terms of population, very few settlements have been excavated, and none of these have yielded enough data for a credible estimate; in terms of political organization, it is likely that elite families were in charge but not much else could be said.[4]

♠ Polity Population ♣ suspected unknown ♥ People. Very few settlements have been actually been excavated and not with nearly the horizontal sample that we should need to be able to address questions of population estimates.

♠ Population of the largest settlement ♣ 6000 ♥ Inhabitants. The largest settlement of the period is Knossos and its population is estimated to about 6,000 individuals. [5]

Hierarchical Complexity

♠ Settlement hierarchy ♣[1-3]♥ levels. Excavation data and survey information is very limited (especially for the 10th and 9th centuries BCE). [6] A large settlement was the center of a sparsely populated territory. Each regional landscape was organized for maximum exploitation of local resources and maximum security. This large center might represent the first synoecism of local population which will led to the emergence, during the late 8th and early 7th centuries BCE, of small city-states. Interdependence and economic and social cooperation between sites is assumed because of topographic isolation and shared water supplies, agricultural land, and pasture. [7]

♠ Administrative levels ♣ suspected unknown ♥ levels. There is no evidence for the administrative organization of Cretan communities. Members of local elite families might controlled the administrative sector of the large settlements that arose in Crete during the period. During the Archaic period (710-500 BCE), political, military and religious control was exercised by the Kosmoi, a board of 3 to 10 nobles annually elected by the Ecclesia, the body of free male citizens. It is very likely that some aspects of this organization existed since the 8th century BCE. [8]

♠ Religious levels ♣ suspected unknown ♥ levels. There is no evidence for the religious organization of Cretan communities. Members of local elite families might controlled the religious sector of the large settlements that arose in Crete during the period. During the Archaic period (710-500 BCE), religious control was exercised by the Kosmoi, a board of 3 to 10 nobles annually elected by the Ecclesia, the body of free male citizens. It is very likely that some aspects of this organization existed since the 8th century BCE. [9]

♠ Military levels ♣ suspected unknown ♥ levels. There is no evidence for the military organization of Cretan communities. Members of local elite families might controlled the military sector of the large settlements that arose in Crete during the period. During the Archaic period (710-500 BCE), religious control was exercised by the Kosmoi, a board of 3 to 10 nobles annually elected by the Ecclesia, the body of free male citizens. It is very likely that some aspects of this organization existed since the 8th century BCE. [10]

Professions

♠ Professional military officers ♣ suspected unknown ♥

♠ Professional soldiers ♣ suspected unknown ♥

♠ Professional priesthood ♣ suspected unknown ♥

Bureaucracy characteristics

♠ Full-time bureaucrats ♣ ♥

♠ Examination system ♣ ♥

♠ Merit promotion ♣ ♥

♠ Specialized government buildings ♣ ♥

Law

♠ Formal legal code ♣ ♥

♠ Judges ♣ ♥

♠ Courts ♣ ♥

♠ Professional Lawyers ♣ absent ♥

Specialized Buildings: polity owned

♠ irrigation systems ♣ present♥
♠ drinking water supply systems ♣ present♥
♠ markets ♣ ♥
♠ food storage sites ♣ ♥

Transport infrastructure

♠ Roads ♣ present ♥
♠ Bridges ♣ present ♥
♠ Canals ♣ ♥
♠ Ports ♣present♥

Special purpose sites

♠ Mines or quarries ♣ present♥ Quarries.

Information

Writing System

♠ Mnemonic devices ♣ ♥
♠ Nonwritten records ♣ present ♥ "Significantly, however, the oral transmission of the traditions of the past allowed Greek culture to survive this loss [the loss of writing] by continuing its stories and legends as valuable possesions passed down thought time. Storytelling, music, singing, and oral performances of poetry, which surely had been a part of Greek life for longer than we can trace, transmitted the most basic cultural ideas of the Greeks about themselves from generation to generation." [11]
♠ Written records ♣ present♥ The oldest and the only known written record is an inscription incised on a pithos (large storage jar) at Phaistos and dated to the end of 8th century BCE. [12]
♠ Script ♣ present ♥ present: 9th century BCE
♠ Phonetic alphabetic writing ♣present♥ Phonetic alphabetic writing was introduced to the Greek World during the 10th or 9th century BCE when Greeks adopted the earlier Phoenician alphabet and used it to write the Greek language. [13] Sound data indicates that the alphabet was first introduced and developed in Crete and not in Euboea, as some scholars had argued. [14] The "Cretan theory" has fully confirmed by the recent find of a Cretan inscription at Eltyna (central Crete). [15] The Doric Cretan alphabet was very close to its Phoenician model. This alphabet was also used to express an unknown language that is believed to be the language of the Minoans that was preserved and spoken by some groups in the isolated mountainous regions of east Crete. [16]

Kinds of Written Documents

♠ Lists, tables, and classifications ♣ ♥
♠ Calendar ♣ ♥
♠ Sacred Texts ♣absent♥
♠ Religious literature ♣absent♥
♠ Practical literature ♣absent♥
♠ History ♣absent♥
♠ Philosophy ♣absent♥
♠ Scientific literature ♣absent♥
♠ Fiction ♣absent♥


Money

♠ Articles ♣present♥ Minting in Greece was introduced around 6th century BCE. Before that period economic transactions were based on a barter system of spits, precious artifacts and metals, animals, food, and services. [17]
♠ Tokens ♣present♥ Minting in Greece was introduced around 6th century BCE. Before that period economic transactions were based on a barter system of spits, precious artifacts and metals, animals, food, and services. [18]
♠ Precious metals ♣present♥ Minting in Greece was introduced around 6th century BCE. Before that period economic transactions were based on a barter system of spits, precious artifacts and metals, animals, food, and services. [19]
♠ Foreign coins ♣present♥ Epigraphic evidence from many regions of the island and archeological finds attest to the use of monetary values from at least the turn of the 6th century. The first coins to be used were the Aiginetans as result of the close relations between Aigina and the Cretan city of Kydonia (West Crete) [20]
♠ Indigenous coins ♣ absent♥ Cretans started minting around 470 BCE perhaps as a response to the reduced supple of new Aiginetan coinage. [21]
♠ Paper currency ♣ absent♥

Postal System

♠ Couriers ♣ absent♥
♠ Postal stations ♣ absent♥
♠ General postal service ♣ absent♥

Warfare variables

♠ RA ♣♥ The following were coded through pers. comm. with Kostis Christakis

Military Technologies

Military use of Metals

♠ Copper ♣ present♥
♠ Bronze ♣ present♥
♠ Iron ♣ present♥
♠ Steel ♣ absent♥

Projectiles

♠ Javelins ♣ present♥
♠ Atlatl ♣ absent♥
♠ Slings ♣ absent♥
♠ Self bow ♣ present♥
♠ Composite bow ♣ present♥
♠ Crossbow ♣ absent♥
♠ Tension siege engines ♣ absent♥
♠ Sling siege engines ♣ absent♥
♠ Gunpowder siege artillery ♣ absent♥
♠ Handheld firearms ♣ absent♥

Handheld weapons

♠ War clubs ♣ absent♥
♠ Battle axes ♣ absent♥
♠ Daggers ♣present ♥
♠ Swords ♣ present♥
♠ Spears ♣ present♥
♠ Polearms ♣ absent ♥

Animals used in warfare

♠ Dogs ♣ ♥
♠ Donkeys ♣present♥
♠ Horses ♣ present♥
♠ Camels ♣ absent♥
♠ Elephants ♣ absent♥

Armor

♠ Wood, bark, etc ♣ absent ♥
♠ Leather, cloth ♣ present♥
♠ Shields ♣ present♥
♠ Helmets ♣present ♥
♠ Breastplates ♣ present♥
♠ Limb protection ♣ present♥
♠ Chainmail ♣ absent♥
♠ Scaled armor ♣ absent♥
♠ Laminar armor ♣ absent♥
♠ Plate armor ♣absent ♥

Naval technology

♠ Small vessels (canoes, etc) ♣present♥
♠ Merchant ships pressed into service ♣ ♥
♠ Specialized military vessels ♣present♥

Fortifications

♠ Settlements in a defensive position ♣ present♥ [22]
♠ Wooden palisades ♣ suspected unknown ♥
♠ Earth ramparts ♣ suspected unknown ♥
♠ Ditch ♣ suspected unknown ♥
♠ Moat ♣ absent♥
♠ Stone walls (non-mortared) ♣ present♥
♠ Stone walls (mortared) ♣ present♥
♠ Fortified camps ♣ ♥
♠ Complex fortifications ♣ absent♥
♠ Long walls ♣ absent♥ km.
♠ Modern fortifications ♣absent♥


Phase II Variables (polity-based)

Institutional Variables

♠ RA ♣ ♥

Limits on Power of the Chief Executive

Power distributed

♠ Constraint on executive by government ♣ ♥
♠ Constraint on executive by non-government ♣ ♥
♠ Impeachment ♣ ♥

Social Mobility

Status

Elite status

♠ elite status is hereditary ♣ suspected unknown ♥ Not much is known about either the island's population numbers at the time, or its political organization. In terms of population, very few settlements have been excavated, and none of these have yielded enough data for a credible estimate; in terms of political organization, it is likely that elite families were in charge but not much else could be said.[23]

Religion and Normative Ideology

♠ RA ♣ Enrico Cioni ♥

Deification of Rulers

♠ Rulers are legitimated by gods ♣ inferred present ♥ Use of expensive, conspicuous items such as bronze shields and tripods as votive offerings at important sanctuaries suggests that elites intended to gain legitimacy by signalling a special relation with the gods. "The military-aristocratic connotations of the dedicated shields speak for themselves. The possession of this kind of armor, often elaborately decorated, was clearly the reserve of an elite. Bronze shields and other weaponry occur as grave offerings in rich Cretan tombs from the late ninth to the seventh century bc and would have articulated the deceased’s role as warrior and leading member of the developing aristocracy. The dedication of such objects in sanctuaries would have had a similar function, but added an element of greater visibility and permanency. Precious votives could remain on display for generations, as attested by ancient authors such as Pausanias. He mentions seeing such votives and being told that these were of great antiquity and offered by famous rulers (e.g. Paus, III.2.8, III.3.8.,V.19.6). Clearly, the religious dedication of precious objects implied special relations with higher powers. Like a claim to military prowess, this relationship enhanced a donor’s position in the community and would have been considered as more than worth the expense.//The bronze tripod-cauldrons, though lacking the overt military connotations of the shields, were no less tied to the aristocratic ethos. An indication of their value may be gained from the Homeric epics, in which they constitute the most prestigious gift exchanged between fellow aristocrats. In a passage of the Iliad (23.703-5), a tripod is estimated to have a value of twelve oxen, whereas a skilled, female slave is considered to be worth only four. O. Murray (1983) has argued that the special meaning of bronze tripod-cauldrons in early Greek times derived from their use as cooking vessels at communal dining parties. Drawing on anthropological parallels and the Homeric epics, Murray describes these as competitive, ritualized affairs, in which the leading members of society would try to outdo each other in generosity, including the provision of vast quantities of food. Tripod-cauldrons would thus have developed into symbols of the owner’s wealth and - no less importantly - of the ability to feed, sustain and organize a group of followers. As pointed out by W. Burkert, bronze cauldrons were also the ideal vessel in which to boil the parts of the sacrificial meat that were not roasted. Their frequent setting up in sanctuaries may have been a way of “giving permanence to the sacrificial act” (Burkert 1985:93)." [24]

♠ Rulers are gods ♣ ♥ absent/present/unknown.

Normative Ideological Aspects of Equity and Prosociality

♠ Ideological reinforcement of equality ♣ inferred absent ♥ Use of expensive, conspicuous items such as bronze shields and tripods as votive offerings at important sanctuaries suggests that elites intended to gain legitimacy by signalling a special relation with the gods. "The military-aristocratic connotations of the dedicated shields speak for themselves. The possession of this kind of armor, often elaborately decorated, was clearly the reserve of an elite. Bronze shields and other weaponry occur as grave offerings in rich Cretan tombs from the late ninth to the seventh century bc and would have articulated the deceased’s role as warrior and leading member of the developing aristocracy. The dedication of such objects in sanctuaries would have had a similar function, but added an element of greater visibility and permanency. Precious votives could remain on display for generations, as attested by ancient authors such as Pausanias. He mentions seeing such votives and being told that these were of great antiquity and offered by famous rulers (e.g. Paus, III.2.8, III.3.8.,V.19.6). Clearly, the religious dedication of precious objects implied special relations with higher powers. Like a claim to military prowess, this relationship enhanced a donor’s position in the community and would have been considered as more than worth the expense.//The bronze tripod-cauldrons, though lacking the overt military connotations of the shields, were no less tied to the aristocratic ethos. An indication of their value may be gained from the Homeric epics, in which they constitute the most prestigious gift exchanged between fellow aristocrats. In a passage of the Iliad (23.703-5), a tripod is estimated to have a value of twelve oxen, whereas a skilled, female slave is considered to be worth only four. O. Murray (1983) has argued that the special meaning of bronze tripod-cauldrons in early Greek times derived from their use as cooking vessels at communal dining parties. Drawing on anthropological parallels and the Homeric epics, Murray describes these as competitive, ritualized affairs, in which the leading members of society would try to outdo each other in generosity, including the provision of vast quantities of food. Tripod-cauldrons would thus have developed into symbols of the owner’s wealth and - no less importantly - of the ability to feed, sustain and organize a group of followers. As pointed out by W. Burkert, bronze cauldrons were also the ideal vessel in which to boil the parts of the sacrificial meat that were not roasted. Their frequent setting up in sanctuaries may have been a way of “giving permanence to the sacrificial act” (Burkert 1985:93)." [25]

♠ Ideological thought equates rulers and commoners ♣ inferred absent ♥ Use of expensive, conspicuous items such as bronze shields and tripods as votive offerings at important sanctuaries suggests that elites intended to gain legitimacy by signalling a special relation with the gods. "The military-aristocratic connotations of the dedicated shields speak for themselves. The possession of this kind of armor, often elaborately decorated, was clearly the reserve of an elite. Bronze shields and other weaponry occur as grave offerings in rich Cretan tombs from the late ninth to the seventh century bc and would have articulated the deceased’s role as warrior and leading member of the developing aristocracy. The dedication of such objects in sanctuaries would have had a similar function, but added an element of greater visibility and permanency. Precious votives could remain on display for generations, as attested by ancient authors such as Pausanias. He mentions seeing such votives and being told that these were of great antiquity and offered by famous rulers (e.g. Paus, III.2.8, III.3.8.,V.19.6). Clearly, the religious dedication of precious objects implied special relations with higher powers. Like a claim to military prowess, this relationship enhanced a donor’s position in the community and would have been considered as more than worth the expense.//The bronze tripod-cauldrons, though lacking the overt military connotations of the shields, were no less tied to the aristocratic ethos. An indication of their value may be gained from the Homeric epics, in which they constitute the most prestigious gift exchanged between fellow aristocrats. In a passage of the Iliad (23.703-5), a tripod is estimated to have a value of twelve oxen, whereas a skilled, female slave is considered to be worth only four. O. Murray (1983) has argued that the special meaning of bronze tripod-cauldrons in early Greek times derived from their use as cooking vessels at communal dining parties. Drawing on anthropological parallels and the Homeric epics, Murray describes these as competitive, ritualized affairs, in which the leading members of society would try to outdo each other in generosity, including the provision of vast quantities of food. Tripod-cauldrons would thus have developed into symbols of the owner’s wealth and - no less importantly - of the ability to feed, sustain and organize a group of followers. As pointed out by W. Burkert, bronze cauldrons were also the ideal vessel in which to boil the parts of the sacrificial meat that were not roasted. Their frequent setting up in sanctuaries may have been a way of “giving permanence to the sacrificial act” (Burkert 1985:93)." [26]
♠ Ideological thought equates elites and commoners ♣ inferred absent ♥ Use of expensive, conspicuous items such as bronze shields and tripods as votive offerings at important sanctuaries suggests that elites intended to gain legitimacy by signalling a special relation with the gods. "The military-aristocratic connotations of the dedicated shields speak for themselves. The possession of this kind of armor, often elaborately decorated, was clearly the reserve of an elite. Bronze shields and other weaponry occur as grave offerings in rich Cretan tombs from the late ninth to the seventh century bc and would have articulated the deceased’s role as warrior and leading member of the developing aristocracy. The dedication of such objects in sanctuaries would have had a similar function, but added an element of greater visibility and permanency. Precious votives could remain on display for generations, as attested by ancient authors such as Pausanias. He mentions seeing such votives and being told that these were of great antiquity and offered by famous rulers (e.g. Paus, III.2.8, III.3.8.,V.19.6). Clearly, the religious dedication of precious objects implied special relations with higher powers. Like a claim to military prowess, this relationship enhanced a donor’s position in the community and would have been considered as more than worth the expense.//The bronze tripod-cauldrons, though lacking the overt military connotations of the shields, were no less tied to the aristocratic ethos. An indication of their value may be gained from the Homeric epics, in which they constitute the most prestigious gift exchanged between fellow aristocrats. In a passage of the Iliad (23.703-5), a tripod is estimated to have a value of twelve oxen, whereas a skilled, female slave is considered to be worth only four. O. Murray (1983) has argued that the special meaning of bronze tripod-cauldrons in early Greek times derived from their use as cooking vessels at communal dining parties. Drawing on anthropological parallels and the Homeric epics, Murray describes these as competitive, ritualized affairs, in which the leading members of society would try to outdo each other in generosity, including the provision of vast quantities of food. Tripod-cauldrons would thus have developed into symbols of the owner’s wealth and - no less importantly - of the ability to feed, sustain and organize a group of followers. As pointed out by W. Burkert, bronze cauldrons were also the ideal vessel in which to boil the parts of the sacrificial meat that were not roasted. Their frequent setting up in sanctuaries may have been a way of “giving permanence to the sacrificial act” (Burkert 1985:93)." [27]

♠ Ideology reinforces prosociality ♣ present ♥ "First, the abundant presence of animal bones and vessels for drinking and eating (figure 5.2) suggests that sacrificial dining was an important aspect of the rituals conducted at these sanctuaries. Recent literature shows how in early Greece ritualized forms of dining particularly when centering around the consumption of meat and wine became the prerogative of a male elite and eventually evolved into specific institutions such as the symposium ('drinking together') of Archaic times. There, as elsewhere, ritualized dining can be seen as a way of selective bonding, of creating a sense of unity between participants and, at the same time, defining the exclusiveness of the group in relation to other segments of society (Murray 1990; Schmitt-Pantel 1992)." [28] "O. Murray (1983) has argued that the special meaning of bronze tripod-cauldrons in early Greek times derived from their use as cooking vessels at communal dining parties. Drawing on anthropological parallels and the Homeric epics, Murray describes these as competitive, ritualized affairs, in which the leading members of society would try to outdo each other in generosity, including the provision of vast quantities of food. Tripod-cauldrons would thus have developed into symbols of the owner’s wealth and - no less importantly - of the ability to feed, sustain and organize a group of followers. As pointed out by W. Burkert, bronze cauldrons were also the ideal vessel in which to boil the parts of the sacrificial meat that were not roasted. Their frequent setting up in sanctuaries may have been a way of “giving permanence to the sacrificial act” (Burkert 1985:93)." [29]

♠ production of public goods ♣ present ♥ "First, the abundant presence of animal bones and vessels for drinking and eating (figure 5.2) suggests that sacrificial dining was an important aspect of the rituals conducted at these sanctuaries. Recent literature shows how in early Greece ritualized forms of dining particularly when centering around the consumption of meat and wine became the prerogative of a male elite and eventually evolved into specific institutions such as the symposium ('drinking together') of Archaic times. There, as elsewhere, ritualized dining can be seen as a way of selective bonding, of creating a sense of unity between participants and, at the same time, defining the exclusiveness of the group in relation to other segments of society (Murray 1990; Schmitt-Pantel 1992)." [30] "O. Murray (1983) has argued that the special meaning of bronze tripod-cauldrons in early Greek times derived from their use as cooking vessels at communal dining parties. Drawing on anthropological parallels and the Homeric epics, Murray describes these as competitive, ritualized affairs, in which the leading members of society would try to outdo each other in generosity, including the provision of vast quantities of food. Tripod-cauldrons would thus have developed into symbols of the owner’s wealth and - no less importantly - of the ability to feed, sustain and organize a group of followers. As pointed out by W. Burkert, bronze cauldrons were also the ideal vessel in which to boil the parts of the sacrificial meat that were not roasted. Their frequent setting up in sanctuaries may have been a way of “giving permanence to the sacrificial act” (Burkert 1985:93)." [31]

References

  1. (Whitley 1998, 27-39) J. Whitley. 1998. 'From Minoans to Eterocretans: the Praisos region 1200-500 BC,' in Post-Minoan Crete: Proceedings of the First Colloquium on Post-Minoan Crete held by the British School at Athens and the Institute of Archaeology, University College London, 10-11 November 1995, edited by W.G. Cavanagh and M. Curtis, M. (eds), London: British School at Athens.
  2. Kostis Christakis, pers. comm., May 2016
  3. Kostis Christakis, pers. comm., May 2016
  4. Kostis Christakis, pers. comm., May 2016
  5. Whitelaw, T. 2004. "Estimating the population of Neopalatial Knossos," in Cadogan, G., Hatzaki, E. and Vasilakis, A. (eds), Knossos: Palace, City, State: Proceedings of the Conference in Herakleion organized by the British School at Athens and the 23rd Ephoreia of Prehistoric and Classical Antiquities of Herakleion, in November 2000, for the Centenary of Sir Arthur Evans's Excavations at Knossos (BSA Studies 12), London, 147-58.
  6. For an overall picture on settlement hierarchies during this period see Borgne, E. 2003. "regional settlement patterns, exchange systems and sources of power in Crete at the end of the Late Bronze age: establishing a connection," SMEA 45, 153-83; Hayden, B. J. 2004. Reports on the Vrokastro Area, east Crete. Volume 2: The Settlement History of the Vrokastro Area and Related Studies (University Museum Monograph 119), 137-66; Haggis, D. C. 2005. KAVOUSI I. The Archaeological Survey of the Kavousi Region (Prehistory Monographs 16), 81-5; Watrous, L. V., Hadzi-Vallianou, D., and Blitzer, H. 2004. The Plain of Phaistos. Cycles of Social Complexity in the Mesara Region of Crete (Monumenta Archaeologica 23), 307-350; Gaignerot-Driessen, F. and Driessen, J. (eds). 2014. Cretan Cities: Formation and Transformation (Aegis 7), Louvain.
  7. Haggis, D. C. 2005. KAVOUSI I. The Archaeological Survey of the Kavousi Region (Prehistory Monographs 16), 83.
  8. Chaniotis, A. 1897. "Κλασική και Ελληνιστική Κρήτη," in Panagiotakis, N. (ed.), Κρήτη: Ιστορία και Πολιτισμός, Heraklion, 192-207.
  9. Chaniotis, A. 1897. "Κλασική και Ελληνιστική Κρήτη," in Panagiotakis, N. (ed.), Κρήτη: Ιστορία και Πολιτισμός, Heraklion, 192-207.
  10. Chaniotis, A. 1897. "Κλασική και Ελληνιστική Κρήτη," in Panagiotakis, N. (ed.), Κρήτη: Ιστορία και Πολιτισμός, Heraklion, 192-207.
  11. Martin, T. R. 1996. Ancient Greece. From Prehistory to Hellenistic Times, New Haven and London, 37.
  12. Bile, M. 1988. La dialect crétois ancient, Paris, 29.
  13. Guarducci, M. 1953. "La culpa dell'alfabeto greco," in Γέρας Αντωνίου Κεραμοπούλλου, Athens, 342-54; Willi, A. 2005. " Κάδμος ανέθηκεν. Zur vermittlung der alphabetschrift nach Griechenland," Museum Helveticum 62, 162-71.
  14. Guarducci, M. 1953. "La culpa dell'alfabeto greco," in Γέρας Αντωνίου Κεραμοπούλλου, Athens, 342-54; Guarducci, M. 1967. Epigrafia greca I, Rome, 189-81; Duhoux, Y. Les Étéocrétoise et l'origine de l'alphabet grec," Ant. Clas. 50, 287-94.
  15. Kritzas, X. 2010. "ΦΟΙΝΙΚΗΙΑ ΓΡΑΜΜΑΤΑ: Νέα αρχαϊκή επιγραφή από την Έλτυνα," in Rethemiotakis, G. and Egglezou, M. Το Γεωμετρικό Νεκροταφείο της Έλτυνας, Heraklion, 3-23.
  16. Duhoux, Y. Les Étéocrétoise et l'origine de l'alphabet grec," Ant. Clas. 50, 287-94.
  17. e.g. Seaford, R. 2004. Money and the Eraly Greek Mind: Homer, Philosophy, Tragedy, Cambridge, 125-46; Tejado, R. and Guerra, G. 2012. "From barter to coins: shifting cognitive frames in Classical Greek economy," in Herrero-Soler, H. and White, A.(eds), Metaphore and Milles. Figurative Language in Business and Economics, Berlin/Boston, 27-48.
  18. e.g. Seaford, R. 2004. Money and the Eraly Greek Mind: Homer, Philosophy, Tragedy, Cambridge, 125-46; Tejado, R. and Guerra, G. 2012. "From barter to coins: shifting cognitive frames in Classical Greek economy," in Herrero-Soler, H. and White, A.(eds), Metaphore and Milles. Figurative Language in Business and Economics, Berlin/Boston, 27-48.
  19. e.g. Seaford, R. 2004. Money and the Eraly Greek Mind: Homer, Philosophy, Tragedy, Cambridge, 125-46; Tejado, R. and Guerra, G. 2012. "From barter to coins: shifting cognitive frames in Classical Greek economy," in Herrero-Soler, H. and White, A.(eds), Metaphore and Milles. Figurative Language in Business and Economics, Berlin/Boston, 27-48.
  20. Stefanakis, M. I. 1999. "The introduction of coinage in Crete and the beginning of local minting," in Chaniotis, A. (ed.), From Minoan Farmers to Roman Traders. Sidelights on the Economy of Ancient Crete, Stuttgart, 247-68.
  21. Stefanakis, M. I. 1999. "The introduction of coinage in Crete and the beginning of local minting," in Chaniotos, A. (ed.), From Minoan Farmers to Roman Traders. Sidelights on the Economy of Ancient Crete, Stuttgart, 247-68.
  22. Willetts, R. F. 1965. Ancient Crete. A Social History, London and Toronto, 56-75; Lembesi, A. 1987. "Η Κρητών Πολιτεία," in Panagiotakis, N. (ed.), Κρήτη: Ιστορία και Πολιτισμός, Heraklion, 166-72.
  23. Kostis Christakis, pers. comm., May 2016
  24. Prent, M. 2003. Glories of the Past in the Past: Ritual Activities at Palatial Ruins in Early Iron Age Crete. In Van Dyke, R.M. and S.E. Alcock (eds) Archaeologies of Memory pp. 81-103. Malden: Blackwell.
  25. Prent, M. 2003. Glories of the Past in the Past: Ritual Activities at Palatial Ruins in Early Iron Age Crete. In Van Dyke, R.M. and S.E. Alcock (eds) Archaeologies of Memory pp. 81-103. Malden: Blackwell.
  26. Prent, M. 2003. Glories of the Past in the Past: Ritual Activities at Palatial Ruins in Early Iron Age Crete. In Van Dyke, R.M. and S.E. Alcock (eds) Archaeologies of Memory pp. 81-103. Malden: Blackwell.
  27. Prent, M. 2003. Glories of the Past in the Past: Ritual Activities at Palatial Ruins in Early Iron Age Crete. In Van Dyke, R.M. and S.E. Alcock (eds) Archaeologies of Memory pp. 81-103. Malden: Blackwell.
  28. Prent, M. 2003. Glories of the Past in the Past: Ritual Activities at Palatial Ruins in Early Iron Age Crete. In Van Dyke, R.M. and S.E. Alcock (eds) Archaeologies of Memory pp. 81-103. Malden: Blackwell.
  29. Prent, M. 2003. Glories of the Past in the Past: Ritual Activities at Palatial Ruins in Early Iron Age Crete. In Van Dyke, R.M. and S.E. Alcock (eds) Archaeologies of Memory pp. 81-103. Malden: Blackwell.
  30. Prent, M. 2003. Glories of the Past in the Past: Ritual Activities at Palatial Ruins in Early Iron Age Crete. In Van Dyke, R.M. and S.E. Alcock (eds) Archaeologies of Memory pp. 81-103. Malden: Blackwell.
  31. Prent, M. 2003. Glories of the Past in the Past: Ritual Activities at Palatial Ruins in Early Iron Age Crete. In Van Dyke, R.M. and S.E. Alcock (eds) Archaeologies of Memory pp. 81-103. Malden: Blackwell.