Knossos: Stratigraphical Museum Excavations, 1978–82. Part III

IF 0.2 4区 历史学 0 ARCHAEOLOGY Archaeological Reports-London Pub Date : 1985-11-01 DOI:10.2307/581143
P. Warren
{"title":"Knossos: Stratigraphical Museum Excavations, 1978–82. Part III","authors":"P. Warren","doi":"10.2307/581143","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The previous report, Part II (AR ig82—8j, 63—87), presented the main evidence of the site from Late Minoan II to Sub-Minoan/Early Protogeometric. Part III is concerned with the subsequent occupation through the independent Greek period down to and including Hellenistic. Part IV will deal with the Roman period. I am most grateful to Professor J. N. Coldstream and Dr P. Callaghan for help with the Geometric-Orientalizing and Classical-Hellenistic pottery respectively. The most notable feature of the Greek Iron Age occupation is the absence of building remains from the end of Sub-Minoan (or possibly Early Protogeometric) around 970 B.C. until Hellenistic in the later 3rd century, the evidence for the long intervening period comprising mainly wells and pits. It is unlikely that Hellenistic and Roman builders would have removed every trace of buildings of the previous centuries, or that all buildings would have been of mudbrick, without stone foundations. The Iron Age remains above the Minoan Unexplored Mansion east of our site were more plentiful, but there too little of actual buildings was preserved other than a roadway with a terrace wall (Sackett, AR IQ72—73, 62—4). It is probable therefore that the built urban area of the city at this time lay further to the east, towards the central zone where the Minoan palace had once been. A classical building that is likely to have stood in the region of our site, perhaps higher to the west, was a 5 th century B.C. temple; a metope depicting Herakles and Eurystheus was found in 1910 close to or on the site, reused as a Roman drain cover (Benton, JHS lvii [1937] 38—43; Hood and Smyth, Archaeological Survey of the Knossos Area [ 1981J 44, no. 132).","PeriodicalId":53875,"journal":{"name":"Archaeological Reports-London","volume":"31 1","pages":"124 - 129"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"1985-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2307/581143","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archaeological Reports-London","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2307/581143","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"ARCHAEOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

The previous report, Part II (AR ig82—8j, 63—87), presented the main evidence of the site from Late Minoan II to Sub-Minoan/Early Protogeometric. Part III is concerned with the subsequent occupation through the independent Greek period down to and including Hellenistic. Part IV will deal with the Roman period. I am most grateful to Professor J. N. Coldstream and Dr P. Callaghan for help with the Geometric-Orientalizing and Classical-Hellenistic pottery respectively. The most notable feature of the Greek Iron Age occupation is the absence of building remains from the end of Sub-Minoan (or possibly Early Protogeometric) around 970 B.C. until Hellenistic in the later 3rd century, the evidence for the long intervening period comprising mainly wells and pits. It is unlikely that Hellenistic and Roman builders would have removed every trace of buildings of the previous centuries, or that all buildings would have been of mudbrick, without stone foundations. The Iron Age remains above the Minoan Unexplored Mansion east of our site were more plentiful, but there too little of actual buildings was preserved other than a roadway with a terrace wall (Sackett, AR IQ72—73, 62—4). It is probable therefore that the built urban area of the city at this time lay further to the east, towards the central zone where the Minoan palace had once been. A classical building that is likely to have stood in the region of our site, perhaps higher to the west, was a 5 th century B.C. temple; a metope depicting Herakles and Eurystheus was found in 1910 close to or on the site, reused as a Roman drain cover (Benton, JHS lvii [1937] 38—43; Hood and Smyth, Archaeological Survey of the Knossos Area [ 1981J 44, no. 132).
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
克诺索斯:地层学博物馆发掘,1978-82。第三部分
先前的报告第二部分(AR ig82-8j, 63-87)提出了该遗址从晚米诺斯II到亚米诺斯/早期原始地理测量的主要证据。第三部分是关于随后的占领,从独立的希腊时期一直到希腊化。第四部分将讨论罗马时期。我非常感谢J. N. Coldstream教授和P. Callaghan博士分别对几何东方化和古典希腊化陶器的帮助。希腊铁器时代占领的最显著特征是,从公元前970年左右的亚米诺斯(或可能是早期原始几何)末期到3世纪晚期的希腊化时期,没有建筑遗迹,这段漫长的中间时期的证据主要包括井和坑。希腊和罗马的建筑者不太可能把前几个世纪建筑的所有痕迹都清除掉,也不可能所有的建筑都是用泥砖建造的,没有石头地基。在我们遗址以东的米诺斯未开发大厦上方,铁器时代的遗迹更为丰富,但除了一条带有露台墙的道路之外,实际保存下来的建筑太少了(Sackett, AR iq72 - 73,62 - 4)。因此,很可能这个时候,城市的建筑城区位于更远的东部,朝着米诺斯宫殿曾经所在的中心地带。在我们的遗址所在地区,可能有一座古典建筑矗立在更高的西边,那是一座公元前5世纪的寺庙;1910年,在遗址附近或遗址上发现了描绘赫拉克勒斯和欧律斯修斯的墙面,重新用作罗马排水沟盖(Benton, JHS lvii [1937] 38-43;胡德和史密斯,克诺索斯地区的考古调查[1981J 44, no. 11]。132)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
75.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
3 Newsround 2 The work of the British School at Athens, 2021–2022 1 Introduction and overview 5 Recent developments in archaeometallurgical research: the Bronze Age Greek Mainland, Crete, and the Cyclades 8 Recent archaeological work in the Cyclades (Geometric to Hellenistic)
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1