In this paper, I argue that Minoanisation (a term used by archaeologists to explain the adoption of Cretan material culture traits and the practices they represent beyond Crete at the end of MBA and the beginning of LBA) was a multi-sited, multi-directional, and a range of processes. After an outline of the archaeological debate, the paper emphasizes that palatial Crete (with its subdivision in two main palatial periods) was never an integrated ‘core’, but rather a complex and composite political landscape that underwent gradual forms of hierarchisation and formalisation in its political, artisanal, and religious systems. It is further argued that the distribution of Cretan cultural traits over the Aegean was never uniform or politically organised and controlled, although at the end of the Neopalatial period (LM IA-IB) one can recognise a leading role played by the centre of Knossos in legitimising a territorial expansion and promoting ideological propaganda on Crete. In order to describe the heterogenous character of Minoanisation, the paper discusses three case studies, i.e., the Cycladic islands, the south-east and the north-east Aegean islands and coasts, focusing on ceramic production and consumption, the mobility of people, things and ideas, and ritual and burial behaviours.
The Uneven and Controversial Character of ‘Minoan’ Culture in Central and Eastern Aegean: A Contextual Analysis
Luca Girella
In corso di stampa
Abstract
In this paper, I argue that Minoanisation (a term used by archaeologists to explain the adoption of Cretan material culture traits and the practices they represent beyond Crete at the end of MBA and the beginning of LBA) was a multi-sited, multi-directional, and a range of processes. After an outline of the archaeological debate, the paper emphasizes that palatial Crete (with its subdivision in two main palatial periods) was never an integrated ‘core’, but rather a complex and composite political landscape that underwent gradual forms of hierarchisation and formalisation in its political, artisanal, and religious systems. It is further argued that the distribution of Cretan cultural traits over the Aegean was never uniform or politically organised and controlled, although at the end of the Neopalatial period (LM IA-IB) one can recognise a leading role played by the centre of Knossos in legitimising a territorial expansion and promoting ideological propaganda on Crete. In order to describe the heterogenous character of Minoanisation, the paper discusses three case studies, i.e., the Cycladic islands, the south-east and the north-east Aegean islands and coasts, focusing on ceramic production and consumption, the mobility of people, things and ideas, and ritual and burial behaviours.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
