Jan Driessen

The site of Pyla-Kokkinokremos, located in Larnaka Bay in south-eastern Cyprus, was explored on different occasions but continues to be of archaeological interest, in part because it is one of the few settlements that was occupied for a relatively short period during what are called the ‘Crisis Years’ of the Eastern Mediterranean (ca. 1200 BCE). The ethnic mix of its material culture is also astonishing, with imports from Mycenaean Greece, Minoan Crete, Nuragic Sardinia, Hittite Anatolia, the Levant, and Egypt—a variety unparalleled at other contemporary Cypriot settlements. Since 2014, an international team consisting of members of the University of Ghent and Louvain in Belgium and of the Mediterranean Archaeological Society in Heraklion, Crete, has continued its exploration, concentrating on different areas of the 7-hectare hill. The aim of the new excavations is to obtain a better understanding of the social structure and internal organization of the site and of its importance for the continuing discussions on migration, interaction, and acculturation, which typify the late 13th and early 12th centuries BCE in the Eastern Mediterranean. The volume is a detailed but preliminary account of the first six excavation campaigns (2014–2019) with a presentation of the archaeological material found in the different sectors of the hill. It also includes the first analyses of the different ceramic categories encountered and a report on the topographical work executed.

Between 2007 and 2011, the Belgian School at Athens undertook excavations on the Kefali or Buff o hill, east of the village of Sissi, on the north coast of Crete, only a few kilometres east of Malia. The project has revealed the remains of a settlement and cemetery, used during different phases of the Bronze Age (2500-1200 B.C.). This volume details the results of the 2011 campaign, the last in our first 5-year programme. The work in the different zones is described and reports on Late Minoan pottery, petrographic analysis, shells and ground stone tools are attached.

This volume This volume has its origin in a similarly entitled session organised at the 24th Annual Meeting of the European Association of Archaeologists in Barcelona in 2018. The specific aim of both the session and this volume was to measure acceptance of, and resistance to, outside influences within Mediterranean coastal settlements and their immediate hinterlands, with an open time range, but with a particular focus on the processes not reflecting simple commercial routes, but taking place at an intercultural level, in situations of developed connectedness. Following a general discussion of the theoretical and long-lasting facets of the discussion on communication, and of some of the reasons for its unevenness, the contributions in the volume give a wide and stimulating view of the ongoing debate about Mediterranean interaction and communication. The papers' timespan is large: from the Late Neolithic of Crete, in the 5th-4th millennium BCE, to the Macedonian conquest of Thrace, in the 4th century BCE. Most contributions, however, focus on the Middle to Late Bronze Ages, as this is a phase of particularly intense communication, which matches the interests and connections of the editors. The geographic frame extends from the Central Mediterranean to Thrace, Cyprus and the Levant, with an important focus on Crete and Mycenaean Greece. Other papers, more than specific areas, instead discuss the figures of some of the actors of the intra-Mediterranean interregional communication, and the nuances of their roles: warriors and merchants.
https://www.i6doc.com/fr/book/?gcoi=28001104706670

Proceedings of the international workshop organised in Louvain-la-Neuve, December 2018.
This collection of papers explores whether the Lévi-Straussian notion of the House is a valid concept in aiding the comprehension of the social structure of Bronze Age Aegean societies. The main question that is addressed is whether there was a specific social institution or definable group that, through its materialisation, differentiated itself from other social units, such as nuclear families. While little agreement was reached, the volume succeeds in stressing the advances made in the study of social structure of the Aegean on the basis of material remains. Moreover, the discussions presented demonstrate that the House as an analytical unit allows a better understanding of what on Crete has usually been called ‘the elite’ – an anonymous group of people with shared values and practices. It is the contention of the editors that such an interpretation of the basal social structure may help understand the unique emergence, development and character of Minoan society, as well as its distinctive material culture.

The divide that once existed between the past and the present and between the archaeology of distant times and that of recent ones has started to disappear. Excavations are now exploring 20th century
sites or ones that are even more recent. The barriers that once compartmentalised the fields of history, archaeology and anthropology have begun to crumble, yielding a vast common space, that of the present. The resulting challenges to traditional methodologies have generated a silent revolution that is undermining the ways these disciplines dealt with the past. Will we prove capable of acknowledging this new state of the social sciences and act accordingly?

Crisis to Collapse. The Archaeology of Social Breakdown.This volume comprises the proceedings of a workshop with the same title which took place in October 2015. It was organised within the frame of the ARC13/18-049 (concerted research action) ‘A World in Crisis?’. It has both a large chronological scope – from the Late Palaeolithic to the 12th c. AD – and wide geographical coverage, with case studies from the Maya, Southern US, Aegean, Sri Lanka, Indus, Gaul, Southern Levant, Anatolia, Egypt, North-western Europe, Alaska and Mesopotamia. It discusses and critically analyses the variety of signatures and archaeological correlates of crisis conditions that led to social breakdown. As such it makes massive strides forward to a better theoretical understanding of crisis-induced collapse.
The authors
Bulent Arikan, Miroslav Bárta, R. Kyle Bocinsky, Megan Cifarelli, Tim F. Cunningham, Jan Driessen, Svante Fischer, Christian Isendahl, Timothy A. Kohler, Igor Kreimerman, Maxime Lamoureux St-Hilaire, Lennart Lind, Patricia A. McAnany, Guy D. Middleton, Lorenzo Nigro, Stephen O’Brien, Gerald Oetelaar, Cameron A. Petrie, Felix Riede, Keir Strickland, Richard VanderHoek, Saro Wallace.

A unique anthropomorphic statue, representing a young man standing tall ca. 50 cm. and primarily made of ivory and with gold decorative elements, was discovered heavily fragmented and burnt during the extensive excavations at the Bronze Age site of Palaikastro in Crete, Greece in 1987, 1988 and 1990. Through a painstaking restoration process of nearly a decade long, the statue was brought back to its original shape from ca. 200 recovered fragments and it is now exhibited in the Siteia archaeological museum in East Crete. The statue and the remaining fragments that the conservators were not able to place on the statue were recently 3D documented by means of a high-precision optical scanner, resulting in the virtual re-positioning of many remaining fragments, correction of the statue's right foot orientation and its overall posture, and a better understanding of its assembly technique. This article presents these results and the digital processes that lead to them.

Summaries of a colloquium at the 120th annual meeting of the AIA in Washington DC, 2020. It was the occasion to present synthetic papers on the various sectors of the Sissi site revealed (cemetery, settlement, central building) , to note parallels and stress the importance of differences, but also to discuss to what degree the excavations have
added, modified, or confirmed past ideas on Minoan civilization.

Format: Public lecture on the 30 th , by Prof. Jim Wright, with lectures on the 31 st of May and 1 st of June. Workshop. A restricted group of scholars as speakers. The meeting is not open to the general public (because of the size of the lecture hall), but a select number of people may apply to sit as backbenchers.

Lévi-Strauss was the first to recognize the potential of Houses as " moral persons holding an estate made up of material and immaterial wealth which perpetuate themselves through the transmission of their name, fortune and titles down a real or imaginary line, considered legitimate as long as this continuity can express itself in the language of kinship or of affinity, and most often of both " for bridging kin-based and class-based social orders. The rigour of the model in illuminating the intersection between individual or small-scale social units and larger, collective structures from a diachronic perspective has generated a wealth of anthropological and archaeological scholarship in recent years. While the flexibility and diversity embodied in the model offer clear advantages for analysing ancient social practices, a lot of its features require greater critical scrutiny. We propose to approach Houses as heuristic devices for exploring social relations and modelling social interactions in the past, viewing the House society model as an inherently flexible set of structuring principles capturing relations, behaviours and patterns that subvert traditional categories of social interaction. Houses are resolutely entangled with material culture and the world of things making them an interpretive model rooted in post-humanist and new materialist approaches; they can encompass and operationalise multiple spatial and temporal scales, without subsuming one to another in overarching hierarchical schemata; their material, social and political facets (e.g., combining hierarchical and heterarchical structures; being focused on collective representation whilst allowing for the emergence of individual identities; deploying architectural elaboration as both a method of unification and differentiation), allow for a more nuanced and sophisticated understanding of the past, which we think is worth exploring further. The geographical and cultural context of the ancient Aegean (broadly defined) offers a meaningful setting in which to situate these concerns, allowing us to follow up materialisations and expressions of Houses through time with reference to social processes and practices with transformative power and long-term implications.

Cut stone masonry is one of the most prominent features that characterises monumental architecture, the appearance of which is imbued with symbolic meaning and corollary to wholesale changes in the societies of the Bronze Age Eastern Mediterranean (Harmanşah 2007; Knapp 2009; Broodbank 2013; Fisher 2014). Ashlar walls and orthostat lining indeed mark a considerable increase in energy investment in architecture, as well as the mobilisation of a large and skilled workforce necessary for its construction in the 3rd and 2nd millennium BC Aegean, Anatolia, Cyprus, Egypt, Syria and Levant. Seen against the backdrop of long-distance interactions that connect these regions from the 3rd millennium onwards and which intensify throughout the Bronze Age, the extensive use of cut stone in the Bronze Age Eastern Mediterranean is taken as one of the main indications of knowledge transfer within the region. The precise form of this transfer remains unclear, however. Although hints at shared building practices between different areas are suggested on the basis of similarities in the tool kits, extraction methods or general structural and formal features (Hult 1983; Wright 1985; Küpper 1996; Palyvou 2005, 2009; Seeher 2008; Shaw 2009; Bachmann 2009; Phylokyprou 2013; Blackwell 2014), no obvious filiation between cut stones building techniques can be traced. Furthermore, detailed technical case-studies, the prerequisite for any comparative study, are few. The purpose of this workshop is to explore the materiality of cut stone masonry in the different regions of the Bronze Age Eastern Mediterranean, in order to provide data that will lay the foundations for a meaningful discussion on transfer of architectural knowledge.

International workshop organized by AEGIS (UCLouvain‐INCAL‐CEMA) and the ARC 'A World in Crisis' LOUVAIN‐LA‐NEUVE, 8 TH ‐9 TH OF MARCH 2018 First Circular – Call for papers Cut stone masonry is one of the most prominent features that characterises monumental architecture, the appearance of which is imbued with symbolic meaning and corollary to wholesale changes in the societies of the Bronze Age Eastern Mediterranean (Harmanşah 2007; Knapp 2009; Broodbank 2013; Fisher 2014). Ashlar walls and orthostat lining indeed mark a considerable increase in energy investment in architecture, as well as the mobilisation of a large and skilled workforce necessary for its construction in the 3 rd and 2 nd millennium BC Aegean, Anatolia, Cyprus, Egypt, Syria and Levant. Seen against the backdrop of long‐distance interactions that connect these regions from the 3 rd millennium onwards and which intensify throughout the Bronze Age, the extensive use of cut stone in the Bronze Age Eastern Mediterranean is taken as one of the main indications of knowledge transfer within the region. The precise form of this transfer remains unclear, however. Although hints at shared building practices between different areas are suggested on the basis of similarities in the tool kits, extraction methods or general structural and formal features, no obvious filiation between cut stones building techniques can be traced. Furthermore, detailed technical case‐studies, the prerequisite for any comparative study, are few. The purpose of this workshop is to explore the materiality of cut stone masonry in the different regions of the Bronze Age Eastern Mediterranean, in order to provide data that will lay the foundations for a meaningful discussion on transfer of architectural knowledge. For doing so, we welcome contributions of two types: 1. Comparative studies that focus on the following questions: When and under what form(s) did cut stone masonry appear in the different regions of the Eastern Mediterranean? What are the specific technical and formal traits of cut stone masonry, and do these remain stable or do they evolve throughout the Bronze Age within each region? What is the production process associated with cut stone masonry in each region of the Eastern Mediterranean? For what purposes were ashlars and orthostats used and is it possible to point out synchronic or diachronic differences in their cultural significance? Are there any indications that the builders tended to adopt foreign architectural traits in stone masonry, and if yes, how did they adapt them to the specificities of the building materials available locally? Or, on the contrary, does cut stone masonry in each region reflect resistance to external influences, and if so, what is the impact of tradition and physical determinism? 2. Case‐driven investigations of ashlar and orthostat use. These contributions should address the stone‐working technologies and construction techniques that were practiced as well as the functional, social and symbolic roles cut stone masonry played in the spaces and structures it adorned. Other topics might include, but are not limited to: the development of ashlar and orthostat use in a site over time; a comparison between the techniques used for the production of cut stone architecture and stone statuary; the assessment of the skill involved in producing cut stone architecture in regard to the use of other building materials; the impact of the development of cut stone architecture on local and long‐used building materials. A Preliminary title and an abstract of minimum 500 words should be sent to the organisers (maud.devolder@uclouvain.be) by the 30 th of September 2017. The number of speakers will be limited and priority will be given to contributions related to the objectives described above. Travel and hotel expenses are not covered by the organisers but lunches will be taken care of. Each presentation will be 30 minutes, and the conference proceedings will be published in the AEGIS collection.

Louvain-la-Neuve, 8-9 december 2016 Collective tombs were widespread in the Near East and Europe during the Neolithic and the Bronze Age, up to the point that their proliferation and diffusion in the late 4 th millennium BC was singled out as a «phenomenon». For example, 6000 Neolithic collective burials have been identified in France 1 and it is by far the most common type of tomb on Crete during the Early Bronze Age, a situation which strongly contrasts with the mortuary customs of other areas and periods of the Aegean 2. All collective burials are characterized by the successive gathering, during a more or less extended period of time, of several deceased within the same confined space. The treatment of the body, however, as well as the mortuary practices and the rituals associated with collective tombs display much variability. The latter can be architectural, with natural and man-made tombs, subterranean and above-ground structures or apply to funerary treatment with a diversity which includes primary or secondary deposits, cremation and inhumation. It can also imply a variety in the deposition of objects, such as personal belongings, provisions for the journey of the deceased or ceremonial items. Finally, it may also entail various manipulations of bones for tomb cleaning or ritual purposes. Currently, research on collective tombs tends to focus on one of the following issues: 1 Chambon 2003 Les morts dans les sépultures collectives néolithiques en France, CNRS éditions. 2 Herrero 2009 The Minoan fallacy: cultural diversity and mortuary behaviour on Crete at the beginning of the Bronze Age, Oxford Journal of Archaeology 28: 29–57

The site of Pyla-Kokkinokremos, located ca. 15 km east of Larnaka along the coast of Cyprus, represents a singularly short-lived settlement in the island’s Late Bronze Age history. Established only a generation or so prior to its eventual abandonment in the early 12th c. BC, the settlement is a valuable ‘time capsule’ of the Late Cypriot IIC/IIIA (1230-1170 BC) critical phase.

A fifth joint excavation campaign between the Universities of Ghent, Louvain and the Mediterranean Archaeological Society took place at Pyla-Kokkinokremos from the 27th of March until the 26th of May.
The site of Pyla-Kokkinokremos represents a singularly short-lived settlement in the island’s Late Bronze Age history. Established only a generation or so prior to its eventual abandonment in the early 12th century BC, the site provides important evidence relating to the crucial period at the end of the 13th and the beginning of the 12th century BC. Former excavations suggest the entire plateau of ca. 7 ha to have been densely occupied. Excavated parts on the plateau were laid-out regularly within a perimeter ‘casemate’ wall. During the 2018 season excavations continued both on the west and east lobe in an effort to better understand the layout, organisation and functional specialisation of the settlement.

Located on the southeast coast of Cyprus, Pyla-Kokkinokremos was only founded a few decades prior to its eventual abandonment at the beginning of the 12 th c. BC. This limited occupation makes the site an excellent case study to explore the impact of the so-called crisis years on the island. Since the settlement was never reoccupied and has an overall lifespan of less than fifty years, Pyla's material culture can be considered a 'time capsule' for this LC IIC-IIIA critical phase.

A sixth joint excavation campaign between the Universities of Ghent, Louvain and the Mediterranean Archaeological Society took place at Pyla-Kokkinokremos from the 26th of March until the 26th of May, 2019.
Since its discovery in the early 1950s, the Late Bronze Age settlement of Pyla-Kokkinokremos has occupied a prominent position in the debates surrounding the ‘collapse’ of Bronze Age Mediterranean societies c. 1200 BCE. Several elements contributed to the site’s particular status in the Late Cypriot IIC-IIIA settlement landscape:
- the short-lived character of the site – founded towards the end of the 13th c. BCE and abandoned during the first quarter of the 12th c. BCE
- its exceptional ‘casemate’ architecture
- its multi-ethnic material culture – with references to Sardinia, Crete, Egypt, Anatolia, the Syro-Palestinian coast and Mycenaean Greece.
In 2014, Prof. Joachim Bretschneider (UGhent), Prof. Jan Driessen (UCLouvain) and Dr. Athanasia Kanta (Mediterranean Archaeological Society) inaugurated a new excavation project at Pyla-Kokkinokremos following previous successful investigations by Dr. Dikaios, Prof. Karageorghis and Dr. Kanta.

Chypre et le Levant nord avec le royaume d'Ougarit ont été touchés par des changements socio-culturels drastiques peu après 1200 av. J.-C., dont les causes et les effets restent à discuter. Cet article résume certaines des recherches les plus récentes, en tenant compte des sources historiques et archéologiques. Dans le cadre de cette analyse supra-régionale, une attention particulière est accordée à l'établissement de Pyla-Kokkinokremos sur l'île de Chypre. Le site, localisé juste à l'est de la baie de Larnaca, sur un plateau naturellement fortifié, fait de nouveau l'objet de recherches archéologiques depuis 2014, par une mission conjointe de l'Université de Gand (J. Bretschneider), de l'Université catholique de Louvain (J. Driessen) et de la Mediterranean Archaeological Society (A. Kanta). Pyla-Kokkinokremos est exceptionnel en raison de son occupation de courte durée : établi avant la fin du XIIIe s. av. J.-C., le site est soudainement abandonné au début du XIIe. En tant que tel, l'établissement représente une « capsule temporelle » documentant une phase critique (Chypriote récent IIC-IIIA) de l'histoire de l'île au Bronze récent. Le caractère multi-ethnique, déjà reconnu pour les découvertes faites sur le site de Kokkinokremos, est confirmé par les fouilles en cours, grâce à des objets provenant de Sardaigne, de Crète, d'Égypte, d'Anatolie, de Grèce mycénienne (en particulier d'Argolide) et de la côte syropalestinienne. Certaines questions comme par exemple de savoir qui fonda ce site en cet endroit stratégique spécifique et pourquoi l'installation fut soudainement abandonnée peu après, ne peuvent trouver de réponse définitive mais restent importantes pour comprendre les relations entre Chypre et Ugarit au crépuscule de l'âge du Bronze.

The excavations of the joint Belgian-Greek team directed by Prof. Joachim Bretschneider (UGhent), Prof. Jan Driessen (UCLouvain) and Dr. Athanasia Kanta (Mediterranean Society Iraklion) took place from October 26 to November 14. As before, the three teams continued work in respectively the west lobe (MS Iraklion, Sector 4), the east lobe (UGhent, Sectors 5 and 7) and the central plateau (UCLouvain, Sector 3) of the hart-shaped hill.