T r n a v s k á u n i v e r z i t a v T r n a v e F i l o z o f i c k á f a k u l t a

U n i v e r s i t a s Ty r n a v i e n s i s F a c u l t a s P h i l o s o p h i c a

A N O D O SStudies of the Ancient World

10/2010

T R N A V A 2011

A N O D O SStudies of the Ancient World10/2010

Redakčná rada/Editors:Prof. PhDr. Mária Novotná, DrSc., Prof. Dr. Werner Jobst, doc. PhDr. Marie Dufková, CSc., prof. PhDr. Klára Kuzmová, CSc.

Redakcia/Editorial Staff: prof. PhDr. Klára Kuzmová, CSc.

Počítačová sadzba/Layout: Zuzana Turzová

© Trnavská univerzita v Trnave, Filozofická fakulta

Kontaktná adresa (príspevky, ďalšie informácie)/Contact address (contributions, further information):Katedra klasickej archeológie, Trnavská univerzita v Trnave, Hornopotočná 23, SK-918 43 Trnava+421-33-5939371; fax: +421-33-5939370 klasarch@truni.sk

Publikované s finančnou podporou Ministerstva školstva SR (Projekt VEGA č. 1/0408/09) a Pro Archaeologia Classica.Published with financial support of the Ministry of Education of the Slovak Republic (Project VEGA No. 1/0408/09) and the Pro Archaeologia Classica.

Za znenie a obsah príspevkov zodpovedajú autori.The authors are responsible for their contributions.

Tlač/Printed by: ForPress, s.r.o., Kmeťkova 1, 949 01 Nitra z tlačových podkladov Filozofickej fakulty Trnavskej univerzity v Trnave

Žiadna časť tejto publikácie nesmie byť reprodukovaná alebo rozširovaná v žiadnej forme - elektronicky či mechanicky, vrátane fotokópií, nahrávania alebo iným použitím informačného systému vrátane webových stránok, bez predbežného písomného súhlasu vlastníka vydavateľských práv.

No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form - electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system, including web pages, without the prior written permission from the copyright owner.

ISBN 978-80-8082-500-3ISSN 1338-5410

Obálka/Cover:Motív „Zázračného dažďa“ zo stĺpa Marka Aurélia v Ríme. V okienku: Detail osthotechu z Keseciku, Turecko (Foto: A. Baldiran).Motif of the „Miracle rain“ from the column of Marcus Aurelius in Rome. In the window: Detail of the osthotech from Kesecik, Turkey (Photo: A. Baldiran).Grafické spracovanie/Graphic elaboration: Mgr. Pavol Šima-JuríčekPočítačové spracovanie/Computer elaboration: PhDr. Ivan Kuzma

Proceedings of the International Conference

THE PHENOMENA OF CULTURAL BORDERS AND BORDER CULTURES ACROSS THE PASSAGE

OF TIME

(From the Bronze Age to Late Antiquity)

Dedicated to the 375th anniversary of Universitas Tyrnaviensis

Trnava, 22 - 24 October 2010

CONTENTS

PREFACE

BALDIRAN, A. An Osthotech with Hunting Scene in Çumra – Sırçalı Höyük ............................................................................................. 9

BARTUS, D. Roman Figural Bronzes From Brigetio: Preliminary Notes ................................................................................................ 17

BLAKOLMER, F. Ethnizität und Identität in der minoisch-mykenischen Ikonographie .........................................................................................29

BOUZEK, J. Frontiers in Pre-Roman Thrace ............................................................................................................................................... 41

CHALUPA, A. Mithraism in Ancient Syria: Persian Cult on the Borders of the Roman Empire ............................................................. 57

DAŞBACAK, C. An Essay on the Heating Costs of Roman Baths .................................................................................................................. 67

DIMITROVA, Y. Rodopi Mountain Between Thrace and Aegea Region: Some Elements of a Border Culture of Early Iron Age in Southern Bulgaria .................................................................. 71

DOKSANALTI, E. M. - MIMIROĞLU, İ. M. Giresun/Aretias - Kalkeritis Island ......................................................................................................................................... 85

DUBCOVÁ, V. Götter ohne Grenzen? Transfer der religiösen Ikonographie in der Bronzezeit – Alter Orient und die frühe Ägäis ....................................................................................................................................... 103

GOLUBOVIĆ, S. – MRĐIĆ, N. Territory of Roman Viminacium - From Celtic to Slavic Tribes ....................................................................................... 117

HLAVÁČOVÁ, S. Greek Heroes on the Borders of the Historical Periods ..................................................................................................... 127

KLONTZA-JAKLOVÁ, V. The Meaning of Time in Late Bronze Age Europe and its Reflection in Material Culture .......................................... 133

KOVÁCS, P. Sarmatian Campaigns During the First Tetrarchy ............................................................................................................. 143

KOVÁLIK, L. The Gate Wall and the Doors of Greek Propyla ................................................................................................................. 155

KUČERÁKOVÁ, K. The Upland Settlements of the Púchov Culture and Germanic Tribes Beyond the North-PannonianFrontier, in the Mountainous Part of Central Slovakia ...................................................................................................... 163

LAZAR, I. The Inhabitants of Roman Celeia - An Insight into InterculturalContacts and Impacts Trough Centuries ............................................................................................................................. 175

MUSILOVÁ, M. Bratislavaer Burg - Arx Boiorum im Lichte der neuesten archäologischen FundeArchäologische Forschung - Winterreithalle ................................................................................................................................187

NÁMEROVÁ, A. Relations Between Greeks and Scythians in Black Sea Area ....................................................................................................207

NOVÁKOVÁ, L. Funeral Rites and Cultural Diversity in Hellenistic Caria Based on Epigraphic and Archaeological Evidence ........................................................................................................... 213

ONDERKA, P. – DUFKOVÁ, M. Die meroitische Stätte in Wad Ben Naga, Republik Sudan ............................................................................................... 223

PAPOUŠEK, D. Centrality and Cosmopolitism in the Lukan Imagination of Paul of Tarsus:A Case of Jerusalem ................................................................................................................................................................ 247

POBEŽIN, G. Sources and History: Crossing From Archives to Historiography and Back The Development of Historiographical Method and Episteme in Respect of Using Archival Sources ................................................................................................................................... 255

POPOV, H. – JOCKENHÖVEL, A. At the Northern Borders of the Mycenaean World: Thracian Gold Mining from the Late Bronze and the Early Iron Age at Ada Tepe in the Eastern Rhodopes ......................................................................................... 265

ŠVAŇA, K. The influence of Roman provincial pottery manufacture on the production of the Suebic wheel-made pottery ....................................................................................................... 283

TRANTALIDOU, K. – BELEGRINOU, E. – ANDREASEN, N.Pastoral Societies in the Southern Balkan Peninsula. The Evidence From Caves Occupied During the Neolithic and Chalcolithic Era ......................................................... 295

VERČÍK, M. Die griechischen Bewaffnung im Lichte des kulturellen Austausches ............................................................................ 321

ZIMMERMANN, Th.Legal Aliens on Hattian Grounds? – Tracing the Presence of ‚Foreigners‘in 3rd Millennium Central Anatolia ....................................................................................................................................... 335

Preface

The publication of ANODOS 10/2010 contains 27 articles in English and German which were presented in the form of papers and posters at the international conference “The Phenomena of Cultural Borders and Border Cultures Across the Passage of Time (From the Bronze Age to Late Antiquity)” which was held in Trnava on the 22th - 24th of October 2010. The participants consisted of scholars from eleven countries (Turkey, Greece, Bulgaria, Serbia, Slovenia, Hungary, Austria, Germany, the Czech Republic, the USA and the Slovak Republic). Graduate and post-graduate students from Trnava participated in both the organization of the conference and the actual programme. The conference was organized on the occasion of the 375th anniversary of Universitas Tyrnaviensis (1635-1777), the first university in the territory of the Kingdom of Hungary, which then included the historical town of Trnava. The current renewed Trnava University in Trnava (1992), situated in the Slovak Republic, follows the ideas and academic identity of the original university.

At the same time, in 2010 it had been ten years since the Department of Classical Archaeo- logy at Trnava University had established the tradition of organizing international scientific conferences on specific themes in chronological sequence – from the Late Bronze Age to Late Antiquity. The idea came from Prof. Dr. Mária Novotná, the founder of the Department and of the Classical Archaeology study programme in Slovakia. The conferences have been held every two-three years so far (in 2000, 2003, 2005 and 2007) and they have had the following themes: Contacts between Middle Europe and the Mediterranean, Jewellery and Costume, Arms and Armour, and Cult and Sanctuary through the Ages. Contributions have been published in four volumes of Anodos - Studies of the Ancient World (1/2001, 3/2003, 4-5/2004-2005 and 6-7/2006-2007). Another conference of this kind was organized under the title “Trade and Production through the Ages” at Selcuk University in Konya (Turkey) in 2008, in co-operation with Selcuk University (our partner institution).

The conference in 2010 and the publication of its proceedings have been financially supported by the Ministry of Education of the Slovak Republic (Project VEGA No. 1/0408/09) and by the voluntary association Pro Archaeologia Classica.

Editors

Trnava, 25 November 2011

Anodos. Studies of the Ancient World 10/2010, 133-141.

133

The Meaning of Time in Late Bronze Age Europe and its Reflection in Material Culture

Vera Klontza-Jaklová

Keywords: Late Bronze Age, Meaning of Time, Symbols of Time, Cyclical Time, Linear Time

Abstract: The article examines the development of approaches to the analysis of questions related to the cosmological structures of prehistoric societies, using the example of ‘the meaning of time,’ based on the proposition that “visual materials have a unique role in the expression of ideology and material culture can take on the role of carrying certain messages that a culture cannot entrust to language”1. The Late Bronze Age and Early Iron Age are particularly well suited to the approach proposed. They cover a period of increasing complexity and relatively rapid change in many spheres; one in which long standing continuities were frequently overturned, where conflict and competition become increasingly marked in the archaeological record and written sources began to supplant verbal memory. Those artefacts, from across all Europe, traditionally related to the meaning and understanding of time (models, icons or symbols of boats, wagons, sun discs, birds, etc.), are presented.

The international conference “The Phenomena of Cultural Borders and Border Cultures across the Passage of Time (From the Bronze Age to the Late Antiquity)”2 has presented me with a very welcome opportunity to discuss some special problems in the interpretation of material culture, of which we are well aware but often avoid confronting. Particularly in Greece, this kind of question can be a very “touchy” topic. Archaeology was already present before the birth of the Greek state and was one of the tools used to create the new identity of the rising young Greek urban class of the 19th Century3. The mainly foreign excavators and scholars taking part in this project applied their romantic notions, as well as their ideologies and convictions, to interpretation of the past4. An excellent example is Arthur Evans’ transfer of British imperial ideals to interpretations of Minoan Crete5. Often, these explanatory models were not questioned because of their authors’ reputations, which were supported by their spectacular discoveries. At other times these interpretations were useful for the aims of political movements (for example the unity of Minoan Crete and Mycenaean Greece implied a common national root and, more recently, the position of women in Bronze Age Crete has stood in stark contrast to that of more ‘modern’ times.)

After extreme reactions, ranging from total refusal to reach any kind of historical or cosmological conclusions, to the adoption of purely theoretical models, which often ignore the archaeological sources, systematic research methods have, in the last couple of decades, provided much evidence which can and should be used to test previous interpretations.

My purpose here is not to analyze these aspects. Instead I would like, by way of an example, to present the problem of the meaning of time from both the methodological and historical

1 Marcus 1995, 2487.2 I would like to extend my acknowledgments to the organizing committee for my invitation, namely Prof. Klára

Kuzmová and Prof. Mária Novotná. This paper owes much to the help and encouragement of Prof. Jan Bouzek, my PhD advisor. I am indebted to Prof. Geraldine Gessell, Dr. Alexander MacGillivray, Dr. Gregor Pobežin, Ricardo Fernandes, MSc and Manolis Klontzas, MA for their feedbacks. My colleague and friend Dr. Sue Bridgford assisted with editing the English text and feedback.

3 Χουρμουζιάδης 2003, 11. 4 Hamilakis and Momigliano 2006, 25-6, 28.5 Hamilakis 2006, 145-8.

Vera Klontza-Jaklová

134

points of view. My paper starts by defining the main question and concludes by establishing a working model and outlining further methodology to make it testable.

Our first question is whether it is even relevant to ask the meaning of time? After all, people, even members of one society, never have uniform opinions and belief systems. But I would say it must, at some level, be a meaningful question because there are always some general or dominant tendencies in each phase of human history. I am even confident that some individual, minority or popular opinions can be found in a reconstructed Bronze Age cosmological system6.

A further question is: Is it possible to try to answer such questions for chronologically far distanced societies such as those of the Bronze Age, where we have no written sources. To my mind it is absolutely relevant and, indeed, it is the main point of our work. Following the same logic, we could equally ask if it makes sense to study the current world, given that we really can’t understand everything that is happening or that there are so many very different opinions about it. Reconstructed abstract models of past belief systems help us to better understand both individual artifacts and material cultures7.

Answering yes, then we move on to where and how to begin the investigation of ‘Temps Perdu’? The shortest way is to find sources which discuss time and which are chronologically as close as possible to Late Bronze Age Europe8.

Even within the works of Heraclitus (c. 535-475 BC) important information about prehistoric ways of understanding the cosmos is hidden. He clearly feels the need to express that everything is changed; that the period of the myth is over; that we should not believe what we have heard; that “Watching is much more trustworthy than listening”9; that nothing can be repeated and what is gone is gone. Time is always on the move, it cannot stop and its direction and speed cannot be changed.

Hesiod, living about 2 centuries before Heraclitus, described in his Theogony a similar but simpler picture of time. He defined ‘Cronos’ as the base of our existence together with the space represented by Uranos and Gea, and as their product. They are gods of the previous generation. Their power is gone. They are something like relics of the past, or part of our memories. Cronos’ partner is Rhea, symbolizing the flow of time. Our current world belongs to the generation of Rhea’s and Cronos’ children10. Cronos is both siring and killing and killing his children. He has been described as the “most terrible of her (Gaia’s) children”, as “devious - devising”11. At the same time he is connecting human time with universal time by means of the repetitive cycle of agricultural activities throughout the year12.

Given this need to express and describe the changed status quo, we can infer that time in the Bronze Age was ‘different’. If it was not linear, it must have been cyclical, as was the Egyptian calendar13. But, within the established Greek pantheon, Hesiod also writes of deities which remain from the Bronze Age and whose movements are cyclical. E g. Demeter’s daughter Kore leaves the world for the underworld and returns in a regular and unchanging cycle. Both worlds exist in parallel and it is in generally possible to move from one to the other. The same phenomenon is described in the Odyssey. Circe suggested to Odysseus that he visit the underworld in order to find out how to continue his journey. He goes there...and he comes

6 Hägg 1981, 35-9.7 E.g. N. Marinatos (2010) revision of Minoan symbolism surviving from Evans’ days gives us not only a completely

new angle of view on Minoan art, cosmology and religion but also the possibility of more accurate interpretations of material culture.

8 Kratochvíl and Bouzek 1994.9 Pobežin 2011. 10 Theogony 135-45, 450-5, 460. 11 Theogony 138-40. Lattimore 198, 131.12 Kratochvíl and Bouzek 1994, 67-76. 13 Parker 1950.

The Meaning of Time in Late Bronze Age Europe and its Reflection in Material Culture

135

back14. Some centuries later the basis of the myth has altered: Orfeus cannot bring back his Eurydike. He tries but it is impossible. He then understands that everything has changed and he must leave her among the dead15.

In Homer’s Iliad the shield of Achilles is described as a metaphor for the world, depicted as concentric circles with the earth in the center, urban society, countryside, nature, wild animals and ocean surrounding and encircling everything in an unending flow16.

The relics of time flowing in circles are alive even today, mainly in agricultural societies. Those societies are less disciplined in their planning of the future, since they believe that it cannot be controlled or influenced by anybody and humans make life easier by “harmonizing” with the laws and cyclic events of nature17. It seems to me that cyclically understood time is characteristic of societies which progress so slowly that changes from one generation to the next are almost invisible, and also of societies which are dependent on knowledge built from long term experience, the loss of which would threaten their very existence.

We don’t have direct written information about Minoan mythology but in 8th-7th Century B. C., and up to the Hellenistic and Roman periods, on Crete, Zeus Cretogenes was worshipped as a cyclical deity dying and recovering every year. This tradition was still alive in modern times in the Cretan

countryside18. The age and roots of this tradition must be studied to confirm or exclude its origin in the Minoan period.

We will turn our attention to Minoan Crete to get more information about time. Time for the first civilizations was naturally related to the sun. N. Marinatos in her latest work19 presented the sun goddess as a very important deity of the Cretan pantheon and she also recognized and explained other symbols related to her, to the sun, to its journey, and to the flow of time. This goddess is usually depicted directly with the sun, with a symbol of mountains with the rising sun, with birds, with ox/bull, double axes, bulb plants or varying combination of these symbols20 (Fig. 1).

14 Odysssey, Book X, Lines 485-94 – Circe’s advise. Book II – by Teiresias. 15 Kratochvíl and Bouzek 1994, 85.16 Kratochvíl and Bouzek 1994, 67-6; Iliad, book 18, Lines 478-608 .17 Lewis 2006, 61.18 Ψιλάκης 1996, 56-7, Verbuggen 1981, 75.19 Marinatos 2010.20 Marinatos 2010, 114 and further, 131 and further.

Fig. 1. a – Seal from Psychro with bovine head, sun and plants; b – Mould from Siteia. Sun goddess and sun disc; c – Larnax from Palaikastro with sun symbols (after Marinatos 2010, Fig. 9: 5b, 12: 12, 11: 1).

Vera Klontza-Jaklová

136

There are many other symbols related to the cycle of rebirth; the path of the sun across the sky, the frontier of the chthonic world, as a baetyl, beetle, bird, symbols of Hathor (bovine), double axe (in some cases possibly a butterfly), genius, horns of consecration (or pair of mountains), tree, kernos, sacral knot or snake, which were used by Cretans21. What do these symbols mean? The symbol of mountains with the sun rising is one of the most important symbols of ancient Egypt (Fig. 2: a) as well as in Crete (Fig. 2: b). Mountains usually symbolize the “axis mundi” connecting heaven and earth22. Also in the Gilgamesh epic it is said that the goal of life’s journey is death, which is identified with reaching the land from which the sun is coming23.

One of the symbols mentioned by the earliest scholars as characteristic of transition between two different worlds or environments was a bird24. The birds connected sky with earth, gods with people25. These symbols are common in the LM IIIA period. In LM IIIB the society which had developed its identity from the Protopalatial period began to disintegrate. These pictures of journeys between the world and the underworld (Fig. 3) are often seen on the house-shaped larnax, related to the palace class26.

Can we find similar artifacts in the north? In the Balkans, Central Europe, West Mediterranean or Scandinavia? They were observed and correctly connected to the world of symbols and belief systems by the pioneers of archaeology and have, since then, been frequently discussed27. Looking for the sun and related symbols, we meet single sun discs, sun discs with wagon or boat, with human figure, with horse and with birds in the archaeological material. Notable among them is the Trundholm chariot (Fig. 4). It features a horse pulling a wagon with a concave sun disc – gold from one side and black from other. If it is moved from

21 Moss 2006, 152.22 Kristiansen and Larsson 2005, 357.23 Marinatos 2010, 111-12, 142-4 with original source. 24 Nilsson 1950, 492; Μυλωνάς 1977, 65.25 Marinatos 2010, 99.26 Marinatos 2010, 140-50.27 Harding 1984; Bouzek 1985; Kristiansen and Larsson 2005; Kratochvíl and Bouzek 1994 (Only recent works are

mentioned here).

Fig. 2. a – Egyptian ideogram of mountains; b – Cretan sym-bol of mountain with double axe (as a sun symbol) and birds (after Marinaos 2010, Fig. 9: 2a, b).

Fig. 3. Netherworld in depth of sea. Larnax from Kavrochori (after Marinatos 2010, Fig. 11: 4).

Fig. 4. Trundholm chariot (after Kratochvíl and Bouzek 1994, Fig. 2).

The Meaning of Time in Late Bronze Age Europe and its Reflection in Material Culture

137

left to right, the sun is gold, it is day. When it is turned back and driven from right to left, the disc is dark and it is night. When it is moving in a circle, it is imitating the sun rising and setting. It is one piece of direct evidence that time in the BA was understood as a cycle.

We can also document chronological differences in the spread of those symbols in Europe. In the Middle Bronze Age it was usual for horses to pull the sun chariot, but in the Late Bronze Age swans or water birds supplanted them. Here I should mention that the bird and its symbolism was nothing new in the Late Bronze Age. For example bird-shaped askoi are known from the Early Bronze Age from almost all of Europe. But Late Bronze Age swans/water birds have a really special position in the expression of prehistoric communities’ understanding of their universe.

We can find them on:

Ceramic or metallic vessels (Fig. 5: a-d). Metal figurines as part of jewelry or tools (Fig. 5: e, g-j).Metal, ceramic, glass/faience figurines (Fig. 5: f).Parts of symbolic chariots (Fig. 5: l).Figurines decorating the sculptures of goddesses/priests, on sanctuary models (Fig. 5: k).Architectural parts (Fig. 6: d).Decorative motives on textile (Fig. 6: c).Incised in cliffs (Fig. 6: a, b).

Also flowers, particularly blossoms of crocus or lily, are symbols of returning, rebirth or repetition28. The artifacts depicting these flowers were recognized and their origin correctly traced to the Aegean by V. Furmánek29. They are very common in Montelius 1st and 2nd period = Reinecke BB2(BC1) – HB1 with a culmination in 14th-13th Century.

Geographically they can be found in all the Old World, from the Near East to Scandinavia, almost at the same time. However, the birds are more usual in Mycenaean culture, in the Balkans, Central Europe and Scandinavia than in the Crete-Egypt-Near East cultural zone.

Before we consider the reason why these symbols spread (probably transferring the same meaning) at the same chronological horizon across such a large region, we should answer our original question: How was the time understood in the Late Bronze Age? If we kept it very simple, then the answer would be: as a cycle. But I am still not sure, because when we follow the symbols characteristic for Late Bronze Age milieu (chariots and their wheels, boats, horses, birds, prestige axes etc.) they are likely to have been spread by Europeans in transition after climatic changes at the end of the Middle Bronze Age. The weather in the Mediterranean and in SE Europe became much drier, resulting in deteriorating agricultural conditions30. The impact of this climatic change, although negative in the Mediterranean, was broadly positive in the northern European regions; higher positions were settled, the rivers and their flood plains became smaller. After some generations the populations grew large and it appears that many decided to follow the “amber road” to the south31. They probably took part in the fall of the Mycenaean palaces and maybe wound up in Egypt and Palestine among the so called “Sea People”32. They could well have been carrying with them the symbols of cyclical time, perhaps with the myth of the Apollo cycle after they adopted or partly adopted those symbols from the SE Europe – Near East – Egypt cultural zone but their time was already running linearly33. After this the old, Bronze Age world changed

28 Marinatos 1993, 196.29 Furmánek 1997, 331-2.30 Jäger 1997, 405; Starkel 1997, 540.31 Furmánek et al. 1991, 323.32 Interpretation models of Late Bronze Age history are still hardly discussed. Overview of the current stage in

Dickinson 2010, 483-9. 33 Similar approach in Kristiansen and Larsson 2005, 358-9: Centered and decentred cosmologies.

Vera Klontza-Jaklová

138

Fig. 5. a – Bronze vessel from Hajdú-Böszörmény-Eimer (Schwarz 2005, 78); b – Ship with water-bird head painted on ceramic vessel form Skyro (Wachsmann 2000, Fig. 6: 20); c – Swan head-shaped boat with a couple of mountains and a rising sun (Bouzek 1985, Fig. 88: 6); d – Bird-shaped bowl from Tell Qasile (Mazar 2000, Fig. 11: 6A); e – Bird-boat shaped bronze figurine from Velem St. Vid (Wachsmann 2000, Fig. 6: 24); f – Clay figurine from Syme (Muhly 2008, Pl. 59/295); g – Pendant from Grünwald (Wachsmann 2000, Fig. 6: 25A); h-j – Bird shaped pendants from Thessaly (Kilian-Dirlmeier 1979); k – Ceramic goddess from Poros (Δημοπούλου-Ρεθεμιωτάκη 2005, 131); l – Part of a hoard from Svijany (Photo Hana Rysová).

The Meaning of Time in Late Bronze Age Europe and its Reflection in Material Culture

139

forever and with it the prevailing meaning of time also had to change – from cyclical to linear – in order to give meaning to the changes which they brought.

My assumption is that people who are acting and radically changing, who are building, creating, and realizing their life on Earth, do not need to stop time, to believe in life beyond, they don’t need cyclical time. Cyclical time is not only the time of primitive societies and of conservative societies, which are afraid to change, It is also the time of a power after its zenith which must mobilize ideology and propaganda in order to convince all, that it will last forever. Even dominant current philosophical approaches speak about the end of history34. Technology and production are better than ever before but life for the majority remains a struggle, while politicians on all sides try only to convince that they and they alone are capable of improving people’s lives. They are recycling their power35.

It seems to me that in all societies both ways of understanding time – cyclical and linear - survive. Time itself can be considered a dimension36.

Investigation of burial customs with a special focus on the meaning and understanding of time could provide us with further insights. Possibly the tumulus or shaft graves symbolized a different approach to time when compared with large uniform urn fields.

34 Grenz 1997, 47-62.35 “Only an eternal society confident that it always exists can think that way (=circularly repeating itself). Each society creates its

own version of time to suit its desired experience. Thus, time can only be relative; absolute time is an illusion in the quantum world, but quite real for those who dwell in Newton’s physics.” A. MacGillivray’s note.

36 Einstein 2004 (1920), 19-22. Ferraro 2007, 49.

Fig. 6. a – Swan shaped boat incised on a cliff at Engelstrup (Kaul 2005, 68); b – Graffiti from Hakal ha-Me’arot (Wachsmann 2000, Fig. 6: 31); c – Detail from the Throne of Verucchio (Gleba 2008, Fig. 87); d – Relief from Medinet Habu (Illustration by author, after Wachsmann 2000, Fig. 6: 5).

Vera Klontza-Jaklová

140

From the point of view of methodology we still have not exhausted all the possibilities of co-operation with other disciplines such as philosophy, ethnology, psychology, biology, cultural anthropology etc. We are not the only ones interested in these problems, nor do we have a unique right to hypothesize. Such an interdisciplinary approach is part of general human knowledge and the study of humanity is surely the real reason for the existence of Archaeology. Putting it simply, Archaeology is not a business it is a field of study and our obligation is to fight to keep it that way.

Vera Klontza-JaklováINSTAP-EC, INSTAP-EC and Priniatikos Pyrgos IISHA projectGR-722 00 Pacheia Ammos&Charles University in PragueInstitute of Classical Archaeology, Celetná 20CZ-116 42 Prague vera.klontza@gmail.com

BibliographyBouzek, J. 1985. The Aegean, Anatolia and Europe: Cultural Interrelations in the Second Millennium B.C. SIMA 29. Göteborg:

Paul Åströms Förlag.Dalfes, H., N. Kukla, G., and Weiss, H. (eds.) 1997. Third Millennium BC Climate Change and Old World Collapse. NATO

Scientific Affairs Division ASI Series Volume I.49. Berlin: Springer.Dickinson, O. 2010. The Collapse at the End if the Bronze Age. In The Oxford Handbook of the Bronze Age Aegean, edited by

E. H. Cline, 483-90. Oxford: Oxbow books.Einstein, A. 2004. Relativity: the special and the general theory. Lynhurst: Barnes & Nobel Publishing. Originally

published 1920. Evely, R. D. G. 2000. Μinoan Crafts: Tools and Techniques. An Introduction. Volume two. Jonsered: Paul Aström Förlag.Ferraro, R. 2007. Einstein’s Space – Time. An Introduction to Special and General Relativity. New York: Springer Science

+ Business Media. Furmánek, V. 1997. Bronzeanhänger als Belege für Kontakte des Karpatenbeckens mit dem östlichen Mittelmeerraum.

In Χρόνος. Beiträge zur prähistorischen Archäologie zwischen Nord- und Südosteuropa. Festschrift für Bernard Hänsel, edited by C. Becker, M.–L. Dunkelmann, C. Metzner-Niebelsick, H. Peter-Röcher, M. Roeder, M., and B. Teržan, 313-24. Espelkamp: Verlag Marie Leidorf GmbH.

Furmánek, V., L. Veliačik, and J. Vladár (eds.) 1991. Slovensko v dobe bronzovej (Slovakia in the Bronze Age). Bratislava: Veda, vydavatelstvo Slovenskej Akadémie Vied.

Gleba, M. 2008. Textile production in Pre-Roman Italy. Ancient textiles Series. Vol. 4. Oxford: Oxbow Books. Grenz, J. S. 1997. Úvod do postmodernismu. Praha: Návrat domů (Originally published by Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing

Co., Michigan with a titel: A Primer of Postmodernism). Hägg, R. 1981. Official and popular Cults in Mycenaean Greece. In Sanctuaries and Cults in the Bronze Age. Proceedings

of the First International Symposium at the Swedish Institute in Athens, 12–13 May, 1980. Akta Instituti Atheniensis Regni Sueciae, Series 4, XXVIII, edited by R. Hägg, and N. Marinatos. Stockholm.

Hamilakis, Y. 2006. “The Colonial, the National, and the Local: Legacies of the ‘Minoan’ Past”. In Archaeology and European Modernity: Producing and Consuming the “Minoans”. Creta Antica 7, edited by Y. Hamilakis and N. Momigliano, 145-62. Padova: Centro di Archaeologia Cretese. Universita di Catania. London: Academic press inc. (London) ltd.

Hamilakis, Y., and N. Momigliano. 2006. “Archaeology and European Modernity: Stories from the Borders”. In Archaeology and European Modernity: Producing and Consuming the “Minoans”. Creta Antica 7, edited by Y. Hamilakis and N. Momigliano, 25-35. Padova: Centro di Archaeologia Cretese. Universita di Catania. London: Academic press inc. (London) ltd.

Hamilakis, Y., and N. Momigliano (eds.) 2006. Archaeology and European Modernity: Producing and Consuming the “Minoans”. Creta Antica 7. Padova: Centro di Archaeologia Cretese. Universita di Catania. London: Academic press inc. (London) ltd.

Harding, A. F. 1984. The Mycenaean and Europe. London: Academic Press.Jäger, K. 1997. “Mid- to Late Holocene Changes in Central Europe Climate and Man”. In Third Millennium BC Climate

Change and Old World Collapse. NATO Scientific Affairs Division ASI Series Volume I.49, edited by H. N. Dalfes, G. Kukla and H. Weiss, 401-8. Berlin: Springer.

The Meaning of Time in Late Bronze Age Europe and its Reflection in Material Culture

141

Kaul, F. 2005. „Das Felsbild von Lökeberg – Sonnenbilder und Sonnenkult in der nordischen Bronzezeit“. In Der geschmiedete Himmel. Die weite Welt im Herzen Europas vor 3600 Jahren, edited by H. Meller, 66-9. Stuttgart: Landesamt für Denkmalpflege und Archäologie Sachsen-Anhalt – Landesmuseum für Vorgeschichte Halle, Konrad Teiss Verlag GmbH.

Kilian-Dirlmeier, I. 1979. Anhänger in Griechenland von der Mykenischen bis spätgeometrischen Zeit. PBF XI, 2. München: C. H. Becksche Verlaugsbuchhandlung.

Kratochvíl, Z., and J. Bouzek. 1994. Od mýtu k logu. Praha: Herman & synové. Kristiansen, K., and T. B. Larsson. 2005. The Rise of Bronze Age Society. Travels, Transmissions and Transformations.

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Lattimore, R. 1998. Hesiod. The Works and Days. Theogony. The shield of Herakles. Michigan: Ann Arbor Paperbacks, and

The University of Michigan Press.Lewis, R. D. 2006. When cultures collide. Leading across cultures. Third edition. Boston, London: Emerald Group

Publishing Limited.Marcus, M. I. 1995. “Art and ideology in ancient western Asia”. In Civilization of the Near East, edited by J. M. Sasson,

2487-2505. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons.Marinatos, N. 1993. Minoan Religion. Ritual, Image, and Symbol. Columbia: University of South Carolina. Marinatos, N. 2010. Minoan Kingship and the Solar Goddess. A Near East Koine. Urbana, Chicago, and Sprigfield:

University of Illinois Press. Mazar, A. 2000. “The Temples and Cult of the Philistines”. In The Sea People and their World: A Reassessment. University

Museum Monograph 108. University Museum Symposium Series 11, edited by E. D. Oren, 213-32. Philadelphia: The University Museum, University of Pennsylvania.

Meller, H. (ed.) 2005. Der geschmiedete Himmel. Die weite Welt im Herzen Europas vor 3600 Jahren. Stuttgart: Landesamt für Denkmalpflege und Archäologie Sachsen-Anhalt – Landesmuseum für Vorgeschichte Halle, Konrad Teiss Verlag GmbH.

Moss, M. L. 2005. The Minoan Pantheon. Towards an understanding of its nature and extent. BAR International series 1343. Oxford.

Muhly, P. 2008. The sanctuary of Hermes and Aphrodite at Syme Viannou. IV. Animal Images of Clay. Library of Archaeological society at Athens, No 256. Athens.

Nilsson, M. P. 1950. The Minoan- Mycenaean Religion and its Survival in Greek Religion. Acta Reg. Societatis Humaniorum Litterarum Lundensis, IX. Second, revised edition. Lund (Originally published 1928 by BIBLO and TANNEN, New York).

Oren, E. D. (ed.) 2000. The Sea People and their World: A Reassessment. University Museum Monograph 108. University Museum Symposium Series 11. Philadelpheia: The University Museum, University of Pennsylvania.

Parker, R. A. 1950. The Calendars of Ancient Egypt. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Pobežin, G. 2011. Sources and History: Crossing From Archives to Historiography and Back. The Development of

Historiografical Method and Episteme in Respect of Using Archival Sources. In Anodos 10/2010, 255-64. Trnava.Schwarz, R. 2005. Mit der Vogelbarke ins Totenreich – das Beil aus Osternienburg. In Der geschmiedete Himmel. Die weite

Welt im Herzen europas vor 3600 Jahren, edited by H. Meller, 78-81. Stuttgart: Landesamt für Denkmalpflege und Archäologie Sachsen-Anhalt – Landesmuseum für Vorgeschichte Halle, Konrad Teiss Verlag GmbH.

Starkel, L. 1997. Environmental Changes in central Europe 5000 – 3000 BP. In Third Millennium BC Climate Change and Old World Collapse. NATO Scientific Affairs Division ASI Series Volume I.49, edited by H. N. Dalfes, G. Kukla and H. Weiss, 532-50. Berlin: Springer.

Verbuggen, H. 1981. La Zeus Crétois. Collection D’Études Mythologiques. Paris: Societé D’Édition „Les Belles Lettres.“Wachsmann, S. 2000: To the Sea of the Philistines. In The Sea People and their World: A Reassessment. University Museum

Monograph 108. University Museum Symposium Series 11, edited by E.D. Oren, 103-43. Philadelpheia: The University Museum, University of Pennsylvania.

Δημοπούλου-Ρεθεμιωτάκη, Ν. 2005. Το Αρχαιολογικό Μουσείο Ηρακλείου. Heraklion: EFG Eurobank. Μυλωνάς, Γ. Ε. 1977. Μυκηναϊκή Θρησκεία. Ναοί, βώμοι και τεμένη (Mycenean Religion. Temples, Altars and Temena).

Αθήνα: Πράμαται της Ακαδημίας Αθηνών. Τόμος 39. Χουρμουζιάδης, Γ. Χ. 2003. Πρόλογος. In Μελάς, Μ.; Η αρχαιολογία σήμερα. Κοινωνική-Πολιτιστική Θεωρία,

Ανθρωπολογία και Αρχαιολογική ερμηνεία. Αθήνα: Ινστιτούτο του βιβλίου Α. Καρδάμιτσα.

Anodos. Studies of the Ancient World 10/2010.

341

UNIVERSITAS TYRNAVIENSISF A C U L T A S P H I L O S O P H I C A

DEPARTMENT OF CLASSICAL ARCHAEOLOGY

PUBLICATIONS

1. ANODOS. Studies of the Ancient World 1/2001. Proceedings of the International Sym‑ posium The Mediterranean and Central Europe in Contacts and Confrontations. From the Bronze Age to the Late Antiquity. Trnava 2001, A4, 231 pages. ISBN 80‑89074‑02‑2.

Price: 20 EUR

2. ANODOS. Studies of the Ancient World 2/2001. In Honour of Mária Novotná. Trnava 2002, A4, 338 pages. ISBN 80‑89074‑40‑5.

Price: 30 EUR

3. ANODOS. Studies of the Ancient World 3/2003. Proceedings of the International Symposium Ancient Jewellery and Costume in Course of Time. From the Bronze Age to the Late Antiquity. Trnava 2004, A4, 229 pages. ISBN 80‑8082‑006‑6.

Price: 25 EUR

4. ANODOS. Studies of the Ancient World 4-5/2004-2005. Proceedings of the International Symposium Arms and Armour through the Ages. From the Bronze Age to the Late Antiquity. Trnava 2006, A4, 262 pages. ISBN 80‑8082‑109‑7.

Price: 35 EUR

5. ANODOS. Studies of the Ancient World 6-7/2006-2007. Proceedings of the International Symposium Cult and Sanctuary through the Ages. From the Bronze Age to the Late Antiquity. Trnava 2008, A4, 520 pages. ISBN 978‑80‑8082‑228‑6.

Price: 45 EUR

6. ANODOS. Studies of the Ancient World 8/2008. In Honour of Werner Jobst. Trnava 2010, A4, 400 pages. ISBN 978‑80‑8082‑384‑9.

Price: 40 EUR

7. ANODOS. Studies of the Ancient World 9/2009. In Honour of Marie Dufková. Trnava 2010, A4, 143 pages. ISBN 978‑80‑8082‑385‑6.

Price: 16 EUR

8. ANODOS - Supplementum 1. Zentren und Provinzen der Antiken Welt. Trnava 2001, A4, 111 pages. ISBN 80‑89074‑03‑0.

Price: 12 EUR

9. ANODOS - Supplementum 2. Probleme und Perspektiven der Klassischen und provinzial‑römischen Archäologie. Trnava 2002, A4, 79 pages. ISBN 80-89074-36-7.

Price: 12 EUR

Anodos. Studies of the Ancient World 10/2010.

342

10. ANODOS - Supplementum 3. Stadt und Landschaft in der Antike. Trnava 2003, A4, 196 pages. ISBN 80‑89074‑76‑6.

Price: 20 EUR

11. ANODOS - Supplementum 4. Forschungen und Methoden vom Mittelmeerraum bis zum Mitteleuropa. Trnava 2007, A4, 124 pages. ISBN 978-80-8082-167-8.

Price: 15 EUR

12. ANODOS - Supplementum 5. Rüstung und Waffen in der Antike. Trnava 2011, A4, 124 pages. ISBN 978‑80‑8082‑435‑8.

Price: 10 EUR

13. KeLemANTIA - BrIgeTIO. Tracing the Romans on the Danube. Guide 2003, 62 pages. ISBN 80‑89074‑61‑8.

Price: 10 EUR

14. KeLemANTIA - BrIgeTIO. Auf den Spuren der Römer an der Donau. Wegweiser 2003, 62 pages. ISBN 80‑89074‑62‑6.

Price: 10 EUR

15. BOHUSLAV NOVOTNÝ (1921-1996). Biografia. Bibliografia. Spomienky. Trnava 2004, 95 pages. ISBN 80‑8082‑011‑2.

Price: 10 EUR

16. Klasická archeológia a exaktné vedy. Výskumné metódy a techniky I. Trnava 2008. A4, 123 pages. ISBN 978‑80‑8082‑229‑3.

Price: 10 EUR

17. Klasická archeológia a exaktné vedy. Výskumné metódy a techniky II. Trnava 2010. A4, 199 pages. ISBN 978‑80‑8082‑317‑7.

Price: 16 EUR