Fragmentation in Archaeology: People, Places and Broken Objects in the Prehistory of SouthEastern Europe by John ChapmanReview by: Alasdair WhittleAmerican Journal of Archaeology, Vol. 105, No. 4 (Oct., 2001), pp. 722-723Published by: Archaeological Institute of AmericaStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/507420 .

Accessed: 18/02/2013 13:36

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

Archaeological Institute of America is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access toAmerican Journal of Archaeology.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded on Mon, 18 Feb 2013 13:36:32 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

BOOK REVIEWS BOOK REVIEWS

suggest that Thera dumped an ash fall of "more than 15

cm, sufficient to cause substantial damage to crops, live-

stock, buildings and water supplies." But this is not in accord with observable data: the Katmai tephra caused such damage only when far thicker. Not that this neces-

sarily invalidates Driessen and Macdonald's argument, but such differences must be addressed. The Katmai study suggests instead support for RJ. Blong's claim that Thera's

tephra fall on Crete had minimal effect (Thera and the

Aegean World 2 [London 1980] 217-25). On a different subject, an implied caution to archae-

ologists (don't take written sources on faith) runs

through several of the articles; and in two of them that caution is overt. J.P. Grattan, D.D. Gilbertson, and A. Dill question a report of a low-intensity eruption of a dormant volcano in Germany in 1783, when a fissure

eruption in Iceland covered much of central Europe with a dry, acid fog. Someone sent a letter to a local German newspaper describing the effects and products of a spurious volcanic eruption of Gleichberg, a dor- mant volcano near Schweinfurt. Although the descrip- tion was detailed, there is no geologic evidence of an

eruption at Gleichberg in the last two million years. The authors conclude the report is likely a hoax or pos- sibly a misunderstanding. Archaeologists can draw an

important lesson: if we can't trust a written report that is only 200 years old, what do we do with those 2000

years old? In their article on classical and archaeological evidence for earthquakes in central mainland Greece, V. Buck and I. Stewart compare the archaeological record with accounts by Strabo, Thucydides, and Diodorus Sicu- lus. All are found wanting. As the authors say, their ar-

gument is to "illustrate the uncertainty that accompa- nies literary and archaeological information, and to high- light the need for caution when using interdisciplinary methods."

If we have to be skeptical about ancient written sourc- es, how are we to treat the Delphic oracle? In what the book calls "perhaps the most intriguing proposal," au- thors J.Z. De Boer and J.R. Hale suggest a geological origin for the oracle. (The only catastrophe I can associ- ate with Delphi is driving a camper there 30 years ago on mountain roads undergoing repair!) This is possibly the best article in the book, well written and fully integrat- ing geology and archaeology. Moderns reject the ancient

descriptions; the authors postulate that the Pythia in- haled bituminous gases, got into a mantic mood, and made her declarations. To understand how this came about, one needs the geologic description that precedes the

archaeological. A major fault zone and a minor swarm of fractures intersect very near the site; these allowed

ground water carrying hydrocarbon gases-from the same

geologic horizon that provides the oil of the Middle East- to rise and be breathed. These gases, in sufficient con- centration, should have mild narcotic effects.

This book does-and does not-accomplish its stated

purpose; most of the articles are at least readable, but a few are dense enough to discourage even the informed

expert. Nonetheless, on balance, I find the work impres- sive, both in its aims and its contents. A caveat: the ar-

chaeologist who does not have a geological background will find some articles difficult in places. But the benefits

suggest that Thera dumped an ash fall of "more than 15

cm, sufficient to cause substantial damage to crops, live-

stock, buildings and water supplies." But this is not in accord with observable data: the Katmai tephra caused such damage only when far thicker. Not that this neces-

sarily invalidates Driessen and Macdonald's argument, but such differences must be addressed. The Katmai study suggests instead support for RJ. Blong's claim that Thera's

tephra fall on Crete had minimal effect (Thera and the

Aegean World 2 [London 1980] 217-25). On a different subject, an implied caution to archae-

ologists (don't take written sources on faith) runs

through several of the articles; and in two of them that caution is overt. J.P. Grattan, D.D. Gilbertson, and A. Dill question a report of a low-intensity eruption of a dormant volcano in Germany in 1783, when a fissure

eruption in Iceland covered much of central Europe with a dry, acid fog. Someone sent a letter to a local German newspaper describing the effects and products of a spurious volcanic eruption of Gleichberg, a dor- mant volcano near Schweinfurt. Although the descrip- tion was detailed, there is no geologic evidence of an

eruption at Gleichberg in the last two million years. The authors conclude the report is likely a hoax or pos- sibly a misunderstanding. Archaeologists can draw an

important lesson: if we can't trust a written report that is only 200 years old, what do we do with those 2000

years old? In their article on classical and archaeological evidence for earthquakes in central mainland Greece, V. Buck and I. Stewart compare the archaeological record with accounts by Strabo, Thucydides, and Diodorus Sicu- lus. All are found wanting. As the authors say, their ar-

gument is to "illustrate the uncertainty that accompa- nies literary and archaeological information, and to high- light the need for caution when using interdisciplinary methods."

If we have to be skeptical about ancient written sourc- es, how are we to treat the Delphic oracle? In what the book calls "perhaps the most intriguing proposal," au- thors J.Z. De Boer and J.R. Hale suggest a geological origin for the oracle. (The only catastrophe I can associ- ate with Delphi is driving a camper there 30 years ago on mountain roads undergoing repair!) This is possibly the best article in the book, well written and fully integrat- ing geology and archaeology. Moderns reject the ancient

descriptions; the authors postulate that the Pythia in- haled bituminous gases, got into a mantic mood, and made her declarations. To understand how this came about, one needs the geologic description that precedes the

archaeological. A major fault zone and a minor swarm of fractures intersect very near the site; these allowed

ground water carrying hydrocarbon gases-from the same

geologic horizon that provides the oil of the Middle East- to rise and be breathed. These gases, in sufficient con- centration, should have mild narcotic effects.

This book does-and does not-accomplish its stated

purpose; most of the articles are at least readable, but a few are dense enough to discourage even the informed

expert. Nonetheless, on balance, I find the work impres- sive, both in its aims and its contents. A caveat: the ar-

chaeologist who does not have a geological background will find some articles difficult in places. But the benefits

of seeing these two sciences cooperate make this volume worthwhile.

LES COLE

756 OPAL AVENUE

VENTURA, CALIFORNIA 93004 LHCOLE@RAIN.ORG

FRAGMENTATION IN ARCHAEOLOGY: PEOPLE, PLACES

AND BROKEN OBJECTS IN THE PREHISTORY OF

SOUTH EASTERN EUROPE, by John Chapman. Pp. xii + 296, figs. 42, maps 3, tables 27. Routledge, London 2000. $100. ISBN 0-415-15803 (cloth). Not "a grand narrative in the Childen mode" (xiii),

this is nonetheless a wide-ranging analysis of several mil- lennia through the Mesolithic, Neolithic, and Copper Age, which draws on evidence from 10 countries of south- east Europe, Greece apart. At its heart lies a concern to

put the material culture of these times and places center

stage in the lives of people. This is played out by refer- ence to the linked hypotheses of enchainment by frag- mentation and of integration by accumulation. From very close attention to the condition, deposition, and charac- ter of material objects, linked to an interest in the treat- ment of the human body after death and in places as ancestral "timemarks," John Chapman is able to work

through a series of powerful case studies. These range from the Neolithic and Copper Age sequence in south- east Hungary and the late Copper Age in northeast Bul-

garia (ch. 5), to the differing worlds of the late Mesolith- ic of the Danube Gorges and the rise of the great tell at Vinca-Belo Brdo on the Danube just south of Belgrade (ch. 6). Based on impressively wide reading, sensitive both to anthropological theory and to the archaeological material itself, this is a distinguished and thought-pro- voking addition to the literature on the prehistory of southeast Europe. It should also cause reflection in other fields.

"Enchainment," taken from Marilyn Strathern's famous treatment of indigenous conceptions of social relation-

ships in Melanesia, is an idea of linkage between people. The individual may not be self-contained, and objects associated with people may transfer something of their own and their previous owners' biographies when they come into new hands. Another important (though hard-

ly in itself new) idea is that of deliberate or "structured"

deposition, the conscious placing of material in chosen contexts, as opposed to the thoughtless or other aban- donment of "rubbish." This is familiar from the mortuary record of the region, but Chapman builds a convincing case for the deliberate retention of material in the do- mestic sphere. By the time of developed tells (roughly, fifth to fourth millennia B.C.), such deposition had an

important part to play in the network of associations of

place, past and corporate groups that these sites may rep- resent, and which the author therefore calls "timemarks."

Pit-digging provides links with the ancestors (140), and burnt houses may represent contexts where material was

deliberately accumulated to be added to the material sub- stance of an ancestral past.

of seeing these two sciences cooperate make this volume worthwhile.

LES COLE

756 OPAL AVENUE

VENTURA, CALIFORNIA 93004 LHCOLE@RAIN.ORG

FRAGMENTATION IN ARCHAEOLOGY: PEOPLE, PLACES

AND BROKEN OBJECTS IN THE PREHISTORY OF

SOUTH EASTERN EUROPE, by John Chapman. Pp. xii + 296, figs. 42, maps 3, tables 27. Routledge, London 2000. $100. ISBN 0-415-15803 (cloth). Not "a grand narrative in the Childen mode" (xiii),

this is nonetheless a wide-ranging analysis of several mil- lennia through the Mesolithic, Neolithic, and Copper Age, which draws on evidence from 10 countries of south- east Europe, Greece apart. At its heart lies a concern to

put the material culture of these times and places center

stage in the lives of people. This is played out by refer- ence to the linked hypotheses of enchainment by frag- mentation and of integration by accumulation. From very close attention to the condition, deposition, and charac- ter of material objects, linked to an interest in the treat- ment of the human body after death and in places as ancestral "timemarks," John Chapman is able to work

through a series of powerful case studies. These range from the Neolithic and Copper Age sequence in south- east Hungary and the late Copper Age in northeast Bul-

garia (ch. 5), to the differing worlds of the late Mesolith- ic of the Danube Gorges and the rise of the great tell at Vinca-Belo Brdo on the Danube just south of Belgrade (ch. 6). Based on impressively wide reading, sensitive both to anthropological theory and to the archaeological material itself, this is a distinguished and thought-pro- voking addition to the literature on the prehistory of southeast Europe. It should also cause reflection in other fields.

"Enchainment," taken from Marilyn Strathern's famous treatment of indigenous conceptions of social relation-

ships in Melanesia, is an idea of linkage between people. The individual may not be self-contained, and objects associated with people may transfer something of their own and their previous owners' biographies when they come into new hands. Another important (though hard-

ly in itself new) idea is that of deliberate or "structured"

deposition, the conscious placing of material in chosen contexts, as opposed to the thoughtless or other aban- donment of "rubbish." This is familiar from the mortuary record of the region, but Chapman builds a convincing case for the deliberate retention of material in the do- mestic sphere. By the time of developed tells (roughly, fifth to fourth millennia B.C.), such deposition had an

important part to play in the network of associations of

place, past and corporate groups that these sites may rep- resent, and which the author therefore calls "timemarks."

Pit-digging provides links with the ancestors (140), and burnt houses may represent contexts where material was

deliberately accumulated to be added to the material sub- stance of an ancestral past.

722 722 [AJA 105 [AJA 105

This content downloaded on Mon, 18 Feb 2013 13:36:32 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

BOOK REVIEWS BOOK REVIEWS

The further, fundamental part of the argument con- cerns fragmentation. Chapman invites us to reconsider the process of fragmentation, arguing not only that many objects were deliberately broken but also that their all-

too-frequent incompleteness at the point of archaeolog- ical recovery is the result of deliberate retention, remov- al, and circulation of pieces elsewhere as part of enchain- ment. The related but opposed principle is that of accu- mulation, whereby whole objects, or objects forming sets, particularly from the onset of copper and gold metallur-

gy, are retained, constituting hoards, grave sets, and even the contents of houses to be burnt. Tension between these principles is seen as a major factor in the devel-

oped Copper Age contexts of the later fifth and earlier fourth millennia B.C.

This perspective encourages welcome attention to the

materiality of this period and to the links between peo- ple, places, and objects. The general case for various kinds of linkage and enchainment, for the importance of place and timemarks, and for various tensions and shifts in

relationships across the millennia, is powerful. One might have wished at the outset for a longer discussion of the nature of individuals, though Chapman is surely right to contest imposing modern, western conceptions on this time and area. The case for at least some deliberate break-

age and deliberate deposition is strong, but the claim for

deliberately created incompleteness will be controver- sial. Chapman is perhaps too ready to reject alternative (and simpler) explanations for the incompleteness of

objects as recovered from many excavations. The argument may be more convincing with selected,

perhaps special objects, such as figurines and prosopo- morphic lids. In the case of pottery, there are few exam-

ples where either enough excavation or sufficient post- excavation analysis has been done. Even at Endrod 119, a small Early Neolithic occupation in the K6r6s valley of the Great Hungarian Plain, and one of the few detailed case studies available to support the hypothesis, analysis of pottery is in fact still in progress. The site was fully excavated by Makkay, but only to the edges of the alluvi- al ridge on which it lies. As the interim report made clear, the site was plow-damaged and excavated with the help of workmen (as far as I know without sieving). Surfaces survived only in the top of the largest subsoil pits. There are indications that pots from these contexts are more

complete than those from the pits (pers. comm., Elisa- betta Starnini). Other processes than deliberate human intervention must presumably be taken into account. Some of the other rejected hypotheses for the motives behind breakage and deposition may also have to be con- sidered. The case may work better in earlier situations of mobility than in later contexts of more settled life. Nor is it entirely clear in particular cases how the "tension" be- tween fragmentation and accumulation is seen to have been played out. One might comment that a sense of local agency is missing, overshadowed by these two near- universal principles.

Perhaps for these reasons, the focus in the longer case studies later in the book shifts noticeably away from frag- mentation to place. Here the author continues themes he has already explored in a notable series of papers. This final discussion builds on these, adding for example

The further, fundamental part of the argument con- cerns fragmentation. Chapman invites us to reconsider the process of fragmentation, arguing not only that many objects were deliberately broken but also that their all-

too-frequent incompleteness at the point of archaeolog- ical recovery is the result of deliberate retention, remov- al, and circulation of pieces elsewhere as part of enchain- ment. The related but opposed principle is that of accu- mulation, whereby whole objects, or objects forming sets, particularly from the onset of copper and gold metallur-

gy, are retained, constituting hoards, grave sets, and even the contents of houses to be burnt. Tension between these principles is seen as a major factor in the devel-

oped Copper Age contexts of the later fifth and earlier fourth millennia B.C.

This perspective encourages welcome attention to the

materiality of this period and to the links between peo- ple, places, and objects. The general case for various kinds of linkage and enchainment, for the importance of place and timemarks, and for various tensions and shifts in

relationships across the millennia, is powerful. One might have wished at the outset for a longer discussion of the nature of individuals, though Chapman is surely right to contest imposing modern, western conceptions on this time and area. The case for at least some deliberate break-

age and deliberate deposition is strong, but the claim for

deliberately created incompleteness will be controver- sial. Chapman is perhaps too ready to reject alternative (and simpler) explanations for the incompleteness of

objects as recovered from many excavations. The argument may be more convincing with selected,

perhaps special objects, such as figurines and prosopo- morphic lids. In the case of pottery, there are few exam-

ples where either enough excavation or sufficient post- excavation analysis has been done. Even at Endrod 119, a small Early Neolithic occupation in the K6r6s valley of the Great Hungarian Plain, and one of the few detailed case studies available to support the hypothesis, analysis of pottery is in fact still in progress. The site was fully excavated by Makkay, but only to the edges of the alluvi- al ridge on which it lies. As the interim report made clear, the site was plow-damaged and excavated with the help of workmen (as far as I know without sieving). Surfaces survived only in the top of the largest subsoil pits. There are indications that pots from these contexts are more

complete than those from the pits (pers. comm., Elisa- betta Starnini). Other processes than deliberate human intervention must presumably be taken into account. Some of the other rejected hypotheses for the motives behind breakage and deposition may also have to be con- sidered. The case may work better in earlier situations of mobility than in later contexts of more settled life. Nor is it entirely clear in particular cases how the "tension" be- tween fragmentation and accumulation is seen to have been played out. One might comment that a sense of local agency is missing, overshadowed by these two near- universal principles.

Perhaps for these reasons, the focus in the longer case studies later in the book shifts noticeably away from frag- mentation to place. Here the author continues themes he has already explored in a notable series of papers. This final discussion builds on these, adding for example

the speculation that at Vlasac and Lepenski Vir in the Danube Gorges the ancestors became sedentary long before the living, and a demonstration of the rapid trans- formation of the site at Vinca from an interesting if un- remarkable occupation to a regionally astonishing con- centration of objects and ritual activity. It is perhaps in these ways that the links between people, objects, and

places best come alive.

ALASDAIR WHITTLE

SCHOOL OF HISTORY AND ARCHAEOLOGY CARDIFF UNIVERSITY

P.O. BOX 909 CARDIFF CF10 3XU WALES

UNITED KINGDOM

WHITTLE@CARDIFF.AC.UK

LERNA: A PRECLASSICAL SITE IN THE ARGOLID 4:

THE ARCHITECTURE, STRATIFICATION, AND POT-

TERY OF LERNA III, by Martha Heath Wiencke. Vol.

1, pp. xvii + 311; vol. 2, pp. xxv + 484. American School of Classical Studies, Princeton 2000. $90. ISBN 0-87661-226-5 (cloth). Even after half a century, Lerna is still the key site for

understanding the cultural development in the Early and Middle Bronze Ages in southern Greece. It is of great importance that the entire documentation forJohn L.

Caskey's excavations in the 1950s is now being gradually published. This is the second volume with archaeological data, followingJ.B. Rutter's publication of the pottery of Lerna IV (EH III; Princeton 1995). It presents the stratig- raphy, architecture, and pottery of Lerna III.

The first part of the book is devoted to architecture and stratigraphy. In the introduction we are reminded that as far back as his preparations in the 1960s for the final publication, Caskey had already established a four- stage ceramic division, Lerna III [= EH II] A, B, C, and D, which can be correlated with four building sequences. The most striking break in the sequence occurs between

phases B and C, and is marked by radical innovations both within the pottery repertoire and architectural fea- tures. At the beginning, Wiencke deals briefly with the few sherds of EH I that date from before phase Lerna IIIA and are sporadic finds on the site.

Caskey's general scheme is retained in Wiencke's treat- ment with corrections based on the studies of stratigra- phy and pottery that have taken place since his time; his scheme can now be substantiated, and Wiencke's study creates a firm foundation for evaluating the development of EH II in the northeast Peloponnese. In addition to Caskey's four main phases, Wiencke introduces in part 1 a series of subphases defined on stratigraphic evidence. Architecture and pottery (in part 2) are presented chro- nologically according to phase: Lerna IIIA early and late; B early, middle, and late; C early, middle, and late; and D.

From phase A no constructions are preserved, and it is known only from fills. For Lerna IIIA early, two deposits contain the greater part of the material, and Neolithic sherds, deriving from the first inhabitants of the site, are

the speculation that at Vlasac and Lepenski Vir in the Danube Gorges the ancestors became sedentary long before the living, and a demonstration of the rapid trans- formation of the site at Vinca from an interesting if un- remarkable occupation to a regionally astonishing con- centration of objects and ritual activity. It is perhaps in these ways that the links between people, objects, and

places best come alive.

ALASDAIR WHITTLE

SCHOOL OF HISTORY AND ARCHAEOLOGY CARDIFF UNIVERSITY

P.O. BOX 909 CARDIFF CF10 3XU WALES

UNITED KINGDOM

WHITTLE@CARDIFF.AC.UK

LERNA: A PRECLASSICAL SITE IN THE ARGOLID 4:

THE ARCHITECTURE, STRATIFICATION, AND POT-

TERY OF LERNA III, by Martha Heath Wiencke. Vol.

1, pp. xvii + 311; vol. 2, pp. xxv + 484. American School of Classical Studies, Princeton 2000. $90. ISBN 0-87661-226-5 (cloth). Even after half a century, Lerna is still the key site for

understanding the cultural development in the Early and Middle Bronze Ages in southern Greece. It is of great importance that the entire documentation forJohn L.

Caskey's excavations in the 1950s is now being gradually published. This is the second volume with archaeological data, followingJ.B. Rutter's publication of the pottery of Lerna IV (EH III; Princeton 1995). It presents the stratig- raphy, architecture, and pottery of Lerna III.

The first part of the book is devoted to architecture and stratigraphy. In the introduction we are reminded that as far back as his preparations in the 1960s for the final publication, Caskey had already established a four- stage ceramic division, Lerna III [= EH II] A, B, C, and D, which can be correlated with four building sequences. The most striking break in the sequence occurs between

phases B and C, and is marked by radical innovations both within the pottery repertoire and architectural fea- tures. At the beginning, Wiencke deals briefly with the few sherds of EH I that date from before phase Lerna IIIA and are sporadic finds on the site.

Caskey's general scheme is retained in Wiencke's treat- ment with corrections based on the studies of stratigra- phy and pottery that have taken place since his time; his scheme can now be substantiated, and Wiencke's study creates a firm foundation for evaluating the development of EH II in the northeast Peloponnese. In addition to Caskey's four main phases, Wiencke introduces in part 1 a series of subphases defined on stratigraphic evidence. Architecture and pottery (in part 2) are presented chro- nologically according to phase: Lerna IIIA early and late; B early, middle, and late; C early, middle, and late; and D.

From phase A no constructions are preserved, and it is known only from fills. For Lerna IIIA early, two deposits contain the greater part of the material, and Neolithic sherds, deriving from the first inhabitants of the site, are

2001] 2001] 723 723

This content downloaded on Mon, 18 Feb 2013 13:36:32 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions