I am specifically referring to the "collapse of Bronze Age Greece" the fall of Myceans on Mainland Greece.
I was sitting in a lecture a couple days ago on the fall of Bronze Age Greece. About the immediate fall of Gla, and Mycenae, and the records of the Pylos tablets recording some sort of preparations (equipment inventories and muster lists etc.)
I had this interesting idea, and I was hoping to see if maybe ou have a touch of insight. Obviously Gla, as well as especially Mycenae fortifications are built on 'dominant' terrain, and the structural patterns (I think) follow the terrain rather than preplanned intentions. At least in the case of the outer most walls.
However what falls later, Pylos, and especially Tyrns, follows an extremely structured pattern. Tyrns being the best example of highly fortified, in response to Mycenae fortification falling. My thought-question is, has anyone done an "analysis" to determine if the rectangular pattern found at Tyrns represents some architectural- relationship to function of defense tactics? It seems odd, that suddenly the pattern goes from obvious fortification that follows the natural pattern of terrain, dominant terrain - to a very manmade shape, in the case of Tyrns, which is built on a 'rock' but relatively 'insignificant' terrain feature? I am guess the rock that it is built on is not a measured rectangle, meaning very quickly the building was intentionally adpting the terrain to the structure, rather than what appears to be the previous pattern of adapting the structure to the terrain.
I am not famliar with the early works (secondary) on Greek Fortifications, but I am aware there are some. I have gone through both Ober and Munn, as we discussed, but both deal with fortifications from much later. Since you are very knowledgeable in Bronze Age, I was wondering f you have seen anyone treat the topic. It would be something interesting to investigate, but as I thought about it, it made me question if we have vidence that might support the building was some reflection of tactics or repsonses to tactics. Obviously the movement from M. to T. is reflective of the insecurity of the travel from supplies, either coming in by trade through a port AND/OR moving security closer to the areas that need to be protected perhaps agriculture that would be around Tyrns. To me that highlights the inability or shift of ability for the forces' respective distance limits of providing enough security.
Now of course a starting point for investigation on this would be (if any evidence IS EVEN available at all), whether there is a building precedent or pattern that indicates the post-fall of Mycenae construction on Tyrns follows the same construction/architectural patterns of PRE-fall, or is it that Tyrns is erected completely fresh and no previous period structure exists on the site at all.
Pylos becomes difficult for one, to use this analysis because it is 'under'- fortified by Mycenae and tyrns standards altogether. but the structure is very 'square' with an obvious "planned and executed" structure
Dan
--
Dan Powers
dar...@gmail.com“It’s not a matter of being afraid or not, it’s about what you do when you ARE afraid”