“semitisches pantheon”. eine “männliche tyche” - MOSAIKjournal.com

74|ANASTASIA CHRISTOPHILOPOULOU
es to such excavation reports which can extract information on
household behaviour. 14 Their main emphasis is on exploring possibilities
to contextualise assemblages at settlement sites with varying
depositional conditions with a view towards a better understanding
of household space and household activity. They have also highlighted
the need to take a critical perspective on the extent to which
archaeological assemblages provide important information about
household activities and the extent to which analogy is useful for
interpreting this data. Almost every type of analogy has the potential
to bias interpretations of archaeological remains. The issue is
not whether analogy is appropriate per se, but whether the particular
analogical inferences made are appropriate to the particular archaeological
data. 15
P. M. Allison has furthermore highlighted the lack of evidence
for many all-encompassing models of household behaviour and
shows how an attempt to comprehend the agencies which form a
household, can lead to a better comprehension of the roles of
households in the wider community. 16 At the same time she insists
that, in the case of Greek household analysis as for domestic material
in other contexts, largely processual approaches are necessary
to produce well-grounded data sets to which more sociological
questions and assumptions concerned with gender, consumption
and production, privacy and symbolism can be addressed and applied.
II. THE SETTLEMENT EVIDENCE
In this part a number of social relationships within the household
were explored by juxtaposing the evidence from the Early Iron Age
settlements with current debates in household archaeology. I shall
introduce the material from the three geographical regions in question
first, and then discuss it with reference to gender ideologies,
functionality, temporality, as well as the symbolic meanings of
household space. 17
14 AULT – NEVETT (1999) 43–57.
15 WYLIE (1985) 63–111.
16 ALLISON (1999) 2–6.
17 ALLISON (1999) 2–9.