Free PDF - American Journal of Archaeology

American Journal of Archaeology Online Book Review
of Cypro-Archaic and Cypro-Classical date,
laid in the late fourth century B.C. as filling
for a road that passed through the ruined
gateway. In the South Area, where greater soil
depth provided better preservation, an area of
housing was found. The process of excavation
is well illustrated by text photographs. Sections
and plans are included as inserts in a pocket
in the back cover, and synoptic tables provide
a schematic presentation of strata and find
distribution.
In part 2 Adelman provides a brief treatment
of the history and significance of the
site. He notes the need for a reassessment of
the Sinda material in light of recent ceramic
studies but unfortunately makes no attempt
to do so. Addressing the question of who
built Sinda and why, it is suggested that the
settlement controlled the only crossing of the
Pedieos River on the copper route from Idalion
and Athienou to Enkomi, perhaps exacting
tolls from travelers and traders. Adelman suggests
that the site was surrounded by a double
wall, with the remains excavated by Furumark
belonging to the inner system. Difficulties in
distinguishing catastrophe material from prefloor
fills are noted but not considered overly
problematic, and life at Sinda is conventionally
described as lively and prosperous, the inhabitants
engaged in agriculture, food production,
craft activities, and bull worship.
It is left, indeed, to Paul Åström to take up
the challenge of reviewing Sinda and its two
destruction levels in the light of more recent
discoveries and within the highly contested
context of the history and chronology of Late
Cypriot III. Åström suggests a lowering of the
dates proposed by Furumark in line with a
lowering of the end of Mycenaean IIIB. Thus,
Period I, which produced Mycenaean IIIB
pottery, ends ca. 1190/1180 B.C., Period II in
ca. 1150/1140, and Period III in ca. 1110/1100
B.C. This lowered chronology raises the possibility
that the first destruction at Sinda was
brought about by the Sea Peoples and not,
as Furumark proposed, by Greek settlers.
Åström’s own view is that both destructions
were caused by pirates and adventurers consisting
of Mycenaeans and groups from other
areas, or possibly by conflict between Cypriots
themselves. Whatever the case, this final
publication of Sinda will no doubt give rise
to renewed debate about events in Cyprus in
the 12th century and, as Åström notes, further
fuel discussion of the radical low chronology
proposed by some scholars for Palestine via
oft-noted links between Sinda Mycenaean
IIIC1b and Philistine pottery.
Part III contains extensive find catalogues
with summary indexes and a listing of all
classes of material with accompanying highquality
black-and-white illustrations and line
drawings. While some items (e.g., a stamp
seal) are discussed in detail, most appear only
as catalogue entries with typological attribution
and some comparanda. Contextual data
and Furumark’s views on ceramic style and
chronology are reported where relevant. Sherd
counts by ware and stratigraphic context and
other distributional and statistical data are
further presented in part IV and an appendix.
The animal remains are reported by Gejvall,
translated from a Swedish original of 1951.
Adelman is to be commended for taking
on an extremely difficult task and achieving
a fine result for which scholars of the Cypriot
Bronze Age have cause to be grateful. The
volume lacks a contemporary reading of the
ceramic evidence and were it not for the important
contribution by Åström would also
be missing a serious analysis of the historical
significance of Sinda. It is clear, however, that
Adelman’s main objective was to retrieve and
present the basic stratigraphic, architectural,
and artifactual data, and he has done this in
full and painstaking detail. In making the primary
data available to other scholars, he has
acquitted the primary obligation of the original
excavator and ably fulfilled the demands
and responsibilities of a collaborative task for
which few of us would have had either the
courage or patience.
ARCHAEOLOGy PROGRAM
LA TROBE UNIVERSITy
BUNDOORA, VICTORIA 3083
AUSTRALIA
Jennifer M. Webb