|
SINDA AND THE ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY OF LATE CYPRIOTE IIIA
The absolute chronology for the end of Mycenaean IIIB?1230 B.C. ? proposed by Furumark in 1941 was based on the circumstance that pottery of that date had not been found in a context later than the reign of Ramses II. This date must now be lowered, since Mycenaean IIIB pottery was found at Deir Allah associated with a faience vase inscribed with the name of Queen Tausret /Tewosret who reigned 1188-1186. Another confirmation of a low date is the fact that Pharaoh Sipta (1194-1188) is mentioned among the documents from Ras Shamra. "There is evidence of destruction and fire throughout the city". Furumark emphasized to me more than once that he considered the latest pottery found at Ugarit to be not later than Mycenaean IIIB; hence that style lasted down to the reign of that pharaoh. A lowering of Furumark's date for Mycenaean IIIB has also been made by others, e.g. Iakovides and Hankey and Warren. The latter suggest 1185/1180 using evidence from Kition. We are then very close to the eighth year of Ramses III who reigned 1184-1153 according to Kitchen. It follows that the absolute dates assigned by Furumark to the different periods at Sinda must be lowered. Period I, in which Mycenaean IIIB pottery was found, should thus end c. 1190/1180 B.C. It is impossible to know exactly how long Period II (= Late Cypriote IIIA1), characterized by Furumark's Mycenaean IIIC:1a and III C:1b (1), lasted. Furumark assumed 40 years (1230-1150). In the new scheme the duration of the period may have been from 1190/1180 to 1150/1140. If we trust?and some do not ?that the Sea Peoples after having destroyed Hattusha, Kode, Carchemish , Arzawa and Alasia were defeated by Ramses III in his eighth year we may have traces of these events in Alasia assuming that Cyprus is meant with that name. Should we attribute one of the destruction layers at Sinda to the Sea Peoples and in that case which one? Furumark assumed that the second catastrophe was due to an attack from the Sea Peoples. Should we hypothesize that the first destruction, which we now date to 1190/1180 B.C., was caused by the Sea Peoples? In that case who destroyed Sinda the second time? I would like to emphasize that these suggestions are hypothetical?and it also involves the equation of Alasia with Cyprus. Personally I believe that pirates and adventurers consisting of Mycenaeans and groups from other areas are responsible for the destructions. We may also have to reckon with wars between the Cypriotes themselves, as the Cypro-Minoan signs on the lead sling bullets from Hala Sultan Tekke suggest. The duration of Sinda Period III (= Late Cypriote IIIA2) is difficult to assess. If we equate the Mycenaean IIIC:1b (2) ware, which is characteristic of Sinda Period III, with Mycenaean IIIC Middle, we may obtain some dates from Greece. Hankey and Warren suggest two generations or about 50 years for IIIC Middle: 1150/1140-1100/1090 B.C. Furumark suggested 40 years for Sinda Period III. This would now mean 1150/1140-1110/1100. The dates are applicable on other sites in Cyprus which show developments similar to that of Sinda, e.g. Enkomi, Sinda and Maa, Palaeokastro. The Proto White Painted Ware appears after Sinda Period III. This is in agreement with Maria Iacovou's opinion that the ware is derivative of LH IIIC Middle and postdates it "making it largely contemporary with LH IIIC Late". These new considerations of absolute dates for Late Cypriote III will give fuel for the discussion of the radical low chronology for Palestine proposed by Finkelstein and Ussishkin. There are links between the pottery from Sinda Period III and the Philistine pottery and the new, low dates proposed here for Sinda effect Palestinian dates. It may be assumed that some of the inhabitants fled to Palestine, where the Philistine pottery betrays influence from Sinda. If we adjust Furumark's absolute dates in the light of new discoveries which make a revision necessary, keeping his approximate, relative dates for the Sinda Periods, the following table emerges:
It should also be mentioned that Sinda was abandoned in the Late Cypriote IIIB period, when Proto White Painted ware appears. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
zurück | |||||||||||||||||||||||||