Ίκλαινα και Άνω Εγκλειανός
της Πυλίας
ήταν πρωτεύουσες
ανεξάρτητων μικροπολιτειών
Του Μιχ. Κοσμόπουλου
 |
| Τα κυκλώπεια τείχη της Ίκλαινας. |
Η «μοντελοποίηση» της
μυκηναϊκής πολιτείας της Πύλου, βασισμένη σε νέα δεδομένα, από την συστηματική
ανασκαφή της Ίκλαινας, δείχνει ότι στην μυκηναϊκή εποχή τόσο η Ίκλαινα όσο και
ο Άνω Εγκλειανός ήταν πρωτεύοντα κέντρα, που ακολουθούσαν παράλληλες τροχιές,
και λειτουργούσαν ως πρωτεύουσες ανεξάρτητων «μικροπολιτειών»…
μυκηναϊκής πολιτείας της Πύλου, βασισμένη σε νέα δεδομένα, από την συστηματική
ανασκαφή της Ίκλαινας, δείχνει ότι στην μυκηναϊκή εποχή τόσο η Ίκλαινα όσο και
ο Άνω Εγκλειανός ήταν πρωτεύοντα κέντρα, που ακολουθούσαν παράλληλες τροχιές,
και λειτουργούσαν ως πρωτεύουσες ανεξάρτητων «μικροπολιτειών»…
ΥΓ:
Δηλ. η έννοια της πόλεως-κράτους και του ομόσπονδου κράτους/πολιτείας, υπάρχει ήδη από την μυκηναϊκή εποχή…
ΔΕΙΤΕ το βίντεο του Γ. Λεκάκη για το “Ανάκτορο του Νέστορος”, στον Άνω Εγκλειανό Πυλίας Μεσσηνίας.
For a long time, the emergence of Aegean states was explained in terms
of general evolutionist models based on evidence from a handful of major
palatial sites. Recently, however, a growing emphasis on regional diversity has
demonstrated the importance of specific models for understanding the multiple
pathways to social complexity. It is becoming increasingly clear that static
neoevolutionary types do not reflect the fluid and dynamic character of human
societies and that top-down explanatory models based on top-tier centers are
biased and incomplete. In this article, a detailed historical modeling of the
Mycenaean state of Pylos based on new data from the systematic excavation of
Iklaina tests the current model and proposes that the Pylian state, as it is
known to us from Linear B tablets, was not integrated until an advanced phase
of the Late Helladic IIIB period. This analysis suggests that for most of the
Mycenaean period both Iklaina and Ano Englianos were primary centers following
parallel trajectories and functioning as capitals of independent micropolities.
A late date for the unification of the Pylian state could account for its
partly decentralized character, the duplication of administrative structures,
and the instability that may have contributed to its collapse.
of general evolutionist models based on evidence from a handful of major
palatial sites. Recently, however, a growing emphasis on regional diversity has
demonstrated the importance of specific models for understanding the multiple
pathways to social complexity. It is becoming increasingly clear that static
neoevolutionary types do not reflect the fluid and dynamic character of human
societies and that top-down explanatory models based on top-tier centers are
biased and incomplete. In this article, a detailed historical modeling of the
Mycenaean state of Pylos based on new data from the systematic excavation of
Iklaina tests the current model and proposes that the Pylian state, as it is
known to us from Linear B tablets, was not integrated until an advanced phase
of the Late Helladic IIIB period. This analysis suggests that for most of the
Mycenaean period both Iklaina and Ano Englianos were primary centers following
parallel trajectories and functioning as capitals of independent micropolities.
A late date for the unification of the Pylian state could account for its
partly decentralized character, the duplication of administrative structures,
and the instability that may have contributed to its collapse.
ΛΕΞΕΙΣ: μυκηναικη, πολιτεια, Πυλος, ανασκαφη, Ικλαινα, μυκηναικη εποχη, Ανω Εγκλειανος, πρωτευουσα, ανεξαρτησια, πολη κρατος, ομοσπονδια, Ανακτορο Νεστορος, Νεστορας, Νεστωρ, Εγκλειανος, Πυλια, Μεσσηνια, κυκλωπεια τειχη
