For nearly four decades, the Cyprus American Archaeological Research Institute (CAARI) has been central to the archaeology of the island. It functions as the aggregating point for the many international scholars conducting fieldwork and study seasons in Cyprus, often hosting lectures in which the most recent results can be promptly presented to an audience of peers. In the course of its life, CAARI has always maintained continuous and profitable cooperation with the Cypriot Department of Antiquities and, since its foundation in 2005, with The Cyprus Institute; cooperation that once again was key to the success of the conference held between the 17th and the 19th of February 2017, titled "Environment, Landscape and Society. Diachronic perspectives on settlement patterns in Cyprus" (fig. 1).
Figure 1: "Conference logo: Vermeule, E. & Karageorgis, V., 1982. Mycenaean pictorial vase painting, Cambridge, MA. (p.46, ill. V.39) – Amphoroid krater from Enkomi (LHIIIB)"
In line with its tradition, on this occasion, speakers from all over the globe convened in Nicosia to discuss theories, methods and future perspectives of Landscape Studies. This event was made possible thanks to the tireless work of CAARI Director Andrew McCarthy (fig. 2) and his staff, and a generous financial contribution by the US Embassy in Cyprus.
Figure 2: Director of CAARI Andrew McCarthy, PhD with the author. (Photo by Katerina Mavromichalou)
The motivation for organizing such a conference was to bring together scholars with different scientific backgrounds, working on a diversity of projects in Cyprus and the Aegean, to tackle the universal question: what is the impetus of settlement? In other words: can we identify a set of environmental/cultural/economic conditions that need to be fulfilled to have a settlement? And are these universal or specific to each case?
Twenty-seven papers were presented in six chronologically ordered sessions. Case studies spanned from the Aceramic Neolithic to the Late Byzantine Period. Environment, landscape and the changes in society were tackled from a variety of perspectives, either investigating what role the first had in shaping the latter, or the importance of Big Data Analysis in studying how people moved across their landscape and why. Another important aspect that emerged from these talks, is how archaeobotanical and isotopic analysis as well as geomorphology can help in reconstructing ancient landscapes.
Professor James C. Wright, Chair of the Department of Classical and Near Eastern Archaeology at Bryn Mawr College and Director of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens, opened the event with the keynote lecture "The Longue Durée: the piedmont of the Corinthia and cycles of regional occupation". He introduced the controversial role that has been attributed to the environment in influencing human choices, with positions bordering environmental determinism on one side, and extreme relativism on the other.
The weight of environmental conditions in the choice of settlement is particularly evident in the study of pre- and protohistoric cultures. In most instances, as one would expect, the favourable location allowing easy access to a different set of resources appeared to be the decisive factor in the choice of settlement. However, in other cases the choice for a particular place was seemingly unrelated to its economic exploitability and the reasons need to be looked for in terms of symbolic value, tradition and social memory.
Mechanisms of occupation, movement, aggregation and abandonment were matters of lively discussion, with special focus on the effects of climate change. It was pointed out that in regards to Cyprus, information on ancient climate changes still relies on Near Eastern proxies and the impact of the climatic events recorded, for example, in the Tell Leilan cores need to be carefully evaluated. What was clear from each one of the presented case studies was that the sheer number of variables that intervene into settlement occupation/abandonment are such that it would be overly simplistic to attribute societal change solely to environmental factors – however big they may be – or to underestimate the role that climatic events – however small – may have on community life in the short term.
To gain a better picture of environment, landscape and society, it is therefore necessary to have a holistic approach that takes into consideration evidences of human activities, faunal and botanical remains, geomorphological, climatic factors, settlement patterns and much more. To deal with this huge variety of information, Big Data and information technologies have grown in importance over the last decade to go "beyond the dots", as Francesca Chelazzi (PhD, University of Glasgow) eloquently showed in her paper. The use of geographic information systems (GIS) is more and more being implemented to investigate the spatial and diachronic development of the landscape, to pose new questions on the relations underlying the patterns of distribution of cultural material and settlements alike. Studies on regionalism in the pottery production during the Chalcolithic, as illustrated by Harry Paraskeva (PhD, University of Cyprus), or the function of sanctuaries as boundaries between for the Iron Age City Kingdoms were just two examples of the potential of GIS combined with more traditional ceramics study. GIS has proven to be a key to interpret data from surveys such as the ASESP Project concerning the relations of settlement and defensive structures along the Yialias River, presented by Despina Pilides (Curator of Antiquities, of the Department of Antiquities) and Eiliš Monahan (PhD Candidate, Cornell University), or Professor Oliva Menozzi’s (Universitá G. D’Annunzio, Chieti - fig. 3) presentation and posters of a large-scale survey in the Moni catchment area, within the MPM Project. Both these archaeological projects would deserve to be treated in detail in merit of their ground-breaking research and, also as an active member of both missions, it is the author's hope to dedicate a full article to them in the near future.
Isotopic analysis can provide some insight concerning the ancient diet and consequently, on the ecosystem that surrounded these ancient populations when integrated with palaeobotanical and palaeoenvironmental studies. This approach was presented with a case study from the MBA site of Erimi Laonin tou Porakou, excavated by the Kouris Valley Project, where the study of stable isotopes and the spatial analysis of the Kourin River catchment provided a plausible reconstruction of the ancient landscape. The paper was co-authored by C. Sciré-Calabrisotto (fig. 4) (Stable Isotope Analysis, Universitá Ca' Foscari di Venezia), E. Margaritis (Archaeobotanic remains, The Cyprus Institute), M. Yamasaki (Spacial analysis, Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, whose participation to this conference was made possible by the generous travel grant by GRK1876 "Frühe Konzepte von Mensch und Natur") , and L. Bombardieri (Project Director, Universitá degli Studi di Torino).
A variety of scientifically sound approaches was presented concerning the motives and mechanisms of settlement, but one must not forget the cultural element in defining the landscape. As Professor Thierry Petit (Université Laval) said in his talk "From Royal Palace to Forlorn Kastro": when does space become place? Social memory and the construction of shared identities, the creation of points of aggregation by human communities charge previously empty areas with meaning and turn geographic spaces into symbolic places.
At the end of these fascinating three days, the conference’s conclusive paper was delivered by Prof. Michael Given of the University of Glasgow. The landscape really is an infinite web of interactions, but we have made such a habit of reducing and standardizing them that our perception of diversity ends up eventually flattened. The roman deforestation of the Troodos foothills for copper extraction and the modern sand mines that hacked into the Yialias aquifer and its water table are just some examples of the dramatic consequences of this flattened perception. Today more than ever, in a moment of runaway climate change, archaeology – from its privileged four dimensional viewpoints – should engage with the landscape and its interactions and not reduce it to mere points on a map. It should be approached in terms of nodes of interaction, routes and mobility across it, the composition of its surfaces and volume and, finally, through its tremendous variations across time.
The nodes of interactions are intended as those areas that show a richness and diversity of life, soils, activities, morphology, etc. The way people and animals move across a territory and the possibility of taking a route instead of another are fundamental elements to understand how the landscape is shaped and inhabited. As for the composition of surfaces, this aspect concerns the way soils are formed through all the activities of geological, botanical, faunal and human life, from worms to ploughing. For example, it is at this level of interaction that we find pottery sherds and material culture remains. Volumes comprise every transformation in the three dimensions, not only in the depths of the ground (where the accumulation of surfaces originates a stratigraphic sequence, which is a volume of typical archaeological interest), but also in the air, with its sounds, smells, and – more recently – pollution. The many changes of a landscape through time are also essential parts of it, as past interactions inevitably have repercussions in the future ones. An example is the case study presented by Prof. Kassianidou (University of Cyprus): the effects of the massive deforestation of the Solea Valley for the Roman copper industry were still visible on the territory until the early 20th Century, when they were in turn obliterated by the modern copper mines. Nevertheless, time variations include smaller, seasonal changes, which are equally important to understand the reasons behind the occupation of a given area.
Even though this is not the place to explore in detail all the implications of these five components, at least a few words need to be spent on the last element, as there can be no better example for Prof. Given’s four-dimensionality of landscape than Cyprus itself. Upon arrival on a chilly February afternoon, it was impossible to ignore how strikingly different the island appeared compared to how most foreign archaeologists (myself included) are used to know it for. In fact, since most excavations take place from May to October, in the archaeologist’s (and in the tourist’s) imagination, Cyprus is a dusty, dry and scorching hot expanse in the Eastern Mediterranean. However, the lush, bright green fields, with their spots of yellow and white wild flowers proved just how diverse a single, ought-to-be-familiar landscape can be, even within a few months difference (fig. 5, 6).
Figure 5: View of Barsak from Ayios Sozomenos Ambelia in Semptember 2016. (Photo by Mari Yamasaki)
Figure 6: View of the Ayios Sozomenos area from Barsak in February 2017. (Photo by Mari Yamasaki)