TOMBS AND BURIAL CUSTOMS lN LATE BRONZE AGE EPIRUS

Epirus, which geographically is taken here as far as the modern borders with Albania
to the north and Aetoloakarnania to the south, is mostly either a mountainous or hilly
country. Since much of the district is unsuitable for cultivation by a settled population, it is
natural to find that the prehistoric peoples lived mainly in those areas which have been
subsequently the most thickly settled.
ln spite of its impressive archaeological material, the district still remains one of the
most neglected areas of Greece and much work is needed for a better knowledge of its
prehistory.
There is a difficulty of defining c1early the chronologicallimits of the Late Bronze Age
in Epirus, but a tentative suggestion based on what is valid for the rest of Greece may be
permitted (ca. 1600/1580-1100 Re) 1.
Of the Late Bronze Age finds corning from 34 sites and divided into four main groups
(architectural remains, tombs, pottery, and artefacts) my paper will be devoted to a brief
survey of the tombs and the burial customs.
To begin with, 27 Late Bronze Age tombs from 14 sites (Anthochori, Gribiani,
Elaphotopos, Kalbaki, Kastritsa, Kiperi, Mazaraki, Mesogephyra, Nekromanteion, Ephyra,
Neochoropoulo, Paramythia, Zeravina and Pogoni) are so far known in the district (Pl.
XXXIV). Most of these tombs were isolated and only four small cemeteries consisting of
two or four tombs are known (Kastritsa, Elaphotopos, Kalbaki and possibly Mazaraki).
Three main types can be distinguished : (a) cist tombs, (b) tholoi tombs and (c)
tumuli. Noteworthy is the total absence of chamber tombs, and in at least one case (at
Ephyra) the use of large handmade jars for infant (?) burials 2.
The [Ifst type (cist tombs) is the most common, prevalent and characteristic,
represented by 19 examples. So far only one tholos tomb is known at Kiperi-Pargas, which
must be regarded as an intrusive Mycenaean element 3. The third type (tumuli) is represented

(1) Cf. e.g. Gazelteer I, p. 431; S. DAKARIS, Thesprotia (1972), p. 50; ThJ. PAPADOPOULOS,
Dodoni 5 (1976), p. 273; F. PREND!, CAH 2 III 1, p. 220; P. MOUNTJOY, Mycenaean Decorated
Poltery : A Guide to Identification (1986), p. 8.
(2) Assigned by Hope-Simpson and Dickinson (Gazelleer I, p. 300) to PG times.
(3) Cf. S. DAKARIS, PraktArchEt 1960, p. 125; PAPADOPOULOS, op. cil., p. 277; Gazelleer I, p.
299.
138 Thanasis J. PAPADOPOULOS

by the recently found three tumuli at Ephyra and two others at Pogoni.
ln parlicular the cist tombs 4 (Pl. XXXIV, a-b) are of a rectangular shape, ranging in
dimensions from 0.96 x 0.45 x 0.55m to 1.95 x 0.47 x 0.5Om. They are mostly built of four
large, sometimes well-dressed schist or limestone slabs sunk into the ground and covered with
one or more similar slabs and only exceptionally earth-graves accur (e.g. at Kastritsa) as a
contemporary alternative where such slabs were not available. Only two tombs from Kalbaki
and one from Kastritsa preserved their covering slabs. The number of burials in each tomb
varied from one to three with no fixed orientation. The dead were buried in a contracted
(Kastritsa), serni-sitting (Kalbaki T.B) or extended antithetical position (Elaphotopos T.I,2;
Kalbaki T.D), usually accompanied by a few and cheap gifts (local handmade pottery, bronze
weapons and tools and cheap jewellery) (Pl. XXXVI, a-d). ln the cist tomb at Nekromanteion
animal bones were found, which may be explained as the remains of food for the after-life
of the dead 5.
The context and information given by the excavators are not always helpful for the
dating of the Epirotic cist tombs. It seems more likely, however, that most of them belong to
the LHIII period, late rather than early, the only probable exceptions being the two LHIIIA-B
tombs at Mesogephyra and Paramythia, while two other from Nekromanteion and
Neochoropoulo are vaguely assigned to the LHIII period.
Connected with the se tombs is the problem of the origin and resurgence of the cist in
Greece at the end of the Bronze Age, as Desborough 6 considered the Epirotic examples, and
especially those from Kalbaki, as evidence to support his theory of an external intrusion by
newcomers from Epirus. This is, however, rejected by Styrenius 7 and Snodgrass 8, who
suggest an origin and continuous use from the Middle Helladic times, a view which seems to
me as highly probable.
The tholos tomb at Kiperi Pargas 9 (Pl. XXXVII, a) north of the Ambracian gulf, was
found plundered and partly destroyed (roof of the tholos, lintel and upper part of the dromos
walling are missing). It is ofrelatively medium size with a dromos facing West and measuring
ca.4m. long and lm. wide. The doorway, ca.1.38m. high and 1.20m. deep, was not
distinguished from the dromos, which led straight into the tholos. No remains of a closing
wall and !intel survived. Its sides converge slightly towards the top and are strengthened by
built walls similar to those of the tholos. The tholos, which is an almost but not quite perfect
circle has lost aIl its upper part above the !intel, stands only ca.2.16m. high, but must have
been at least ca.3.80m. high to correspond roughly with its diameter. There is no foundation

(4) For a fuller discussion see my paper in Dodoni 5 (1976), p. 278.

(5) And not the remains of a probable sacrifice as Dakaris has suggested (PraktArchEt 1963, p. 91).
(6) DESBOROUGH, Last Mycenaeàns, p. 37-38.
(7) C. STYRENIUS, Submycenaean StIidies (1967), p. 161. See also, S.A. IMMERWAHR, The
Athenian Agora 13, The Neolilhic and Bronze Ages (1971), p. 103.
(8) A.M. SNODGRASS, The Dark Ages of Greece (1971), p. 173, 177 sq. For a most recent discussion
see O.P.T.K. DICKINSON, BSA 78 (1983), p. 55 sq.
(9) See my recent full publication of this tomb in AM 76 (1981), p. 7-24.
 TOMBSANDBURIALCUSTOMSIN LATEBRONZEAGEEPIRUS 139

course of large blocks, but it is carefully built of small (ca.O.1Om. thick) partly dressed
limestone slabs, mostly set in regular, roughly isodomic, courses. Noteworthy is the presence
of "frieze slabs" (v'tou~Évta) above the fourth and seventh course, a feature observed also in
the tholos tomb 1 at Malthi 10, in that of Clytemnestra at Mycenae Il and in the two tholos
tornbs at Marathia in Aetolia 12. This has been interpreted by Pelon 13 as a decorative
architectural elernent. The floor of bath the tholos and drornos was paved with sea-pebbles,
but no side-charnber or burial pits either in the drornos or in the tholos were noted and the de ad
may have been buried directly on it 14.
No intact burial was found, except for sorne scanty skeletal rernains probably belonging
to a woman in a state about to give birth or died in childbirth, sherds of both local handmade
and Mycenaean pottery and one bronze lanceolate spearhead (Pl. XXXVII, b-d).
It is difficult to be certain of the construction date and the time-span of its use. It seems,
however, highly probable on the basis of the imported Mycenaean pottery and the lanceolate
spearhead, that it was made in LH IlIA! (or earlier) 15 and remained in use over a long period,
i.e. until the end of the 13th century Re. 16
This tomb represents a local type of tholos tomb, which roughly corresponds to Wace's
second Group 17 or to Pelon's Type ID 18 known from the SW Peloponnese, Achaea, Aetolia,
Phocis amd Euboea. The architectural similarities with the Aetolian tombs are, however, so
close that might one lead to wonder whether they were constructed by the same masons
working for the noble Mycenaean farnilies buried in the Parga and the Aetolian tholos tombs.
Lastly, as regards tumuii, the three (A, B, C) found at the acropolis of Ephyra (1975-
1984) 19 (Pl. XXXV m, a) were much destroyed and only a part of their perivoloi was
preserved. This was due to the strong inclination of the hillside, as a result of which the area is
almost wholly denuded leaving very few traces of their original shape and upper earth filling.

(10) N. VALMIN,The Swedish Messenia Expedition (1938), p. 213.

(11) Al.B. WACE,BSA 25 (1921-1923), p. 361.
(12) E. MASmOKOSTAS,PraktArchEt 1%3, pl. 175 b, 180 a-b, 183 a-b.
(13) PELON, Tholoi, p. 344-345. For a discussion on the use of these "frieze slabs" see also Sp.
IAKOVIDIS,Xapto-nlpWVÈtç 'A.K. 'OpMvOoV,r', (1966), p. 109.
(14) As can be inferredfrom the samepracticein othertholostombs,e.g. in the Aetoliantholostombs.
(15) Sorneof the alabastraand of the low-stemmedkylix-sherdsfoundin the tomb may be earlierthan LH
InA: 1.
(16) Judging by the presence of the lanceolate spearhead, which is dated LH IIIB/C elsewhere
(DESBOROUGH,Last Mycenaeans, p. 66-67; DESBOROUGH,Dark Ages, p. 96; A. SNODGRASS,
Early Greek Amwur and Weapons. from the end of the Bronze Age to 600 B.e. (1964), p. 119; ID.,
The Dark Ages of Greece (1971), p. 307. See also, DESBOROUGH,Dark Ages, p. 94 : "the tholos
10mbat Parga seems10havebeenabandonedbefore 1300 B.C."
(17) Al.B. WACE,Mycenae. an archaeological History and Guide (1949), p. 16-19.
(18) PELON,Tholoi, n. 3, p. 340 et 417-418.
(19) See preliminaryreports in PraktArchEt and Ergon 1975-1984. Also N.GL HAMMOND,CAH 2 III
1, p. 636.
140 Thanasis J. PAPADOPOULOS

However, on the basis of the few remains it may be suggested that the perivoloi were
rough1y oval with a diameter ranging between ca.9m.(tumulus B) and 13.50m.(tumuli A, C),
their width between lm. and 1.50m., while their preserved height did not exceed 0.30m. They
were built of local irregular field-stones and the enclosed area was filled with a thin layer of
black-reddish earth, irregular stones and rocks. Noteworthy is the construction of a cyclopean
wall (6.85 x 2.15 x OA5m) to the SW of tumulus A to retain in place its perivolos.
Tumulus A (Pl. XXXVIII, b) contained three burials of adults in situ and sorne
carefully collected human banes in a rock crevice, belonging to a fourth push-aside burial. Of
the three burials in situ, two lay diagonally one upon another in an extended position and had
been accompanied by funerary gifts of different kinds (local handmade pottery, clay and
steatite buttons and a fragmentary bronze pin) probably of LH IIIC or even later date. The third
intact burial was placed in a roughly rectangular rock-crevice whose floor was covered with
small stones reminding us the normal practice of Middle Helladic cist tombs in a strongly
contracted attitude with hands on the face. The skull had been smashed by a slabstone placed
on il. No offerings of any kind were found.
Roughly in the centre of tumulus B (Pl. XXXVIII, c), in a shallow rock-crevice the
skeleton of an adult was found, placed in an extended position but without offerings, which
makes its dating uncertain.
The most impressive finds come from tumulus C (Pl. XXXIX, a). It contained two cist
tombs, one small (0.52 x 0.19 x 0.21m.) built of four verticallimestone slabs. Its covering
slab was missing and was used for the burial of an infant with no offerings. The second was
larger (2.05 x 0.95 x OA1m.) and of different construction, i.e. small slabs were used to built
its walls and preserved two of the covering slabs. It contained the skeleton of an adult in an
extended position and in a deeper layer the skulls and banes of 13 secondary burials mixed
with a few local handmade and imported Mycenaean pottery, beads of glass and amber, clay
and steatite buttons, one bronze ring and stone implements. It seems that this cist was used
bath as an ossuary and for a burial. Two more burials, one of an adult in an extended position
and one of a child lay nearby, while in a distance lm. to the east the burial of a woman in a
slightly contracted attitude embracing her child 20 and accompanied by two broken handmade
local vases was found (Pl. XXXIX, b).
On the basis of the pottery and small finds Tumulus C could be dated to the LillUA-C
period. The presence of imported LHIIIA-C pottery and small finds suggests that the tumuli at
Ephyra were made during the prosperous years of the Late Bronze Age and not after the
collapse of Mycenaean Ephyra as Hammond 21 had suggested before the discovery of
Tumulus C. The crudeness of the perivoloi and the poverty of what remains may, however,
indicate their construction and use by local pastoralist people coming there every year for the

(20) This is a very rare attitude, so far observed once in Prosymna (BLEGEN, Prosymna, p. 48 : MH. Tomb
XI) and thrice in Eleusis (G.E. MYLONAS, Tb ~unKbv NEKPO'tCL<pEîov 'tll<; 'EÀ.Euoîvoç B' [1975], p.
12, pl. 97 : LH. Tomb Yn4; p. 49, pl. 129, 130 [LH. Tomb 8nIS]; p. 192, pl. 18Sb [MH. Tomb
Mp6]).
(21) HAMMOND, op. cil., p. 636.
 TOMBS AND BURIAL CUSTOMS lN LATE BRONZE AGE EPIRUS 141

winter and taking their flocks for the summer to high pastures. Those who died in the win ter
months were buriOO at Ephyra and the summer casualties were interred near the summer
pastures. The finding of sepulchral tumuli inside the fortifiOO acropolis is not strange, as
similar intramural burials are known from the acropolises of Mycenae, Tiryns and Teichos
Dymaion 22.
The settlement to which the tumuli of Ephyra belong has not as yet been identified due
to the very limited extent of the excavated area, but it is hoped to be found saon in the
acropolis itself.
The two tumuli (A, B) excavated at Pogoni by the Ephorate of Ioannina (1979-
1981) 23 were found on the woody north slopes of the Koutsokrano mountain, where more
tumuli scattered in an area of 2kms. still await investigation. Their perivoloi are roughly
circular measuring 12m. and 8m. in diameter and lm. and 0.50m. in height respectively.
Tumulus A containOO 30 cist tombs, while tumulus B only 5. They are built of locallimestone
slabs and most of them had been looted. Information conceming measurements and burial
customs are in most cases lacking. It seems, however, judging by the very few intact tombs,
that the dead layon their back in an extended position and were accompanied by funerary gifts
of no great value (local handmade pottery, bone pins, bronze and iron jewellery and
implements, coins, etc.) which 100the excavator to suggest that Tumulus A was used from the
end of the Late Bronze Age down and until the 4th century RC., while Tumulus B had been
assignOOto the llth century B.e.
The settlement of Pogoni was located in 1981 to the east of the tumuli, where
"foundations of circular, semicircular and rectangular buildings are still visible". The
continuous use of Tumulus A from the end of the Late Bronze Age to the classical times and
the existence of many other tumuli and settlement remains probably testify for a lasting and
prosperous community.
The discovery of the tumuli at two Epirotic sites (Ephyra and Pogoni) is of great
importance for three reasons. First, the other two Late Bronze Age settlements at Kastritsa and
Dodoni, which have been to sorne extent systematical1y investigated have not as yet produced
finds betraying the existence of tumuli cemeteries. Secondly, the finds from the tumuli are
exceptionally variOOand interesting : local handmade and imported Mycenaean pottery, bronze
and iron objects and small finds. The handmade pottery either plain or decorated with plastic or
incisOO motifs shows affinities with that found in other sites of southem Greece (e.g. Aigeira,
Tiryns, Ayios Stephanos) called "barbarian ware", which is dated to the late LlilIIB and IlIC
periods 24. Opinions of scholars still differ as to the prob1em of its origin and the population
responsible for its production. Although, as Dr Catling 25 rightly says that "we need to know a

(22) See WACE, op. cil., p. 59 sq. (Grave Cirele A); KI. IÇ.ILIAN, AA 1979, p. 386 (Unterburg LXII, 36-
37); E. MASTROKOSTAS, Ergon 1966, p. 159; PAPADOPOULOS, Myeenaean Aehaea , p. 49.
(23) A provisional report has been given by the excavotor E. ANDREOU in ' APX<XlOÂ.oyia 3 (1982), p. 54-
60.
(24) Cf. H. CATLING, BSA 76 (1981), p. 83.
(25) Ibidem.
 142 ThanasisJ. PAPAOOPOUWS

great deal more about "Barbarian" ware in an its aspects", it must be hoped that the final
publication of the Epirotic material will be of great value and help towards the solution of this
problem. On the other hand the frnding of Mycenaean pottery, clearly shows connexions with
the Mycenaean Greece and strengthens the evidence provided by the tholos tomb at Kiperi and
that of Mycenaean weapons for such contacts between the two areas. Thirdly, these tumuli
are the first found in Greek Epirus and fill a gap in our knowledge not only for the district but
for the whole Western Greece. So far such tumuli were known from Messenia, Elis, Leukas,
Albania and the Dalmatic coasts 26. Their existence in Epirus was suspected in the past by
sorne scholars 27 and myself and was confrrmed by their excavations. Together with those
from the above mentioned areas they promise to throw much new light on the Late Bronze Age
burial customs in Epirus.
Taking into account aU the evidence provided by the study of the Late Bronze Age
tombs of Epirus one could suggest that (a) inhumation was the only practice of burial noted
there, (b) the crudeness and the relative scarcity of funerary gifts possibly indicate the local
conservative character and the poverty of the Epirotic people during the Late Bronze Age, (c)
in contrast to what is known from the rest of Greece the inhabitants of Epirus continued the old
custom to bury their dead in cist tombs, (d) the tholos tomb at Kiperi must be regarded as a
foreign, Mycenaean e1ement showing occasion al links with Southem Greece 28, (e) the use of
tumuli probably betrays influence from the North 29 and cornes to fIll the gap in sequence of
this type of tomb along the West coast of Mainland Greece.
Lastly, it must be stressed that 1 wish to reserve final judgement on the identity of the
people which used cist and tumuli tombs 30, as there is no clear evidence to support any theory
that their use was the result of the arrivaI or invasion of newcomers.

Thanasis J. PAPADOPOULOS

(26) For a discussionand catalogueof these tumulisee PELON,Tholoi, p. 73 sq.; F. PRENDIand N.GL
HAMMOND,CAH 2 III 1, p. 235 (Albania),p. 625-636 (Illyria,Epirus)and Gazetteer l, p. 299-300,
429.
(27) E.g. by S. DAKARIS:op. cit., n. 211, p. 69.
(28) Desboroughsuggests(Dark Ages, p. 85) that the presenceof Mycenaeanpotteryand the tholostombat
Parga "indicateactual settlement,and not just casual contact".As 1 mtvesuggestedelsewhere(AM 96
[1981], p. 24) Pargawouldbe a veryappropriatesite for contactby sea with the Mycenaeanworld.
(29) Cf. S. DAKARIS, ArchEph 1956, p. 149; DESBOROUGH,Last Mycenaeans, p. 101; N.GL
HAMMOND,BSA 62 (1%7), p. 104; F. PRENDI,CAH 2 III 1, p. 235 ("Tumulusburial shouldbe
derived,as has been generallysupposed,from the first Inda-Europeannomadshepherdswho infiltrated
from the countryto the north of the Black Sea.....). See, howeverthe argumentsof Mylonasand Pelon
(Kyklos B, p. 241; Tholoi, p. 115,450 sq.)
(30) Any theoryconnectingthe tumuliof Epiruswitha distinctethnicelement(e.g. the Kurgans)still needs
moreconclusiveand documentedevidence.
 TOMBS AND BURIAL CUSTOMS lN LATE BRONZE AGE EPIRUS 143

LIST OF ILLUSIRA TIONS

Pl. XXXIV: Map of Epirus showing the Late Bronze Age tomb-sites.
Pl. XXXV, a: Cist 10mb at Mazaraki (after Vokotopoulou).
Pl. XXXV, b: Cist 10mb al Nekromanteion.
Pl. XXXVI, a-d : Burial gifts from the cist tombs al Mazaraki and ElapholopoS (after Vokotopoulou).
Pl. xxxvn, a: Mycenaean tholos 10mb at Kiperi-Pargas (from west).
Pl. xxxvn, b-d : Sorne of the finds from the tholos 10mb.
Pl. XXXVIII, a : Ephyra. The cemetery of the tumuli (from north).
Pl. XXXVIll, b : Ephyra. Tumulus A, burial 1 in situ.
Pl. XXXVIII, C : Ephyra. Tumulus B (from north).
Pl. XXXIX, a: Ephyra. Tumulus C (from north).
Pl. XXXIX, b : Ephyra.Tumulus C, burials of a woman and her child in situ.
 XXXIV

rnOMNHMA

• /((iWTlO{fX~jio, TIt"O'

."'-'_0-.- l'.~.
/'
nfIJ1~ )If

/
(,-,,/
...

i\.
<:

,...
"'
\ , .;
\. ••.••..•••
.1

<.
...

l'
/
,
".
~.-....--.-,'
,~.1 /flANN/NA

NcoXtJPOTrovAo •

• NCI(POjiltIlTCïOIl

AMBPAKIKO[ "
KOflnOr.
 xxxv

b
 XXXVI

a.
a

, t ••••J' r
, 0

1
O·~
(' ( ~ cr' ,&,
~
L
0,,'

o
lA:

b c
 XXXVII

d
XXXVIII
 XXXIX