GCA & GCB
- Created by: Ruthfeath
- Created on: 17-05-18 22:04
View mindmap
- GCA & GCB
- GCB (1650 - 1600BC)
- Earliest graves were cist type - burials contracted, offerings not rich
- 26 graves enclosed with low wall of rough stones - marked tombs out as specific group
- One gold mask
- 14 shaft graves
- Scatter of graves appears disordered with variety of grave types with different orientations and no overall plan
- Probably graves of several different family groups with a boundary wall that unites them - sets them apart as elite class
- People in same grave bore family resemblances- probably belonged to same family
- Family connections between graves - facial similarities
- GCA (1600 - 1500BC)
- New area chosen for richest graves before GCB went out of use - later included in citadel wall when it was extended
- Same burial practices as GCB
- Circular wall built c.1250BC - would have been earlier boundary wall
- 6 large shaft graves with 7th outside later circular wall - reopened on several occasions to make additional burials, as fill of shafts contained scraps of gold from earlier burials
- Wealth of gold and imported materials shows high statusof occupants - already indicated by separate burial area
- Citadel wall later deliberately extended to include GCA - Lion Gate designed to bring people into citadel right next to burial enclosure
- Much wealthier than GCB - increasing development & wealth of civilisation, extension of cultural contacts with grave goods suggesting contact with as far away as Syria
- Suggestion that Schilemann added to grave goods from other sites to make work at Mycenae more interesting in 1876
- 6 shaft graves contained 2 - 5 skeletons each - only II had a single burial
- Also smaller pit graves
- 5 gold masks found
- Size of graves, wealth of grave goods quantity of grave goods and the gold masks suggest they were trying to copy the Egyptians
- Untitled
- GCB (1650 - 1600BC)
Comments
No comments have yet been made