Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Aegean monkeys and the importance of cross-disciplinary collaboration in archaeoprimatology: a reply to Urbani and Youlatos

  • News and Perspectives
  • Published:
Primates Aims and scope Submit manuscript

The Original Article was published on 13 May 2020

Abstract

In their reply to our article “A new identification of the monkeys depicted in a Bronze Age wall painting from Akrotiri, Thera” [Primates 61(3), 2019], Urbani and Youlatos (Primates https://doi.org/10.1007/s10329-020-00825-2, 2020) argue for the traditional identification of the monkeys depicted on the north and west walls of Room 6 of Building Complex Beta at Akrotiri, Thera, as vervet monkeys (Fig. 1). Their argument is based largely on previous scholarship and their analysis of monkey morphology as it appears in this Bronze Age artwork. Here, after clarifying some misconceptions and misquotations, we thoroughly contextualize the wall painting in question, emphasizing the importance of collaboration between disparate disciplines for a multifaceted and rigorous approach. The nature of the item in question is key in this reply: it is an artwork. Because the artwork in question is a cultural representation of monkeys rather than a study of live primates or preserved specimens, consideration of artistic choice, color conventions, and the agency of the artist, which are important facets of material culture, is important when answering the questions raised by Urbani and Youlatos, and should stimulate further cross-disciplinary discussions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Adapted from Google Earth

Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Arnott R (2020) Crossing continents: between India and the Aegean: from prehistory to Alexander the Great. Oxford, Oxbow (in press)

  • Aruz J (2003) Art of the first cities: the third millennium B.C. from the Mediterranean to the Indus. Yale University Press, New Haven

    Google Scholar 

  • Aruz J (2008) Marks of distinction. Seals and cultural exchange between the Aegean and the Orient (ca. 2600–1360 B.C.). von Zabern, Mainz am Rhein

    Google Scholar 

  • Barnett RD (1973) Monkey business. J Anc Near East Soc 5(1):2132

    Google Scholar 

  • Becker H (2021) Pigments—color terminology. To each his own name. In: Gliozzo E, Pizzo A, La Russa M (eds) Mortars, plasters, and pigments: research questions and answers. J Archaeol Anthropol Sci, Springer (in press)

  • Cavassa L, Delamare F, Repoux M (2010) La fabrication du bleu égyptien dans les Champs Phlégréens (Campanie, Italie) durant le Ier siècle de notre ère. Aspects de l’arisanat en milieu urbain: Gaule et Occident romain. Rev Archéol Est [Suppl 28] 235–249

  • Chakrabarti DK (1993) ‘Long-barrel cylinder’ beads and the issue of Pre-Sargonic contact between the Harappan Civilization and Mesopotamia. In: Possehl G (ed) Harappan civilization. Oxford and IBH Publishers, New Delhi, pp 265–270

    Google Scholar 

  • Chapin A, Pareja MN (2020) Peacock or poppycock? Investigations into exotic animal imagery in Minoan and Cycladic art. In: Davis B, Laffineur R (eds) ΝΕΩΤΕΡΟΣ: studies in Bronze Age Aegean art and archaeology in honor of Professor John G. Younger on the occasion of his retirement. Aegaeum 44

  • Chapin AP, Pareja MN (2021) Beyond the boundaries: rarity, marginality, and liminality in Minoan and Cycladic animal art. In Laffineur R (ed) ZOIA. (Aegaeum 45), Peeters, Louvain (in press)

  • Colburn CS (2008) Exotica and the Early Minoan elite: eastern imports in Prepalatial Crete. Am J Archaeol 112:203–224

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Collon D (1995) Ancient Near Eastern art. University of California Press, Berkeley

    Google Scholar 

  • Collon D (2005) First impressions: cylinder seals in the Ancient Near East. British Museum, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Doumas C (1992) The wall paintings of Thera, Athens. The Thera Foundation-Petros M, Nomikos

    Google Scholar 

  • Frison G, Brun G (2016) Lapis lazuli, lazurite, ultramarine ‘blue’, and the color term ‘azure’ up to the 13th century. J Int Color Assoc 16:41–55

    Google Scholar 

  • Gillis C (2004) The use of colour in the Aegean Bronze Age. In: Cleland L, Stears K (eds) Colour in the ancient Mediterranean world, British Annual Reports International Series 1267 (BAR-IS). Archaeopress, Oxford, pp 56–60

  • Greenlaw C (2011) The representation of monkeys in the art and thought of Mediterranean cultures: a new perspective on ancient primates. British Archaeological Reports, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Groman-Yaroslavski I, Mayer DEB-Y (2015) Lapidary technology revealed by functional analysis of carnelian beads from the early Neolithic site of Nahal Hemar Cave, southern Levant. J Archaeol Sci 58:77–88

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harper PO, Aruz J, Tallon F (eds) (1992) The royal city of Susa: Ancient Near Eastern treasures in the Louvre. Abrams, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Immerwahr SA (2005) Left or right? A study of hands and feet. In: Morgan L (ed) Aegean wall painting: a tribute to Mark Cameron, British School at Athens Studies 13. British School at Athens, London pp 173–183

  • Jones M, Hunt H, Kneale C, Lightfoot E, Lister D, Liu X, Motuzaite-Matuzeviciute G (2015) Food globalization in prehistory: the agrarian foundations of an interconnected continent. J Br Acad 4:73–87

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kenoyer JM (2008) Indus and Mesopotamian trade networks: new insight from shell and carnelian artifacts. In: Olijdam E, Spoor RH (eds) Intercultural relations between south and south-west Asia. Studies in Commemoration of E. C. L. During-Caspers 1934–1996. Archaeopress, Oxford, pp 19–28

  • Kenoyer JM (1997) Trade and technology of the Indus Valley: new insights from Harappa, Pakistan. World Archaeol 29:262–280

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kenoyer JM, Price D, Burton JH (2013) A new approach to tracking connections between the Indus Valley and Mesopotamia: initial results of strontium isotope analyses from Harappa and Ur. J Archaeol Sci 40:2286–2297

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klengel H (1984) Near Eastern trade and the emergence of interaction with Crete in the third millennium BC. Stud Micenei Egeo-Anatolici 24:7–19

    Google Scholar 

  • Lambrou-Phillipson C (1990) Hellenorientalia: the Near Eastern presence in the Bronze Age Aegean, ca. 3000–1100 B.C. Interconnections based on the material record and the written evidence plus orientalia. A catalogue of Egyptian, Mesopotamian, Mittanian, Syro-Palestinian, Cypriot, and Asia Minor objects from the Bronze Age Aegean. SIMA pocket-book 95, Göteborg

  • Linares V, Adams MJ, Cradic MS, Finkelstein I, Lipschits O, Martin MAS, Neumann R, Stockhammer PW, Gadot Y (2019) First evidence for vanillin in the old world: its use as a mortuary offering in Middle Bronze Canaan. J Archaeol Sci Rep 25:77–84

    Google Scholar 

  • Marshall M (2019) Ancient monkey painting suggests Bronze Age Greeks travelled widely. New Scientist, London (Accessed 11 December 2019)

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller NF, Spengler RN, Frachetti M (2016) Millet cultivation across Eurasia: origins, spread, and the influence of seasonal climate. Holocene 26(10):1566–1575

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moorey PRS (1994) Ancient Mesopotamian materials and industries: the archaeological evidence. Clarendon, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Morgan L (2005) New discoveries and new ideas in Aegean wall painting. In: Morgan L (ed) Aegean wall painting: a tribute to Mark Cameron, British School at Athens Studies 13. British School at Athens, London, pp 21–44

  • Pareja MN (2021) Early Bronze Age evidence for possible Aegean-Indus trade. In: Recht L, Zeman-Wisniewska K (eds) Animal iconography in the archaeological record: new approaches, new dimensions. Equinox, Sheffield (in press)

  • Pareja MN (2019) Reconstructing Minoan cult practices through secondary sources. Proceedings of the 12th International Congress of Cretan Studies, Heraklion, 21–25 September 2016, pp 1–8

  • Pareja MN (2017) Monkey and ape iconography in Aegean art. Astrom, Uppsala, Sweden

    Google Scholar 

  • Pittman H (1984) Art of the Bronze Age: Southeastern Iran, Western Central Asia, and the Indus Valley. Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Platon N (1947) Συμβολή εις την σπουδήν της μινωικής τοιχογραφίας. Ο κροκοσυλλέκτής πιθηκος. Kret Chron 1:505–524

    Google Scholar 

  • Powell E (2020) A barrel of Bronze Age monkeys. Archaeol Mag (March/April) 2020:12

    Google Scholar 

  • Radiolab (2012) Why isn’t the sky blue? https://www.wnycstudios.org/podcasts/radiolab/segments/211213-sky-isnt-blue. Posted 21 May 2012. Last accessed 21 May 2020

  • Ratnagar S (2004) Trading encounters: from the Euphrates to the Indus in the Bronze Age. Oxford University Press, New Delhi

    Google Scholar 

  • Reinholdt C (2003) The Early Bronze Age jewellery hoard from Kolonna, Aigina. In: Aruz J (ed) Art of the first cities: the third millennium B.C. from the Mediterranean to the Indus. Met Publications, New York, p 260

  • Şahoğlu V (2005) The Anatolian trade network and the Izmir region during the Early Bronze Age. Oxf J Archaeol 24(4):339–361

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sarianidi VI, Kowalski LH (1971) The lapis lazuli route in the ancient Near East. Archaeology 24:12–15

    Google Scholar 

  • Shank E (2005) Evidence for Anatolian relations in Crete in Early Minoan I-IIA. In: Laffineur R, Greco E (eds) Emporia: Aegeans in the Central and Eastern Mediterranean. Proceedings of the 10th International Aegean Conference/10e Recontre égéenne interntionale, Italian School of Archaeology in Athens, 14–18 April 2004, Liège, Histoire de l’art et archéologie de la Grèce antique, University of Liège. Aegaeum 22:103–108

  • Urbani B, Youlatos Y (2020a) Occam’s razor, archaeoprimatology, and the ‘blue’ monkeys from Thera: a reply to Pareja et al. (2020). Primates. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10329-020-00825-2

  • Urbani B, Youlatos Y (2020b) A new look at the Minoan ‘blue’ monkeys. Antiquity 94(9):1–5

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Buren ED (1939) The fauna of ancient Mesopotamia as represented in art. Pontificum Institutum Biblicum, Rome

    Google Scholar 

  • Valamoti SM (2013) Millet, the late comer: on the tracks of Panicum miliaceum in prehistoric Greece. Archaeol Anthropol Sci 8(1):51–63

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whipple T (2019) Curious tail of monkeys who crossed the ancient world. The Times, London (Accessed online 10 December 2019)

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilkinson TC (2014) Tying the threads of Eurasia: trans-regional routes and material flows in Transcaucasia, Eastern Anatolia and western Central Asia c. 3000–1500BC. Sidestone, Leiden

    Google Scholar 

  • Wu KJ (2019) Painted Bronze Age monkeys hint at the interconnectedness of the ancient world. Smithsonian, Washington, DC (Accessed online 16 December 2019)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to extend their gratitude to the Archaeological Institute of America and the Ancient Painting Studies Interest Group for the opportunity to present the preliminary results of this study. M. N. P. C. personally thanks Robert Arnott, Tristan Carter, Anne P. Chapin, Tiffany L. Hunt, Jonathan M. Kenoyer, Leanna Kolonauski, and Doug Morrow for their thoughts on, and enthusiasm for, this project.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA

    Marie Nicole Pareja

  2. School of Applied Sciences, University of South Wales, Pontypridd, UK

    Tracie McKinney

  3. Department of Anthropology, Durham University, Durham, UK

    Joanna M. Setchell

Authors
  1. Marie Nicole Pareja
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Tracie McKinney
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Joanna M. Setchell
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marie Nicole Pareja.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Ethical approval

No studies with human participants or animals were performed by any of the authors in connection with this article.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Pareja, M.N., McKinney, T. & Setchell, J.M. Aegean monkeys and the importance of cross-disciplinary collaboration in archaeoprimatology: a reply to Urbani and Youlatos. Primates 61, 767–774 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10329-020-00855-w

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10329-020-00855-w

Keywords

Search

Navigation