<p>In accordance with the heterological tradition, this study emphasises the determining effect of theoretical assumptions on our conceptualizations of the past. This study scrutinises how classical archaeologists and ancient historians have conceptualized ethnic groups, in particular the Messenians.</p><p>Ethnic groups have traditionally been regarded as static with clear-cut boundaries. Each group has also been attributed with certain essential characteristics. According to this view, the Messenian ethnic identity was preserved during the period of Spartan occupation. This view is facilitated by a passive perspective, which regards evidence as reflections of reality and emphasises continuity. This culture historical perspective, which gives precedence to literary evidence and reduces archaeology to a handmaiden of history, has prevailed in classics from the 19th century until today. It can be juxtaposed with perspectives, discernable in classics from the 1960s onwards, which maintain that various parts of culture are manipulated in accordance with contemporaneous socio-political needs. These active perspectives — ranging from systems theoretical, functionalistic to processual models — resemble the instrumentalist model in anthropology which regards ethnicity as a dynamic and flexible strategy. Nevertheless, the instrumentalist redefinition of ethnicity did not influence classics until the late 1990s. According to the instrumentalist perspective, the Messenian ethnic identity emerged as a strategy of distinction in opposition to the Spartans. </p><p>Despite the variations, these perspectives can be regarded as part of a dogmatic tradition. Scholars within the dogmatic tradition tend to focus on the evidence and neglect the influence of the scholarly discourse on the conceptualizations of the past. This study, which is influenced by Michel de Certeau’s critique of the dogmatic tradition, elaborates on the discursive constraints of classical archaeology and ancient history. </p>

In accordance with the heterological tradition, this study emphasises the determining effect of theoretical assumptions on our conceptualizations of the past. This study scrutinises how classical archaeologists and ancient historians have conceptualized ethnic groups, in particular the Messenians. Ethnic groups have traditionally been regarded as static with clear-cut boundaries. Each group has also been attributed with certain essential characteristics. According to this view, the Messenian ethnic identity was preserved during the period of Spartan occupation. This view is facilitated by a passive perspective, which regards evidence as reflections of reality and emphasises continuity. This culture historical perspective, which gives precedence to literary evidence and reduces archaeology to a handmaiden of history, has prevailed in classics from the 19th century until today. It can be juxtaposed with perspectives, discernable in classics from the 1960s onwards, which maintain that various parts of culture are manipulated in accordance with contemporaneous socio-political needs. These active perspectives — ranging from systems theoretical, functionalistic to processual models — resemble the instrumentalist model in anthropology which regards ethnicity as a dynamic and flexible strategy. Nevertheless, the instrumentalist redefinition of ethnicity did not influence classics until the late 1990s. According to the instrumentalist perspective, the Messenian ethnic identity emerged as a strategy of distinction in opposition to the Spartans. Despite the variations, these perspectives can be regarded as part of a dogmatic tradition. Scholars within the dogmatic tradition tend to focus on the evidence and neglect the influence of the scholarly discourse on the conceptualizations of the past. This study, which is influenced by Michel de Certeau’s critique of the dogmatic tradition, elaborates on the discursive constraints of classical archaeology and ancient history.

The use of past archaeological survey data for examination of landscape dynamics became very popular during the last decades of the 20th century, when Geographical Information Systems analysis were introduced in archaeology. In the present thesis, past survey data from Northern Messenia’s Middle and Late Helladic periods are combined to the topography and the environment of the region. These data are examined under the GIS prism, which attempts to update our knowledge on this geographical area.             The main scope of this thesis is to examine potential settlement patterns and land use, connectivity between sites and sites’ hierarchies. In the first query, the Kernel Density analysis has been used for estimating settlements’ patterns, and to consequently estimate preference of specific topographical features for land use, such as slope. Based on the patterns formed as a result of the analysis conducted in the first query, connectivity and hierarchy between sites is being tested with the use of cost connectivity and visibility tools.             The outcome of this analysis shows that the inhabitants of the past were significantly interacting with the landscape, since they preferred to nest around the protective slopes of the Soulima and the Kyparissian valleys. The area around their settlements reveals that these inhabitants opted to cultivate in flat or marginal land, while visibility from the sites seems to be an important factor for monitoring the region. However, it has been proved that a good number of collaborating sites were required to supervise the entire territory, which disproves any hierarchical ranking between them. On the other hand, connectivity depicts potential movement over Northern Messenia’s terrain and indicates that a few sites in the heart of the study area were to be considered as panoptic meeting grounds of the eastern and the western side. In conclusion, the overall analysis reveals a potential spatial bond between sites rather than a relationship based on rivalry.