The present chapter provides a detailed review of the available material evidence concerning the representation of primates and their context in the Minoan civilization. More specifically, we analyzed the depictions of primates in two frescos from Knossos, Crete, and four frescos from Akrotiri, Thera/Santorini. Furthermore, we studied primate representations in portable objects from Crete. The material consisted of 2 figurines, 2 pendants, 2 pieces of jewelry, 12 seals with primatomorphic handles, and 17 seals/sealings with primatomorphic printing surfaces. In these pieces, we identified two kinds of monkeys, vervets (Chlorocebus spp.) and baboons (Papio spp.). Our analyses concur with previous reports and support the contentions that: (a) there was an extensive cultural exchange between Minoans and Egyptians, (b) Minoans were either first-hand observers of primates or were painters of detailed narratives, (c) some monkeys (vervets) are related to a leisure –yet naturalistic– context and some others (baboons –by then deified in Egypt) act as mediators in ritual contexts, (d) primates reach Minoan imageries in two time periods, and (e) the representation of primates among Minoans is an example of the earliest transmission of exotica into Europe.

Archaeoprimatology – a term originally coined by one of the editors – explores the interface between humans and nonhuman primates (hereafter referred to as ‘primates’) in antiquity. Hence, archaeoprimatology embraces, both theoretically and methodologically, the disciplines of archaeology and primatology. Archaeoprimatological research is still relatively limited despite its significant implications that range from the art history realm of past iconographic identification of primates to a better grasp of current primate conservation issues. Archaeoprimatology is a discipline that offers multiple perspectives to understand the roots of our perception and apprehension of our own taxonomic group, the order Primates. The edited volume in your hands –the first fully devoted to this discipline – is thus intended to serve as an effort to promote and expand archaeoprimatological studies.

Introduction

Living atelines form a unique group that occupies an important place in the adaptive radiation of New World monkeys. The four (or five) genera, Alouatta, Ateles, Lagothrix (and Oreonax) and Brachyteles, that compose the group are distinguished from other platyrrhines by their relatively large size (c. 5–11 kg), strong inclination to herbivory (fruits and leaves), tail-assisted forelimb-dominated suspensory positional behavior with associated postcranial morphology, and a prehensile tail with a naked ventral grasping surface (Rosenberger and Strier, 1989; Strier, 1992). Although consistent in its phylogenetic unity, atelines are morphologically and behaviorally heterogeneous.

More precisely, howler monkeys, Alouatta spp., appear to have opted for an energy minimizing foraging strategy, feeding on high proportions of leaves through sitting and tail–hindlimb assisted postures, and exploiting small home ranges traveling short daily distances mainly by quadrupedally walking and clambering above branches (Rosenberger and Strier, 1989; Strier, 1992). On the other hand, the rest of the genera, grouped as atelins, appear to share several derived features related to more agile and suspensory locomotor and postural behaviors as well as a more energy maximizing foraging strategy (Rosenberger and Strier, 1989; Strier, 1992). Phylogenetic relationships between these genera have not been established yet, especially under the light of new data deriving from molecular studies (Harada et al., 1995; Schneider et al., 1996; Cavanez et al., 1999; von Dornum and Ruvolo, 1999; Meireles et al., 1999; Collins, 2004).