The Minoan Past in the Past:
Bronze Age Objects in Early Iron Age Burials
A thesis submitted to the
Graduate School
of the University of Cincinnati
in partial fulfillment of the
requirements for the degree of
Master of Arts
in the Department of Classics
of the College of Arts and Sciences
2016
by
Alice Crowe
B.A. Boston University, 2014
Committee Chairs: A. Kotsonas, Ph.D. and Eleni Hatzaki, Ph.D.
ABSTRACT
Knossos is one of the few Aegean Bronze Age (BA) palatial centers at which occupation continued uninterrupted into the Early Iron Age (EIA); as a result, the site, and especially its burial record, provides a unique setting for a study of the use of the Minoan past in general, and of BA objects in particular, in EIA society. About thirty Knossian EIA tombs have produced BA objects, which would have been between 100 and 1,400 years old at the time of their redeposition. Through an analysis of the morphologies and EIA contexts of these reused BA objects, this thesis examines how and for what purposes the BA past was employed during the
EIA. The study also explores how and from where the BA objects were acquired, in what periods of the EIA they were redeposited, and in what kinds of tombs and with what kinds of objects they were placed.
This analysis suggests that BA objects are unlikely to have been “heirlooms”—objects passed down within a kin group—but rather functioned as “antiques.” It also shows that most were probably robbed from Final Palatial - Postpalatial—rather than from earlier Minoan— tombs. Additionally, the analysis reveals a stark difference in the morphologies and functions of
BA objects redeposited during periods in which the BA was the “recent past” and in periods during which it was the “deep past.” In the Subminoan period (11th century)—only circa 100 years removed from the end of the BA—the materials and shapes of the antique BA objects were ones that were no longer able to be produced in the EIA, and the restricted distribution of these objects indicates that one elite group monopolized this seemingly exotic past. In the
Protogeometric “B” - Orientalizing periods (late 9th to 7th centuries)—circa 400 years removed from the end of the BA—the materials and motifs of the BA objects resembled those of EIA burial goods and thereby fit within the constructs of EIA ideologies. The objects were also
ii dispersed within several tombs of moderate wealth, which suggests that the use of past objects was not only more inclusive but also one of several competing means of expressing status.
iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This thesis could not have been completed without the constant support, assistance, and advice of many UC faculty members, colleagues, friends, and family members. First and foremost, I would like to thank my committee chairs, who entrusted me with this topic and constantly guided me throughout the research and writing process. Antonis Kotsonas has tirelessly provided feedback on all aspects of this thesis, and has both challenged and encouraged me. I am grateful for the time and patience that he has invested in this project, and I greatly appreciate having him as a mentor and advisor. Eleni Hatzaki has offered much insightful guidance on this thesis, and discussions with her have greatly influenced how I approached the topic. I also owe many thanks to the other UC Classics faculty members, who have provided continual academic and professional mentoring throughout my graduate career, and to Todd
Whitelaw, who kindly offered the advice and resources necessary for solving the mystery of
“Hogarth’s seals.”
Many UC graduate students have provided much needed support throughout this process.
In particular, I would like to thank Sarah Beal for her helpful and insightful edits (provided at all hours of the day) and for her constant enthusiastic support; the “boys of summer”—especially
Mitch Brown and Simone Agrimonti—who welcomed me with open arms into the brotherhood;
Haley Bertram and Maura Brennan for listening to and laughing with me; and Charles Sturge for our always stimulating discussions about everything from LH IIIC to English football stadiums.
Finally, I would most especially like to thank my sisters, Mary and Anna Crowe, and my parents,
Patricia and Vincent Crowe. Their constant support over the years and their interest (feigned or otherwise) in the Bronze Age and Early Iron Age is forever appreciated. Without them, none of this could have been accomplished.
v
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT ...... ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ...... v
TABLE OF CONTENTS ...... vi
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION: THE (RE)USE OF THE PAST ...... 1 HISTORY OF SCHOLARSHIP: APPROACHING THE EIA REUSE OF BA MATERIAL IN AEGEAN BURIALS ...... 4 EIA BURIAL PRACTICES AND THE FUNERARY LANDSCAPE OF KNOSSOS ...... 6 KNOSSIAN ANTIQUES: ASSEMBLAGE, ANALYSIS, AND EIA KNOSSIAN SOCIETY .. 8
CHAPTER 2: BA LARNAKES IN KNOSSIAN EIA TOMBS ...... 11 CRETAN BA LARNAKES ...... 12 CRETAN EIA BURIAL CONTAINERS ...... 17 BA LARNAKES IN EIA CONTEXTS AT KNOSSOS ...... 18 CONCLUSIONS ...... 39
CHAPTER 3: BA SEALS IN KNOSSIAN EIA TOMBS ...... 49 PROTOPALATIAL-POSTPALATIAL CRETAN SEALS ...... 50 GEOMETRIC AND ORIENTALIZING SEALS ...... 54 BA SEALS IN EIA CONTEXTS AT KNOSSOS ...... 56 CONCLUSIONS ON BA SEALS IN EIA KNOSSIAN TOMBS AND COMPARISONS FROM ELSEWHERE IN CRETE...... 79
CHAPTER 4: BA BEADS IN KNOSSIAN EIA TOMBS ...... 80 CRETAN LBA BEADS ...... 81 CRETAN EIA BEADS ...... 85 BA BEADS IN EIA KNOSSIAN TOMBS ...... 86 CONCLUSIONS ...... 93
CHAPTER 5: SYNTHESIS AND CONCLUSIONS: BA OBJECTS AND EIA KNOSSIAN SOCIETY ...... 98 ANTIQUE ACQUISITION ...... 98 A DIACHRONIC PERSPECTIVE ON ANTIQUE USE: EIA SOCIETAL CHANGES AND THE EVOLVING USE OF BA OBJECTS ...... 102 CONCLUSIONS ...... 112
CHAPTER 6: CONCLUSIONS ...... 114
BIBLIOGRAPHY ...... 116
APPENDIX A: CATALOGUE OF ANTIQUES ...... 140
vi
APPENDIX B: SEALS FROM ‘HOGARTH’S TOMBS:’ BA OR EIA CONTEXT(S)? 142
FIGURES ...... 146
vii
Chapter 1
INTRODUCTION: THE (RE)USE OF THE PAST
Societies have long grappled with the existence of past material remains in the landscapes of the present.1 Particularly in periods without written records, objects and structures “out of time”2 not only provided tangible connections to an alien past3 but could also be associated with magical properties and lost or supernatural races.4 These remains of the past were often manipulated in order to serve agendas in the “present.”5 As a result, analyzing uses of the “past in the past” provides insight into societal developments within the “present in the past.”
While tombs, monuments, objects, and buildings were reused in the past, this thesis focuses exclusively on the reuse of portable objects. Objects with production dates significantly older than that of their (re)depositional contexts are varyingly referred to within scholarly literature as heirlooms or antiques.6 The term antique simply refers to an old object, including an object that was disposed of and recirculated much later, while the term heirloom denotes an inherited object connected to an ancestral lineage.7 Katina Lillios has pointed out that “to call an object an heirloom refers primarily to how the object is treated by its owner, or to a state of being, rather than to any essential quality of the object,” which makes it difficult to identify an
1 Schnapp 1997; Alcock 2002; Boardman 2002; Bradley 2002; Van Dyke and Alcock 2003a; Trigger 2006, pp. 40- 48; Yoffee 2007a; Georgiadis and Galou 2009. 2 The phrase “matter out of time” is adopted from Byron Hamann (2008, p. 803), who defines it as “matter that violates the cultural ordering of temporality.” 3 Joyce 2003; Prent 2003; Yoffee 2007b. 4 Brown 1993, p. 47; Trigger 2006, p. 42. 5 Similarly, archaeological remains continue to be manipulated for present purposes in modern time (see Trigger 2006, pp. 543-545; Davis 2007; Yoffee 2007b, pp. 4-5). 6 For the use of the term heirloom, see Catling 1984; Lillios 1999; Van Dyke and Alcock 2003b; Palaima 2003. For the use of the term antique, see Van Wijngaarden 2005; Whitley 2013. 7 For discussions of the definition of “heirloom” and distinctions between heirlooms and antiques, see Lillios 1999; Whitley 2002, p. 226; Van Wijngaarden 2005, p. 407; Whittaker 2009, p. 5; Whitley 2013, pp. 400, 406.
heirloom archaeologically, especially in a pre- or protohistoric context.8 As a result, throughout this thesis, reused objects found in significantly later contexts are referred to as antiques.
The concepts of object biography and object life cycles, theoretical paradigms taken from broader anthropological and archaeological scholarship, are integral to the study of antiques. A biographical approach to examining objects—as developed most notably by Igor Kopytoff and
Arjun Appadurai in the edited volume The Social Lives of Things—presumes that objects, similar to people, have biographies that can be reconstructed from the time of their production (birth) to that of their disposal (death).9 It also presumes that there is a fundamental relationship between people and objects and that the meanings, functions, and forms of objects change through their contact with and circulation between people.10 Throughout its “life stages,” an object’s meaning is fundamentally shaped by its cultural context and, in some cases, linked to particular personages or events. Accordingly, if reused after its initial disposal, the object could be reinterpreted and given new meaning. In this situation, the object may lose the significance it had at the time of its production and may acquire a different significance based upon its new social and cultural context.11 The concept of object life cycles and life histories is closely connected with the concept of object biography; however, life histories focus more on the physical changes which an object undergoes, particularly changes during production and different uses, and also
8 Lillios 1999, p. 243. Furthermore, Lillios has also argued that once an heirloom is deposited within a grave it stops acting as an heirloom (1999, p. 257). In fact, in prehistoric archaeology, the absence of elite goods in burials has often been interpreted as an indication that objects were maintained in circulation as heirlooms. In historical societies, on the other hand, textual evidence provides evidence that can assist in identifying heirlooms archaeologically (see especially Härke 2000, pp. 383-386). 9 Appadurai 1986; Kopytoff 1986. Following the publication of this volume, the concept of object biography has been developed and frequently utilized in archaeological scholarship. See Gosden and Marshall 1999; Langdon 2001; Bradley 2002, pp. 49-58; Eckardt and Williams 2003; Joy 2009. 10 For ethnographic studies that examine this connection between objects and people, see Malinowski 1922; Hoskins 1998. 11 Eckardt and Williams 2003, pp. 141-143. 2 through post-depositional processes.12 Thus, object life histories inform object biographies. Due to the presumed link between objects, people, and a broader cultural context, the biographies and life histories of objects can be particularly informative for studying past societal developments.
Drawing upon these theoretical paradigms, this thesis presents a case study on the reuse of objects in the past. Around 1200 B.C., at the end of the Aegean Bronze Age (BA) (3000-1200
B.C.) (Figure 1), the sociopolitical, economic, and cultural order of the Aegean was transformed; literacy was lost, elite palaces were abandoned, and trans-Mediterranean contact diminished.13 In the subsequent period, the Early Iron Age (EIA) (1200-600 B.C.) (Figure 2), new burial practices, social hierarchies, and settlement patterns were established.14 Knossos, a site located in the Kairatos river valley south of Herakleion, Crete, was a renowned Minoan15 political and cultural center and is one of the few BA centers at which a large and prosperous EIA settlement was established.16 Due to this continuation of occupation as well as the site’s extensive and very visible material remains,17 Knossos presents a unique opportunity for a case study on the EIA reception and manipulation of the Minoan past and more broadly on uses of “the past in the past.”
At Knossos, about thirty EIA tombs (out of the circa 200 discovered in the area) have produced BA objects, which would have been between 100 and 1,200 years old at the time of their redeposition (see Appendix A). This thesis discusses each of these reused BA objects with the aim of reconstructing aspects of their biographies and life histories from the time of their
12 For discussions and examples of this approach, see Binford 1983; Schiffer 1987; Peña 2007; Joy 2009; Lawall and Lund 2011. For discussions of fragmentation specifically, see Rehak 1995; Chapman 2000; Hatzaki 2009. 13 Dickinson 2006, pp. 24-57; Wallace 2010, pp. 4, 22-23. 14 For overviews of this period, see Snodgrass 1971; Dickinson 2006; Wallace 2010. 15 The problems with the term “Minoan” have been discussed extensively in recent scholarship (see Hamilakis 2002; Whitley 2003; Karadimas and Momigliano 2004); however, it continues to be used in scholarship and, thus, will be used within this thesis as well. 16 Kotsonas, Vasilakis, and Whitelaw 2012; Kotsonas et al. forthcoming. 17 The site contains evidence of occupation from the Neolithic period to the Late Roman period. (Hood and Smyth 1981, p. 5). 3 production in the BA to that of their deposition within an EIA grave. Recurring patterns identified in the biographies and life histories of different objects are used to extrapolate glimpses into societal developments in EIA Knossos.
This introductory chapter prefaces the four body chapters by summarizing previous scholarship and theoretical paradigms which inform this thesis, by presenting the topographical distribution and excavation history of the EIA Knossian burials, and by defining the extent of the analyzed assemblage. Thus, chapter 1 provides the essential background information on the concepts and spaces integral to this study.
I. HISTORY OF SCHOLARSHIP: APPROACHING THE EIA REUSE OF BA
MATERIAL IN AEGEAN BURIALS
Perceptions of the BA past in the Greek EIA have long been of interest to scholars; however, such interest has primarily focused on 8th century tomb cult on the mainland, which involved the placement of EIA offerings at Mycenaean tombs.18 The systematic study of the reuse of BA objects only began with the renewed scholarly interest in EIA burials in the late
1980s and early 1990s. As a result of publications by Ian Morris and James Whitley on EIA
Athenian burials,19 the significance and functions of burial goods became a major topic of scholarly exploration.20 Morris, Whitley, and others following their line of inquiry focused on answering societal-level questions through theoretically informed analyses of burial customs, and emphasized how burials and burial goods had complex and (sometimes) contradictory
18 Coldstream 1976b; Morris 1988; Antonaccio 1995. These offerings connected local elites with past individuals and landscapes. Through this connection, these elites legitimized their position. For a history of scholarship on tomb cult, see Antonaccio 1994, pp. 389-398. 19 Morris (1987) used statistical analyses of burials to explore questions concerning demography, access to burial, and state formation, whereas Whitley (1991) utilized pottery to discuss social hierarchy. 20 Houby-Nielsen 1995; Cavanagh 1996, p. 668. 4 meanings that often reflected the interests and societal maneuverings of the living.21 Therefore, their studies highlighted how burial goods, such as antiques, could be used to make dynamic statements about past societies.
Specific scholarly discussions of the reuse of BA objects in Aegean EIA burials began with the work of Nicolas Coldstream on the redepositional contexts, function(s), and impact of
BA larnakes found in Knossian EIA tombs.22 Nevertheless, this line of inquiry has largely focused on the Heroon at the Toumba of Lefkandi on Euboea. This early 10th century monumental burial complex contained two human burials with several imported eastern goods, including BA objects.23 Morris has argued that these opulent, exotic antique and eastern objects were deposited within the Heroon in order to associate the deceased with a mythical heroic world, elevating them beyond the realm of the impoverished present.24 This heroic world was created through the conflation of conceptions about the east and the BA past. In the 10th century, the heroic package of foreign and antique goods available at Lefkandi was reserved for those buried in the Heroon; however, by the 9th century, these objects were appropriated by a broader subset of the elite population and served to differentiate them from other social groups.
In addition to the finds from Knossos and Lefkandi, the descriptions of antique objects in the Homeric epics have been a major stimulus for the study of the subject. Drawing upon the work of Appadurai and Kopytoff, Jan Paul Crielaard approached such objects through the lens of object biography.25 In the epics, several objects—including Agamemnon’s scepter (Il. 1.234–
237, 2.101-108), the silver krater awarded at the funeral of Patroklos (Il. 23.741–749, 777-778),
21 Houby-Nielsen 1995, pp. 129-130; Dickinson 2006, pp. 174-178. 22 Coldstream 1996b, 1998, 2000. A University of Sydney senior thesis (Barron 2013) has also synthesized this material. 23 Popham, Touloupa, and Sackett 1982. 24 Morris 2000, pp. 195-256, 311. 25 Crielaard 2003. 5 and the boar’s tusk helmet given to Odysseus by Meriones (Il. 10.260–271) —are given biographies that resemble the genealogies of heroes and include information about where the objects originated, their materials, and the various heroes who possessed them. These biographies connected the current owners of the objects with the past (and the past owners of the objects), intertwining the lives of the objects with the lives of the heroes who possessed them.
Scholars have also applied this concept of object biography to the EIA archaeological record, both with and without reference to Homer.26 In particular, Whitley has argued that some BA objects found in Aegean EIA contexts circulated within an elite, Mediterranean-wide system of gift exchange and acquired biographies via their travels and connection with important persons.27
The study of the reuse of the BA past and BA objects in an EIA Cretan context, which was pioneered by Coldstream, was recently taken up by Saro Wallace.28 Drawing upon settlement, sanctuary, and burial evidence from Crete of the SMin to O periods, she studied diachronic changes in the use of the past and its relevance to EIA social structure. The above diverse studies of antiques and burials have established the importance of the reuse of BA material in parts of Greece; nevertheless, there is still no comprehensive analysis of BA objects in Aegean or Cretan EIA communities.
II. EIA BURIAL PRACTICES AND THE FUNERARY LANDSCAPE OF
KNOSSOS
About 200 EIA tombs—primarily chamber tombs but also pit caves, cist graves, and a tholos—have been found at Knossos.29 Archaeologically visible burial seems to have been an
26 Langdon 2001; Papadopoulos and Smithson 2002. 27 Whitley 2002, 2013. 28 Wallace 2003. 29 For a catalogue of the EIA burials at Knossos, see Hood and Smyth 1981; Eaby 2007, pp. 149-167. 6 elite (or at least restricted) activity;30 therefore, those buried within the Knossian tombs are here considered to be among the elite.31 The primary cemetery of the site was probably the Knossos
North Cemetery (KNC) (Figure 3), which is located about 1 km northwest of the BA palace and included EIA tombs dated from the SMin to the O periods.32 The majority of these tombs were excavated through a series of rescue excavations33 and were subsequently published in four volumes by Coldstream and Hector Catling.34 The publication included material from excavations conducted in three areas: the Medical Faculty site, the Teke site, and the Fortetsa
(NE) site. Due to the large number of tombs (particularly at the Medical Faculty site) and the time restrictions of the rescue dig, the excavations were, at times, difficult and rushed.35 This problem was compounded by the dense placement of the tombs, the cutting of numerous
Hellenistic and Roman tombs, and the construction of a church over top of the cemetery in the
Early Christian period.36
In addition to the tombs published in the four KNC volumes, a tholos tomb and two chamber tombs excavated by Richard Hutchinson at the Khaniale Teke site may have once been part of this large cemetery.37 Burials have also been found at other sites scattered throughout the
Knossos area.38 Notable clusters of chamber tombs used in the EIA have been found about 1 km
30 Dickinson 2006, p. 177. 31 Several studies have analyzed the relative wealth of the tombs. Hector Catling ranked wealth based on the bronzes within a tomb (Catling 1996a, pp. 548-549), while Anthony Snodgrass ranked it based on the iron objects (Snodgrass 1996, p. 575). Finally, Vyron Antoniadis analyzed the tombs based on eight different variables, including imports and burials per tomb (Antoniadis 2012, pp. 194-196). These valuable analyses will be referenced throughout this thesis. 32 Hood and Smyth 1981, pp. 37-39; Coldstream and Catling 1996, pp. 712-714; Eaby 2007, pp. 155-161. 33 KNC I, pp. 53-55. 34 KNC I-IV. 35 For a discussion of the Medical Faculty site excavation procedures, see KNC I, pp. 53-56; Whitley 1998. 36 KNC I, p. 56. EIA tombs were frequently cut by several Hellenistic and Roman tombs. 37 Hutchinson and Boardman 1954; Boardman 1967; Antoniadis 2012, p. 60. 38 Beyond those sites mentioned below, tombs were also found at Isopata, Mavro Spelio, Kephala, Kallithea (Babali), the Villa Ariadne, the Stratigraphical Museum site, and the Lower and Upper Gypsades areas. Eaby 2007, pp. 155-161; Antoniadis 2012, pp. 50-66. 7 north of the KNC at the site of Agios Ioannis,39 while to the southwest of the KNC, seventeen to eighteen chamber tombs were found in different clusters at the Fortetsa cemetery (Figure 9).40
Cremation and inhumation were both practiced at Knossos;41 however, the majority of burials were cremations placed within urns and deposited within chamber tombs housing several generations of burials.42 Burials usually included grave goods, such as jewelry, weapons, and clay vessels.43 Due to the frequent reopening of chamber tombs for the new burials, the tombs were often highly disheveled, making it is difficult to determine what objects were deposited with the different interments. Despite these problematic aspects, the Knossian EIA tombs, especially the KNC tombs, were fairly well preserved, contained a large amount of rich and varied goods, and were systematically excavated and presented in a detailed and high quality publication. Due to these positive characteristics and to the large number of tombs in the area, significant conclusions can be drawn based on the study of this material.
III. KNOSSIAN ANTIQUES: ASSEMBLAGE, ANALYSIS, AND EIA KNOSSIAN
SOCIETY
BA objects occasionally appear in burials and in settlements on Crete during the EIA,44 but the large number that has thus far been found in Knossian EIA tombs (over 40) remains unique. While particular antiques from Knossos have been the focus of detailed analysis and the material itself has figured in broader, Aegean-wide discussions of the reuse of BA objects,45
39 Boardman 1960; Hood and Smyth 1981, no. 6. Eight chamber tombs were uncovered at the site. 40 Brock 1957. 41 Snodgrass 1971, p. 165; Cavanagh 1996, p. 664. 42 Cavanagh 1996, p. 657. 43 Cavanagh 1996, pp. 670-672. 44 For BA objects in Cretan EIA burials at sites other than Knossos, see Sakellarakis 1976; Stampolidis 2004, nos. 392-393; Krzyszkowska 2005a, p. 309, n. 148; Sherratt 2008, p. 219, n. 22; Stampolidis 2012, no. 42. For those found in settlement and sanctuary contexts, see Sakellarakis 1976; Rizza 2008, pp. 216, 230, 246. 45 Coldstream 1996b, 1998, 2000; Wallace 2003, pp. 269-271; Barron 2013; Whitley 2013. 8 these artifacts have yet to be examined as a unified assemblage. This thesis examines how, when, and why BA objects were reused in Knossian EIA tombs through an analysis of the morphologies, materials, and production dates of the BA objects as well as their modifications and (re)depositional contexts during the EIA. The approach develops bottom-up, with the detailed analysis of the objects leading to the identification of specific patterns of reuse and to a synthetic discussion of the relevance of this reuse to broader societal changes at EIA Knossos.
In addition to antiques, the Knossian EIA tombs yielded BA objects that were used as building material and others that appear to have been enmeshed in the fills of tombs rather than to have been intentionally deposited within burial assemblages.46 While these two classes of material provide insight into EIA tomb construction techniques and possible areas of BA activity, in most cases, their reuse is the result of taphonomic and other process that can be distinguished from those that pertain to the reuse of antiques. Hence, these objects have been excluded from this analysis. The study also excludes objects whose dating to the BA is questionable and/or debated. Examples include bronze tripods47 and lotus-handled jugs,48 which sometimes are assigned a BA production date49 but which were probably produced in the EIA.50
The remaining BA objects found in EIA Knossian tombs largely fall into three functional categories: seals, beads, and larnakes. These objects were found with far greater frequency than the other antiques: twenty-six larnakes, nine seals, and seven beads were uncovered in the tombs.
46 Reused BA building material found in Knossian EIA tombs includes stones used as stomion and side chamber blockings in Agios Ioannis tombs V and VIII (Boardman 1960, pp. 133, 139) and KNC 24 (Evely 1996, p. 626). Objects that appear to have been from the fill of a tomb include a plethora of obsidian (see chapter 5) and stone vase fragments from KNC Q, 75, 98, 106, and 292 (Evely 1996, p. 626). 47 The bronze tripods found in the Knossos tombs include KNC 100.f4, 8, 21-23, 30, 39 and Fortetsa no. 188. One example was found in Ambelokipoi Tekke tomb 3 (Catling 1982-83, p. 51), and another was found in a tomb excavated by Hogarth (Hogarth 1899-1900, p. 83). For a detailed analysis of these pieces, see Papasavvas 2004, pp. 316-317. 48 The lotus-handled jugs found in the Knossos tombs include KNC 100.f31, KNC G.f5, KNC N.f10, and Fortetsa nos. 1571-1572. 49 For the dating of the tripods to the BA, see Catling 1984. For the lotus-handled jugs, see Carter 1998; Whitley 2002, pp. 225-226; Whitley 2013, p. 402. 50 Matthäus 1988; Papasavvas 2001, 2004, 2012. 9
Therefore, one chapter is dedicated to the objects in each of these functional categories; chapter 2 covers the larnakes, chapter 3 the seals, and chapter 4 the beads. The chapters also make references to individual BA objects of miscellaneous types, which are rarely found in EIA tombs, such as clay vases, a glass furniture inlay, and a boar’s tusk helmet. The full discussion of these objects in a separate chapter would be worthwhile, but could not be pursued here because of time constraints. A fourth chapter explores the spatial and temporal distribution of the BA objects of all (including rare) types; provides a synthesis of the main patterns identified in the materials, iconography, and shapes of the objects; and explores their wider relevance to the development of
EIA society at Knossos.
The discussion of the Knossian antique seals, beads, and larnakes in the following chapters are informed by the theoretical paradigms and methodologies presented above. These discussions not only highlight the life cycles of individual objects but also reveal clear diachronic changes in the function(s), quantity, distribution, and morphological traits of the BA objects selected for reuse in different periods of the EIA. These diachronic differences are indicative of the changing role of BA objects in EIA burials and, more broadly, of the BA past in the EIA present. Furthermore, they reflect larger changes within EIA society and highlight the differences between promoting connections to the recent past and to the distant past. Thus, through the study of BA antique objects, this thesis examines Knossian EIA society.
10
Chapter 2
BA LARNAKES IN EIA KNOSSIAN TOMBS
In contrast to the BA seals and beads found in Knossian EIA burials, which have rarely been noted by scholars, the BA larnakes have been the subject of frequent scholarly discussion.51
Coldstream, in particular, has explored the spatial distribution, redepositional dates, functions, and influence of larnakes on EIA art as well as the potential means through why they were acquired.52 By drawing upon and reexamining the hypotheses of Coldstream and others, this chapter aims to expand upon previous analyses of the antique larnakes, to explore the object biographies of individual pieces, and to elucidate how these objects fit into the broader discussion of Knossian antiques.
Prior to discussing antique larnakes, I will offer an overview of the morphology, functions, and iconography of both BA larnakes and EIA burial containers—with a particular focus on Knossos. This will provide a background against which the EIA use of antique larnakes can best be understood by enabling the comparison of the functions and meanings of LBA larnakes and EIA burial containers in Knossian EIA contexts. In the BA, larnakes served as burial containers; however, it remains unclear if the antique larnakes did so during the EIA (see below). It is possible that these objects were simply markers of a connection between those buried in the tomb and the BA past. Additionally, the BA contexts in which Minoan larnakes have been found will be summarized so as to highlight the contexts from which the antique larnakes may have been acquired. The summaries of BA and EIA burial containers will be
51 Coldstream 1984; Morgan 1987; Coldstream 1988; Coldstream and Catling 1996, p. 719; Coldstream 1998; Coldstream 2000. 52 Coldstream 1984, 1988, 1998, 2000. 11 followed by discussions of each BA larnax in an EIA Knossian tomb, including a discussion of the morphological traits, contexts, and functions of the objects.
I. CRETAN BA LARNAKES
Contexts and Functions
From EM III-MM I,53 clay containers—predominantly larnakes and pithoi— held primary (collective and individual) and secondary burials54 and were typically deposited in communal tombs.55 This practice of container burial continued and became widespread throughout the Protopalatial and early Neopalatial periods;56 however, after reaching a high point in MM III, the use of clay burial containers appears to have stopped in LM IA.57
58 Clay larnakes reappeared on Crete in LM IIIA2, and they continued to be used for
59 burials until the beginning of LM IIIC. LM IIIA2-B larnakes are prolific in the archaeological record— about 1000 examples have been uncovered, and larnax burial was the second most popular type of interment during the Final Palatial period.60 Larnakes are found almost exclusively in burials,61 and they were typically placed within chamber tombs, though, in some
53 Several pithos burials date to EM II (Xanthoudides 1918), but the practice was not widely adopted until EM III (Vavouranakis 2014, p. 198). 54 Larnakes and pithoi with multiple primary interments have been found in tholoi C and E at Archanes-Phourni (Sakellarakis and Sapouna-Sakellaraki 1997, pp. 182, 188, fig. 135). Pithoi holding secondary burials were discovered within the Archanes-Phourni Tholos Gamma (Papadatos 2005, p. 71; Hatzaki 2012, p. 309). 55 Branigan 1993, pp. 65-67, 141; Hatzaki 2012, p. 309; Legarra Herrero 2012, pp. 348-349. While communal tombs were the most common depositional location for burial containers, at the Pachyammos and Sphoungaras cemeteries, these were placed within individual pits (Hall 1912, pp. 58-72, pl. XI; Seager 1916; Preston 2004b, p. 179). 56 Pini 1968, pp. 11-13; Preston 2004b, pp. 179-181; Christakis 2005, p. 55. 57 Preston 2013, p. 102. 58 Preston 2004b, pp. 182-183; Hatzaki 2005, pp. 87-89. Two larnakes are said to be from LM II contexts; however, both are problematic. An example from Kastelli Pediada was dated based on a verbal description rather than visual analysis, and the second piece—a larnax from Malia Perivolia—is unpublished (Pendlebury, Money-Coutts, and Eccles 1935, pp. 80-81; Platon 1954, p. 516; Preston 2004b, p. 182). It is also possible that some larnakes were produced in LM IIIA1 (Preston 2004b, pp. 182-183). 59 Pini 1968, p. 55; Watrous 1991, p. 289; Wallace 2010, p. 152. 60 The most popular placement was on the floor of a chamber tomb (Preston 2004b, pp. 178, 188). 61 An exception to this pattern is fragments of a decorated bath tub larnax that were found at the Knossos Royal Villa (Morris 1995). 12 cases, they were found in pits, caves, shaft graves, or chamber tombs’ dromoi.62 Within the larnax, the deceased was usually placed in a flexed position and had limited accompanying grave goods.63
Shapes and Materials
Larnakes in all periods of the BA were made of coarse clay.64 EM III-MM I larnakes varied in form; they were rectangular and oval, had lids and were open, and varied in the number of their handles.65 This diversity in shape continued throughout the Protopalatial and Neopalatial periods.66 In contrast, LM III larnakes had two standardized forms: chest-shaped and tub-shaped larnakes. Both forms are the same relative size.67 Chest type larnakes were the more common of the two types,68 and are cuboid with four feet, a lid, and, often, handles placed close to the rim.
Exterior decoration includes indented or incised panels and painted designs.69 Holes were sometimes punched into the bottom, possibly to assist in the decomposition of the body or to aid in the firing process, and some larnakes also had holes near the rim, which likely facilitated the stringing of rope to secure the lid of the larnax.70 Tub larnakes, in contrast, have no lid or feet, though some do have handles. They are oval in shape and can have both exterior and interior decoration.71
Iconography
62 Larnakes placed in pits and caves are largely limited to East Crete (Preston 2004b, p. 186). 63 Rutkowski 1966, p. 134; Watrous 1991, p. 289. Concurrent with the rise in prominence of larnakes in the mortuary record is a decline in investment of wealth within burials. This decline is first clear in LM IIIA2 and continued into LM IIIB, when the few known burials are relatively poor (Preston 2004a, p. 331). 64 Rutkowski 1966, p. 131. The LM IIIA2 stone Hagia Triada sarcophagus (Paribeni 1908; Rutkowski 1966, p. 131; Long 1974; La Rosa 1998) is an exception. 65 Rutkowski 1966, p. 133, pl. XLIII; Rutkowski 1968, p. 220, fig. 1. 66 Rutkowski 1966, p. 139; Preston 2004b, p. 183. 67 For illustrations of both larnax types, see Rutkowski 1966, pl. XLIV; Rutkowski 1968, fig. 2. The length of both types ranged from 0.90-1.50 m, the width 0.35-0.60 m, and the height 0.50-0.85 m (Preston 2004b, p. 183). 68 The only area where chest-shaped larnakes were the more popular type is in the far east and the west of the island. Chest-shaped larnakes were undoubtedly the most common type at Knossos (Preston 2004b, p. 189, fig. 7). 69 Pini 1968, pp. 52-53; Watrous 1991; Preston 2004b, p. 183. 70 Evans 1905, p. 98; Morgan 1987, pp. 173-174, n. 8; Watrous 1991, p. 289. 71 Pini 1968, pp. 53-54; Rutkowski 1968, p. 220, figs. 2.6, 2.7; Preston 2004b, p. 183. 13
Larnakes were largely undecorated until the Final Palatial period, and even the vast
72 majority of LM IIIA2-B larnakes were unpainted. The few LM IIIA2-B larnakes that were painted were decorated with diverse designs, ranging from simple painted lines to complex funerary (or religious) scenes.73 The most common images were simple abstract designs—such as spirals, wavy lines, quatrefoils, and cross-hatching74—while more complex motifs included depictions of animals and plants as well as images with religious connotations, such as bulls and horns of consecration.75 Though rare, several larnakes show scenes with human figures— typically images of hunts, sacrifices, and religious or mourning activities.76
Knossian Larnakes
While larnax burials dating to the Prepalatial-Protopalatial periods have been found at
77 Knossos, these burials are far rarer than the site’s numerous LM IIIA2-B larnakes, and no larnax burials dating to the late Neopalatial period have yet been found in the area.78 The later
79 LM IIIA2-B larnakes were deposited almost exclusively in chamber tombs, and many have been uncovered in the Zapher Papoura, Mavro Spelio, and Upper Gypsades cemeteries.80 Most were unpainted and constructed of a coarse, gritty fabric of an orange or buff color.81 The ten total painted larnakes found in the above Knossos cemeteries have relatively simple
72 Rutkowski 1966, pp. 130, 133. 73 Watrous divides the motifs that appears on larnakes into four categories: 1) abstract designs, 2) ritual figures and objects, 3) animals and plants “sacred to the divinity,” and 4) representations of the afterworld. Watrous 1991, pp. 289-301. 74 Rutkowski 1966, p. 133; Watrous 1991, pp. 289-290. For a more extensive list of abstract designs that appear on larnakes, see Watrous 1991, pp. 289-290. 75 Mavriyannaki 1972, pp. 95-100; Watrous 1991, pp. 290-294. 76 Rutkowski 1966, pp. 133-134; Morgan 1987, pp. 191-193; Watrous 1991, pp. 294-301. 77 For Prepalatial-Protopalatial pithos and larnax burials found in the Mavro Spelio cemetery, see Forsdyke 1926-27, p. 247. For larnakes in the Gypsades tholos, see Hood 1960, pl. 18b; Branigan 1993, p. 140, fig. 7.14. 78 Hatzaki 2012, p. 310. 79 Two exceptions to this pattern are fragments of a decorated bath tub larnax that were found at the Royal Villa (Morris 1995) and a larnax found in shaft grave Zapher Papoura tomb 34 (Evans 1905, p. 50). 80 Evans 1905; Forsdyke 1926-27; Hood et al. 1958-59. 81 Hood et al. 1958-59, p. 227. 14 iconography: three have traces of paint or wavy lines,82 and five others have abstract or plant imagery—primarily spirals and papyrus plants.83 Only two depict either animals or humans.84
Due to the extensive robbing of the Knossos cemeteries, larnakes and the tombs which housed larnakes rarely contained grave goods, but some did contain weaponry, seals, jewelry, and pottery.85
II. CRETAN EIA BURIAL CONTAINERS
Contexts and Functions
EIA burial practices were highly variable between regions, sites, and even individual tombs;86 as a result, this overview of EIA burial containers focuses on the region of central Crete, where some chronological patterns in container shapes, materials, sizes and functions are identifiable. In this region, burials were rarely placed in containers until the PG period, the era during which cremations took over from inhumation as the main method of burial on Crete.87
During and following the PG period, urn burial continued to be the primary method of interment
82 Larnakes from Zapher Papoura tombs 90, 98 (Evans 1905, pp. 83, 86); Upper Gypsades tomb VII (Hood et al. 1958-59, p. 231). 83 Larnakes from Zapher Papoura tomb 100 (Evans 1905, pp. 90-92); Upper Gypsades tombs VI, XIII (Hood et al. 1958-59, pp. 227, 231-232); Mavro Spelio tombs V, X (Forsdyke 1926-27, pp. 257, 270). 84 One from Mavro Spelio XI (Forsdyke 1926-27, pp. 270-271, fig. 26), which shows stylized argonauts, and one from Zapher Papoura tomb 9 (Evans 1905, p. 29, fig. 26a). One panel of the Zapher Papoura example has a chariot, while the other has a man leading an agrimi by a rope. Although it is a fairly complex scene, particularly compared to the other depictions on Knossian larnakes, Evans describes it as a drawing “altogether of the rudest kind” (Evans 1905, p. 29). 85 Evans 1905. At Zapher Papoura, only 18 out of the cemetery’s 49 chamber tombs were untouched by looters (Evans 1905, pp. 103-104). 86 Kurtz and Boardman 1971, p. 171; Snodgrass 1971, p. 165; Morris 1987, p. 18; Dickinson 2006, pp. 189, 195; Wallace 2010, pp. 286, 303. 87 Snodgrass 1971, p. 165. The rise in the use of burial urns was not entirely dependent upon the increasing popularity of cremations. Cremations appear in the SMin period and, on occasion, even the LBA (Dickinson 2006, pp. 180-181). Additionally, cremations could be left on pyres or placed in pits rather than placed in urns, though this was rarer in Crete (Dickinson 2006, pp. 186-187). 15 up until the last quarter of the 7th century, when the majority of central Cretan cemeteries were abandoned.88
Typically, burial containers were deposited within communal chamber tombs and housed cremations.89 They rarely held more than one burial and usually contained few burial goods.90
Some burial vessels may originally have been used in domestic contexts, but others almost certainly were commissioned exclusively for burials (especially the polychrome jars of the O period).91 On Crete, no differentiation between the genders buried in particular urns has been noted; however, there may have been a difference in wealth between those buried in decorated urns and those buried in plain urns during the 7th century.92
Shapes, Materials, and Iconography
Throughout the EIA, burial containers were primarily made of clay.93 Their shapes, on the other hand, evolved across periods. In the PG period, the bell-krater was the most common shape, while in the PGB period the necked jar and the straight-sided jar took over as the dominant forms.94 From the EG-MG period, these shapes slowly disappeared and were replaced by the four-handled, plump, neckless ovoid pithos, which continued to be the major burial container shape into the O period.95
88 Coldstream and Catling 1996, p. 722; Kotsonas 2011, p. 133. 89 Kurtz and Boardman 1971, pp. 171-173; Snodgrass 1971, p. 165; Cavanagh 1996. Pithoi did, however, occasionally contain child inhumations (Snodgrass 1971, p. 168; Wallace 2010, p. 300). 90 Musgrave 1996, pp. 681, 690; Kotsonas 2011, p. 132. 91 Cavanagh 1996, p. 667. 92 Whitley 2004, p. 437. 93 Nevertheless, a few bronze burial containers were used. These include a SMin example from Tylissos (Snodgrass 1971, p. 166) and, most famously, on the mainland, from the Lefkandi Heroon (Popham, Touloupa, and Sackett 1982). 94 While Coldstream refers to these jars as “necked pithoi” and “straight-sided pithoi,” here they are referred to as jars following Kotsonas (2008, p. 79), who has advocated this modification in name in order to differentiate these fine wares from the large, coarse, storage pithoi. The necked jar is short with a concave neck and a round body, whereas the straight-sided jar has a straight shoulder with a sharp carination, a flat base, and horizontal handles. The straight-sided jar typically had a knobbed lid and may have been a continuation of the LBA pyxis or an imitation of the EBA-MBA straight-sided pithos. Coldstream 1996a, pp. 311-317; Coldstream 2008, pp. 235-236. 95 Coldstream 1996a, pp. 317-324; Coldstream 2008, pp. 239-240, 242, 247. 16
The decoration on EIA burial containers could be ornate or plain and varied between periods. In the EPG period, Attic Protogeometric designs, such as triangles and concentric circles, were adopted and adapted.96 A uniquely Cretan decoration—which combined elements of Minoan art, Eastern metalworking, and local PG patterns—was developed in the PGB period.97 This style featured combinations of curvilinear, rectilinear, and compass-drawn motifs; only on occasion did figural scenes appear.98 Contemporaneous with these uniquely decorated urns, plain vessels were also used for burial.99 During the Geometric period, Attic geometric patterns once again returned to prominence, and figures were largely limited to birds.100 In contrast to this more conservative style, polychrome pithoi with new motifs, including palmettes and guilloches, became popular in the O period, particularly, it seems, for wealthier burials.101 At the same time, a tradition of plain burial urns, decorated with simple black bands and concentric circles, continued.102
III. BA LARNAKES IN EIA CONTEXTS AT KNOSSOS
Burial containers, specifically larnakes, are by far the most numerous type of BA object found in Knossian EIA tombs. Twenty-two fragmentary—or fragments of—antique larnakes have been found in the area’s EIA burials: nineteen larnakes were discovered in the KNC, two larnakes in the Fortetsa cemetery, and one larnax in the Khaniale Teke cemetery. Whereas in the following two chapters the discussion of BA antiques will be arranged on the basis of the date of the redeposition of the object, in this chapter, the analysis is ordered according to the geographic
96 Desborough 1952, pp. 247-250; Coldstream 2008, pp. 234-235. 97 Whitley 2004, p. 433, n. 3; Coldstream 2008, p. 234. 98 Brock 1957, p. 143; Coldstream 2008, pp. 237-238. 99 There does not seem to be any differentiation in wealth between those buried in ornate burial containers and those buried in plain burial containers during the PGB period (Whitley 2004, p. 434). 100 Coldstream 2008, pp. 241-248. 101 Whitley 2004, p. 434. 102 Whitley 2004, p. 434. 17 location of the tombs in which they were redeposited. This arrangement was chosen due to the clustering of fragments within particular areas and the largely confused contexts and resulting broad redepositional dates of the burial containers, which makes ordering the material chronologically difficult. The larnakes and the other antiques discussed in this thesis will be identified by the numbers given to them in their respective original publications; the first number or letter indicates the tomb in which the object was found and the second number (when given) represents the individual object number. Images of the objects are included at the end of this thesis, if a published image of the object was available, and are referenced at the beginning of the discussion of each object.
KNC Southeast Sector
In the KNC southeast sector, five tombs contained larnax fragments. Four of the five tombs (KNC 18, KNC 31, KNC 103, and KNC 134) were located in the northeast area of the southeast sector and were within twenty meters of each other. The one isolated burial (KNC 85) was an individual larnax burial.
Larnax KNC 31.11
KNC 31.11 is a single larnax burial found in a comparatively well-preserved context.
Although the upper half of the larnax is heavily damaged, the base is almost entirely preserved, while the southern and western ends are half preserved.103 Fragments of the east side also
104 remain. The larnax is an unpainted LM IIIA2-B chest type larnax made of coarse orange clay.
The base of the larnax has holes placed there at the time of its BA manufacture. Another larnax burial, KNC 18.15, was deposited near to KNC 31.11.105 Although fragments of KNC 31.11 were found level with larnax KNC 18.15, a Hellenistic tomb was constructed in between the two
103 KNC I, p. 80. 104 KNC I, p. 81. 105 The two burials were separated by about 1.40 m. KNC I, p. 68. 18 larnax burials, and the excavators state that it is unlikely that the two were ever part of the same tomb.106
The larnax was found in between chamber tombs KNC 18 and KNC 25 above burnt soil, and its redeposition dates to the LG period.107 Sixteen small pots,108 two figurines (goat figurine
KNC 31.3 and bird figurine KNC 31.4), and a rock crystal bead (KNC 31.f2) were found in the fill alongside and above the larnax. Unburnt bones were found near to the larnax, but they give no indication of the age or gender of the deceased.109
Larnax KNC 18.15
Larnax KNC 18.15, of which one short side and one long side is preserved, is a LM
110 IIIA2-B undecorated chest-shaped larnax made of coarse orange clay. Its lip is everted and squared, and it has a raised ridge at the level of its base. The preserved long side of the larnax has two vertical strap handles and panels framed by incised lines.111 As mentioned in the discussion of KNC 31.11, KNC 18.5 was found near to KNC 31.11, but the two were probably not part of the same larnax.
KNC 18.15 was found in the eastern section of the KNC 18 dromos, and the redeposition of the larnax probably dates to the PGB-EG periods.112 Unburnt bones, an iron knife (KNC
18.f5), and a PGB gold-set BA seal that will be discussed in chapter 4 (KNC 18.f3) were found close to the larnax; it is possible, though not probable, that the two objects were deposited
106 While a discussion of the burials in KNC I (p. 67) suggests that the two may be from the same larnax, both Coldstream (2000, p. 277) and the KNC I descriptions of KNC 18 and KNC 31 (KNC I, pp. 68-69, 80-81) give no such indication that they are part of the same larnax. 107 KNC I, pp. 80-81; Coldstream 2000, p. 277. 108 They included two feeding jugs (KNC 31.21, 25), four small cups (KNC 31.6, 10, 13, 35), six skyphoi (KNC 31.16, 29-33), one oinochoe (KNC 31.26), one pyxis (KNC 31.28), one hydria (KNC 31.37), and one tray (KNC 31.36). KNC I, p. 80; Coldstream 2000, p. 277. 109 KNC I, p. 81. The bones are not mentioned in Musgrave’s chapter on the osteological material. 110 KNC I, p. 69; Coldstream 2000, p. 277. 111 KNC I, p. 69. 112 KNC 18 was originally built during the SMin period but was reused during the PGB-EG period (Cavanagh 1996, p. 666). Based on the plethora of PGB-EG pottery in the dromos, the larnax was probably deposited during the PGB-EG reuse of the tomb. 19 together with KNC 18.15.113 KNC 18.15 is, nevertheless, the only larnax in the KNC southeast sector that was found in a tomb that contained multiple BA objects, and the two antiques were probably redeposited within 50 years of each other.
Larnax KNC 103.2
Similar to KNC 18.15 and the majority of other Knossian antique larnakes, KNC 103.2
114 was a fragmentary LM IIIA2-B unpainted chest-shaped larnax of coarse orange clay. Most of the preserved fragments of the larnax belong to the object’s base, though some body fragments were found, including ones with incised lines framing the panels of the larnax. The larnax was found with a fragmentary MG-LG juglet (KNC 103.2) in the northeast area of the KNC southeast sector and was not found near to any tomb; thus, it appears to have been an isolated burial
(though no bones were found nearby).115
Larnax KNC 134.77
One long side—including two vertical strap handles—and one short side of unpainted, chest-shaped larnax KNC 134.77 are preserved. The larnax was produced in LM IIIA2-B and constructed of coarse orange clay.116 The container was discovered in the north niche of the chamber dromos of the tomb, which held sherds of seventy-seven different ceramics and several fragments of bronze and iron.117 While the majority of these pots were in the fill of the niche, according to the excavators, the larnax appeared to be in situ. Two pots were found inside the larnax (MG-LG juglet KNC 134.24 and MG-LG pedestalled krater KNC 134.25), and an additional sixteen EG-LG pots—most of them small—were found between the larnax and the
113 KNC I, p. 68; Musgrave 1996, p. 694. See chapter 3 for a more detailed discussion of seal KNC 18.f3’s context. These objects may alternatively belong to a PGB-EG pithos burial (KNC 18.8) found just to the north of the larnax. 114 KNC I, p. 138; Coldstream 2000, p. 277. 115 KNC I, p. 138; Coldstream 2000, p. 277. 116 KNC I, p. 177. 117 KNC I, p. 174; Coldstream 2000, p. 278. Unfortunately, no bones were discovered in the niche. 20 niche’s blocking wall.118 These vessels were primarily pouring vessels, drinking vessels, or oil flasks.
Larnax KNC 85.1 (Figure 10)
One of the few painted BA larnakes found in an EIA context, KNC 85.1 is unique both for its decoration and for its context. In shape, however, it greatly resembles the other Knossian antique larnakes—it is chest-shaped with vertical handles and is composed of coarse orange clay.119 One half of one of the long sides of the larnax, two of the legs of the larnax, and several base fragments remain. The preserved half of the long side is decorated with red-black paint and is divided into halves by two rectangular panels. Each panel is filled by a quatrefoil whose interior is painted and exterior is outlined; small spirals fill the space in between the quatrefoils’ petals. A wavy line separates the rectangular panels from the leg. The leg, in turn, is framed by a double lined rectangular box within which are running spirals. One fragment of the second leg of the long side is preserved, and it is decorated with this same pattern, suggesting that the larnax may have been symmetrical and, thus, that the long side’s missing panel may also have been decorated with quatrefoils. Overtop of the quatrefoil panels, a strip framed by horizontal lines filled with interspersed groups of three parallel bands separates the central decorated panels from the raised rim. The rim is also decorated with painted bands. LBA larnakes were often decorated with quatrefoils, but the quatrefoils were typically used as framing elements rather than as the central image.120 Based on stylistic parallels, the production of the larnax is dated to LM IIIB.121
118 These pots included four small cups (KNC 134.36-37, 39-40), five juglets (KNC 134.26-27, 31-32, 43), four lekythoi (KNC 134.28, 30, 38, 44), one oinochoe (KNC 134.29), one feeding jug (KNC 134.42), and one small amphora (KNC 134.42). 119 KNC I, p. 128. 120 Watrous 1991, pp. 289, 303. 121 The quatrefoils on KNC 85.1 resemble quatrefoils used as framing elements on a LM IIIB larnax from Palaikastro (Kanta 1980, figs. 9, 77; Watrous 1991, pl. 82a/b; Coldstream 1996a, p. 393) and on one panel of one of the long sides of an unprovenanced larnax in the Rethymon museum (Watrous 1991, pl. 86e). 21
KNC 85 is a shallow rectangular cutting into which two rectangular pits were carved.122
The tomb is located in the western section of the KNC southeast sector in a rather isolated area, particularly compared to the rest of the congested southern half of the cemetery (Figures 7 and
8). While some larnax fragments were found within the top fill of the cutting, the majority were found in the northern rectangular pit.123 In addition to the larnax fragments, the northern pit held fragments of a LG pithos, and, as a result, the redeposition of the larnax is dated to the LG.124
The larnax and pithos were the only two objects found in the tomb.125 Although no larnax fragments were found within the southern pit, it too may once have held a larnax.126 KNC 85.1 is the only painted antique larnax found in an individual pit burial, and it is also the only painted larnax found at Knossos in an area other than in the western area of the KNC.
KNC Southwest Sector
Four larnakes were found in burials in the KNC southwest sector: KNC 98.19, KNC
106.42, KNC 113.1, and KNC 60.3. Three of the larnakes (KNC 98.19, KNC 106.42, KNC
113.1) were found in a 10 m2 area of the southeastern corner of the sector, while one was in a tomb in the sector’s central area (KNC 60.3).
Larnax KNC 98.19
Multiple larnax fragments, which once may have been a part of two or three different larnakes, were classified as larnax KNC 98.19.127 A foot and an upper edge piece—both of which were unpainted and made of gritty orange clay with a yellow slip—may have been part of
122 KNC I, p. 128. 123 KNC I, p. 128; Coldstream 2000, p. 277. 124 KNC I, p. 128. 125 Coldstream (2000, p. 277) stated that MG-LO sherds were found in the tomb, but he hypothesized that the sherds did not belong with the KNC 85.1 larnax burial. The sherds are not mentioned in KNC I. 126 The northern pit was 1.55 x 0.53 m while the southern pit was 1.27 x 0.48 m. Both would have been large enough to fit an average size larnax, as larnakes ranged in size from 0.9 x 0.35-1.5 x 0.6 m (Preston 2004b, p. 183). 127 KNC I, p. 131; Coldstream 2000, p. 277. 22 one larnax.128 A second group of fragments included portions of one long side and a squared rim
129 with a projecting ridge. Both sets of fragments were once part of LM IIIA2-B chest-shaped larnakes.
KNC 98, the tomb in which KNC 98.19 was found, is a pit tomb located in the southeastern section of the KNC southwest sector and is highly disturbed.130 KNC 98 dates to the
SMin-EPG periods; however, the larnax fragments were found in what the excavators describe as an “uncertain context” on the pit floor against the pit’s south wall, and the fragments were not directly associated with any objects.131 If the larnax fragments were redeposited in the SMin-
EPG periods, they are the earliest redeposited larnakes in the Knossos area. KNC 98 is a further anomaly among the tombs that contained Knossian antique larnax fragments, because it is the only tomb outside of the KNC west sector which contained fragments of multiple larnakes.
Considering the excavator’s misgivings about the context of the larnax, the seemingly anomalous redepositional date, and the multiplicity of larnakes represented by the fragments, it is possible that these fragments’ findspot does not reflect the EIA depositional context of the larnax.
Larnax KNC 106.42
132 Two unpainted legs of chest-shaped LM IIIA2-B larnax KNC 106.42 were preserved.
Both legs were discovered within the KNC 106 chamber, but each was uncovered in a different
128 KNC I, p. 131. 129 KNC I, p. 131. It is unclear from the object’s description whether this second group of fragments was also made of orange clay. 130 KNC 106, a Hellenistic grave, and two Roman graves were all cut into KNC 98. The tomb may once have been a pit cave whose “‘cave’ was sliced off” during the construction of KNC 106 over KNC 98 (KNC I, p. 130). 131 The reasoning for the excavator’s uncertainty is never made clear. In an article on Knossian BA larnakes in EIA contexts, Coldstream states that the larnakes were found on the floor of a robber’s pit, but no such robber’s pit is mentioned in KNC I. While the publication does state that the fragments were “found on the floor of the pit” (KNC I, p. 130), the pit the authors refer to is pit grave KNC 98. 132 KNC I, p. 148. The type of clay used to produce the legs is not identified. 23 layer of the chamber’s fill.133 KNC 106.42 is one of only three Knossian antique larnakes found in the chamber of a tomb; all three tombs were in the KNC southwest sector. Due to the fragments’ disturbed contexts, the redeposition of the larnax is dated to PGB-LO.134
KNC 106 is directly to the northeast and connected to KNC 98 (Figure 7). Based on
William Cavanagh’s analysis of the KNC tomb’s constructions, KNC 106 is one of three EIA tombs in the Knossos area that had the structural characteristics of a BA tomb and also contained
BA objects.135 Problematically, though, KNC 106 cut into EIA tombs KNC 98 and KNC 168, and, therefore, at least part of the tomb must have been constructed in the EIA.136 Similar to larnax KNC 98.19, KNC 106.42 is poorly preserved and found in a disturbed context; therefore, it may not be in its original redepositional context, and, given that the two larnakes were found in tombs in very close proximity to each other, KNC 106.42 may be somehow connected to the
KNC 98.19 fragments.
Larnax KNC 113.1 (Figure 11)
Unpainted chest-shaped, LM IIIA2-B larnax KNC 113.1 appears to have been a single larnax burial, possibly associated with a fragmentary LG oinochoe (KNC 113.2).137 The larnax itself was fragmentary: the majority of one short side was preserved in addition to several fragments of the two long sides. Both legs of the short side are preserved as well as two handles
133 One was in the fill to the south of a wall that was built over top of the chamber fill and split the chamber in half, while the second was found underneath this wall alongside an EG-MG cup (KNC 106.6) and a MG-LG juglet (KNC 106.7). Coldstream (2000, p. 278) states that the fragments were found in the dromos fill, but the original publication (KNC I, p. 146) does not support this claim. 134 Different date ranges are given in various publications. Coldstream (2000, p. 278) assigns it to MG-LO and Cavanagh (1996, p. 657) to PGB-EG. Here, the dates of the EIA pottery listed in KNC I (PGB-LO) are used to date the tomb (KNC I, p. 147). 135 Cavanagh 1996, pp. 653-656. 136 Coldstream has argued that KNC 106 is a BA tomb that once held larnax fragments KNC 106.42, KNC 113.1, and KNC 98.19, and he dismissed the cutting into KNC 98 and KNC 168 as extensions of an already existing BA tomb (Coldstream 1998). 137 KNC I, pp. 129-130, 163-164; Coldstream 2000, p. 278. 24 of the long side.138 The larnax was found on top of the collapsed chamber of tomb KNC 106, and bones were found nearby.139 At the time of the excavation of the larnax, no evidence was found of a pit into which the larnax may have been inserted, and the excavators suggest that the larnax may have been displaced.140
Larnax KNC 60.3
Several wall fragments of an unpainted, chest-shaped, LM IIIA2-B larnax were found in chamber tomb KNC 138. KNC 138—a small chamber tomb used from the LG-O periods that was cut into KNC 60—was not identified as separate from KNC 60 until late in the excavation process;141 as a result, although the larnax was found in KNC 138, it is cataloged with the KNC
60 finds. The fragments of the larnax, KNC 60.3, were made of a coarse orange clay and were found on the KNC 138 chamber floor142 underneath a limestone block that may have been produced in the BA.143 A LG skyphos (KNC 60.2) and an iron sword blade (KNC 60.f4) were also found in the chamber.144
KNC West Sector
Three of the four total tombs in the KNC west sector contained fragments of larnakes
(KNC 75, KNC 107, and KNC 132). Each of the three tombs appears to have contained fragments of multiple larnakes.
Larnax KNC 75.225
138 KNC I, p. 164. 139 KNC I, pp. 129-130, 163-164; Coldstream 2000, p. 278. No information about the gender or age of the deceased was obtained (Musgrave 1996, p. 697). 140 KNC I, p. 163. 141 KNC I, p. 100. 142 KNC I, p. 101. Coldstream (2000, p. 278) states (it seems mistakenly) that the larnax fragments were found in the tomb’s upper fill, but KNC I states that at least one of the fragments was found on the chamber floor (KNC I, p. 178). 143 KNC I, p. 103; Evely 1996, p. 626. The BA date is based on a decorative motif carved into the side of the block. The piece may have been used to support an urn. 144 Coldstream 2000, p. 278. 25
Body fragments, base fragments, four feet, and one strap handle of unpainted chest- shaped LM IIIA2-B larnax KNC 75.225 were found in the dromos fill of chamber tomb KNC 75
(PGB/EG-LO).145 The fragments of the larnax were found scattered throughout the dromos fill and were not found with any objects.146
With a high number of metal grave goods, KNC 75 was among the KNC’s richest tombs.147 It is also one of the few tombs that, according to Cavanagh, had the characteristics of a
BA tomb,148 and it is generally considered the most likely of the KNC tombs to be a BA tomb.149
In addition to unpainted larnax KNC 75.225, the KNC 75 dromos contained fragments of painted larnax 107.214.150 Two other possible BA objects—a piece of obsidian and a fragment of a serpentine stone vase (KNC 75.f65)—were also found in the tomb. Not only did the tomb contain BA objects it also contained objects imitating BA objects. Two domed lids were decorated with octopi (KNC 75.45 and KNC 75.180) (Figure 29) that resemble octopi on LM
151 pottery. Regardless of the tomb’s construction date, its architectural features, the LM IIIA2-B larnax KNC 75.225, and the domed octopi lids suggest that those buried in KNC 75 were forging connections with the BA through their burials.
Larnax KNC 107.214 (Figures 18-27)
Due to its complex and unique iconography, KNC 107.214 is the Knossian antique larnax most often discussed by scholars;152 however, its EIA context is rarely analyzed. Lyvia
145 KNC I, p. 118; Coldstream 2000, p. 277. 146 Coldstream 2000, p. 277. 147 KNC 75 was ranked seventh in Catling’s rankings of wealth based on bronze (Catling 1996a, pp. 548-549), while it received a C rating in Snodgrass’ rankings based on iron (Snodgrass 1996, p. 575). In Antoniadis’ analysis, which ranks wealth based on eight different variables, the tomb is in his third group (Antoniadis 2012, pp. 195-196). 148 Cavanagh 1996, pp. 653-657. 149 Coldstream and Catling 1996, p. 719. 150 Morgan 1987, p. 171; Coldstream 2000, p. 277. 151 For discussions of 8th century octopi lids, see Alexiou 1950; Coldstream 1988, pp. 27-29. The lids may be imitating LM IB marine style specifically. 152 Coldstream 1984; Morgan 1987; Coldstream 1988; Watrous 1991, pp. 291-292. Coldstream 1998. 26
Morgan, who published the larnax, focused on the BA iconography of the piece,153 while
Coldstream has focused on how the imagery of the larnax inspired an EIA artist.154 Although the decoration of the larnax is important for understanding Minoan art and religion and for understanding the relationship built between the BA and the EIA via objects, as a result of the focus on these complex issues, the context and fragmentation of the larnax are often overlooked.
Therefore, I first offer a brief overview of the iconography of the object, and then discuss the less-discussed aspects of the larnax.
Fragments of the lid and the four sides of chest-shaped KNC 107.214 are preserved
(Figure 22). Each of its sides is decorated with scenes rendered in a red-orange to chocolate brown paint.155 The front long side is divided into two panels; both show a skirted female with raised arms who gazes upwards (Figures 18 and 25). A bird is placed above the woman on the right panel, and wavy lines—possibly hair cut off in mourning and attached to the dress of the woman—extend from behind her.156 On the left panel, a flower is placed behind the woman’s head. The legs of the front side and central raised ridge—features which frame the panels—are decorated with intertwined spirals. The back side of the larnax also has two decorated panels: the better preserved of the two (Figures 26 and 27) is decorated with running spirals, while the fragmentary left panel possibly shows spiral shaped leaves emanating from a stem. Connected to the top ridge and projecting over the edge of the larnax are handmade painted protomes, which depict some animal (possibly a bull) (Figure 20).157
One of the short sides of the larnax shows a tree with spiral leaves framed by retorted spirals (Figures 21 and 23), and the other very fragmentary panel shows a human figure (Figures
153 Morgan 1987. 154 Coldstream 1984, 1988, 1998. 155 KNC I, p. 159. 156 Morgan 1987, p. 182. 157 Morgan 1987, p. 174. 27
19 and 24). The figure may have a skirt, and it is possible that a central circular feature is a shield.158 Lines projecting from the figure’s head may be a headdress or stick-like hair. To the right of the figure is a horizontal line, which appears to be a staff. This iconography is enigmatic, and so is its placement, since the short sides of BA larnakes rarely have depictions of humans.159
Morgan interprets the overall iconographic package of the larnax as a ritual procession, possibly funerary, while Vance Watrous has simply seen it as a mourning scene.160 Funerary scenes are rare on Cretan BA larnakes,161 which adds to the uniqueness of the piece. Based on parallels with the Hagia Triada sarcophagus, the piece has been dated stylistically to LM
162 163 IIIA1; however, given the redating of the Hagia Triada sarcophagus to LM IIIA2, KNC
107.214 should be redated to LM IIIA2 as well.
KNC 107 ranks among the wealthiest EIA tombs in the Knossos area and contained a large number of burials.164 The majority of the fragments of KNC 107.214 were found in the largest of the tomb’s six niches, and the only object associated with it was an iron pinhead (KNC
107.f17).165 Although only one object is associated with the larnax, it appears as if PGB straight- sided urn KNC 107.114 (Figure 28) may have been inspired by the imagery on the larnax. One side of the urn depicts a bell-skirted woman standing on a platform with her arms raised and a bird in each of her hands. She is surrounded by curvilinear trees. Coldstream has pointed out that
158 Morgan 1987, p. 177. 159 Morgan 1987, p. 191. 160 Morgan 1987, pp. 198-199; Watrous 1991, pp. 291-292. 161 Morgan 1987, p. 192. 162 Morgan 1987, p. 171. 163 La Rosa 1998. 164 KNC 107 was ranked second in Catling’s rankings of wealth based on bronze (Catling 1996a, p. 548), while it received a C rating in Snodgrass’ rankings based on iron (Snodgrass 1996, p. 575). In Antoniadis’ analysis, the tomb also ranks as one of the area’s wealthiest tombs (Antoniadis 2012, p. 196). For a quantification of the burial urns by period, see Kotsonas 2011, fig. 7. 165 KNC I, p. 150. 28 the depictions of the woman, the bird, and the tress resemble those on larnax KNC 107.214.166
Additionally, the women on the larnax hold their hands raised upwards in a pose similar to that of women in mourning scenes on EIA pots as well as EIA “goddesses with upraised arms” depicted in various LM III-O media.167 According to Coldstream’s stylistic analysis, the larnax must have been deposited in the PGB period and is one of the earliest objects deposited in the tomb. An O jar (KNC 107.24) and several other vessels of the same date were found within this niche, though in a layer over the larnax, which indicates that the latter was redeposited here sometime between the first use of the tomb in the PGB period and the time of the deposition of the O jar.
In addition to the fragments found in KNC 107, fragments of KNC 107.214 were found in the dromoi of neighboring KNC 75 and KNC 294.168 The fragments in KNC 294 belonged to the back long side of the larnax,169 but no information is published about to which part of the larnax the fragments found in the KNC 75 dromos belong. The three tombs are located within a short distance of each other: KNC 75 and KNC 107 are direct neighbors, while KNC 294 is about 50 m to the northeast and separated from KNC 75 by one tomb. No other antique Knossian larnax (despite their largely fragmentary states) had fragments distributed across multiple tombs; indeed, no other vessel in the entire KNC was reported to have had fragments found in two different tombs.170 Therefore, the only ceramic vessel with fragments found in multiple KNC
166 Coldstream 1984, 1988, 1996a, p. 393, 1998. 167 For the goddesses with upraised arms, see Alexiou 1958; Gesell 1985, pp. 41-46; Gesell 2004; Prent 2005, pp. 399-403, 424-440. For an overview of the continuity of this image into the EIA, see Coldstream 1984; Prent 2005, pp. 432-441; Prent 2009. 168 Morgan 1987, p. 171; Coldstream 2000, p. 277; Coldstream and Catling 1996, p. 719. 169 Morgan 1987, p. 171. 170 The only other instance of possible cross-joins noted in KNC I is between fragments of vessels found in tomb KNC 219 and ones found near pyre KNC 310, which was just to the north of the tomb. KNC 310 appears to have been the pyre used for a cremation in KNC 219. It seems that pieces of several vessels were broken off during the cremation and the remaining pieces of the vessels were moved to KNC 219 (KNC I, p. 211). 29 tombs is not only an antique but also arguably the most iconographically complex piece from the entire cemetery.
The larnax appears to have been damaged prior to the deposition of O pithos KNC
107.24, and, therefore, the dispersal of the larnax fragments is unlikely to be the result of
Hellenistic and Roman looting or tomb construction. Both KNC 107 and 294 were in use from the PGB-LO periods; Tomb 75, however, was only in use from the EG-LO periods. Therefore, if the fragmentation of the larnax and the redeposition of the fragments in both tomb 75 and 294 occurred at the same time, the redeposition probably occurred sometime between the EG and the
O period. Coldstream has proposed that KNC 75 was once a BA tomb that held KNC 107.214
(hence the pieces found therein) and several of the other redeposited larnakes. According to his argument, larnax KNC 107.214 was broken inside KNC 75, prior to or during its move to KNC
107.171 This proposal, however, does not explain the fragments found in KNC 294. The three tombs in which the fragments were found also contained fragments of other antique larnakes.
Both KNC 75 and 107 contained fragments of an unpainted larnax, while KNC 294 had fragments of a painted as well as an unpainted larnax. If the fragments of KNC 107.214 are taken into account, each of the tombs contained fragments of both an unpainted and a painted larnax.
KNC 107.214 is an iconographically complex piece with an equally complex life history.
In LM IIIA2, larnax KNC 107.214 probably stood in the chamber of a chamber tomb, was intact
(complete with a lid), and contained a body. Over the course of its EIA reuse, this same object was placed in the niche of a (probably) different chamber tomb, inspired the imagery on a straight-sided urn, and was broken into fragments that were distributed across multiple chamber tombs. This evolution in the function and significance of larnax KNC 107.214—which the
171 Coldstream’s argument relied on Cavanagh’s analysis that showed that KNC 75 had the structural characteristics of a BA tomb (Coldstream 1998, pp. 58-59). 30 production and final depositional contexts, morphology, and iconography of KNC 107.214 has revealed—indicates that the role of the object changed with each of its uses and reflected the differing interests of its audience.
Larnax KNC 107.215
Also found in KNC 107, specifically in one of the northern niches of the tomb’s dromos
172 (niche 1), were fragments of unpainted, chest-shaped LM IIIA2-B larnax KNC 107.215. This niche was the one farthest from the tomb’s chamber as well as the one closest to the modern surface. Presumably as a result of this proximity to the surface, only fragments of the base of the larnax and lower body were preserved.173 No objects or bones were found with the larnax.174
KNC 107 was used from the PGB to the LO period, and this date-range is the only indication for the period to which the larnax was redeposited.
Larnax KNC 132.38
LM IIIA2-B KNC 132.38 is the only tub-shaped antique larnax found in the Knossian
EIA tombs.175 Fragments of a base and a rim were uncovered, and it seems that these two groups of fragments represent two different larnakes.176 The base fragments were unpainted and of gritty orange clay, while the rim fragments were painted dark red and made of gritty grey clay.177
Although the two may belong to different larnakes, their curvature suggests that both belong to tub-shaped larnakes.
172 KNC I, pp. 149, 159; Coldstream 2000, p. 278. 173 KNC I, p. 159. 174 KNC I, p. 149. 175 Coldstream 1996a, p. 392. 176 Coldstream (2000, p. 278) implies that the two sections belong to the same larnax, while KNC I (p. 173) states that they belong to two different larnakes. The two publications also differ in their description of the larnax fragments’ context. 177 KNC I, p. 173. 31
Several larnax fragments were found in the tomb’s dromos, but the majority was found in the dromos’ niche, where they appeared to be in situ.178 The excavators suggest that several unburnt bones found in the dromos fill may have come from the larnax burial, but no osteological material was directly associated with the fragments.179 In the dromos niche, fragments of a LG-EO pithos (KNC 132.1) were found next to the larnax;180 however, the association of the two containers is tentative and the larnax redeposition is dated to the MG-LO period based on all the pottery found in the tomb.
KNC 132 is one of the few EIA tombs that contained multiple BA antiques. In addition to
(but not associated with) larnax KNC 132.38, MM I straight-sided pithos 132.9 was deposited within the tomb.181 This pithos is the oldest antique found in an EIA Knossian tomb and would have been 1,100-1,400 years old at the time of its MG-LO deposition. During its MG-LO reuse, it was probably used as a cremation urn.
KNC North Sector
Larnax KNC 292.239 (Figure 15)
Painted chest-shaped larnax KNC 292.239 was found against the KNC 292.239 dromos wall next to one of the tomb’s niches (niche 4).182 The larnax was constructed of orange-brown clay with a buff slip. Body, rim, and base fragments were preserved.183 Holes in the upper corner of the larnax, which may have been used in the BA for stringing rope that attached the lid to the
178 KNC I, p. 171. Coldstream (2000, p. 278) mistakenly (?) states that the fragments were found in a robber’s pit in the chamber. 179 KNC I, p. 171. 180 KNC I, p. 171. 181 KNC I, p. 172. 182 KNC I, p. 259. Coldstream (2000, p. 278) mistakenly (?) states that this larnax was unpainted. 183 KNC I, p. 270. 32 body,184 suggest that, at least in the BA, the larnax was covered by a lid. The base of the larnax also had several holes.
Red-brown paint was used for the decoration of the larnax.185 Along its squared lip, a wavy line was framed by two parallel bands. The top half of one long side was divided into three zones; the first zone contained spiral volutes (possibly trees), the second contained a spiral with a solid background, and the third had a floral motif. On the other long side, the bottom was decorated with a tricurved arch and a cuttlefish, while another body fragment from this same side was decorated with a tentacle.186 Both a cuttlefish and a tentacled animal also appear on larnax
KNC 294.63, which was produced in the EIA (PGB-EO) and was found in a tomb only about 20
187 m from KNC 292. Based on its decoration, KNC 292.239 is dated to LM IIIA2.
When uncovered, larnax KNC 292.239 was partially blocking niche 4 and it is possible that it was used as a decorative covering for the niche, given that painted larnax KNC Q.116 may also have been used as a blocking wall. Although the larnax was found without associated objects and therefore cannot be dated on the basis of associated pottery, the niche which it blocked (niche 4) contained a MO cup (KNC 292.14), and, thus, it appears that this blocking was done sometime in the O period.
In KNC 292, two other potential BA objects were discovered—fragments of a Minoan stone vase (KNC 292.f1a) and a piece of obsidian. Additionally, objects that appear to have been inspired by Minoan objects were discovered in the tomb. LG/EO kalathoi KNC 292.168 and
KNC 292.189 were decorated with octopi that seem to be imitating the octopi that adorn
184 Watrous 1991, p. 289. 185 KNC I, p. 270. 186 KNC I, p. 270. 187 KNC I, p. 270; Coldstream 1996a, p. 393. 33
Neopalatial marine style (LM IB) pots.188 Another piece possibly inspired by Minoan art is a
PGB straight-sided jar (KNC 292.144); it is decorated with birds sitting on a curvilinear tree that resemble figures on LM IIIC pottery.189
Larnax KNC 294.63 (Figure 13)
KNC 294.63 is one of two chest-shaped larnakes deposited in KNC 294. In contrast to its undecorated counterpart (KNC 294.6), KNC 294.63 is painted with brown paint and, based on its
190 decoration, can be dated to LM IIIA2. The fragments of KNC 294.63 uncovered in the tomb include pieces of the projecting lip of the larnax and its raised ridge, its walls, two feet, and its gabled lid.191 Unusually, the fabric of the larnax is purple in color.192 The panels of the long side of the larnax are decorated with linked papyri and framed by parallel bands in between which are a line of small open circles, while the short side is decorated with cuttlefish and a tentacled animal.193 A solid wave runs down the edge of each larnax side.
The larnax was found in a side niche off of the tomb’s dromos, and its redeposition seems to date to the MG-LG periods.194 Five MG-LG juglets (KNC 294.16-20) were placed in between the feet of the larnax, suggesting both that the larnax was deposited during this period and that a burial practice similar to that used in the case of painted larnax KNC Q.116 (where small pots were also placed underneath a larnax; see below) was used here.
Larnax KNC 294.6
188 For 8th century octopi lids, see n. 151. 189 Coldstream 1988, p. 26. The vessels straight-sided shape may have been intended to imitate BA shapes. 190 KNC I, p. 278; Coldstream 2000, p. 278. 191 KNC I, p. 278. 192 KNC I, p. 278. 193 KNC I, p. 278; Coldstream 1996a, p. 393; Coldstream 2000, p. 278. There is no image of the short panel’s decoration. 194 A clay bead (294.f16), a LG feeder, a LO small lekane, and a gaming piece (294.f17) were also found in the side chamber. KNC I, p. 275; Coldstream 2000, p. 278. 34
The later of the two redeposited BA larnakes found in KNC 294, KNC 294.6 is also the simpler of the two. It is an unpainted, chest-shaped LM IIIA2-B larnax, and body pieces from three sides and a vertical handle were found.195 Unlike the majority of the Knossian BA larnakes found in EIA contexts, KNC 294.6 is made of coarse brown clay with black grits.196 The redeposition of KNC 294.6 seems to date to the EO period.197
The larnax fragments were found in the tomb’s southern niche—one of three side chambers emanating off the dromos of the chamber tomb. Although the long side closest to the dromos was not preserved, fragments of an O coarse pithos (KNC 294.5), which appears to have contained an interment, were found within the larnax.198 Several small vessels, a bronze object
(KNC 294.f1), a clay bar (KNC 294.f4), and a bronze earring (KNC 294.f5) were found in the O pithos burial.199 To the east of the larnax were two EO cups (KNC 294.3-4).200 No bones were found in the larnax, but the placement of the O pithos within the larnax may suggest that the larnax was a container for a cremation container.
KNC Teke Tombs and the Khaniale Teke Tombs
One larnax was found during the excavation of the KNC Teke tombs (KNC Q.116) and fragments of another larnax were reported from the excavation of Khaniale Teke tomb 3.
Larnax KNC Q.116 (Figure 17)
201 Larnax KNC Q.116—produced in LM IIIA2 and redeposited in the PGB period—has the earliest redepositional date of any of the securely dated BA larnakes found in EIA Knossian
195 KNC I, p. 276; Coldstream 2000, p. 278. 196 KNC I, p. 276. 197 KNC I, pp. 275-276. 198 KNC I, p. 275. 199 These small vessels were a cup (KNC 294.1), a jug (KNC 294.2), and an aryballos (KNC 294.8). 200 KNC I, p. 275. 201 Coldstream 1996a, p. 393. Coldstream dates this piece based on parallels with a larnax found in Upper Gypsades Tomb XII. 35 tombs.202 Similar to the other antique larnakes, KNC Q.116 is chest-shaped and made of coarse orange clay coated in a buff slip.203 The larnax is well-preserved: the majority of both long sides, fragments of the short sides, three feet, and fragments of a gabled lid were recovered.204 Both of the long sides of the larnax have recessed panels and two vertically placed strap handles. Most of the object, including its base, was found in a niche off the dromos of tomb Q; however, two large decorated fragments of one of its long sides had been broken off and reused as a blocking wall for the tomb’s stomion.
The four sides of KNC Q.116 are decorated with brown or black paint.205 Both long sides show spiral plants, probably papyrus plants.206 One long side has circles with crosses in the area between the plants, while the other side lacks these circles but includes an ivy leaf in the top left corner. Depictions of rocks, which proceed along all four sides, frame the scenes on both long sides, and spirals run down the legs. The short sides and the lid are decorated with similar motifs; the top of the lid is decorated with papyrus plants, while its rim is decorated with simple bars.
Although no definitive osteological material could be associated with the larnax,207 forty
PGB pots were found underneath it. The ceramics are a mix of drinking pieces and oil containers,208 and many are small.209 In addition to the objects underneath the larnax, a figurine and several pots were placed to side of the larnax. KNC Q.116 is furthermore one of the only antique larnakes that was found with non-ceramic goods. These objects included iron fragments,
202 Coldstream 2000, p. 276. 203 KNC I, p. 51. 204 KNC I, p. 51. 205 KNC I, p. 51. 206 KNC I, p. 51. 207 Burnt bones were found within the niche’s fill, and, since the larnax is the only potential urn in this side chamber, the burnt bones may indicate the larnax housed a cremation. 208 Shapes include the hydria, pyxis, cup, kalathos-lid, aryballos, lekythos, oinochoe, and a jug-aryballos. 209 The small vessels include miniature oinochoai KNC Q.21, 23, 26; miniature jug-aryballoi KNC Q.46-48; miniature cups KNC Q.17, 41; strainer KNC Q.49. 36 pin fragments, a glass bead, and a shallow pan.210 Notable among the assemblage are askos KNC
Q.115, bull figurine KNC Q.f25, and conical cup KNC Q.45. Shaped like a hybrid of a horse and a bird (KNC Q.115), the askos is not an antique, but is considered Minoan in style, as is bull figurine KNC Q.f25. While this hybrid creature has no predecessor in Minoan art, its wings resemble a LM IIIA bird vase from Nirou Chani in both style and production technique.211 The bull figurine, on the other hand, is described as having an “almost Minoan appearance,”212 an observation which could easily be dismissed if it were not for the possibly Minoan inspired askos, the BA larnax, and another BA object found underneath the larnax—a conical cup.213 The pairing of the conical cup with the larnax is one of the few instances in which two antiques were directly associated with each other in a Knossian EIA burial. Such a plethora of Minoan and
Minoan-looking objects suggests that the assemblage was intended to create a connection to the
BA past.
Larnax from Khaniale Teke Tomb 3
Fragments of a larnax (or possibly of larnakes) were reportedly found in the dromos of
Khaniale Teke tomb 3, a chamber tomb located north of the Teke tholos.214 According to the excavators, the fragments were found high up in the dromos fill (within 0.25 m of the modern surface).215 Although details about the shape, clay, and decoration of the fragments are not recorded, based on the production dates of Knossian larnakes216 the fragments probably date to
210 KNC I, p. 46. 211 Kanta 1980, p. 44, pl. 11; Coldstream 1988, p. 25. This potentially Minoan-inspired piece may in turn have inspired the image of a hybrid creature on oinochoe KNC Q.23, an object also found underneath the larnax (Coldstream 1976a, p. 68, pl. 11b). 212 Higgins 1996b, p. 611. 213 KNC I, pp.46, 48; Coldstream 2000, p. 276. 214 Boardman 1967, p. 70. 215 Boardman 1967, p. 70. 216 For the down-dating of all Knossian larnakes to LM IIIA2-B, see Hatzaki 2005, pp. 87-89. 37
LM IIIA2-B. The tomb itself was highly disturbed and primarily contained sherds of PGB-O ceramics.217
Fortetsa
Two Fortetsa tombs contained BA larnakes: tomb I (the name for the dromos of tomb P) and tomb VII. The two tombs are located on opposite sides of the Fortetsa plot (Figure 9).
Larnax from Fortetsa Tomb I/P
One LM IIIA2-B chest-shaped larnax was found to the south of and parallel to the dromos of Fortetsa tomb P. Its find context suggests that it was placed in one of the dromos’ niches, and the niche has since eroded.218 No mention is made of the state of preservation of the larnax; however, James Brock referred to it as if it was entirely or mostly preserved in his publication of the Fortetsa cemetery.219 Three MG vessels (feeding jug, oinochoe, and aryballos) were found near to the larnax,220 dating the redeposition of the larnax to the MG period.
As will be discussed in chapter 4, tomb I/P was one of the richest tombs in the Knossos area and contained a large number of burials.221 In addition to this larnax, four BA seals seem to have been deposited in the tomb’s dromos.222 This is the only instance in which these kinds of antiques were uncovered in the same Knossian EIA tomb.
Larnax from Fortetsa Tomb VII
The larnax found in chamber tomb Fortetsa tomb VII appears to be one of the only entirely preserved larnakes found in the EIA Knossian cemeteries (Figure 14).223 It is chest-
217 Several metal objects and an amber bead were also found in the tomb (Boardman 1967, pp. 74-75). 218 Brock 1957, p. 5; Coldstream 2000, p. 271. 219 Brock always refers to the object as a “larnax” rather than fragments of a larnax, and, on several occasions, compares it to the intact Fortetsa tomb VII larnax (Brock 1957, pp. 4-5, 98). 220 Brock 1957, p. 99, nos. 1134-1136; Coldstream 2000, p. 271, n. 1. 221 Kotsonas 2011; Antoniadis 2012, pp. 195-196. 222 Brock 1957, nos. 1168-1171. For a discussion of the seal’s find contexts, see chapter 3. 223 As stated above, it is unclear if the Fortetsa I/P larnax is entirely preserved. It is the only other antique larnax, besides the Fortetsa tomb VII larnax, which may have been found entirely preserved. 38 shaped, unpainted, and dates to LM IIIA2-B. The larnax had two vertical handles on one of its long sides and probably had another two on the other long side. Similar to the Fortetsa tomb I/P larnax, the Fortetsa tomb VII larnax seems to have been placed in a niche of the tomb’s dromos.224 Two small MG cups and a MG pyxis were found beside the larnax on top of a stone packing.225
IV. CONCLUSIONS
Morphology
While the above discussions of individual antique larnakes emphasizes their unique contexts and life cycles, the following assemblage-based analysis highlights broad patterns in the
EIA acquisition and reuse of BA larnakes in the Knossos area. With the exception of two larnakes found in KNC 294, the containers were made of coarse orange fabric.226 The vast majority of larnakes were fragments of chest-shaped larnakes; only one, possibly two, sets of fragments belonged to tub-shaped larnakes, and both sets were found within the same tomb
(KNC 132). This dominance of chest-shaped larnakes and coarse orange fabric mirrors the evidence for BA larnakes found in BA Knossian tombs, most of which were chest-shaped and had an orange fabric.227
While the material, shape, and production dates of the Knossian antique larnakes are largely consistent, their decoration is more diverse: six larnakes were painted and fourteen larnakes were unpainted. Six painted larnakes out of twenty-two total larnakes is a large
224 Brock 1957, pp. 4-5, 72; Coldstream 2000, p. 271. 225 Brock 1957, p. 73. 226 In addition to the larnakes, four other antiques made of ceramic were found in Knossian EIA tombs: conical cup KNC Q. 45(see above), straight-sided pithos KNC 132.9 (see above), LM II oval-mouthed amphora KNC G.37, and Khaniale Teke tomb 3 no. 14. The fabric of straight-sided pithos KNC 132.9 was also coarse orange, while that of the conical cup was brick red. No information is published about the fabrics of the other objects. 227 Hood et al. 1958-59, p. 227; Preston 2004b, p. 189, fig. 7. 39 proportion, particularly considering that only a total of ten painted larnakes were found in the BA cemeteries of Mavro Spelio, Upper Gypsades, and Zapher Papoura. Of the painted antique pieces, one simply had red paint, one had a figural scene, and four were decorated with abstract motifs. Marine creatures, such as cuttlefish and tentacled animals, act as framing devices on two of the larnakes (KNC 292.239 and KNC 294.63). The abstract designs were primarily spirals and spiral plants (possibly papyri). Papyri and spirals are also the primary designs on BA larnakes found in Knossian BA tombs;228 thus, the prominence of these motifs on antique larnakes is probably due to their prominence on most of the BA Knossian larnakes. While the majority of the motifs on the Knossian antique larnakes were fairly common in the BA, the figured scenes on
KNC 107.214 would have been unique. Few BA larnakes have human figures,229 and, thus, KNC
107.214 with its multiple figures would have been unique not just in the EIA but also in the
LBA.
As Coldstream has pointed out, images and motifs on several of the antique larnakes appear to have been adopted and adapted by EIA potters.230 Based on the similarities between the women depicted on larnax KNC 107.214 and a bell-skirted figure on PGB straight-sided pithos
KNC 107.114, as well as on the similarity in the trees and birds on both vessels, it has been argued that the artist who painted straight-sided pithos KNC 107.114 was drawing from motifs on larnax KNC 107.214.231 The imagery on these two vessels is the most well-known instance of interplay between larnakes and EIA pottery, but there may be other examples. The spiral-leaved trees on PGB straight-sided pithos KNC 292.144 resemble a spiral plant on larnax KNC 292.239,
228 Out of the 10 painted larnakes found in the major Knossian LBA cemeteries, four were decorated with spirals or papyri plants. These larnakes were found in Zapher Papoura tomb 100 (Evans 1905, pp. 90-92), Upper Gypsades tombs VI and XIII (Hood et al. 1958-59, pp. 227, 231-232), and Mavro Spelio tomb V (Forsdyke 1926-27, p. 257). 229 Watrous 1991, pp. 290-294. 230 Coldstream 1984, 1988. 231 Coldstream 1984. 40 and cuttlefish appear both on BA larnakes KNC 292.239 and KNC 294.63, as well as on PGB straight-sided pithos KNC 107.114 and PGB-LG miniature larnax KNC 104.118. Unfortunately, because of depositional and post-depositional disturbances in the Knossian collective tombs, it cannot be established whether the larnakes were deposited in the tombs prior to the deposition of the EIA pottery with motifs inspired by the larnakes.
Production and Redepositional Dates
While larnakes were produced in most periods of the BA, the Knossian antique larnakes thus far discovered date to the Final Palatial and Postpalatial periods. Few larnakes dating to the
Prepalatial-Protopalatial periods have been found in Knossian EBA-MBA graves, whereas LM
IIIA2-B larnakes are prolific in local LBA chamber tombs. Therefore, the similarity in the production dates of BA larnakes in EIA Knossian tombs is probably due to the similarity in production date of the BA larnakes deposited in BA Knossian tombs, rather than to an EIA preference for a particular style.
Based on the larnakes redepositional dates, it appears that BA burial containers were primarily reused in the 8th century. Larnax fragments (KNC 98.19) were found in one problematic SMin-EPG context, but the other antique burial containers were found in contexts with dates placed securely during or after the PGB period. During the PGB period, several major changes occurred in the KNC: new tombs were inaugurated while many others stopped being used, cremation became the primary burial rite, and the number of burials increased (perhaps suggesting a rise in population).232 It is during this period as well that many EIA burial urns were decorated with patterns that incorporated Minoan decorative styles.233 The redeposition of
232 Coldstream and Catling 1996, p. 718; Coldstream 1998, p. 58. 233 Coldstream 1994, 1998; Whitley 2004, p. 433, n. 3; Coldstream 2008, p. 234. Due to the appearance of larnakes at this time as well as the Minoan inspiration clear on many PGB decorated pots, the PGB period is thought to be one of “Minoan revival.” 41 larnakes, therefore, seems to have begun during a period of great change in the cemetery and a period in which the use of objects from the past—or the use of objects that drew upon past styles and images—became popular. While the practice may have begun during the PGB period, it continued for at least another 150 years and seems to have peaked during the Geometric period.
Thirteen of the larnakes were deposited after the MG period and another seven may have been as well. Indeed, with the exception of PGB KNC Q.116, all of the antique larnakes that can be dated based on their associated ceramics (rather than on the assemblage of ceramics found within the tomb in which they were deposited) date to the MG-EO period.
Spatial Aspects of Reuse
The majority of antique larnakes were found in chamber tombs, specifically within the niches or fills of the dromoi of chamber tombs. In tombs that contained both larnakes and niches, the larnakes were almost universally found within the niche.234 Three larnakes were found in the chamber of a tomb: KNC 98.19, KNC 106.42, and KNC 60.3. All three were deposited in tombs in the KNC southwest sector, and two of the three (KNC 98.19 and KNC 106.42) have problematic contexts.
Although the majority of larnakes were found in chamber tombs, four were found in individual larnax burials— KNC 31.11, KNC 85.1, KNC 103.2, and KNC 113.1. With the exception of KNC 113.1, which may have been moved from its EIA redepositional context, these larnakes appear to have been placed within pits. The four individual larnax burials all dated to the MG-LO periods, and all were placed in the southeastern area of the KNC.235 Most single interment larnakes were undecorated; only one, KNC 85.1, was painted. Unfortunately, none contained bones, but most were associated with a few ceramics.
234 KNC 75 and KNC 292 are the only exceptions, and, in KNC 292, the larnax was blocking the dromos niche. 235 Three were found in the KNC southeast sector, and one of the burials was found in the southeastern corner of the KNC southwestern sector, which directly abuts the KNC southeast sector. 42
At Knossos, chest-shaped LM IIIA2-B larnakes have been found exclusively in mortuary contexts;236 therefore, the Knossian antique larnakes were very probably acquired from the area’s
LBA tombs.237 Coldstream has argued that several of the KNC chamber tombs were constructed in the BA and were the source of the antique larnakes.238 His argument relied heavily on
Cavanagh’s structural analysis of the KNC tombs.239 Although Cavanagh identified only two of the tombs that contained antique larnakes as possible BA tombs (KNC 75 and KNC 106),240
Coldstream was led based on that conclusion to argue that the antique larnakes were found near to Cavanagh’s potential BA tombs (Figures 30 and 31), and, thus, the larnakes may have been moved from these nearby BA tombs into the tombs in which they were ultimately discovered.241
While this hypothesis is conceivable, it requires accepting that some of the KNC tombs were constructed and used during the BA, a proposition which is doubted by Cavanagh, and is much debated and beyond the scope of this thesis.242
While Coldstream’s supposition could explain how some of the antique larnakes were acquired, it is possible that some of the antique larnakes were taken from other nearby cemeteries. Hints of larnax robbery have been found in several of the area’s LBA tombs. In
Zapher Papoura tomb 8, a BA chamber tomb, four unpainted larnakes were stacked on top of each other in two rows of two (Figure 16). The top row was stacked crosswise, a feat that could
236 Evans 1905; Forsdyke 1926-27; Hood et al. 1958-59. While no chest-shaped larnakes have been found in settlement contexts, fragments of a decorated bathtub larnax were found at the Royal Villa (Morris 1995). 237 More specifically, they probably came from chamber tombs. Only one BA Knossian larnax, a larnax found in Zapher Papoura tomb 34 (Evans 1905, p. 50), was found in a BA tomb type other than a chamber tomb. 238 Coldstream 1996b, 1998, 2000. 239 Cavanagh 1996. 240 In both articles, Coldstream states that KNC 75 was the only potential BA tomb that contained a larnax (2000, p. 272; 1998, p. 59); however, KNC 106 was classified as a potential BA tomb by Cavanagh (1996, pp. 654-656) and contained larnax fragments. 241 Coldstream 1998, 2000. 242 For discussions and debates of this problem, see Brock 1957, pp. 4-5; Boardman 1960, p. 143; Catling 1995, pp. 123-124; Cavanagh 1996, pp. 653-657; Coldstream and Catling 1996, p. 719. 43 only have been accomplished had a third larnax been included in the bottom row.243 The missing larnax of the bottom row, possibly one of the antique larnakes found in the EIA tombs, was seemingly robbed from the tomb.244 In Mavro Spelio tomb V, fragments of eleven larnax lids were uncovered together with fewer larnax bodies, which may indicate that some of these larnakes were reused in EIA tombs.245 Although both the Zapher Papoura and Mavro Spelio cemeteries are near to the KNC, moving the larnakes from these locations to the KNC would have required a considerable effort and investment. This high investment in acquisition contrasts with the process required for the majority of the other antiques found in Knossian EIA tombs, most of which were very small and highly portable.
To summarize: The EIA tombs containing BA larnax fragments were not clustered within one particular EIA cemetery; they were located in the Fortetsa cemetery, the Khaniale Teke cemetery, and all five sectors of the KNC. While larnakes were not clustered within particular cemeteries or sectors, they were often found in clusters within each of these sectors (Figure 31).
Four larnakes (KNC 31.11, KNC 85.1, KNC 103.2, and KNC 134.77) were uncovered in the northeast area of the KNC southeast sector, three in the southeast corner of the KNC southwest sector (KNC 98.19, KNC 106.42, and KNC 113.1), and five in the KNC west sector (KNC
75.225, KNC 107.214, KNC 107.215, and KNC 132.38a/b). Although the larnax fragments were found in areas near to each other (with the exception of KNC 107.214), the excavators did not note any joins between fragments found in different tombs, and, furthermore, the fragments within clusters were not all redeposited in the same period.
243 Evans 1905, p. 27, fig. 24. 244 A Roman pot uncovered here could indicate that the robbing was done during the Roman period, but no instances of larnax use in a Roman burial have been found in the Knossos area. 245 Forsdyke 1926-27, p. 257. Only two of the KNC antique larnakes were found with fragments of lids (KNC 107.214 and KNC 294.63). 44
Coldstream interpreted this clustering as an indication that the larnakes had ultimately derived from nearby tombs originally constructed in the BA,246 but there are distinct patterns in the clustering that may suggest otherwise. The majority of painted larnakes were found in the western half (west and north sector) of the KNC. Out of the four painted larnakes found in the western half of the cemetery (KNC 107.214, KNC 132.38, KNC 292.239, and KNC 294.63), two were found in tombs that ranked among the top three richest tombs in the Knossos area based on bronzes (KNC 107.214 and KNC 292.239), and another was found in a tomb that ranked in the top twenty (KNC 294.63).247 In an analysis of the tombs where eight different variables, including imports and metals, were taken into account, three of the KNC western tombs with painted larnakes (KNC 75, KNC 107, and KNC 292) were ranked among the Knossos area’s richest.248
In addition to a wealth of burial goods, the tombs with painted larnakes that were located in the western half of the KNC had a large number of BA objects—including straight-sided urn
KNC 132.9, unpainted larnakes, and obsidian249—and a large number of objects that resembled
BA objects. Multiple larnakes, including painted and unpainted ones, were often found together in BA tombs; however, in the EIA Knossian tombs, the redeposition of two larnakes in the same tomb was highly unusual. Indeed, it only occurs in four EIA Knossian tombs, and three of them were tombs in the western half of the cemetery.250 These three tombs each contained fragments of one painted and one unpainted larnax. While the relationship between the two larnakes in these tombs is unclear, in the only tomb with a painted and unpainted larnax where both the larnakes could be given secure dates (KNC 294), the unpainted larnax was redeposited in the
246 Coldstream 1998. 247 Catling 1996a, pp. 548-549. 248 Antoniadis 2012, pp. 195-196. 249 The KNC west sector tombs frequently contained obsidian. This pattern will be explored further in chapter 5. 250 The other tomb in which multiple larnakes were deposited, KNC 98, is a highly problematic context. 45 tomb 10-80 years after the painted larnax. Based on the correlation between wealth, BA objects, and objects imitating BA objects, the clustering of larnakes, specifically painted ones, in the western half of the KNC appears to be due to the interest of these wealthy inhabitants in curating a connection with the past.251
KNC Q.116 and KNC 85.1, the two painted larnakes that were found in a Knossian EIA tomb outside the western half of the KNC, were found in the KNC Teke plot and the KNC southeast sector respectively. KNC Q was not analyzed by Catling or Anthony Snodgrass in their analyses of the wealth of the KNC tombs (based on bronze and iron respectively), and KNC 85 was a single larnax burial, and therefore would not rank highly in richness. While the two could not be evaluated for their wealth, one of the larnakes, KNC Q.116, was found with another antique (conical cup KNC Q.45) as well as several objects possibly imitating BA objects, just like the painted larnakes in the KNC western sector. Similar to KNC Q and the tombs in the western area of the KNC, Fortetsa I/P also yielded a concentration of antiques. Fortetsa I/P was one of the wealthiest tombs in the Knossos area (and one with the largest number of burials) and contained four seals in addition to a plain larnax.252 This plethora of antiques in a wealthy tomb again suggests an interest by an elite family in investing in BA objects.
Function
The larnax fragments were rarely found near to osteological material;253 grave goods, though, were found within, beside, and underneath larnakes. These goods were primarily
251 Coldstream (1998, pp. 59-60) has previously noted the connection between these rich tombs and an interest in forging a connection to the BA. 252 Kotsonas 2011; Antoniadis 2012, pp. 195-196. See chapter 3 for a discussion of the seals. 253 Osteological material was only found in one larnax. According to Brock (1957, p. 73), small teeth were found within the larnax in Fortetsa tomb VII. 46 ceramics, and, as Coldstream has highlighted, usually undersized.254 The vessels were primarily pouring and drinking vessels or oil containers—the broad categories into which the majority of ceramic grave offerings in the KNC tombs fall;255 in contrast to the KNC-wide pattern, in the larnax assemblages, the pouring vessels were much more dominant. In a typical KNC burial assemblage, one pouring vessel was found with one or two cups,256 but, in the larnax assemblages, pouring vessels sometimes outnumbered the drinking ones. This pattern, together with the large number of small vessels, may suggest that the ceramics were deposited to accompany the deceased rather than as part of a mortuary ritual involving drinking.
While there are many clear patterns in how the larnakes were clustered, a central problem remains how they were used during the EIA. Even when most of the larnax is preserved, bones are virtually never found within the larnakes and objects rarely are. Additionally problematic is that many of the larnakes contained holes in the bottom—a factor which would have caused problems for holding cremations. Based on the small pots typically associated with the larnakes as well as the placement of the larnakes outside of the chamber (which could indicate those buried in the larnax were not fully fledged members of society), Coldstream has suggested that the burials belonged to children.257 While this is possible, particularly given the dearth of child burials in the cemetery,258 no osteological material has been found to confirm this supposition and identifying the age or gender of the deceased based purely on objects is highly problematic.
Considering the surprising lack of bones found with the larnakes (in contrast to the plethora of
254 Coldstream 1998, 2000. Out of the 9 larnakes in the KNC with which grave goods could be associated, seven contained small pots. KNC 85.1, which was found within a pithos, and KNC 107.214, near to which a pin was found, were the only two larnakes found with burial goods other than undersized pots. 255 Cavanagh 1996, pp. 668-672. 256 Cavanagh 1996, p. 672. 257 Coldstream 2000, pp. 274-276. 258 Musgrave 1996, p. 680. 47 osteological material preserved in larnakes discovered in BA tombs),259 it is even questionable whether they were used as burial containers in the EIA.
While the morphology of the Knossian BA larnakes in EIA tombs was largely the same, their decoration, redepositional placement, and uses were remarkably diverse: the burial containers were painted and unpainted, were deposited in the niches of chamber tombs and in individual simple pits, and inspired EIA pottery as well as served to connect the deceased to the
BA. In contrast to the other BA objects found in Knossian EIA tombs, the larnakes were large and would have been particularly visible markers of a connection between the deceased and the
BA, both during the initial placement of the larnax in the tomb and during subsequent reopenings of the tomb. The more elaborate larnakes were often associated with other BA objects or objects inspired by BA objects, which further highlighted the deceased’s connection to the past. For these wealthy deceased as well as those buried in the simpler unpainted, single larnax burials— both of whom were placed in the newly established PGB-O tombs— the BA past may have served as a means of legitimization. While some elite groups invested in particular types of craft goods or controlled the supply of raw materials,260 these elites appear to have invested in curating a connection with the past through the reuse of larnakes. Notably, no antique larnakes have been found in EIA tombs outside of Knossos.261 Therefore, the reuse of larnakes seems to be a practice unique to a group of Knossian elites, who turned from emphasizing present connections towards emphasizing a connection with a distant BA past.
259 For evidence of osteological material in larnakes in Knossian BA tombs, see Evans 1905. Unfortunately, studies of osteological material from larnakes have been limited (Preston 2004b, p. 193). 260 Whitley 2004; Kotsonas 2006. 261 EIA pottery was placed within and beside larnakes in tombs at Liliana (Gerola and Pigorini 1902, p. 318; Pendlebury 1963, p. 325) and Mavro Spelio (Forsdyke 1926-27, pp. 275-276; Wallace 2003, p. 270, n. 77), but no examples of larnakes being moved from one tomb to another seem to have been found outside of Knossos (Coldstream 1996b, p. 240; Coldstream 1998, p. 58). 48
Chapter 3
BA SEALS IN EIA KNOSSIAN TOMBS
As a result of their durability—but also because of their portability, vibrant colors, and complex yet miniscule designs—Minoan seals were widely reused and reinterpreted in antiquity.
As John Boardman pointed out in his monumental study of seals, seals “may call to mind activities as different as magic or book-keeping, forgery or haute couture.” 262 This variability is evident even in a time and place as narrowly defined as EIA Knossos. Through a detailed analysis of the object biographies of BA seals in EIA Knossian tombs, I will explore how antique seals were used in EIA mortuary contexts and how this use differed both from that of other antiques and from that of BA seals in the BA.
In order to accomplish these objectives, a background synopsis of BA and EIA Cretan seals will be given. This overview demonstrates how certain designs and materials popular in the
BA were not common among antique seals in use during the EIA. The production dates of these antiques, however, reflect the date at which most Cretan BA seals were produced. I will also show that antique seals functioned in the same way as many of the seals deposited in BA tombs but without BA bureaucratic associations. The time span discussed covers the Protopalatial through Final Palatial periods—the eras in which the BA seals deposited in EIA contexts at
Knossos were produced—while the EIA summary will cover the Cretan EG-LO periods. The
Geometric period marked the first time since LM IIIB (the period during which BA seal production ceased)263 that stone seals were carved;264 however, it was also a time in which
262 Boardman 2001, p. 13. The galopetras—seals with white veins believed to protect the milk of a nursing mother and worn by Cretan women in the 19th century—are a particularly good example of a case where seals were believed to have magical properties (Boardman 2001, p. 19; Brown 1993, p. 47). 263 Seal production may have stopped at the end of LM IIIA2. Seals made of hard stones certainly had stopped being produced by the end of LM IIIA2, and those made of soft stones possibly had as well. Krzyszkowska 2005a, pp. 228-229. 49
Knossians reused BA seals within their burials. A summary of EG-LO seal production and development enables a comparison of the functions and meanings of LBA and EIA seals in
Knossian EIA contexts and elucidates the extent to which the discovery and reuse of BA seals affected the designs, motifs, and production techniques of seals produced in the EIA.
I. PROTOPALATIAL-POSTPALATIAL CRETAN SEALS
Seal Functions and Ownership
Seals were used for two primary purposes throughout the BA: 1.) administration— including labeling, fastening, and authorizing and 2.) adornment.265 In the Protopalatial period, the first era in which there is clear evidence for their administrative function, seals were used to secure goods or doors, to label objects, and to stamp noduli and roundels— sealed clay objects which acted as tokens and receipts respectively.266 Seals continued to serve these same general functions in the Neopalatial and Final Palatial periods up until LM IIIB.267 The destruction of the
268 Knossos palace, dated to LM IIIA2 or LM IIIB early, brought an end to administrative seal use at the site, while their administrative function continued elsewhere in Crete until LM IIIB.269
Most seals are pierced, and, thus, could have been strung as jewelry. Seal findspots, morphologies, and depictions on various media—particularly frescoes—indicate that these objects were worn as bracelets, necklaces, and anklets. Within tombs, necklaces and bracelets which incorporate seals have been uncovered, while seals found near skeletons’ necks, ankles, and wrists suggest that the objects were once suspended on chains composed of a now
264 Boardman 1963, p. 110. 265 Krzyszkowska 2005a, pp. 21-23. 266 Krzyszkowska 2005a, pp. 98-103. 267 Krzyszkowska 2005a, pp. 154-155, 216-217. 268 For debates on dating the palace’s destruction, see Palmer and Boardman 1963; Popham 1970; Niemeier 1983; Popham 1994, p. 102; Hatzaki 2004. 269 Krzyszkowska 2005a, pp. 230-231. 50 deteriorated material.270 Depictions on frescoes and terracotta statues, furthermore, show men and women wearing seals. Most well-known is the Cupbearer Fresco from the Knossos
Procession Fresco, where a male wears a bracelet with a lentoid seal on his left wrist.271
Aside from these two primary functions, Minoan seals were also dedicated at sanctuaries, placed outside tombs (potentially as charms), and collected in boxes or cups to be buried with the deceased or hoarded by the living; however, these uses were rare in the BA.272 Votive seals have been found at the Dictaean Cave, Idaean Cave, and Minoan peak sanctuaries.273
In contrast to seal function, which remained relatively steady throughout the BA, seal ownership fluctuated. A large section of the population seems to have possessed seals during the
Protopalatial period,274 but ownership reached its peak in the Neopalatial period.275 Thereafter, a serious decline appears to have occurred, beginning in the Final Palatial period276 and continuing into the Postpalatial period.277
Seal Contexts at Knossos
270 Younger 1977, pp. 146-147. 271 PM II.2, pp. 704-705, fig. 441; Cameron 1975, p. 675. No motif is shown on the seal, but the banding of the agate is visible. Other less discussed examples from Knossos include a miniature fresco with marching warriors (PM III, p. 82, fig. 45; Cameron 1967, p. 67, fig. 7B; Younger 1977, p. 148), the terracotta statues from the Shrine of the Double Axes (PM II.1, p. 337, fig. 193; PM II.2, p. 705; Younger 1977, p. 148), and a statuette in a hut urn from the area of the Caravanserai Spring Chamber (PM II.1, p. 129, fig. 63; PM II.2, p. 705; Younger 1977, p. 148). For a review of depictions of seals on frescoes, see Younger 1992. 272 Younger 1977, pp. 142-145. At Knossos, in Gypsades tomb 11, two amygdaloid seals were found in an ivory box, while, in the LM IB Ivory Cutter’s Workshop, several may have been held in a wooden box (all that remained of the box was traces of wood. Hood et al. 1958-59, p. 200; Younger 1977, p. 145). 273 Sakellarakis 1997; Krzyszkowska 2005a, p. 216. 274 This assumption is based upon the large number of MM II seals thus far discovered. As Olga Krzyszkowska points out, though, one person certainly could have owned multiple seals. Krzyszkowska 2005a, p. 98. 275 It has even been suggested that, at this time, every adult possessed a seal. Krzyszkowska 2005a, p. 214. 276 During LM II-IIIA1, only wealthy graves have seals. While this is certainly related to the fact that poor burials are rare in this period, seal ownership also seems to be more exclusive. Krzyszkowska 2005a, p. 215. 277 Even fewer graves contain seals in LM IIIA2-B, and the few seals present must be antiques; they are made of hard stone, a material which was not worked during this period. Krzyszkowska 2005a, p. 215. 51
Most seals dating to the Protopalatial period were found in tombs, though many come from settlement contexts, including workshops.278 This depositional pattern greatly contrasts with that of the seals from the Neopalatial period. Burials during this era were incredibly infrequent and, when they did occur, contained few burial goods.279 As a result, most Neopalatial seals do not have a provenance or are known from sealings rather than from the discovery of physical seals.280 Those which do have a context usually come from settlements or were deposited as antiques in Final Palatial tombs. Knossos has yielded several Neopalatial tombs, in contrast to most of the rest of the island,281 and two of these burials contained seals.282 The nearby port town of Poros, however, does have several Neopalatial tombs with seals283 as well as a Neopalatial seal workshop,284 and there are numerous examples of Neopalatial seals from the
Knossos palace and settlement.285
Several Final Palatial tombs in the Knossos area contained seals, though, the number with seals is relatively few in relation to the total number of tombs dating to this period. At the Upper
Gypsades cemetery, only two of the eighteen graves dated to LM III had seals,286 while at Zapher
Papoura, the total percentage of tombs with seals was equally low—nine seals were found among the cemetery’s 100 total LM II-IIIA/B tombs.287
278At Knossos, they have been found in the palace and the settlement as well as in chamber tombs at Mavro Spelio and Ailas. For the Mavro Spelio seals, see Forsdyke 1926-27, pp. 279-280; CMS II.2, nos. 35-40. For the Ailas seals, see Hood 2010, p. 167. 279 Rehak and Younger 1998, pp. 110-111; Hatzaki 2012, p. 310. 280 Krzyszkowska 2005a, p. 120. 281 Hatzaki 2012, p. 310. 282 The Agios Ioannis Gold Cup tomb and Upper Gypsades tomb XVIII. Hood 1956, pp. 93-95; Hood et al. 1958-59, p. 252; CMS II.3, pp. 31-36, nos. 50, 60-61. 283 Muhly 1992, pp. 140-142; Dimopoulou 1999, pp. 28-29. 284 Dimopoulou 1997; Dimopoulou 2000. 285 CMS II.3, p. 9, nos. 8-26. 286 Tombs II and VII each yielded two seals. The four were antiques. Hood et al. 1958-59, pp. 197, 200, 208, 224; CMS II.3, nos. 46-49; Krzyszkowska 2005a, pp. 194, 215. 287 Evans 1905, pp. 58-59, 89; CMS II.3, nos. 40-42, 44-45; CMS II.4, nos. 3-6; Krzyszkowska 2005a, pp. 194, 215. Krzyszkowska includes a signet ring and a cylinder seal in her count, which I have chosen not to include here. 52
Motifs, Shapes, and Materials
Motifs on Protopalatial seals are primarily non-pictorial with some figural pieces.
Circular shaped seals were the most common, though pyramidal and zoomorphic ones appear as well.288 Non-pictorial motifs continue to be used into the Neopalatial period, including abstract patterns referred to as talismanic designs, but there is an increased use of natural and figural imagery during this period.289 Animals and hybrid creatures were particularly popular. The most common animal was cattle, followed closely in popularity by goats.290 Sheep, deer, boars, lions, fish, and birds also appear. Hybrid creatures include griffins, sphinxes, and genii.291 Human scenes are the least common figural depiction, making up about 5-10% of images.292 At the same time as motifs were becoming more diverse, shapes were becoming less so. Lentoids, amygdaloids, and cushions dominated.293
A major change in motifs occurred during the Final Palatial period. Quadrupeds— especially cattle, goats, and lions—were now the most common images.294 Of the hybrid creatures, griffins and genii were the most frequently depicted.295 Partially due to the popularity of the lentoid shape, which was ubiquitous during this period, but also to a seemingly new horror vacui, images generally take up the whole seal. Contorted poses, which could fill the entirety of the space, were favored, and figures became much more stiff and schematic. 296
About 40% of the cemetery’s tombs were robbed (Evans 1905, pp. 1-3, 103-104). This certainly contributes to the low amount of seals. 288 Krzyszkowska 2005a, p. 83. 289 Krzyszkowska 2005a, pp. 144-145. 290 Krzyszkowska 2005a, pp. 144-145. 291 Krzyszkowska 2005a, pp. 144-145. 292 Krzyszkowska 2005a, p. 137. 293 Krzyszkowska 2005a, p. 124. 294 Krzyszkowska 2005a, pp. 208-210. 295 Krzyszkowska 2005a, pp. 208-210. 296 Krzyszkowska 2005a, pp. 209-210. 53
The material used for BA stone seals is divided into two categories: soft and hard stones.
Soft stones— steatite, serpentine, and chlorite297— are local to Crete and easier to carve.298 In the
Protopalatial period, this stone type was the primary material used for seal manufacture. Hard stones, in contrast to their soft stone counterparts, usually had to be imported. Amethyst, hematite, and lapis lazuli were certainly imported, while rock crystal and jasper may have been locally available.299 Hard stones were first worked in the Protopalatial period but were used more frequently during the Neopalatial period; about 75% of LM I seals were made of this material.300
During the Final Palatial period, there was a decline in the diversity of hard stones used, and, by
LM IIIA2, their use had completely stopped. Soft stones continued to be used until LM IIIB, when production of seals stopped entirely.301
II. GEOMETRIC AND ORIENTALIZING SEALS
Contexts, Materials, Shapes, and Motifs
Following the cessation of BA seal manufacture in LM IIIB, seal production stopped for about a half millennium (circa 400-600 years), only resuming again in the Geometric period.302
The find contexts of BA seals cataloged in this thesis date to the period before or around that of the resumption of seal manufacture, though the BA seals never appear in the same context as
EIA seals.
297 Differentiating between individual types of soft stone (i.e. between steatite or serpentine) is often difficult, and publications do not always correctly identify the material (Krzyszkowska 2005a, p. 15). Throughout this thesis, a distinction will be made based on the information given in the publication, but the main distinction made will concern the hardness of the stone. 298 Krzyszkowska 2005a, pp. 12, 85. The exact location of the BA quarries remains debated. See Warren 1969 and Becker 1976 for extensive discussion of possibilities. 299 Krzyszkowska 2005a, p. 12. 300 Krzyszkowska 2005a, pp. 85, 124. 301 Krzyszkowska 2005a, pp. 196, 199. 302 Boardman 1963, p. 110; Boardman 2001, p. 111. 54
The earliest EIA stone seals were produced in the Aegean islands by the mid-8th century,303 and another production center emerged in the 7th century at Argos.304 Geometric motifs dominate on these pieces, although some simple figural scenes do occur. Five LG ivory seals were uncovered at the Idaean cave, which suggests that seals were produced on Crete in the
Geometric period;305 however, the earliest stone seals found on the island are “lumpy ornaments” with “poorly cut devices” that probably date to the mid-7th century.306 In addition to locally produced pieces, seals of faience, glass, and stone were imported from Phoenicia, Rhodes,
Cilicia, Egypt, and Cyprus.307 These exotic objects were primarily dedicated at sanctuaries, though in certain cases they may have been used as amulets.308
A major change in production of EIA seals occurred in the third quarter of the 7th century, when the island of Melos and potentially other islands began creating what are known as the “Island Gems.”309 These seals are primarily lentoids and amygdaloids.310 Neither Near
Eastern nor Egyptian seals used these shapes; thus, it is possible the manufacturer’s inspiration came from rediscovered Minoan seals.311 On the earliest of these gems, animal motifs— especially goats, stags, and horses—were the most popular.312 Hybrid creatures also were common, but very few seals had human figures.313 During the late 7th century, bulls, fish, and
303 Boardman 1963, p. 110; Boardman 2001, p. 109. 304 Boardman 2001, pp. 110-111. 305 Sakellarakis 1983, pp. 478, 481, 485, pl. 275β; Sakellarakis 1988, n. 17. 306 Boardman 2001, p. 110. 307 Boardman 2001, p. 110. Two such seals were deposited in an Orientalizing pithos at the Fortetsa cemetery (Fortetsa nos. 1071, 1074; Brock 1957, p. 96). 308 Boardman 2001, pp. 110-111. 309 Unfortunately, due to their popularity among collectors, very little can be said about how these objects were used, as most lack contexts. Boardman 1963 remains the major publication about this group (Krzyszkowska 2005a, p. 309, n. 149). 310 Boardman 1963, pp. 21-22; Krzyszkowska 2005a, p. 309. 311 Boardman 1963, pp. 89, 92; Boardman 2001, p. 119; Krzyszkowska 2005a, p. 309. 312 Boardman 1963, pp. 23-38; Boardman 2001, pp. 119-120. 313 Boardman 1963, pp. 21, 48-49, 54-68; Boardman 2001, pp. 119-120. 55 dolphins all began to be featured on the seals.314 Together with some seals which appear to resemble the talismanic style,315 these motifs may suggest designs, in addition to shapes, were now inspired by BA seals.316 Furthermore, some of the various animals’ poses resemble those on
Minoan seals and may also have been influenced by BA seal motifs.317 In contrast to the “Island
Gems,” 7th century Cretan seals do not resemble Minoan ones; they have a disc shape and rarely use typically Minoan motifs.318 The discovery and reuse of BA seals in mortuary contexts at
Knossos, therefore, does not seem to have affected the shape and design of Cretan EIA seals.
III. BA SEALS IN EIA CONTEXTS AT KNOSSOS
Four antique seals were uncovered in the KNC, and an additional five were found at
Fortetsa; however, only four of the Fortetsa seals could be traced for final publication.319 Of questionable origin are eight seals—also allegedly antiques—found in “Hogarth’s tombs.”320
Due to their dubious context, they will be treated in Appendix B. While most of the antique seals probably functioned as jewelry in their final use,321 each differs in its depositional history, design, material, preservation, and shape. These seals will be discussed on an individual basis, in a rough chronological order of the context of deposition. Their variations will be explored with the twofold goal of studying individual objects’ life cycles and illuminating overall patterns in
EIA antique seal use.
314 Boardman 2001, pp. 120-121. 315 Pini 1975; Krzyszkowska 2005a, p. 310. 316 Krzyszkowska 2005a, p. 309. 317 Boardman 1963, pp. 92-93; Krzyszkowska 2005a, p. 309. Popular poses with BA antecedents include an animal leaping with its legs spread and an animal in a contorted position with its head turned back (Boardman 1963, pp. 92- 93). 318 Boardman 2001, p. 123. 319 Brock 1957, p. 17, n. 1. 320 CMS II.3, nos. 72-75; CMS II.4, nos. 7, 132-134; Xanthoudides 1907, nos. 125-132. 321 The seals’ deposition within a mortuary context also indicates the seals had some religious or magical associations. Their placement with the deceased may have related to beliefs about the afterlife or the magical properties of seals. 56
KNC 2.f1 (Figure 32)
Unique among the seals uncovered in the Knossos EIA cemeteries is an olive-green, grey steatite blank. Conoid in shape with one flat face and irregular sides, the piece was probably intended to be a disc shaped seal but was broken during the manufacturing process.322 It does not have a suspension hole, and the irregularity of the object rules out its use as an inlay in jewelry.
KNC 2, the SMin grave with which the stone is associated, was robbed in antiquity.323 It is located in the southern area of the SW sector of the cemetery—the sector where the majority of SMin tombs were placed324 and which contained a cluster of SMin tombs with a large number of BA antiques (KNC 98, 200, and 201).325 Although the stone is cataloged with the KNC 2 objects, it was uncovered in the upper fill of the trial trench that identified the tomb.326 Its context, therefore, makes it impossible to determine whether the object was 1.) intentionally deposited within the tomb as a grave good and removed during a later robbing incident, 2.) accidentally deposited during the robbing or some later event, or 3.) inadvertently included within the matrix of the tomb’s original fill. Roman glass tessera KNC 2.f2 was the only other object found in the same deposit as the blank.327 While this lends credence to the theory of accidental deposition, Roman material was also found in the tomb’s chamber; 328 thus, this later material does not necessarily disassociate the blank from the tomb.
322 KNC I, p. 59. 323 KNC I, p. 58. 324 Catling 1996b, p. 641. 325 The antiques are beads KNC 200.f2a/b, gold rosettes KNC 200.f3, bead KNC 200.f9, bead KNC 200.f11, and boar’s tusk plates KNC 201.f13. The tomb 98 antique (larnax KNC 98.19) was found in a robber’s pit and possibly dates to a later period (KNC I, p. 131; Coldstream 1996a, p. 277). 326 KNC I, p. 58. 327 KNC I, p. 58. 328 KNC I, p. 58. 57
No other BA seal blanks have yet been found in EIA contexts. Most BA blanks and unfinished seals have been discovered in BA settlements, especially workshops.329 In the
Knossos area, several partially worked and damaged seals were discovered in a LM IA workshop at Poros.330 While blanks are rare in BA mortuary contexts,331 partially completed seals have been found in several tombs, including a tomb in the Isopata cemetery at Knossos.332 These partially complete seals had recognizable engraved figures; thus, their design, although not finished, added to the object’s value. In contrast, if KNC 2.f1 was intentionally deposited, it must have been valued entirely for its material. Steatite, the material of which it is made, was not exploited in the EIA, Geometric, or Archaic periods except for on Cyprus.333 Based on its mixed context, the lack of parallels for a blank in a mortuary context, and the lack of other seals in
SMin contexts, this object is unlikely to have been a burial good deposited in KNC 2.
KNC J.f10 (Figure 41)
KNC J.f10 is a LM II-III black serpentine lentoid,334 making it the youngest of the redeposited seals. Guidelines are still visible near the top edge of the piece, and abrasion marks were also noted in the object’s description in KNC I.335 These marks, particularly the guidelines, indicate that the object was either unfinished or, more likely, poorly cut. Depicted on the seal is a
329 In addition to those found at Poros (mentioned below), blanks were also discovered in an MM I-IIB workshop at Malia (CMS II.2, nos. 186-198; Quartier Mu III, pp. 7-21, 103-110). 330 Dimopoulou 1997, p. 436; Dimopoulou 2000. The building also contained evidence for craftsmen working soft stones (Dimopoulou 1997, p. 436)—the same category of material used to make blank KNC 2.f2. 331 Two pieces currently in the Ashmolean Museum are said to have come from BA chamber tombs, but there is no secure evidence for this. AE 312g is attributed to a tomb “by Kareas on the Western foothills of Hymettus…” while AE 1238 is said to be from Hagia Pelagia (CMS VI.1, pp. 26-27). 332 Evans 1914, pp. 14-18, fig. 20a; Younger 1974; Preston 2007, p. 271. The seal (Heraklion Museum no. 908) shows an agrimi with its kid sketched below it, and was found in the “Mace-Bearer’s Tomb.” Other examples of partially finished seals from tombs are two seals from a Mycenae chamber tomb (CMS I, nos. 140-141) and one from the Vapheio tholos (CMS I, no. 220) (Younger 1981, pp. 35-37). 333 Boardman 2001, p. 374. 334 Evely 1996, p. 625. 335 KNC I, p. 30. 58 horned goat, which has turned its head back towards its leg in order to lick its foot, a contorted pose typical of later Minoan seals. It is unclear if the goat is a domesticated goat or an agrimi.336
Tomb J was not looted or damaged by the construction of later tombs, and, therefore, is significant for understanding EIA burial practices, including the reuse of seals. The tomb was in use in the EPG-PGB periods, a timespan of about 150 years. The seal was discovered within an urn, EPG coarse pithos KNC J.2, placed in the eastern corner of the burial chamber. In addition to the seal, the pithos held a cremation and inhumation. According to Jonathan Musgrave’s osteological report, one burial was a middle aged (36-45 years old) adult while the other was an adult of unknown age.337
The exact depositional history of the EPG pithos burial is unclear. According to the excavators, the vessel originally held the cremation, while the inhumed body was first placed on the chamber floor and later swept into the urn.338 Besides the seal, the grave goods consisted of two pieces of a silver-plated bronze pin, two gold pins, a stone pellet, a rock crystal bead, a rock crystal double axe, an amethyst bead, a carnelian bead, and a bone plaque.339 The double axe, amethyst bead, bone plaque, and seal were found within the upper levels of the cremation; however, each of the objects, except for the bone plaque, was unburnt, suggesting that they were either deposited with the inhumation or deposited with the cremation but not burnt with the body.340
336 Differentiation between the two depends on horn length and the thinness of the legs—agrimia have longer horns and thinner legs (Bloedow 2003, p. 3). The best parallel for this piece, identified by Evely (1996, p. 625, n. 1387), is CMS II.3, no. 224, a carnelian lentoid depicting a quadruped, possibly a cow, in a contorted position. The seal was excavated by Hogarth at the Dictaean Cave and stylistically dates to LM IIIA1. In addition to the similarity in pose, this piece has a guideline at the top just as KNC J.f10 does. 337 Musgrave 1996, p. 700. Musgrave’s analysis contrasts with the description of the burial in KNC I, which claims the cremation was of a female under 30 years old and the inhumation was of a 22 year old female (KNC I, p. 26). I have chosen to follow Musgrave’s osteological report. 338 KNC I, p. 26. 339 KNC I, p. 26. 340 KNC I, p. 26. 59
It is clear that the beads were once part of a necklace or bracelet, and Evely has suggested that both the double axe and seal were once used as jewelry as well.341 Notably, the carnelian and amethyst beads are the only objects of their kind found within the KNC.342 Additionally, no objects of stone or metal, aside from those found within pithos KNC J.2, were found within the tomb’s chamber.343 Either the inhumed person was given far more valuable objects than anyone else buried in the tomb or he/she was given a collection of the valuables previously deposited on the chamber floor.344 The stone objects within the vessel, except the stone pellet and the seal, are of hard stone, and several of them have no parallel elsewhere in the cemetery. In the case of the seal, its design and relation to the past may have contributed to its value and, thus, resulted in its inclusion within this group.
Fortetsa Tomb Θ no. 137
Brock was unable to locate this seal; however, he published its context and a brief description of its imagery, which were recorded by the cemetery’s original excavators, Humfry
Payne and Alan Blakeway.345 Payne and Blakeway did not mention the seal’s shape or material, but the motif is described as a flying fish. The piece was one of the few finds within tomb Θ, a small PG chamber tomb located in the southernmost area of the cemetery. Within the tomb, the seal was underneath an EPG amphora and associated with a small straight-sided jar, a bell
341 Evely 1996, pp. 622, 625. 342 Evely 1996, p. 622. 343 A bronze pin (KNC J.f13) is associated with the tomb, but it was found outside the dromos. 344 It is rare to find stone beads or pendants accompanied by other stone objects at the KNC. Therefore, Evely has suggested that the stone pendants in the pithos were at one point—presumably when the inhumation was on the chamber floor—surrounded by incised clay beads discovered on the chamber floor (Evely 1996, p. 622). This would support the suggestion that the assemblage in the pithos was a collection of valuables formerly deposited on the tomb floor. However, as will be discussed below, antique seals seem to have been strung together with stone objects in other KNC tombs; therefore, it is possible that all these valuable objects were part of one or more jewelry pieces. 345 Brock 1957, pp. 16-17. 60 skyphos, and a crystal pendant.346 A production date cannot be assigned to the seal exclusively based on this brief description.347
KNC 18.f3 (Figures 33-36)
KNC 18.f3 has a complex biography: over the course of its life cycle, the object underwent at least two and possibly even four sets of modifications. This gold-set seal was deposited within KNC 18,348 a tomb which received its first burial during the SMin period and, after a hiatus, was reused during the PGB/EG period (the era to which KNC 18.f3 dates).349
According to the excavators, the object was found just within the dromos’ western wall along with “crumbs of an ‘amber’ bead” and pieces of bone.350 They suggest that the object may additionally have been associated with an intrusive EG pithos burial (KNC 18.8) cut into the
351 352 dromos of KNC 18 or with LM IIIA2/B larnax KNC 18.15. As a result of its disordered context, the object has been dated to the PGB period based upon the technique of the gold backing; however, this method is also problematic, since there is debate over to which period the backing dates (see below).
346 Brock 1957, pp. 16-17. 347 It is worth noting that an LM I flying fish seal was found by Hood in Gypsades tomb VII. The seal was found underneath a larnax and alongside LM IIIB-C pottery, which suggests that the seal was 300-400 years old at the time of deposition (Hood 1958-59, p. 249). 348 The tomb was highly disturbed by a later EG pithos burial, a Hellenistic tomb, and a cutting across its dromos possibly made during the Roman period or later. Additionally, due to the high density of tombs in the area, the excavators had difficulty separating the graves from each other and, thus, often had difficulty determining which objects belonged to which burials (KNC I, pp. 66-68). 349 KNC I, pp. 67-68; Cavanagh 1996, p. 666. 350 KNC I, p. 68. 351 The EG pithos was associated with several other grave goods: forty amber beads, two PGB/EG cups, one EG/MG basin, and an EG/MG juglet (KNC I, p. 68). 352 KNC I, p. 68. The seal was found at a distance of 0.7 m from the pithos burial and 0.5 m from the larnax fragments. It was also 0.9 m from the KNC 31 larnax (KNC 31.11). The redeposition of larnax fragments KNC 18.15 is dated to PGB-EG and the redeposition of KNC 31.11 is dated to LG. 61
KNC 18.f3 is often discussed because of its gold setting,353 but the seal itself is also unique. Carved from rose-colored amethyst some time in MM III-LM I, it the only seal from
Knossian EIA tombs made of a hard stone. Amethyst is not native to Crete and would have been imported from Egypt or the Near East.354 The oval shape of the seal is also unparalleled among antique seals, and is rare among BA pieces.355 Of additional interest is the seal’s convex face and concave back, which suggest it was intended to be inset into some backing.356 The object’s closest parallel is a MM III-LM I oval seal, also with a convex front and a concave back, from the Idaean Cave. In his publication of the Idaean Cave seal, Yannis Sakellarakis argued that the seal was made to be set into a ring.357 He pointed out how the receding edges of the concave face could be fastened into a ring while the convex back would have facilitated the placement of the ring on a finger.358 Parallels for this, he added, include a MM III-LM I ring with an oval seal from a pithos burial at Sphoungaras,359 and a LM I-II ring in the Metaxas collection potentially from Tourtouloi (East Crete).360 A similar shape, but without the ring, was found in Mavro
Spelio tomb XVIIB.361 Ingo Pini and John Betts hypothesized that KNC 18.f3 was either originally manufactured with the intent for it to be fixed in some form of setting, as the above examples were, or it was a stone ring which broke (a common occurrence) and was later shaved
353 Coldstream 1996a, p. 273; Boardman 2001, p. 107; Boardman 2002, p. 98; Krzyszkowska 2005a, p. 309, n. 148; Dimopoulou-Rethemiotaki 2005, p. 391. 354 Krzyszkowska 2005a, p. 12; Krzyszkowska 2005b.The exact BA source of amethyst is unknown. See Krzyszkowska 2005b for a summary of the problems. 355 Sakellarakis 1997, pp. 24-25. 356 Higgins 1996a, p. 540, n. 1083; Krzyszkowska 2005a, p. 146, n. 87. 357 Sakellarakis 1997. 358 Sakellarakis 1997, pp. 26-27. 359 Hall 1912, p. 68; CMS IV, no. 58; Higgins 1996a, p. 540, n. 1083; Sakellarakis 1997, pp. 26-27. 360 CMS II.3, no. 240; Higgins 1996a, p. 540, n. 1083; Sakellarakis 1997, pp. 26-27. 361 Forsdyke 1926-27, p. 279; CMS II.4, no. 127; Sakellarakis 1997, p. 25. 62 down to be put into a setting.362 Based upon the Idaean Cave example, the former suggestion seems more probable.
The seal’s engraving depicts an agrimi (Cretan wild goat) with its legs bent inward, seated over a baseline while a lion attacks from above.363 Based upon the agrimi’s heavy body and solid-drilled hooves, Pini and Betts dated the animal’s carving to MM III-LM I; but, they also suggested that the lion, because of its “smooth mane, wasp-waist, and pronounced solid- drilling,” may have been carved in LM IIIA.364 While making this suggestion, the two scholars added a caveat: the agrimi’s hooves and the lion’s paws look similar, which may suggest the two figures were in fact engraved at the same time.365
At some point concurrent with or after the addition of the lion (if indeed it was a later addition), the seal was modified into a pendant. A hole through which some sort of chain would have been strung was added on the right side of the seal between and slightly over-top of one of the lion’s legs.366 If hung in this way, the seal would have been viewed with the base line on the right side. This modification must have happened some time prior to the addition of the gold setting, as the gold setting has suspension holes incorporated into its back (Figure 35), which would make the string-hole irrelevant.
Adding an additional layer to an already complex object biography is the seal’s gold setting. Composed of a sheet-gold backing with two transverse loops on the back and four
362 Pini and Betts’ suggestion was made in a personal comment to Reynold Higgins (Higgins 1996a, p. 540, n. 1083). 363 There are several parallels for the style and positioning of the individual animals (Higgins 1996a, p. 540, n. 1083). For the agrimi seated above a base line, see CMS II.3, no. 34; CMS X, no. 281; CMS XII, no. 137; CMS XIII, no. 19. For the heavy bodied agrimi, see CMS VII, no. 42; CMS XII, no. 135. For a similar lion, see CMS VII, no. 176. None of these parallels have a provenance. 364 As they also pointed out, though, if the lion was added later, something else must have been placed above the agrimi prior to the alteration. The agrimi was placed left of center, and there would have been a large blank space on the seal’s right side if the lion was not there (Higgins 1996a, p. 540, n. 1083). 365 Higgins 1996a, p. 540, n. 1083. 366 Higgins 1996a, p. 540. 63 projections emanating off the sides, the setting encases the seal with a raised collar made of soldered twisted wire. A line of granulation circles around the stone and follows the projections.
Each projection is triangular and divided in half either by a line of granulation, as is the case for the two side ones, or by a hammered line, as is the case for the slightly larger bottom one. The top projection, which is heart-shaped rather than triangular, is more complex. In addition to a granulated border, it has two granulated lines that appear to be part of retorted spirals. The pattern resembles that of a quatrefoil pendant from the Teke tholos (Khaniale Teke no. 18)367 described by Boardman in his publication of the tomb as scrolls outlined by granulation (Figure
39).368 It is unclear what exactly the KNC 18.f3 backing depicts, though it is probably some sort of plant. Reynold Higgins, Pini, and Betts tentatively suggested an ivy leaf, while Coldstream alternatively proposed a lotus.369
The piece’s suspension loops are designed so that the elaborate projection is at the top of the pendant. This is the same way it was hung in its previous “life” when it was suspended by the pierced hole over top of the lion and the same way it would have been positioned if used as a ring in its “first life.” The backing was thus designed in accordance with how the seal was used immediately prior to the addition of the gold elaboration rather than so that the seal’s base line was at the bottom of the pendant.
The gold backing’s date is contested. Higgins describes the piece as “the ‘Teke School’ at its best,” while Pini believes it is a LBA creation. The Teke School refers to a jewelry workshop operating out of Knossos from the PGB to the EO periods, which created technically skilled pieces using filigree, granulation, and other techniques. It derives its name from the Teke tholos
367 For discussions of the pendant, see Boardman 1967, p. 69; Higgins 1980, p. 109, pl. 17D; Hoffman 1997, pp. 25- 26; Dimopoulou-Rethemiotaki 2005, p. 390. 368 Boardman 1967, p. 69. 369 Higgins 1996a, p. 540, n. 1083; Coldstream 1996a, p. 273. 64 tomb, where most pieces attributed to the school were found.370 No explanation for the reasoning behind Pini’s suggestion is provided;371 however, it may be because gold ivy-shaped relief beads, which resemble the heart-shaped top projection of the gold backing, were popular in the LBA
(Figure 38).372 Additionally, granulation, a technique employed widely on this piece, was common in the BA,373 but, problematically for this interpretation, it was also common in the
EIA.374 Pini’s suggestion has largely been ignored, and the scholarly consensus leans towards a
Teke workshop production;375 however, the similarity in shape between the top projection and ivy-shaped LBA relief beads is certainly worth exploring, particularly given the date of the embedded seal. There are several examples of seals with BA added gold decoration. Most gold additions are caps or embellishments along seal string-holes; none are as elaborate as KNC 18.f3.
The closest comparisons are BA: a lapis lazuli lentoid from the South House set in a gold circlet decorated with granulation (CMS II.3, no. 24)376 and a lapis lazuli cushion seal from Enkomi surrounded by a gold casing (CMS VII, no. 168).377 Moreover, gold decoration on seals is more typical on the BA mainland than on Crete.378 While no other antique seals were embedded in gold during the EIA, many precious objects were. Other gold-set pieces include rock crystal beads (Khaniale Teke 30-42) and a scarab (Khaniale Teke 23), both found in the Teke tholos,379 as well as a boar’s tusk piece in a silver mounting (KNC 292.35).380 Just like these pieces, the
370 For discussion of the workshop and tomb, see Boardman 1967; Higgins 1980, pp. 107-111; Hoffman 1997, pp. 191-245; Boardman 2005; Kotsonas 2006. 371 Higgins 1996a, p. 540, n. 1083. 372 For examples of such beads, see Higgins 1980, p. 82 and Popham, Catling, and Catling 1974, p. 222. 373 Higgins 1969, p. 143; Higgins 1980, p. 82; Laffineur 1998, p. 10; Ogden 1998, p. 14. 374 For the many examples from Attica and Crete, see Higgins 1969. 375 Krzyszkowska 2005a, p. 309, n. 148; Dimopoulou-Rethemiotaki 2005, p. 391. Neither Coldstream (1996, p. 273) nor Kotsonas (2006, p.164) comment on the date of the backing in their respective discussions of the object. 376 Krzyszkowska 2003, pp. 200-201; Krzyszkowska 2005a, p. 240, no. 207. 377 Murray 1900, no. 1; Krzyszkowska 2005a, p. 240, no. C42. For more examples of BA gold additions to seals, see Krzyszkowska 2003, p. 200, n. 16. 378 Krzyszkowska 2003, p. 200, n. 16. 379 Boardman 1967, p. 69; Boardman 2005, p. 165. 380 KNC I, p. 272. 65 seal was made of rare material, which its backing emphasized. These comparisons raise the question whether it is possible to accommodate the different views on the production date of the piece. Might the gold backing be a Teke School product imitating Minoan patterns? In shape, it certainly resembles the BA relief beads, such as those from not-too-distant Sellopoulo (Figure
37).381 The PGB period, the possible date for the addition of the gold-setting, seems to have been a time of Minoan revival.382 If a Teke School product, this object would fit within this movement.
One seal (and indeed any object) reworked three or four times is unique. Although in its
“first life” the object may have been used for administrative purposes in addition to decorative ones, in each of its succeeding “lives” it maintained an ornamental function; thus, despite its varying modifications, the object continued to serve the same purpose. Furthermore, the flattened back of the object, which was probably created to be inlaid within a metal backing, resulted in the seal’s incorporation into a gold backing in the EIA; in other words, its morphology led its final owner(s) to use it in a way that was comparable to how its first owner(s) had used it.
KNC 129.f1 (Figure 40)
As with the majority of the BA seals found in the Knossos EIA tombs, seal KNC 129.f1 dates to the Neopalatial period.383 The seal’s imagery is typical for this period384 and is also found on other BA seals found in EIA contexts, both in the Knossos area and across Crete. A large central cross divides the object into quarters, and each quarter is filled with multiple grooved channels. The seal itself is made from grey-green chlorite and is amygdaloid in shape.
381 Popham, Catling, and Catling 1974, p. 222, no. J9-10, fig. 11e, pl. 36a; Dimopoulou-Rethemiotaki 2005, p. 320. 382 Coldstream 1994, p. 115; Coldstream 1998. 383 Evely 1996, p. 625. 384 Don Evely has suggested two parallels for the seal (1996, p. 635, n. 1387): the chlorite CMS XII, no. 259 and the serpentine CMS II.3, no. 186. Similar to KNC 129.f1, both have a central cross dividing the seal into quarters, which are in turn filled with grooved channels. Both were also manufactured in the Neopalatial period. 66
Although the seal was pierced through its shorter axis (a rarity for amygdaloids), no beads or stones with which the seal could have been strung were found in KNC 129. It is the only
Knossian antique seal that was not contextually associated with a bead or pendant.385
Furthermore, in contrast to the other antique seals, almost all of which are entirely intact,386 KNC
129.f1 is only partly preserved. Due to the seal’s symmetric pattern, it is apparent that the missing section repeats the pattern visible in the other three quarters of the seal, although it is unclear during which historical time period or stage of the object’s life the damage occurred.
Tomb 129, where seal KNC 129.f1 was uncovered, is located in the southernmost area of the KNC west sector and was in use in the EG-EO period. It was robbed at an unknown period and contained a heavily mixed fill.387 Unfortunately, the seal was found in the chamber fill and cannot be given a more specific date than that given to the tomb as a whole. It is, nevertheless, worth noting that the object was found directly above a MG pithos, which stood in the center- back of the chamber and appeared to be in situ.388 The seal was the most impressive object uncovered within the tomb; the only other small finds were fragments of bronze sheets (total weight=0.1 g) and an obsidian blade, both found within the chamber. Six vases were also uncovered, and all were fragmentary.389 There was no remaining osteological material. Based on this lack of goods and the presence of the obsidian blade—an object typically found in fills rather than in purposeful depositions—Don Evely suggested the seal may have been “trash” accidentally deposited within the tomb.390 This is certainly possible. The discovery of an obsidian piece may suggest the obsidian itself was “trash,” but it does not necessarily indicate the
385 Two other seal groups (KNC 2.f1 and the Fortetsa tomb I/P seals) are not associated with beads, but they come from problematic contexts where the seals were not associated with any artifacts. 386 Fortetsa no. 1168 is the only other damaged seal in an EIA Knossian tomb, and it is not as extensively damaged as KNC 129.f1. 387 KNC I, pp. 169-170. 388 KNC I, p. 170. 389 KNC I, p. 170. 390 Evely 1996, p. 625. 67 seal was so. Obsidian was found in all four of the tombs in the KNC west sector, the area in which KNC 129 is located. No other sector has anywhere near as many tombs with obsidian let alone as high a percentage of tombs with obsidian (see chapter 5). While the lack of small finds in the tomb may indicate that the seal is an anomaly, it could simply be a sign of extensive robbing, particularly since the bronze fragments suggest that there were once metal objects in the tomb. A seal could have been easily missed by (or could have been of no interest to) robbers and ended up in the fill alongside the many Geometric sherds found in this same deposit. The seal’s context, damaged face, and lack of associated beads seems to suggest the object was damaged and disturbed during the later robbing rather than that it was “trash.”
Fortetsa Tomb I nos. 1168-1171 (Figures 42-45)
Fortetsa tomb I is the only tomb that produced more than one seal, and four seals within one tomb is unique among the Knossian EIA burials. While the four Fortetsa tomb I seals have the best documented and most intelligible imagery of those found at Fortetsa, they also have the most problematic contexts. Although attributed to tomb I, the name given to the dromos of tomb
P, the seals were found within “excavated soil,” which probably indicates that they were found in spoil heaps believed to have come from the excavation of tomb I.391 The burials in the tomb date to the Orientalizing period,392 and since Fortetsa nos. 1168-1171 have no context, these seals’ deposition is dated to this period.
Each of the four seals is made from soft stone (serpentine and chlorite), while two are lentoid or button shaped and two are amygdaloid. The four seals each have a unique motif, but only one, heavily damaged seal could be categorized as figural. This LM I figural seal, Fortetsa no. 1168 (Figure 45; CMS II.4, no. 129), is a lentoid and depicts some indistinguishable
391 Brock 1957, p. 100. 392 Brock 1957, p. 98. LPG-LO sherds were found in the tomb, though. 68 quadruped (Figure 8.a), possibly with a bovine head.393 The other three seals have symmetric, ornamental designs. On Fortetsa no. 1169—a MM III-LM I amygdaloid of serpentine (Figure
42; CMS II.3, no. 57)— a series of two rows of three circles, each with a point in the center, are framed by a rectangular box around which are a series of grooved channels. The object is workshop fresh:394 it has no signs of use-wear and probably was not used prior to its deposition within a BA tomb. On the second amygdaloid seal, Fortetsa no. 1170 (Figure 43; CMS II.3, no.
58)—which dates to LM I—395 a plain, vertical belt bordered by two semicircular branches divides the seal in half. The branches frame the ends of the seal, which each have a long triangular indent. In between the branches and these indents are two dots placed vertically one on top of the other. An anomaly among these seals is Fortetsa no. 1171 (Figure 44; CMS II.2, no.
72); it dates stylistically to MM II.396 Aside from its production date, the characteristics of this seal are consistent with the other antique seals. It has an ornamental motif—a rosette—and a button shape.
Although it is unclear whether Fortetsa nos. 1168-1171 were deposited together, it would not be surprising if they were a group based on their morphology. Each is perforated and, therefore, could have been part of a jewelry piece. Additionally, their symmetrical nature suggests that they could have been strung together. There are two lentoid/circular seals and two amygdaloids, which, if strung together in a composition, would produce a balanced piece.
Additionally, the four are a similar greenish color (black-greenish to blue-greenish),397 and none
393 CMS II.4, no. 129; Brock 1957, p. 100. Brock believes it is a griffin while the CMS simply describes it as a quadruped. 394 CMS II.3, no. 57. 395 CMS II.3, no. 58. 396 CMS II.2, no. 72. 397 Brock 1957, p. 100. 69 have a motif that sets it apart from the others as the central, individual focus of a necklace or bracelet.
IV. CONCLUSIONS ON BA SEALS IN EIA KNOSSIAN TOMBS AND
COMPARISONS FROM ELSEWHERE IN CRETE
Although the number of seals used in EIA funerary contexts at Knossos is relatively small, some significant patterning, and lack thereof, in their spatial distribution, material, shape, imagery, and date of production and deposition is detectable. These patterns will first be described and then contrasted with the patterns of BA seal use in other EIA Cretan mortuary contexts. Through this comparison, general patterns of antique seal use across regions, as well as specific patterns unique to Knossos, will be elucidated.
Production dates for the seals vary from MM II to LM III and, due to the seals’ EIA contexts, are assigned based on style. Six were produced in the Neopalatial period (one of which was later modified in the Final Palatial period), one in the Protopalatial period, one in the Final
Palatial period, and one at an unknown date. Based on their production and redeposition dates, the majority of the seals were circa 650-1,100 years old at the time of their EIA reuse.
Knossian antique seals were primarily amygdaloids and lentoids— common BA forms.
Two exceptions to this uniformity are incomplete KNC 2.f1 and oval-shaped KNC 18.f3. The oval shape and flat back of KNC 18.f3 are rare traits for a BA seal, but they make the object perfectly suited for the EIA practice of inlaying rare stones in gold-settings, a common technique employed by the Teke School. In the case of KNC 18.f3, the seal was both a rare stone
(amethyst) and an antique with intricate carving. It was the only antique seal made of a hard stone. Aside from this piece, the seals did not differ noticeably in material, as they were all of
70 soft stone. No signet rings were found, which fits with the lack of metal antiques across different artifact types.
The images on the seals can be divided into two primary groups: 1.) quadrupeds and 2.) geometric patterns. Non-figural motifs (including geometric patterns) and quadrupeds are the most popular images on Minoan seals; however, the motifs on the Knossian antiques differ from what would be expected if a random selection of BA seals were redeposited in the EIA. Despite cattle being the most popular images on Minoan seals,398 these animals are noticeably missing from the Knossian antiques. Differentiating quadrupeds can be difficult, but the lack of images identified as cattle remains surprising. In addition to cattle, hybrid creatures are missing. Hybrid creatures were particularly popular on seals during the BA, but there are no antique seals with such creatures.
Agrimia appear with surprising frequency—they are the only quadrupeds represented in the KNC. These animals are common images on other BA media399 as well as on EIA ones.400 In both periods, the animals are typically shown in hunting scenes, which may reflect a coming of age ritual.401 The earliest EIA scene featuring an agrimi is a hunting scene on an EPG bell-krater from the KNC (KNC E.3).402 Images of males hunting agrimia continued to be popular into the
Geometric and Orientalizing period. Goats were common images on the 7th century “Island
Gems”—some goats were even depicted in a similar contorted position to that of the goat on antique seal KNC J.f10.403 Scenes on bronze plaques at the Sanctuary of Hermes and Aphrodite
398 Sakellarakis 1976, pp. 302-303; Krzyszkowska 2005a, p. 144. 399 Agrimia feature prominently not only on seals but also on larnakes, including ones from Knossos (Evans 1905, p. 29, fig. 26A), Armenoi Rethymnis (Tzedakis 1971, p. 219, fig. 26), and Episkopi Hierapetras (Bloedow 2003, p. 14). For a list of agrimi images in the BA, see Bloedow 2003. 400 For a discussion of agrimi images in the EIA, see Eiring 2004. 401 Lebessi 1985, pp. 17-20, 221; Bloedow 2003, pp. 6-15; Eiring 2004, p. 443. 402 Sackett 1976; Coldstream 1976, p. 69; Eiring 2004, p. 444. 403 For the popularity of goat images, see Boardman 1963, pp. 22-38; Boardman 2001, p. 119-120. For the popularity of the contorted position, see Boardman 1963, pp. 92-93; Krzyszkowska 2005a, p. 309. 71 at Kato Syme (7th -6th century) depict young men with wild goats and may represent an initiation rite in which young men captured agrimia and brought them back to the sanctuary alive.404 It is possible that the large number of depictions of agrimia on antique seals is similarly related to male hunting activities. The age of the human bones associated with the Tomb J agrimi seal (KNC J.f10) suggests that the seals were deposited with adults. It is unclear whether the seal was associated with the inhumation of an adult of unknown age or with the cremation of a middle aged adult;405 however, the age of both sets of bones indicates that the seal was not related to a youth initiation rite. There is no definitive information about the gender of the people buried with any of the Knossian antique seals; therefore, it is impossible to tell whether agrimia seals were buried with males. Regardless, the image of an agrimi was clearly popular in the EIA, and, as a result, the depictions of this animal on antique seals would have been recognizable and of significance to an EIA audience. The same is true of the geometric motifs. Protogeometric and
Geometric pottery, as these names imply, was characterized by geometric and symmetric motifs, just as the geometric antique seals were. While there is no evidence that particular seals inspired particular patterns on pots (as possibly happened with larnax KNC 107.214 and straight-sided pithos KNC 107.114), the images on the antique seals are similar in appearance to motifs on geometric pottery. The flower on Fortetsa no. 1171 greatly resembles patterns Brock identified on Fortetsa pots (Figures 46-47),406 as do the circles on Fortetsa no. 1169 (Figure 42)407 and the
KNC 129 cross and dash pattern (Figure 40).408
404 Eiring 2004, pp. 444-445. 405 See Musgrave 1996, p. 700 for his analysis of these bones. 406 Brock 1957, nos. 9bi, 9bp. 407 Brock 1957, nos. 9s, 9r. 408 Brock 1957, no. 2l. 72
The images on EIA antique seals differ noticeably from those found on antique seals in the Archaic Sanctuary of Demeter at Knossos, which is located south of the palace.409 Several antique seals were dedicated at the Sanctuary of Demeter at Knossos,410 and their motifs include hybrid creatures (a half woman-half bird and a griffin), abstract talismanic designs, and a waterbird,411 motifs not found on Knossian EIA antique seals. This suggests that the images on
EIA antique seals reflect images appealing to EIA Knossians.
The seals’ primarily Neopalatial dates suggest that the objects were robbed from Final or
Postpalatial tombs. Several Neopalatial burials are known from the Knossos area,412 but seals have rarely been discovered in them;413 the practice of secondary burial used during this period resulted in the disturbance and disposal of most grave goods, such as seals.414 In contrast, Final
Palatial and Postpalatial burials with antique Neopalatial seals were common.415 KNC 18.f3, which seems to have been produced in MM III-LM I but modified in LM IIIA, could be taken to support this possibility, particularly since it was found near to LM IIIA-B larnax fragments. It is even conceivable that the two items were found together in an LM III burial. Fortetsa I no. 1169, which was “workshop fresh,” must also have been robbed from a tomb, though its Protopalatial date could indicate that it was robbed from a burial dating to a period earlier than LM III.
409 Coldstream 1973. 410 During the Archaic period, the deposition of different types of dedications shifted from burials to sanctuaries. This phenomenon was first commented upon by Snodrass (Snodgrass 1980) and later discussed by François de Polignac (de Polignac 1995, pp. 11-89). Antique seals seem to follow this pattern. A total of 68 Cretan BA seals have been found in 18 Iron Age sanctuaries across the Aegean, and 65 of them were deposited in the Archaic period. For a catalog of seals dedicated in sanctuaries, see Sakellarakis 1976. 411 Kenna 1973; Sakellarakis 1976, pp. 297-298; CMS II.3, nos. 77-85; CMS II.4, nos. 8, 135. 412 Hatzaki 2012, p. 310. 413 Seals were found in the Agios Ioannis Gold Cup tomb and Upper Gypsades tomb XVIII (Hood 1956, pp. 93-95; Hood et al. 1958-59, p. 252; CMS II.3, pp. 31-36; CMS II.3, nos. 50, 60-61) as well as in tombs at Poros (Muhly 1992, pp. 140-142; Dimopoulou 1999, pp. 28-29). 414 Hatzaki 2012, p. 310. 415 Final and Postpalatial burials with Neopalatial seals include Sellopoulo tomb 4 (Popham, Catling, and Catling 1974, pp. 210-225), Isopata Tomb 1 (Evans 1914, pp. 8-13; Preston 2007, pp. 260, 264), and Upper Gypsades tombs II and IV (Hood et. al 1958-59, pp. 200, 208). 73
It is impossible to get a secure date for the deposition of any of the pieces, but, broadly speaking, one dates to the SMin period, four date to the PG, one to the EG-EO, and four to the O period (the four from Fortetsa I/P). Thus, most were deposited in the PG and O periods; however, it should be noted that the PG period lasted the longest (about 160 years), which may account for the large number of finds.
In the Knossos area, antique seals were not clustered within cemeteries, but instead were found in the most distant locations possible from one another. None of the tombs containing seals were in the same sector. Spatially, they were found in various parts of a tomb, from the dromos to the chamber, and in a variety of burial types, from within pots to on the chamber floor.
Not enough osteological data is available to determine if there was an association between a particular sex or age group and the seals, nor if there was an association between the objects and either cremations or inhumations. The seals were rarely found in tombs that contained other BA objects. Only two tombs with an antique seal, KNC 18 and Fortetsa I/P, also held another antique. In both cases, the other antiques were larnakes. While it is possible that seal KNC 18.f3 and/or the Fortetsa I/P seals were deposited with the larnakes, both contexts are too disturbed to be certain. The lack of association with other BA objects suggests that the Knossos antique objects were not simply trash left over from the clearance of BA tombs. This suggestion is supported by the secure, non-fill, EIA contexts of several of the seals and the EIA gold addition to KNC 18.f3.
Based on their string-holes and their associated objects, the seals were probably either hung as stand-alone jewelry pieces or as the central feature of a beaded necklace or bracelet. The clearest case is gold-embedded seal KNC 18.f3, which has a backing with loop holes for threading the piece. It was found near “crumbs” of amber beads—objects with which the seal
74 could have been hung.416 Fortetsa tomb Θ no. 157 was uncovered near a crystal pendant, and the two may have been strung together. The seal in KNC J was found with both a pendant and beads.
Blank KNC 2.f1 certainly was not used as jewelry, since it lacks a suspension hole, and was either an accidental deposition or a piece valued purely for its material. The function of the broken KNC 129.f1 is uncertain.
Multiple seals were found together in Fortetsa I/P, but, unfortunately, their findspot(s) is problematic. One possible explanation for the large number of seals in the tomb is that a seal assemblage was robbed from a BA tomb and subsequently redeposited together in tomb I/P.
Indeed, several Final Palatial and Postpalatial tombs in the Knossos area contained multiple seals within one tomb,417 and looting of tombs of these dates was quite common.418 The assemblage of seals could have been subsequently redeposited in an EIA burial. This possibility is undermined by the different production dates of the four Fortetsa I/P seals: one dates to the Protopalatial period and the other three date to the Neopalatial period. The one Protopalatial piece would have been a very old antique in a Final or Postpalatial tomb (370-750 years old).
Two alternative explanations could be offered for the exceptional concentration of seals in tomb I/P. First, this tomb was one of the richest EIA tombs in the Knossos area (and also by far the tomb with most burials),419 and the use of multiple seals, probably in one jewelry piece, may have been a means of displaying status. Second, tomb I/P was primarily used during the
Orientalizing period.420 By this time, seals were being produced in and imported to Crete,421 a
416 It may also have been associated with a pithos which held forty amber beads—more object with which the seal could have been strung. 417 Examples include three seals in Zapher Papoura tomb 36 (Evans 1905, pp. 58-59), two seals from Zapher Papoura tomb 99 (Evans 1905, p. 89, fig. 101), two in Upper Gypsades II and two in Upper Gypsades VII (Hood et. al 1958-59, pp. 200, 208). 418 About 40% of the 100 LM III Zapher Papoura tombs were robbed (Evans 1905, pp. 1-3, 103-104). 419 Kotsonas 2011; Antoniadis 2012, pp. 195-196. 420 Brock 1957, p. 101. 421 Boardman 2001, pp. 110-111. 75 new development which may have affected the value of antique seals. Within nearby Fortetsa tomb II, two EIA imported seals (Fortetsa nos. 1071 and 1074)—one of jasper and the other of steatite—were found inside an Orientalizing polychrome pithos.422 Based on their imagery and context, the seals seem to have been strung together in a jewelry piece that highlighted connections with Egypt. The carvings on both seals are imitations of hieroglyphs, and seal 1074 is scaraboid, an Egyptianizing shape.423 Three faience scarabs and several beads were found alongside the seals in the pithos; the seals, scarabs, and beads were probably all hung together.424
Therefore, rather than the seals being a single featured piece, they were valuable when used as part of a composition and in multiples. The use of BA seals in the Orientalizing period, specifically those found in tomb I/P, may have conformed to this practice. 425 By this period, perhaps, possession of multiple seals became a major expression of wealth as opposed to earlier periods when highlighting one particular piece was the norm.
Contextualizing the Knossos Finds: BA Seals in EIA Contexts outside Knossos
Although the Knossos area has the largest concentration of Minoan seals deposited in the
EIA, there are many other Cretan EIA burial sites where BA seals have been found. Comparing the antiques found in these areas with those from Knossos highlights some of the peculiarities about the Knossos assemblage as well as some commonalities in the reuse of BA material in EIA
Crete.
According to research by Eberhard Thomas and Olga Krzyszkowska respectively,426 four
Cretan sites besides Knossos have BA seals redeposited in EIA tombs: Chamaizi,427
422 Brock 1957, p. 96. 423 Brock 1957, pp. 96, 208-209. 424 Skon-Jedele 1994, p. 1840. Two beads and three pendants were also found in the pithos (Brock 1957, p. 96). 425 Of the other antique seals, only KNC 129.f1 could have been deposited in the Orientalizing period. Its deposition dates anywhere between EG-EO (KNC I, p. 170). 426 Thomas 1987; Krzyszkowska 2005a, p. 309, n. 148. 427 CMS V, nos. 22, 49. 76
Vrokastro,428 Elounda,429 and Eleutherna.430 Only ten seals were found at the sites. This is only slightly more than the total amount found in the Knossos area. In shape and date, the seals from the sites in other parts of Crete are similar to the Knossian ones. They have been dated to the
Neopalatial period431 and include five amygdaloids, two cushion seals, two lentoids, and one discoid seal.432 As emphasized previously, the Knossian seals are primarily Neopalatial and, thus, fit in with this Cretan wide pattern.
While shape and production date are similar between the Knossian and other Cretan assemblages, the Knossos seals differ greatly from the others in regards to their material. The seals from Knossos were primarily of soft stone. This contrasts with the other Cretan antique seals which are of hard stone, with the exception of one heavily worn seal of slate from Chamaizi grave 3 (CMS V, no. 49).433 Six are carnelian, one jasper, one hematite, and one agate.434 While hard stone seals may have been chosen due to their foreign materials, exotic colors, and technical precision, it is more difficult to explain why the Knossian antiques would be of soft stone, particularly given the wealth and high level of craftsmanship at BA Knossos and the large number of Neopalatial seals made of hard stones.435 This perplexing pattern remains to be resolved.
The date of redeposition for the antique seals from outside Knossos ranges from SMin to
EO. While one seal from Vrokastro is only half preserved, the other non-Knossian pieces are
428 CMS II.3, nos. 228-230. 429 CMS V Suppl. 1A, no. 50. 430 CMS V Suppl. 3, nos. 328-329; Stampolidis 2004, nos. 392-393; Stampolidis 2012, no. 42. 431 Three seals from Eleutherna have only been published in a museum catalogue (Stampolidis 2012, no. 42) and have not been assigned a production date. 432 CMS II.3, nos. 228-230; CMS V, nos. 22, 49; CMS V Suppl. 1A, no. 50; CMS V Suppl. 3, nos. 328-329; Stampolidis 2012, no. 42. 433 The material of the three unpublished Eleutherna seals (Stampolidis 2012, no. 42) has also not been identified. The stone is orange-red. 434 CMS II.3, nos. 228-230; CMS V, no. 49; CMS V Suppl. 1A, no. 50; CMS V Suppl. 3, nos. 328-329. 435 In LM I, 75% of seals were made of hard stones (Krzyszkowska 2005a, p. 124). 77 undamaged. The range of motifs is similar to those found at Knossos, but, while the Knossian seals typically depict either a geometric design or a quadruped, the non-Knossian ones have far more talismanic designs and fewer quadrupeds. They include six talismanic designs, one pair of fishes, one squid, one ship, one double axe and one heavily weathered quadruped.436 These images, like the ones on Knossian seals, appear in EIA visual representation and would have been familiar to EIA audiences. Talismanic designs were popular images on seals produced in the Orientalizing period as were marine animals.437 At the same time, the large number of talismanic designs and the lack of the agrimi on non-Knossian seals shows how the Knossian antiques were an oddity among the Cretan wide assemblage. The difference in material and motifs between antique seals found at Knossos and those found at other Cretan sites is a pattern that remains to be interpreted.
Final Remarks
Rather than seals made of the most exotic hard stones or ones with the most finely carved, complex scenes, the seals selected for use in EIA Knossian burials were constructed of soft stones available in Crete, featured iconography common in EIA art, and even, at times, showed technical flaws. Nevertheless, the seemingly ordinary character of the seals does not mean that the value of the objects was diminished. In most phases of the EIA, they were used as stand-alone jewelry pieces or as the main focus of beaded necklaces. However, in the
Orientalizing period multiple BA seals may have been strung together in one piece. The elaborate gold backing of KNC 18.f3, a piece that had an exceptionally rich life cycle, shows the large investment Knossians were willing to put into these objects. At the same time, this gold-set seal shows how EIA Knossians made objects from a largely foreign BA past into something
436 CMS II.3, nos. 228-230; CMS V, nos. 22, 49; CMS V Suppl. 1A, no. 50; CMS V Suppl. 3, nos. 328-329; Stampolidis 2012, no. 42. 437 Pini 1975; Krzyszkowska 2005a, p. 310. 78 familiar: the seal depicted the common Cretan wild goat, was worn in a similar manner to pendants that adorned many of the EIA deceased, and was placed in a gold backing just as other rare materials were embellished by the Teke School. Selected seals bridged the 500-1,300 year old gap between the BA and EIA through their familiar images and connections to the past, thereby creating a past for EIA Knossians that resembled EIA life.
79
Chapter 4
BA BEADS IN EIA KNOSSIAN TOMBS
While BA seals in EIA contexts are easily identifiable due to their multiplicity of distinguishing characteristics (shapes, materials, motifs, production technology, etc.), BA beads in EIA contexts are more difficult to recognize, because BA beads can be similar to those produced in the EIA. The two major characteristics used to differentiate BA beads from EIA beads are morphology, particularly shapes unique to the BA, and material, particularly materials that do not appear to have been worked during certain parts of the EIA. Most BA Cretan beads have been uncovered in BA burials,438 which have often been disturbed or used over a long period of time and therefore are difficult to date. As a result, it is difficult to assign a date to individual BA beads and to identify chronological trends in BA bead shapes.439 Due to this lack of fine-grain stylistic differentiation, most of the BA beads used in EIA tombs at Knossos cannot be given a more precise date than LM. Nevertheless, through a contextual and stylistic analysis of the beads in the KNC that seemingly date to the BA, patterns in redepositional dates, redepositional locations, and materials become apparent. As in the previous chapters, a summary of BA bead production and use will be provided, and the summary will be limited to LBA beads, as the beads found in the EIA tombs date to the LBA. This will be followed by a summary of
EIA bead production and use. Each object will then be profiled, highlighting its morphological and stylistic traits as well as its role in EIA mortuary practices.
438 Effinger 1996, pp. 23-40; Konstantinidi 2001, pp. 172-198. 439 Effinger 1996, p. 87; Konstantinidi 2001, pp. 1-2; Nikita 2003, p. 23. 80
I. CRETAN LBA BEADS
Contexts, Functions and Ownership
Due to the dearth of Neopalatial burials on most of Crete and the resulting lack of preserved grave goods from this period,440 little Neopalatial jewelry has been uncovered, and therefore little is known about the beads of this period.441 However, it seems that from the
Neopalatial-Postpalatial periods beaded jewelry largely served the same functions: it was worn by the living,442 buried with the dead,443 deposited as dedications,444 and gifted to foreign rulers.445 While beads have been found in settlement contexts,446 they are more commonly uncovered in tombs, where they decorated the body447 or were collected in vessels.448 Beaded jewelry was not only a decorative element but also something that could encode status449 and potentially signify religious positions450 or play a role in religious rites.451
Wall paintings, terracotta figurines, rhyta, and other BA media—which show men, women, and children wearing necklaces, anklets, bracelets, and other beaded ornamentation452— are another source of evidence for studying BA beaded jewelry.453 Although wall paintings provide many insights into how beads were used and worn, many frescoes have contested
440 Rehak and Younger 1998, pp. 110-111; Hatzaki 2012, p. 310. 441 Effinger 1996, p. 87; Evely 2000, p. 424. 442 As is shown on frescoes. Younger 1992. 443 Konstantinidi 2001. 444 Depictions of women and men holding beads rather than wearing them may suggest beads were deposited as dedications (Marinatos 1984, p. 75). Finds of beads at sanctuaries in the Cyclades and on the mainland support this (Nightingale 2000, p. 9). 445 On an Egyptian wall painting in the Tomb of Rekhmire, Cretans appear to be bringing offerings of beads to an Egyptian official (PM II.2, fig. 473; Younger 1992, p. 268, no. 51; Hughes-Brock 1993, p. 220). 446 Konstantinidi 2001, pp. 226-232. 447 Pieces found around the heads, wrists, and necks of bodies suggest jewelry was used to decorate the corpse. Konstantinidi 2001, pp. 244-248. 448 Konstantinidi 2001, pp. 236, 250. 449 Younger 1992, p. 276; Konstantinidi 2001, pp. 236-238. 450 Effinger 1996, p. 88; Hughes-Brock 1999, p. 291; Konstantinidi 2001, pp. 238-239, 241-243. 451 Younger 1992, p. 263; Effinger 1996, p. 88; Konstantinidi 2001, pp. 238-243. 452 For an extensive discussion of visual depictions of jewelry, see Younger 1992. 453 Effinger 1996, p. 3. 81 dates,454 which makes it difficult to use them to differentiate or identify chronological trends in jewelry. Additionally, frescoes and terracotta figurines depict particular contexts, events, and social classes that are unlikely to represent every day events or the life of an average person;455 thus, representations of beads on these media may show particular uses of beaded jewelry rather than general uses.
Final and Postpalatial beads are found frequently and in more widespread locations than in previous periods, which suggests that beaded jewelry was owned by a larger section of the population at this time.456 Although richer tombs contained larger quantities of beads, these objects were deposited in graves of all types.457 Beads of hard stone and vitreous material continued to be deposited in graves of the LM IIIC period; nevertheless, the quantity of deposited beads decreased greatly and many were antiques at the time of their deposition.458 By the end of LM IIIC, beads of hard stones and vitreous materials were no longer produced.459
Although Neopalatial tombs at Poros did contain elaborate beaded jewelry,460 in the
Knossos area, beads have primarily been found in Final Palatial-Postpalatial burials.461 They are particularly common in the area’s LM II-IIIA1 “warrior graves,” where they were deposited with weapons and vessels.462 Most tombs contained one to three beads, but one Sellopoulo tomb
(tomb 3) had 38 glass beads,463 and a Mavro Spelio grave (chamber B) had 72 faience beads.464
Beaded Jewelry Types and Bead Shapes
454 Cameron 1975; Hood 2005. 455 Konstantinidi 2001, p. 233; Morgan 2005, p. 21. 456 Jewelry is particularly common in LM III tombs. Effinger 1996, p. 87. 457 Nightingale 2008, p. 82. 458 Evely 2000, p. 430; Dickinson 2006, p. 166. 459 Nightingale 2002, p. 313; Dickinson 2006, p. 166. 460 Muhly 1992, pp. 89-93; Dimopoulou 1999, p. 32; Konstantinidi 2001, pp. 178-179. 461 For a catalog of beads in Knossian Final Palatial-Postpalatial burials, see Konstantinidi 2001, pp. 186-191, 195- 198. 462 Kilian-Dirlmeier 1985, 1988; Alberti 2004. For the origins and significance of the term “warrior grave,” see Alberti 2004, p. 129. 463 Popham, Catling, and Catling 1974, pp. 222-224; Konstantinidi 2001, p. 197. 464 Forsdyke 1926-27, pp. 252-254; Konstantinidi 2001, p. 195. 82
Necklaces—which could be chokers or multi-stranded, have one bead or hundreds, and be composed of uniform beads or diverse ones—were the most common type of beaded jewelry.465 Beads also could be used in other forms of jewelry, sewn onto clothing, or used as pinheads.466 While beads, especially ones made of faience, were common in the Neopalatial period,467 they were ubiquitous during LM IIIA-B when mass-manufactured glass bead production reached its peak.468
LM bead shapes can be divided into three categories: 1.) simple beads, 2.) composite beads, and 3.) relief beads.469 Simple beads were relatively uniform and either rounded
(spherical, ovoid, etc.) or faceted (rectangular, conical, etc.).470 Composite beads were the same basic shapes as simple beads but had added decorative elements, such as collars or grooves.471
More elaborate were the characteristically Mycenaean relief beads,472 which were mould-made and were shaped like flora, fauna, hybrid creatures, objects, and abstract motifs.473
Materials
LBA Cretan beads were made of organic materials, metals, clay, stone, faience, and glass. Although most organic pieces have not survived, ivory and bone beads have been discovered on occasion,474 and beads imitating seed shapes may indicate seeds were once used as beads.475 Gold, silver, and bronze were all used for beads from the Neopalatial-Postpalatial
465 Hughes-Brock 1998, p. 249; Hughes-Brock 1999, pp. 278-279; Nikita 2003, p. 33. 466 Nightingale 2000, p. 8; Hughes-Brock 1999, p. 278. 467 Panagiotaki 2008, pp. 39-40. 468 Nightingale 2000, p. 6. 469 Kalliopi Nikita uses these designations for glass beads (Nikita 2003, pp. 28-31), but the categories can be applied to beads of other materials as well. 470 Nikita 2003, p. 28. For a typological catalogue, see Effinger 1996, pp. 23-30. 471 Nikita 2003, pp. 28-29. 472 These objects have not been found outside of the Aegean and have often been interpreted as a marker of Mycenaean identity (Hughes-Brock 1998, p. 265; Panagiotaki et al. 2004, p. 164). 473 For a list of relief bead types with excellent illustrations, see Higgins 1980, pp. 76-83. See also Effinger 1996, pp. 30-40; Nightingale 2000, p. 8. 474 Evely 2000, pp. 239, 242. 475 Hughes-Brock 1999, pp. 288-289. 83 periods, with gold being the most commonly used of the metals.476 As with seals, both soft
(serpentine and steatite) and hard stones (including amethyst, rock crystal, carnelian, amber and lapis lazuli) were used to make beads.477 During the Postpalatial period, the range of hard stones used in jewelry declined, and stone bead production had stopped by the end of LM IIIC.478
Faience and glass (vitreous materials)—man-made materials produced by heating silica—are difficult to differentiate without scientific analysis and were both used for beads in the LM period.479 Although faience was more common than glass on Crete in the Neopalatial period,480 glass later overtook faience as the major vitreous material for jewelry production following its introduction on the island in LM IA.481 During LM III, both materials were used primarily to make mass-produced, simple beads, while glass was also used to produce relief beads and inlays.482 Aegean glass beads were almost exclusively blue and rarely decorated,483 while LM faience beads typically were covered in blue glaze.484 Faience and glass working probably took place at the major Aegean palatial centers, especially Mycenae and Knossos,485 and had stopped by the end of LM IIIC.486
476 Effinger 1996, p. 23; Evely 2000, pp. 424-430. 477 Konstantinidi 2001, pp. 8-9, 10. For a more extensive discussion of stone sources and types, see chapter 3. 478 Dickinson 2006, pp. 119, 166. 479 Sherratt 2008, p. 210. For specifics on the differences between the two materials, see Krzyszkowska 2005a, p. 352; Sherratt 2008, pp. 209-210. Throughout this thesis, faience and glass antiques will be distinguished according to the information given in the publication, but the focus will be upon the distinction between vitreous and non- vitreous materials. 480 Faience production on Crete reached a high point in the Neopalatial period (Maniatis, Panagiotaki, and Kaczmarczyk 2008, p. 111). 481 Panagiotaki 2008, p. 45. There is no certain evidence glass was produced on Crete in the BA; however, it seems that unprocessed glass was worked at Knossos by LM IB (Cadogan 1976; Panagiotaki 2008, p. 46). The peak of Aegean glass production was in LM IIIA/B (Nightingale 2000, p. 6). 482 Nikita 2003; Panagiotaki 2008, pp. 45-48. 483 Nikita 2003, p. 25; Nightingale 2008, pp. 67, 77. 484 Panagiotaki 2008, p. 49. 485 Moulds are concentrated around the palaces, which suggests that these sites were the major areas of production (Nightingale 2000, p. 6). At Knossos, glass waste found to the west of the palace may indicate that this is where glass was worked (Cadogan 1976; Panagiotaki et al. 2004, pp. 153, 164; Panagiotaki 2008, pp. 46-47). 486 Dickinson 2006, pp. 119, 166; Nightingale 2008, p. 88; Sherratt 2008, pp. 218-219, n. 22. 84
II. CRETAN EIA BEADS
Materials, Shapes, and Contexts
While beads were ubiquitous in LM IIIA-B burials, they were rare in the EIA.487 Faience and glass bead production seems to have stopped by the SMin period, although beads of vitreous materials continued to be imported from the Eastern Mediterranean.488 Hard stone working seems to have ceased by this period too,489 while gold, silver, and bronze continued to be manufactured, albeit in smaller quantities.490
The importation of Eastern Mediterranean beads of vitreous materials—primarily disc shaped faience pieces—was particularly common in the 10th and early 9th centuries.491 By the late 9th- early 8th century, though, the deposition and importation of faience had decreased, and the working and importation of glass and hard stone beads (especially amber and rock crystal) had begun.492 Glass beads were primarily spherical or sub-spherical in shape and had varied colors including translucent green, brown, and violet.493 These beads continued to be popular into the early 7th century.494 Rock crystal and amber beads occurred in particularly high
487 Dickinson 2006, pp. 158, 166. Beads of simple materials, such as clay and bone, are lacking from EIA contexts in addition to the more valuable metal and hard stone beads (Dickinson 2006, p. 166). 488 Dickinson 2006, p. 119; Sherratt 2008, p. 218. 489 Hard stone jewelry pieces found in SMin contexts probably were produced in the BA or were imported (Dickinson 2006, pp. 119, 166). 490 Dickinson 2006, pp. 119-120, 166. SMin KNC 200, which contained 81 small gold beads, is one of the few burials from this period with large amounts of gold (KNC I, pp. 192-194; Catling 1996c, pp. 530-531; Higgins 1996a, p. 539). While bronze was not commonly used for jewelry during the LBA, in the EIA, due to the development of iron, bronze was no longer reserved for utilitarian purposes and became more common in jewelry (Higgins 1980, p. 88; Hughes-Brock 2003, p. 13). 491 The burials at Toumba Lefkandi have the largest concentration of these imports (Webb 1996, pp. 599-600; Sherratt 2008, p. 219; Sherratt 2010, p. 130), but a few have also been found at Knossos (Webb 1996, p. 599) and in the Argolid (Dickinson 2006, p. 167). 492 Webb 1996, p. 600; Sherratt 2008, p. 219; Sherratt 2010, pp. 130-131. 493 Webb 1996, pp. 600-603, 609. 494 Webb 1996, pp. 600-603, 609. 85 quantities in the Teke tholos (late 9th-7th century),495 but were relatively rare in other contexts.496
EIA beads were primarily strung as necklaces but also could be used for bracelets or armlets.497 In addition to their use as jewelry, they served as grave goods and as dedications at sanctuaries.498 Similar to BA beads, EIA beads seem to have been status markers, but the relative rarity of EIA beads suggests that these objects were more restricted in ownership than their LM counterparts.499 The Eastern origin of SMin and EPG beads further suggests that, during these periods, faience and glass beads were significant for their connection to the foreign and exotic.500
III. BA BEADS IN EIA TOMBS AT KNOSSOS
Seven BA beads were discovered in Knossian EIA tombs (all in the KNC), five of which were found together in the same tomb. In addition to these seven beads, three sets of beads found in the Teke tholos tomb were tentatively dated to the BA by John Boardman and Richard
Hutchinson in their publication of the Teke tomb.501 Although it is possible that two of the three sets are BA beads, there is not sufficient evidence at this time to support this claim.502 Thus, the below study will be limited to the seven beads from the KNC.
495 Hutchinson and Boardman 1954; Boardman 1967. 496 Sakellarakis 1988, p. 187; Kotsonas 2006. 497 Evely 1996, p. 622; Dickinson 2006, p. 167. 498 For a list of the sites at which amber beads have been found, see Sakellarakis 1988, pp. 186-187. 499 Dickinson 2006, p. 166. 500 Sherratt 2010, p. 219; Sherratt 2010, pp. 130-131. 501 Hutchinson and Boardman 1954, p. 219; Boardman 1967, nos. 5, 30-42, 77. 502 The three sets include a necklace of gold lined rock crystal beads (Khaniale Teke nos. 30-42), a group of beads of diverse material and shape (Khaniale Teke no. 77), and a gold lined spacer bead (Khaniale Teke no. 5). Hutchinson argued that beads Khaniale Teke nos 30-42, nine of which had gold-lined string-holes, could have dated from the BA. The dating was based upon the spherical shape of the beads and the small size of their string-holes (Hutchinson and Boardman 1954, p. 219); however, Boardman argued that they were not BA pieces. He highlighted the use of rock-crystal elsewhere in the tomb as well as the beads’ gold additions to argue that they were EIA products (Boardman 1967, p. 63). In support of his two important points are the spherical amber beads with gold-lined string-holes dating to the 8th century that were found at the Idaean Cave (Sakellarakis 1988, pp. 184- 187), which suggest that this style of necklace was common in the EIA. 86
KNC 200.f2 a/b, 200.f6, 200.f9, 200.f11 (Figures 48-54)
In KNC 200, three faience and two glass LM beads were mixed in with the bones of a cremated adult female, the only person buried in KNC 200.503 Two of the beads were ellipsoid and three were spherical. The two ellipsoid beads, KNC 200.f2a/b, are both made of faience and have four lobes (Figures 48-49, 52).504 The longer of the two beads has a deep central notch framed by two shallower ones, while the shorter simply has one deep notch.505 Additionally, the longer bead has straight edges, whereas the shorter bead has rounded edges. Both have string- holes through their long axis and roughly square cross-sections (Figure 49). This shape is classified as “incised four sided” or “seed-shaped” and was a common LBA faience bead shape.506 Also, the inside of each bead is brown,507 a common color for faience seed-shaped beads.508 At the time of their LBA deposition, the beads were probably covered in a cobalt blue glaze,509 but the glaze has since deteriorated.
The group of beads of diverse material and shape (Khaniale Teke no. 77) contained some beads which Boardman suggested had BA shapes. One is a pierced disc of rock-crystal, one is an amygdaloid, two others are of an unknown material, and another is a flattened cylinder (Boardman 1967, p. 70, no. 77, pl. XLIX). Unfortunately, little is published about them, and more information is needed to determine whether these objects are truly BA ones. The gold lined spacer bead (Khaniale Teke no. 5). may date to the LBA, but it only has one thread hole (Boardman 1967, p. 68), whereas LBA spacer beads typically had five holes (Strong 1966, p. 16; Harding, Hughes- Brock, and Beck 1974, p. 155). The five string-holes were integral to the bead’s purpose, which was to connect five strands of beads to form one necklace (although they may not have always served this function in the Aegean, see Hughes-Brock 2005, p. 301); thus, the lack of the five holes is a particular problem. Given the plethora of amber products in the Teke tholos, it is possible that the bead is an EIA product. 503 KNC I, p. 192; Musgrave 1996, p. 692. 504 KNC I, p. 193. 505 In the object description, the beads are treated as if they have the same shape, and the illustrations makes the beads look almost identical (Figure 48); however, the photograph seems to show a difference in the number and shape of the notches (Figure 52). It is possible that the shorter bead has more notches on the other side, but seed- shaped beads usually have the same notch patterning on all four sides (Nightingale 2008, p. 65). 506 Goldstein 1979, p. 92, no. 171b; Grose 1989, p. 65, no. 25; Webb 1996, p. 599; Effinger 1996, p. 25; Nightingale 2000, p. 8, fig. 2.16; Panagiotaki et al. 2004, p. 155; Panagiotaki 2008, p. 49. 507 KNC I, p. 193. 508 Panagiotaki 2008, p. 49. 509 Brown colored faience beads were covered with blue glaze in the LBA (Panagiotaki 2008, p. 49; Nightingale 2008, p. 64; Tite and Shortland 2008, pp. 121-123). 87
The second antique faience piece, KNC 200.f9, is a creamy-yellow spherical bead with grey calcinations (Figures 51 and 53).510 Similar to KNC 200.f2a/b, the bead originally would have had a dark blue glaze.511 Spherical faience beads, like seed-shaped ones, were popular in the LBA,512 and yellow-cored faience was a common material.513
Only fragments of spherical dark blue glass bead KNC 200.f11 were found in KNC
200.514 Despite the bead’s fragmentary state, it is clear that KNC 200.f11 was a very typical LBA glass bead; as was mentioned above, Aegean LBA glass beads were a dark, cobalt blue in color,515 and spherical beads are one of the most common types.516
Glass bead KNC 200.f6 also has a spherical shape but is slightly irregular and flattened at the top and bottom (Figure 50, 53-54).517 This bead is larger than spherical faience bead KNC
200.f9 and has a dark brown-green base with a green on white trail decoration (Figure 54).518 Of the antique beads found in the Knossos area, KNC 200.f6 is the only decorated piece, and decorated glass pieces were rare even in the LBA.519 The green color of the bead is a further oddity, as LBA Aegean glass beads are blue.520 In addition to its unique decoration, the piece was made through an unusual manufacturing technique. According to Virginia Webb, KNC
200.f6 was made through core-winding521—a technique not used in the LBA Aegean.522 While it is possible that the bead was made using wire winding—a similar technique to core-winding that
510 KNC I, p. 194. 511 Panagiotaki 2008, p. 49; Nightingale 2008, p. 64; Tite and Shortland 2008, pp. 121-123. 512 Effinger 1996, p. 25; Nightingale 2000, p. 8; Panagiotaki et al. 2004, p. 155. 513 Panagiotaki 2008, p. 49. 514 KNC I, p. 194; Webb 1996, p. 599. 515 Nikita 2003, p. 25; Nightingale 2008, p. 77. 516 Effinger 1996, p. 25; Nightingale 2000, p. 8; Nikita 2003, p. 28. 517 KNC I, p. 194; Webb 1996, p. 598. 518 Webb 1996, p. 599. 519 Nightingale 2008, p. 67. 520 Nikita 2003, p. 25; Nightingale 2008, p. 77. Corrosion often changes the color of the glass from its original blue; however, it usually becomes an opaque white (Nikita 2003, p. 25) rather than green. Thus, corrosion does not seem to be the explanation for the green color. 521 Webb 1996, p. 599. 522 Nikita 2003, p. 27. For an explanation of core-winding, see Grose 1989, p. 31. 88 may have been employed in the LBA Aegean523—it is also possible (and more probable given the color of the bead) that it was an import. Differentiating locally produced beads from foreign ones is problematic,524 but it does seem that simple circular shaped beads were imported from
Egypt and the Near East in the LBA525 and were often strung together with locally produced beads.526 Beads with a trail decoration, like that of KNC 200.f6, are the most likely candidates to be imports from the East.527 Indeed, two spherical trail-decorated beads found in Sellopoulo tomb 4 (Figure 55), which resemble KNC 200.f6 in shape and decoration, have been hypothesized to be from Egypt.528
The five antique beads in KNC 200 were likely strung together in a necklace or a bracelet.529 Seed-shaped beads were often used as spacer beads in the LBA,530 and they may have been placed between each of the three spherical beads in the KNC 200 necklace. The pin head and 81 gold beads that were also found with the woman’s cremated bones531 likely decorated the corpse along with the antique beads. Additionally, the burial contained two gold- sheeted relief rosettes (KNC 200.f3), which, although probably not antiques,532 greatly resemble
523 Nikita 2003, p. 27. 524 Nikita 2003, p. 25; Nightingale 2008, pp. 73-75. 525 Nightingale 2008, p. 74. 526 Nikita 2003, p. 25. 527 Nightingale 2008, p. 74. 528 Popham, Catling, and Catling 1974, pp. 214, 224, fig. 11n, pls. 36e, 38j; Nightingale 2008, p. 74. The beads differ from KNC 200.f6 in color and size: the color of the Sellopoulo beads is described as “silvery grey and black,” and they are significantly larger than KNC 200.f6. Just as KNC 200.f6, though, the bead was strung with other beads of different shapes and was found in a burial with gold rosettes. 529 Catling 1996c, p. 535. 530 Goldstein 1979, nos. 171, 172. 531 KNC I, p. 192. 532 Reynold Higgins (1996a, p. 539) and Hector Catling (Catling 1996c, pp. 530-531) consider rosettes KNC 200.f3 to be SMin products (contra Webb 1996, p. 599, who seems to consider them antiques). Gold sheeted rosette reliefs were first produced in the LM period as decoration for burial shrouds (Popham, Catling, and Catling 1974, pp. 206, 214, 224; Effinger 1996, pp. 5-6), and they appear to continue to be produced into LM IIIC and the EIA (Higgins 1996a, p. 539; Catling 1996c, p. 531; Laffineur 1998, p. 9; for Cypriot production in the early Cypro-Geometric I or Cretan SMin-EPG, see SCE I, pls. 44, 57; Yon 1971, pp. 12-13, pl. 14). KNC 200 contained several other EIA gold ornaments, and it seem probable that the rosettes were EIA products as well. Another gold relief rosette was found in SMin KNC 40 (KNC 40.f2). While Catling is skeptical that this object was produced in the SMin period (Catling 1996c, pp. 530-531), it is here considered as a SMin product. 89
BA objects.533 These objects were sewn onto burial shrouds in the LBA,534 and they seem to have served the same function in KNC 200.535 Rosettes, like beads, were common in LM III burials536 but infrequent in the EIA;537 thus, their deposition in an EIA tomb may have been intended to mirror BA practices.
KNC 200 is one of three niches in a pit cave burial complex that encompasses KNC 200-
202 (Figure 56)538 and is unique not only because of its form but also because of its wealth and ties to the LBA. The complex was one of the richest SMin tombs both in the Knossos area and on Crete539 and had the highest concentration of BA antiques of any EIA burial in the Knossos area. In addition to the five beads in KNC 200, KNC 201 yielded a bronze four-sided stand
(KNC 201.f1) (Figure 58) and fragments of a LM boar’s tusk helmet (KNC 201.f13) (Figure
59).540 Both objects were cremated with the bones of two adults (possibly one male and one female) and a child (?),541 and, as a result, the objects were highly damaged. Nineteen boar’s tusk plates, including several with stitch holes, remained.542 Fragments of the ring and legs of the bronze four-sided stand were preserved, including two registers of ajouré decoration depicting animals, a robed figure, and a sphinx.543 The object was originally produced on Cyprus in the LC
533 For BA gold-sheeted relief rosettes, see PN III, pp. 81-83, pl. 169; Popham, Catling, and Catling 1974, pp. 206, 214, 224, pl. 36b; Kardara 1977, pl. 4; Effinger 1996, pp. 5-6. 534 Popham, Catling, and Catling 1974, pp. 206, 214, 224. 535 The two rosettes have holes punched into them through which thread would have been sewn in order to attach the objects onto the shroud. Additionally, they were found mixed with the woman’s bones, suggesting they were on the body at the time of her cremation. 536 Effinger 1996, pp. 5-6. 537 Dickinson 2006, pp. 158, 166. 538 KNC I, pp. 191-192; Catling 1996b, p. 640. KNC 202 was empty. 539 Catling 1995, p. 126; KNC I, p. 193; Catling 1996b, pp. 645-649; Coldstream and Catling 1996, p. 715. 540 KNC I, pp. 191-192. 541 Musgrave 1996, p. 692. 542 KNC I, p. 195; Catling 1996c, pp. 534-535. 543 KNC I, p. 194; Catling 1996c, pp. 517-518; Papasavvas 2014, p. 320. 90
IIC-IIIA period (LM IIIB-IIIC),544 and it may be the only Knossian antique that was produced outside of Crete.
Due to the provenance of the stand and the morphology of the KNC 200 beads, Catling has argued that the antique beads are EIA Cypriot products which resemble Mycenaean beads,545 but, since the bead shapes and core-colors are consistent with LM pieces found in the Knossos area and since antiques were also found in KNC 201, it seems more probable that these pieces were Cretan products, perhaps robbed from one of the many Knossian LM tombs, which often contained beads.546 Through the use of LBA objects (KNC 200.f2 a/b, 200.f6, 200.f9, 200.f11) and objects which resemble LBA ones (gold rosettes KNC 200.f3), the burial in KNC 200 drew upon LBA burial practices and symbols of wealth. A similar use of LBA status symbols seems to have occurred in KNC 201, as will be discussed in chapter 5.
KNC 121.f3 (Figure 57)
One LM glass bead, KNC 121.f3, was reused in SMin tomb 121. The bead is a flattened sphere with a large string-hole through the center,547 a shape common in the LBA.548 When uncovered, the bead was opaque with patches of golden-yellow coloring; 549 however, at the time of its manufacture, it would have been blue.550
544 While the date of the object (BA or EIA) has been frequently debated (Catling 1984, 1996c, p. 518; Whitley 2013, p. 405), George Papasavvas (2001, 2004, 2012, 2014)—who has conducted extensive analysis of Cypriote type stands and tripods found on Crete—has shown that this object is one of the few Cretan stands that dates to the BA. 545 Catling 1995, pp. 125-126; Catling 1996c, p. 535. 546 Konstantinidi 2001, pp. 186-191, 195-198. 547 KNC I, p. 165; Webb 1996, p. 599. 548 Stern and Schlick-Nolte, no. 18; Nikita 2003, p. 28. 549 KNC I, p. 165; Webb 1996, p. 599. 550 Nikita 2003, p. 25; Nightingale 2008, p. 77. The corrosion of glass often changes the glass from its original blue to an opaque color (Nikita 2003, p. 25). 91
KNC 121 was located in the southern area of the KNC, the place where most of the SMin tombs were located.551 The bead was probably associated with the inhumation of a male possibly under 35.552 Two flasks and one stirrup jar were deposited with the man, but the bead was the only associated non-ceramic find. The other two burials in the tomb also only possessed one non- ceramic grave good (both were jewelry pieces);553 thus, while it is possible that the bead is an accidental deposition, it alternatively may have been hung by itself, possibly as a bracelet.554
KNC 78.f28
KNC 78.f28 is a faience flattened spherical bead with a yellow cream core that resembles bead KNC 200.f9.555 The bead was found just outside a LG/EO pithos burial (KNC 78) of a child between twelve and sixteen months old.556 Unfortunately, the pithos (KNC 78.1) was missing its top half, and many of the grave goods, including the bead, were found well outside the pithos.557
Closer to the pithos, another BA object, glass hairpin KNC 78.f11, was found. The hairpin is a hollow, rod-shaped pin with a spiral coil wound around the outside, and is of a type found in LM
I-IIIC contexts.558 In addition to these two antiques, a plethora of other objects were associated with the burial, including a beaded necklace (composed of amber, crystal, and glass beads), seven Egyptian objects (four scarabs and three faience figurines), and nine ceramic vessels.559
551 Catling 1996b, p. 641. 552 KNC I, pp. 164-165; Musgrave 1996, p. 691; Catling 1996c, pp. 644-645. The remains of three people were found in KNC 121: a male, a female, and a child. 553 The only other non-ceramic finds in the tomb were two bronze fibulae that were associated with the female and child and an incised ivory or bone tube that was said to have been found during the study of the osteological material from the tomb. 554 KNC I, p. 165; Catling 1996c, p. 535. 555 KNC I, p. 125; Webb 1996, p. 603, n. 1272. No photograph or drawing of KNC 78.f28 is published. 556 Musgrave (1996) does not mention the bones in his report; however, KNC I quotes him on the age of the child (KNC I, p. 123). 557 KNC I, p. 123. 558 KNC I, p. 124; Webb 1996, p. 603; Effinger 1996, p. 55. 559 KNC I, pp. 123-125. 92
The pit into which the pithos was inserted was placed in the southern portion of the KNC southeast sector and cut into the dromos of SMin KNC 112,560 making it difficult to identify to which burial individual grave goods belong. The situation is further complicated by a Hellenistic grave, which was also cut into the dromos of KNC 112.561 The large quantity of small finds associated with KNC 78562 contrasts with the lack of goods in KNC 112, which contained a few ceramics but no other materials.563 If the bead belongs to KNC 78, which seems probable given the dearth of small finds in KNC 112 and the large quantity of jewelry in KNC 78, it is the only antique beads in the KNC from a post-SMin context.
IV. CONCLUSIONS
A total of seven antique beads were found in just three Knossian EIA tombs. These three tombs are relatively well-preserved, and, as a result, they provide detailed information about how these beads were used. The materials, shapes, dates of redeposition, and redepositional locations of the seven antique beads are largely similar, while the ways in which they were displayed as well as the sexes with which they were associated differ.
Despite the diversity of materials used to produce BA beads, only faience and glass antique beads were found in the KNC. While faience and glass were the predominant materials used to produce LM beads, gold and hard stones were also common during the LBA.564 The lack of antique beads made of these materials may indicate BA objects of metal and hard stone were melted down or reworked rather than reused in their BA form. While glass and faience can also
560 KNC I, p. 123. 561 KNC I, p. 123. 562 The burial has 30 associated small finds and 10 associated ceramic objects. 563 KNC I, pp. 162-163. 564 Effinger 1996, p. 23; Nightingale 2000, p. 6. 93 be melted down,565 glass working does not seem to have continued in the EIA.566 In regards to shape, most of the Knossian antique beads are categorized as “simple” BA beads, and none are relief beads—the most complex type of LBA beads. Only KNC 200.f9 was a particularly unique bead, as it was decorated and probably imported. A LBA glass rosette inlay found in the KNC
(KNC 219.f12) (Figure 60) was made with the same techniques that were used to make relief beads, but it has no string-holes through which it could have been hung and, therefore, could not have been used as a bead. 567
Based on their vitreous materials and characteristically LBA shapes, the Knossian antique beads date to the LM period. Beads were commonly placed in Final Palatial and Postpalatial burials, and the BA beads in Knossian EIA burials may have been acquired from Final Palatial-
Postpalatial mortuary contexts.
Two out of the three tombs in which BA beads were found date to the SMin period, and the third, KNC 78, seems to date to the LG/EO period but was cut into a SMin tomb. If KNC
78.f22 does date to the LG/EO period, the bead would have been 500-900 years old when redeposited. This contrasts with the KNC 200 beads and bead KNC 121.f3, which both would have been 100-400 years old at the time of their redeposition and could have been deposited at a time when LBA practices were not very remote. Additionally, based on the redepositional dates of the beads, EIA interest in BA faience and glass beads seems to have occurred prior to (and possibly following) the EPG period—the period during which there was an interest in imported faience and glass beads both on Crete and on the mainland.568 The interest in antique faience and glass at Knossos, therefore, does not seem to be related to the EIA interest in imported Eastern
565 Sherratt 2008, p. 213. 566 Dickinson 2006, pp. 119-120, 166. 567 KNC I, p. 218. The inlay is a double petalled, mould-made rosette with eight petals. The surface of the object is yellow but was probably originally blue. It was redeposited in the PG period. 568 Popham, Sackett, and Themelis 1980, pp. 417-421; Webb 1996, pp. 599-600; Sherratt 2008, p. 219. 94 faience and glass beads. In other words, Knossians were not simply reusing BA faience and glass beads because the materials of BA beads resembled those of coveted EIA Eastern beads. At sites other than Knossos, antique BA faience and glass beads also have been found in LH IIIC and PG contexts. At Elateia, several beads were discovered in LH IIIC burials,569 and two BA faience beads were found in the Lefkandi Heroon (dated between 1000-950 B.C.).570 Indeed, one of the
Lefkandi faience beads is a “seed-shaped” or “four-sided” bead,571 which resembles KNC 200.f2 a/b. A “four-sided” bead was also found in a LH IIIC grave at Elateia.572
The three KNC tombs containing BA beads were located within 20 m of each other in the central area of the southern portion of the KNC—the portion of the cemetery where SMin tombs were concentrated and which contained a large amount of tombs with antiques.573 None of the tombs were identified as possible BA tombs in Cavanagh’s analysis of the Knossos area tombs,574 but the high concentration of antiques could be related to BA activity in the area, a possibility that will be explored in chapter 5. While the tombs were concentrated in a small area, they belong to different types: one was a pit cave, one was a chamber tomb, and one was a pithos burial. The beads were further associated with both inhumations and cremations and deposited with a male, a female, and a child.
While the five KNC 200 beads were probably part of one jewelry piece, KNC 121.f3, which was deposited at a roughly contemporaneous time, was not found with any BA or EIA jewelry575 and therefore may have been a singular pendant or amulet. During the SMin period,
569 Nightingale 2002, p. 313. 570 Popham, Touloupa, and Sackett 1982, pp. 171-172, pl. XXIIIb. 571 Popham, Touloupa, and Sackett 1982, p. 172, pl. XXIIIb. 572 Nightingale 2002, p. 313. 573 In addition to the beads, the antiques found in this area include sealstone KNC 2.f1, larnax KNC 98.19, larnax KNC 106.42, hairpin KNC 78.f11, boar’s tusk helmet KNC 201.f13, and bronze four-sided stand KNC 201.f1. This high concentration of antiques will be explored in chapter 5. 574 Cavanagh 1996, pp. 654-655. 575 Unless the pin found during the examination of the bones found in KNC 121 belonged with the male burial. 95 the possession of multiple antique beads may have been tied to status, particularly since the richer of the two SMin graves with antique beads (KNC 200) was the one with more beads. KNC
78.f28 seems to have been strung by itself; if this is so, none of the BA beads were strung with
EIA beads, and the BA beads may have been separated from other EIA beaded pieces due to their perceived antiquity.
Two out of the three tombs contained another antique in addition to the antique beads.576
Tomb 78 contained a BA glass hairpin (KNC 78.f11) as well as a BA faience bead (KNC
78.f28). In the KNC 200-202 complex, antique beads were deposited with the female burial in niche KNC 200, while a BA boar’s tusk helmet (KNC 201.f18) and a BA four-sided stand (KNC
201.f1) probably accompanied the male and female (and possibly child) burial in niche KNC
201. Through the deposition of these objects, ties to the LBA seem to have been promoted in both burials. This use is similar to the manner in which antiques were employed in the Lefkandi
Heroon, where a man and a woman were buried with several antiques, including jewelry pieces with the female and a bronze vessel with the male.577
The primarily SMin dates of the BA beads found in the KNC, their discovery alongside other antiques, and their similarity to BA beads in LH IIIC-EPG burials outside Knossos suggests that beads were a type of antique used in the earliest periods of the EIA to forge connections with the recent past. Although BA beads in EIA contexts largely seem to have served the same functions as they did in the BA, due to their age, their distinct shapes, and their materials, BA beads in EIA contexts additionally served as objects that recognizably dated to an earlier period, highlighting the differences between the BA and the EIA while, at the same time, presenting a visible connection to the past. Thus, despite the relative chronological closeness
576 The KNC 200-202 complex is here referred to as one tomb. 577 Popham, Touloupa, and Sackett 1982; Catling 1995. 96 between the LBA and the SMin period, through the deposition of BA beads in EIA Knossian burials, the differences (rather than the similarities) between the two periods were promoted and individual connections to this previous era were displayed.
97
Chapter 5
SYNTHESIS: BA OBJECTS AND KNOSSIAN EIA SOCIETY
While the three previous chapters were centered on the analysis of the material classes into which the majority of Knossian antiques can be grouped (larnakes, seals, and beads), this chapter synthesizes patterns in the redepositional contexts and functions of Knossian antiques across material classes. In particular, it focuses on the methods through which the antiques were acquired and the diachronic distinctions—which were revealed through the object biographies presented in the previous chapters—between the materials, quantities, types, and spatial distribution of BA objects reused in the EIA. There are particularly marked contrasts in the morphologies and distribution of BA objects redeposited in the SMin period, the EPG-LPG periods, and the PGB-O periods. These contrasts are indicative of fundamental differences in how and why the past was employed during these three eras, and they reflect (and are the product of) broader diachronic sociopolitical changes within EIA Knossian society.
I. ANTIQUE ACQUISITION
While information on the provenance of the different objects cannot always be obtained without more detailed macroscopic and microscopic evidence, the available descriptions of the materials (clay, faience, and glass) suggest that the majority of larnakes and beads were locally made and therefore locally acquired.578 A local provenance for the antiques is further supported by the fact that the shapes of the different antique objects were typical for BA objects found in
578 Glass bead KNC 200.f6 may have been produced in the Near East or Egypt, but it was probably transported to Knossos during the BA. Bronze four-sided stand KNC 201.f1 was produced in Cyprus (Papasavvas 2001, pp. 82-84, 241-242; Papasavvas 2012, p. 132), but it remains unclear whether it was transported to Knossos in the BA or the EIA. Additionally, two of the antique larnakes (KNC 294.6 and KNC 294.63) have fabrics that differ from the coarse orange fabric typical of the other antique larnakes, which may suggest that these two were produced outside Knossos. 98
the Knossos area. The larnakes were almost exclusively chest-shaped larnakes—the most common larnax form in Knossian LM III graves—while the beads were all popular Aegean BA bead shapes, including seed-shaped and spherical beads. Similarly, the antique seals were primarily amygdaloids and lentoids, which were two of the most common BA Aegean seal shapes.
The small seals and beads (seals: 1-2.2 x 1.1-1.6 cm; beads: 1-1.8 x 0.5-0.65 cm) are highly portable and could have been circulated, exchanged, or traded locally prior to their EIA redeposition.579 Antique larnakes, on the other hand, due to their large size (53-76 x 84-130 cm), are unlikely to have been circulated prior to their reuse; instead, they must have been acquired from local sites and transported directly to the tomb.580 These seals, beads, and larnakes were probably acquired through tomb robbing rather than through inheritance or gift exchange.
Larnakes were far too large and unwieldy to have been passed down through generations or exchanged as gifts, and the seals and beads, while portable, showed few signs of the type of extensive wear that might be expected from an object that had been handed down through the centuries.581 Additionally, the seemingly local material of the antiques suggests that these objects were not acquired through foreign trade or gift exchange.582
The production dates of the antiques and the evidence from Knossian LBA tomb assemblages suggest that the antique objects were acquired from local Final Palatial-Postpalatial tombs. The antique beads date to the LM period, and beads of this date frequently, though not
579 Few of the Knossian antiques offer direct evidence for such exchange, but gold-set seal KNC 18.f3, which underwent at least three modifications, could have circulated and been modified by particular individuals. Additionally, Whitley (2013) has argued that the antiques in KNC 201 (bronze four-sided stand KNC 201.f1 and boar’s tusk helmet KNC 201.f13) were exchanged as gifts. The seemingly local provenance of most of the Knossian antiques, though, suggests that the objects were circulated locally (if at all). 580 As Coldstream has stated, “To think that these cumbersome objects had been stored for so long in people’s houses would be absurd” (1996b, p. 242). 581 In particular, seal Fortetsa no. 1169 was “workshop fresh,” which means it had no signs of use-wear. 582 The bronze four-sided stand (KNC 201.f1), which was produced in Cyprus in LM IIIB-C (Papasavvas 2012, p. 132), may be an exception. It is unclear at what point this object arrived at Knossos.
99
exclusively, are found in Final Palatial-Postpalatial tombs.583 Although the antique seals were primarily produced in the Neopalatial period, they also were probably acquired from Final
Palatial-Postpalatial tombs. Neopalatial tombs rarely contained seals, while Final Palatial-
584 Postpalatial tombs often did. Larnakes are found almost exclusively in LM IIIA2-B chamber tombs at Knossos;585 therefore, the antique larnakes from the EIA tombs must have been acquired from these locations. Significantly, the majority of the known Knossian BA tombs date to the Final Palatial-Postpalatial periods, and the extensive Zapher Papoura cemetery—which yielded many tombs that contained larnakes, seals, and beads—is only a little over 500 m from the KNC.586 Indeed, there is extensive evidence for looting, including the robbing of larnakes,587 in the Zapher Papoura tombs and other Knossian Final Palatial-Postpalatial tombs.588 Due to their large number and the plethora of goods which they held, these tombs would have been the most accessible source for BA objects for EIA Knossians, and it was probably from these tombs that most of the antiques were acquired.
The date of the construction of some chamber tombs in the KNC is much debated, and it remains possible that some of these tombs were constructed in the BA and served as the source for the BA objects found in the KNC EIA tombs.589 However, only three of the six KNC EIA tombs, which were identified by Cavanagh as having the morphological characteristics of BA tombs,590 contained BA objects (KNC 75, KNC 106, and KNC 219),591 suggesting that there is
583 Konstantinidi 2001, pp. 186-191, 195-198. 584 For seals in Neopalatial tombs at Knossos, see n. 282, and for seals in Final Palatial and Postpalatial tombs at Knossos, see p. 52. 585 Evans 1905; Forsdyke 1926-27; Hood et al. 1958-59. 586 Evans 1905. 587 See pp. 43-44. 588 About 40% of the circa 100 LM III Zapher Papoura tombs were robbed (Evans 1905, pp. 1-3, 103-104). 589 For discussions and debates of this problem, see Brock 1957, pp. 4-5; Boardman 1960, p. 143; Catling 1995, pp. 123-124; Cavanagh 1996, pp. 653-657; Coldstream and Catling 1996, p. 719; Coldstream 1996b, pp. 244-247; Coldstream 1998. 590 Cavanagh 1996, pp. 653-657.
100
no significant correlation between the find contexts of antiques and tombs that resemble BA structures.592 Additionally, the antiques do not cluster in areas particularly close to these tombs,593 and only a few of the Knossian EIA tombs contained BA pottery sherds or other broken BA objects that might be expected in cleared out tombs.594 Many of the tombs in the southern area (KNC southwest and southeast sectors) and western area (KNC west and north sectors) of the KNC contained pieces of obsidian.595 The material is typically assumed to be indicative of BA occupation at a site,596 and it has been found at many of the BA sites excavated in the Knossos area.597 However, it was rarely found in LBA graves,598 and apparently continued to be worked into the EIA.599 Any concentrations of pieces of obsidian, therefore, do not necessarily indicate that these tombs were once BA tombs, particularly since some of the tombs in which the obsidian was found were not chamber tombs but rather belonged to types typical of the EIA. Therefore, based on the contexts in which the antiques were found, the antiques themselves are unlikely to have been “left-overs” from the clearing out of specific BA tombs reused in the EIA. Nevertheless, the highly clustered finds of obsidian may suggest that the western and southern areas of the KNC were places of BA activity.
591 KNC 75 and KNC 106 contained larnax fragments, while KNC 219 contained a glass rosette inlay. 592 The lack of correlation between tombs with antiques and tombs resembling BA ones has previously been noted by both Cavanagh (1996, p. 656) and Coldstream (1996b, p. 246). 593 Coldstream (1996b, figs. 4-5) has argued that tombs with antique larnakes cluster near tombs that resemble BA tombs, but the potential BA tombs are so dispersed throughout the cemetery that most tombs are near to a tomb that resembles a BA tomb, making it difficult to see a particular correlation between the location of tombs that resemble BA ones and the areas in which antiques have been found. 594 LM IA sherds were found in KNC tomb G (KNC I, p. 14), but BA sherds were not reported from the other KNC tombs. 595 West sector: KNC 75, 107, 129, 132; North sector: KNC 238, 285, 287, 292; Southern area: KNC 79, 98, 208. Aside from these tombs, only one other tomb in the KNC (KNC G) contained obsidian. 596 Runnels 1982, p. 365. 597 For a list of sites in the Knossos area at which obsidian has been found, see Panagiotaki 1999, p. 30, n. 168. 598 No obsidian was reported from the tombs at Zapher Papoura (Evans 1905), Isopata (Evans 1914; Preston 2007), Mavro Spelio (Forsdyke 1926-27), or Sellopoulo (Popham, Catling, and Catling 1974). 599 Runnels 1982, pp. 364-365; Dickinson 2006, p. 115.
101
II. A DIACHRONIC PERSPECTIVE ON ANTIQUE USE: EIA SOCIETAL
CHANGES AND THE EVOLVING USE OF BA OBJECTS
BA Objects in SMin Tombs
Morphologies, Iconography, and Materials
In the tombs of the SMin period (11th century), the majority of reused BA objects were beads. Six out of the seven antique beads found in the Knossian EIA tombs were found in SMin contexts; in contrast, only one seal (KNC 2.f1) and one larnax (KNC 98.19) were found in SMin
(?) tombs, and both of these objects had problematic contexts. In addition to these objects, two
BA antiques that were not among the three primary classes discussed in this thesis—a four-sided stand (KNC 201.f1) and a boar’s tusk helmet (KNC 201.f13)—were redeposited in the SMin period. The majority of the SMin antiques were not decorated; however, the bronze four-sided stands contained two registers of figured ajouré decoration, which included depictions of birds, a winged sphinx, and a lion (Figure 58).600
The technology for working faience, glass, and boar’s tusk, the materials used to make most of the BA objects redeposited in the SMin period, did not exist at that time. It was primarily through these alien materials that the antiques would have been not only clearly differentiated from EIA objects but also identifiable to SMin audiences as having been produced in the BA.
The morphologies of the antiques would have similarly indicated that these were BA objects.
The antique LM glass and faience beads largely have shapes and colors unique to the LBA
Aegean, while boar’s tusk helmets were an integral part of the Mycenaean warrior costume and a distinctive marker of an Aegean MBA-LBA warrior.601 These objects that recognizably dated to an earlier period emphasized the differences between the BA and the EIA and forged a tangible
600 Catling 1996b, p. 517; Papasavvas 2014, p. 320. 601 Papadopoulos 2006, pp. 202, 257-258; Papadopoulos 2008-09, p. 22.
102
connection between the BA past and those EIA persons buried with the antiques. The redeposition of the BA bronze four-sided stand, which was the only metal antique found in an
EIA tomb, further highlights how tangible connections with the BA were prioritized in the SMin period. Its reuse indicates that, during this period, a BA metal object was more valuable in its BA form than if melted down to make a new (EIA) bronze object.602
Spatial Distribution and EIA Functions
The SMin antiques were all redeposited in the KNC within 20 m2 of each other at the border between the KNC southeast and southwest sectors (Figures 7 and 8). This is the area of Knossos with the highest concentration of SMin tombs.603 Specifically, the majority of the antiques were found within the KNC 200-202 tomb complex. This was the richest SMin context in the Knossos area and one of the richest of the period on Crete and in the Aegean.604 The complex contained the cremation of a female adult in one niche (KNC 200) and the cremation of two adults
(possibly one male and one female) and a child (?) in another niche (KNC 201).605 Five BA faience and glass beads were uncovered with the female in KNC 200 (KNC 200.f2 a/b, 200.f6,
200.f9, 200.f11), while the four-sided stand (KNC 201.f1) and boar’s tusk helmet (KNC 201.f13) were uncovered with the male, female, and child in KNC 201. A total of seven antiques redeposited in one tomb complex is otherwise unparalleled among the Knossian EIA tombs, and this large concentration within a tomb with a plethora of metal objects suggests that the possession of BA objects was connected with wealth in the SMin period.
Other objects from this tomb complex were not “antiques,” but drew upon BA burial practices, symbols of power, and methods of presenting status. KNC 200 yielded gold relief
602 The object was reused and never thus recycled; nonetheless, it was cremated along with those buried in KNC 201 (KNC I, p. 194), and, thus, the object’s life cycle was intended to end with the life of those buried within KNC 201. 603 Cavanagh 1996, p. 651; Coldstream and Catling 1996, pp. 717-718; Eaby 2007, p. 157. 604 Catling 1995, p. 126; KNC I, p. 193; Catling 1996b, pp. 645-649; Coldstream and Catling 1996, p. 715. 605 KNC I, p. 192; Musgrave 1996, p. 692.
103
rosettes (KNC 200.f3), which were apparently produced in the SMin period but adhered to a type that was attached to burial shrouds in many Final Palatial-Postpalatial burials. The boar’s tusk helmet and the bronze four-sided stand were found with the cremation of a male and a plethora of EIA bronze weapons.606 Similar to the gold relief rosettes, bronze weapons are frequently found in Final Palatial-Postpalatial burials, and were probably associated with elite BA males.607
Therefore, these objects, although not “antiques,” drew upon BA burial practices, symbols of power, and methods of presenting status.
The burial of two females, one male, and one child in one tomb complex suggests that the deceased may have been a kin group.608 The deposition of BA objects as well as objects that resemble BA objects with each of these burials may have been intended to highlight the connection between them and their BA ancestors (real or imagined). Although these objects were probably not “heirlooms,” they were intended to convey an exclusive connection with the past similarly to “heirlooms.” While the similarity between this burial and BA burials could be due to a continuation in burial practices, the location of the tomb contrasts with that of Final-
Postpalatial burials. The KNC 200-202 burial complex is probably the earliest tomb in the KNC; therefore, those who constructed the tomb may have been establishing a new burial area that contrasted with the traditional Final and Postpalatial cemeteries.609 Despite this physical break with the burial locations of the BA, the contents of the tomb emphasized connections with the
BA past. Additionally, the resemblance between the assemblage in the KNC 200-202 complex and that of other contemporaneous burials in the Aegean further suggests that the similarity
606 The bronze weapons found in this burial include six arrowheads (KNC 201.f3-6, 17), one sword (KNC 201.f7), one spearhead (KNC 201.f8), and one phalara (KNC 201.f16). 607 Kilian-Dirlmeier 1985, 1988. 608 Wallace 2010, p. 159-160. 609 Coldstream and Catling 1996, p. 715.
104
between the KNC 200-202 tomb and BA burials was an attempt to forge a connection with the past rather than a manifestation of a continuity in practice.
BA Objects in EPG-LPG Tombs
Only three BA objects—two seals (KNC J.f10 and Fortetsa Θ no. 137) and a glass inlay
(KNC 219.f12)—were redeposited in the EPG-LPG periods (early 10th to mid-9th centuries).
The two seals were decorated with an agrimi (KNC J.f10) and a pair of flying fish (Fortetsa Θ no. 137), while the glass inlay was in the shape of a rosette. This prevalence of objects with iconographic depictions (despite the small total number of antiques) contrasts with the few decorated antiques in the SMin tombs. Additionally, because each of the SMin antiques was found within the KNC, seal Fortetsa Θ no. 137 is the earliest antique found in a tomb outside of the KNC.
The dearth of BA objects reused in this lengthy period (circa 100 years) is not the result of a hiatus in activity in the area. On the contrary, at PG Knossos, extensive urban growth occurred610 and a plethora of tombs were constructed.611 Through these building projects,
Knossians would have come into contact with BA material, yet they rarely reused BA objects in their burials. Instead, in this period, there was a dramatic increase in the number of imported
Athenian and Near Eastern goods in tombs,612 and urns and other grave goods became more varied in type and style.613 The varied assemblages and diverse range of EPG-LPG graves in which imports and decorated pottery have been found suggests that these goods were accessible to a broad section of the elite population.614 Therefore, the lack of BA objects in tombs dating to
610 Kotsonas, Vasilakis, and Whitelaw 2012; Kotsonas et al. forthcoming. 611 About sixty tombs were constructed in the EPG period alone (Antoniadis 2012, p. 201). 612 Coldstream 1994, p. 110; Coldstream and Catling 1996, p. 716; Jones 2000, p. 92, tbl. 1; Hoffman 1997, p. 257; Wallace 2010, pp. 195, 201-205; Antoniadis 2012, p. 201. 613 Whitley 1991, pp. 186-187. 614 Whitley 1991, pp. 188-189; Wallace 2010, p. 205.
105
this period indicates that, rather than relying upon connections to the BA past, Knossian elite invested in a variety of foreign and local EIA products. In a world of increased urbanization and developing external contacts, present connections, possibly even with particular Athenian families,615 were valued over descent from or connections to the BA past.
BA Objects in PGB-O Tombs
Morphologies and Materials
The majority of BA objects found in Knossian EIA tombs were redeposited in the PGB-O period (mid-9th to late 7th century)—a period that is nearly twice as long as both the SMin and the EPG-LPG periods. It is impossible to assign the redeposition of most of these antiques to a more specific period (other than PGB-O), because they were frequently placed within collective tombs that were used throughout the PGB-O periods. In contrast to the dominance of beads observed in SMin tombs, the antiques redeposited in the PGB-O periods were primarily larnakes and seals (21 larnakes, six seals, and one bead). The large number of larnakes redeposited at this time stands out particularly, because redeposited larnakes are unknown from elsewhere on EIA
Crete.616 In contrast, examples of redeposited BA beads and seals have been found in several other Cretan sites.617 Therefore, the reuse of larnakes was limited to Knossos of the mid-late 9th-
7th centuries and conforms to a localized method of connecting with the past, which contrasts with the more Mediterranean-wide pattern identified for the SMin period.
The distinctive rectangular shape of the larnakes, which differed greatly from the rounded jars typically used for burial in the EIA, and the curvilinear decoration on the painted larnakes, which contrasted with the regularized geometric ceramic designs that characterized most EIA
615 For this suggestion, see Coldstream and Catling 1996, pp. 715-717. 616 See p. 48, n. 261. 617 For BA seals in EIA contexts on Crete, see Sakellarakis 1976; Stampolidis 2004, nos. 392-393; Krzyszkowska 2005a, p. 309, n. 148; Stampolidis 2012, no. 42. For BA beads in Cretan EIA contexts, see Sherratt 2008, p. 219, n. 22.
106
urns, would have identified these pieces as products of an earlier age. Seals too would have had shapes and materials that differentiated them from Cretan EIA products. The technology for carving stone seals, which was fairly widespread in the BA, did not reappear in Crete until the late 7th century B.C.618 The rarity of particular stones (and the technology used to work them) in the EIA may have contributed to the selection of antique seal KNC 18.f3 for reuse. The seal was made from rose-colored amethyst—a stone that would have had to be imported to Crete—and had a gold backing that emphasized this material. On the contrary, the other antique seals were all made of soft stones that are available on Crete, rather than the rarer hard stones (such as amethyst) which were imported in the BA; thus, it seems that seals made of exotic materials were not specifically sought out for reuse. Similarly, the material of the larnakes, coarse clay, is unlikely to have been one of the stimuli that caused the larnakes to be selected for reuse, since clay is a readily available resource in the Knossos valley and is neither rare nor particularly valuable.619
Iconography
Several antiques with figural depictions were deposited in the PGB-O periods. The six painted larnakes found reused in Knossian EIA burials is a large quantity when compared to the ten total painted larnakes known from Knossian BA tombs; nevertheless, the prevalence of plain larnakes (16 larnakes) among the antiques suggests that decoration, like material, was often a secondary factor in the selection of antiques. Furthermore, the motifs on seals and larnakes were often simple and rarely of especially notable technical quality. While painted larnax KNC
107.214 is unique among all BA larnakes for its complex figural scene, most of the painted larnakes are decorated with motifs common on BA larnakes, such as papyrus plants, marine
618 Boardman 2001, p. 110. 619 For potential locations of clay deposits in the Knossos area, see Tomkins et al. 2004, pp. 54-56.
107
creatures, and quatrefoils. As for the seals, none of the images were of human figures or show particularly complex scenes.
The motifs would have been familiar and of relevance to EIA audiences. The two most popular motifs on antique seals were geometric patterns—many of which resemble patterns on
EIA pottery—and animals, such as the agrimi, an animal which still would have lived on Crete during the EIA and appears to have been integral to EIA male hunting activities.620 On painted larnakes, geometric motifs, such as quatrefoils, were also common, as were marine animals and plants. Additionally, on larnax KNC 107.214, women hold their hands raised upwards in a pose similar to that of women in mourning scenes on pots as well as the EIA “goddesses with upraised arms” depicted in various LM III-O media.621 The contrast between familiar iconography and foreign shapes (see above) identified the objects as items from the past (thereby connecting the deceased to the BA), while simultaneously making them relevant to EIA audiences.
Fragmentation and EIA Modification
Only two intact larnakes were found, and, in many cases, only a few fragments of a larnax were preserved. The heavily fragmented nature of the larnakes is probably due to the damage which all ceramic objects suffer in tombs that were robbed and/or used over extensive periods of time.622 Although some of the damage may have occurred prior to the redeposition of the larnakes or during their movement to their new location, it seems probable that most of the damage happened during the disturbance of the EIA tombs.
620 Eiring 2004, pp. 444-445. 621 For the goddesses with upraised arms, see Alexiou 1958; Gesell 1985, pp. 41-46; Gesell 2004; Prent 2005, pp. 399-403, 424-440. For an overview of the continuity of this image into the EIA, see Coldstream 1984; Prent 2005, pp. 432-441; Prent 2009. 622 Coldstream (1996b, p. 240) pointed out the difficulty in cross-mending the earliest urns deposited in the KNC communal tombs.
108
The lack of damage exhibited on the seals is probably due to their small size and the durability of stone. A seal is the only antique that was modified from its original BA form; seal
KNC 18.f3 was placed in a gold backing and was used as a pendant. Through this addition, the
BA seal was made to resemble an EIA grave good. It was worn in a similar manner to pendants that adorned many of the EIA deceased and was placed in a gold backing just as other rare materials were embellished by the Teke School jewelers from the PGB to the O period.623
EIA Functions
The seals appear to have been used in necklaces and bracelets—a function which they also had in the BA. Larnakes were used as burial containers in the BA, but their EIA function remains unclear. Despite the discovery of 22 larnakes in EIA Knossian tombs, only one (a larnax in Fortetsa tomb VII) was found with any remnants of bones in it, and this was merely a small tooth. While the bones of the deceased may simply have disintegrated or been removed, it is also possible that the larnakes were never intended to be reused as burial containers. Instead, they may have been placed within the niches of the dromoi of chamber tombs or within pits, serving as markers of a connection with the past more so than burial containers.624
PGB-O antiques were rarely found with osteological material, and the little such material that has been found with the antiques indicates that the objects were not associated with particular age or gender groups.625 Additionally, the antiques were deposited with both cremations and inhumations, and therefore do not seem to have been associated with a particular method of interment. Although the majority of antiques were not found with any other BA
623 See p. 70. 624 In some BA chamber tombs, offerings have been found placed beside larnakes, as if the larnax served as some other form of monument, and it is possible the Knossian antique larnakes served this same function. 625 It has been hypothesized that the antique larnakes held child burials (Coldstream 1996b, pp. 247-248; Coldstream 2000, pp. 273-276), but there is no osteological evidence to support this.
109
objects,626 they were often found in close association with EIA objects. The larnakes were typically discovered together with small ceramic vessels, while the seals were often found with
EIA beads with which they may have been strung. Several of the BA objects, particularly the larnakes, were found in tombs which also produced objects inspired by Minoan iconography or shapes.627 In most of these tombs, there is no evidence that these Minoanizing objects were deposited in close association with the antiques;628 however, the relationship, or lack thereof, between tombs with Minoanizing objects and those with antiques is a topic worth exploring in future research.629
Spatial Distribution
As mentioned above, larnakes were largely used for in individual larnax burials or were deposited in the niches of the dromoi of chamber tombs, and the seals were found in all parts of tombs, including dromoi and chambers. Unlike the SMin antiques, PGB-O antiques do not show concentrations in particular tombs. Twenty-two different tombs contained antiques, and, despite the fact that most of these tombs were used continuously for several generations, only seven of the tombs contained multiple antiques and none held more than five pieces. Additionally, in this period, antiques were found in both wealthy and not wealthy tombs. While some of the richest tombs of the period (e.g. KNC 107 and Fortetsa I/P) contained BA objects, others did not (e.g.
KNC 285). Indeed, the majority of tombs with antiques were among the poorer tombs.630 The large number of BA objects found in PGB-O contexts and the wide dispersal of these antiques amongst the tombs of the area (both wealthy and not) suggests that antique grave goods were
626 The exceptions to this pattern are the group of four seals possibly found together in Fortetsa tomb I/P. 627 See pp. 40-41. 628 One exception is larnax KNC Q.116, underneath which were found a figurine and a pot that resemble Minoan examples. 629 Based on preliminary cursory analysis, there are circa 30 EIA objects imitating Minoan shapes, styles, and/or imagery within the Knossian EIA tombs. 630 For rankings of the wealth of Knossian EIA tombs, see Catling 1996a, pp. 547-549; Snodgrass 1996, p. 575; Antoniadis 2012, p. 195.
110
more accessible during this period, possibly due to continuing urban expansion,631 and also of continued interest.
While the antiques were dispersed throughout the KNC, the Fortetsa cemetery, and the
Khaniale Teke site,632 there was a particularly large concentration of antiques in the KNC west sector. All four tombs located in this area contained BA objects, and, in total, seven antiques were found distributed between the tombs. Three of the four tombs contained larnakes (KNC 75,
KNC 107, and KNC 132)—indeed two of these tombs contained two larnakes (KNC 107 and
KNC 132), while the fourth tomb contained a seal (KNC 129).633 These tombs all began to be used in the 9th century,634 and Coldstream has proposed that the quantity of antiques in these tombs could be due to a branch of newly established elites drawing upon BA objects for legitimization when inaugurating their tombs.635 While this is possible, the antiques that were found in the KNC west sector and had closely dateable contexts were apparently redeposited in the 8th-7th centuries, indicating that these BA objects were not the earliest depositions in the tombs. An alternative possibility for the high concentration in the area is that particular elites, especially those buried in the KNC west sector, may have been choosing to use Minoan objects and styles while others did not.636
To conclude, antiques reused in the PGB-O periods were not characterized by rare materials and decoration with complex scenes but were objects that were valued for their antiquity and for their morphological and functional similarity to EIA status symbols: their
631 For the urban development of EIA Knossos, see Kotsonas, Vasilakis, and Whitelaw 2012; Hatzaki and Kotsonas forthcoming; Kotsonas et al. forthcoming. 632 Blocks that appear to have been cut in the BA were used as building material in tombs at the Agios Ioannis cemetery (Boardman 1960, pp. 133, 139), but no BA burial goods were found there. 633 One tomb (KNC 132) also contained a MM I straight-sided pithos (KNC 132.9). 634 Cavanagh 1996, p. 652. 635 Coldstream 1996b, p. 254; Coldstream 1998, pp. 59-60. 636 The relation between tombs with high amounts of Minoan or Minoanizing objects and tombs with pots decorated in Whitley’s exuberant pottery style (Whitley 2004) is another line of research worth future exploration.
111
iconography was familiar to EIA audiences and they were deposited with grave goods typical of
EIA burials (and, in at least one case, modified to resemble such EIA grave goods). Furthermore, the use of BA objects appears to have been a more inclusive and widespread activity in the PGB-
O periods than in the SMin and EPG-LPG periods. While in the SMin period one group monopolized the use of antiques and in the EPG-LPG periods hardly any group showed interest, in the PGB-O periods, BA objects were reused by a wide subset of elites. In this period, particular elite groups appear to have invested in particular categories of objects, such as antiques. Whitley has highlighted how some 9th century elite families invested in ornate pottery styles while others chose plain or Atticizing ones,637 and Antonis Kotsonas has shown that during this same period, in the realm of jewelry production, the Teke tholos group monopolized jewelry distribution and access to particular rare materials.638 In addition to local pottery and jewelry, Knossians invested in acquiring goods produced in the Aegean and the East and West
Mediterranean.639 Thus, from the PGB period onwards, a plethora of means of expressing status were available to and utilized by elites to differentiate and to legitimize themselves. A connection with the BA past was one of these competing methods.
III. CONCLUSIONS
Through the comparison of individual object biographies and object classes, a broad picture of the acquisition and use of BA objects in the EIA has been reconstructed. Based on the materials, shapes, and production dates of the antiques, it seems that Knossians were robbing
Final Palatial-Postpalatial tombs throughout the EIA in order to acquire BA objects. While the method through which these goods were acquired probably remained the same, the particular
637 Whitley 2004. 638 Kotsonas 2006. 639 Kotsonas 2008, p. 295; Hatzaki and Kostonas, forthcoming.
112
objects chosen and the functions and meanings of these objects varied between the SMin period, the EPG-LPG periods, and the PGB-O periods. These contrasts between antique use in the SMin period, only up to circa 100 years removed from the end of the BA, and antique use in the PGB-
O periods, 300-500 years removed from the end of the BA, reflect differences between relating to the recent past and the more distant past. Furthermore, the lack of objects in EPG-LPG indicates that interest in (in addition to the meaning of) the BA varied between periods. In this way, the analysis of the redepositional dates, morphological traits, and spatial distribution of the antiques reveals the changing role of the BA past and thus the changing nature of EIA society.
The restriction of antiques redeposited in the SMin period largely to KNC 200-202—a tomb of one kin group with a plethora of wealth—suggests that, during the SMin period, BA objects and status symbols were monopolized by one wealthy kin group to form an exclusive connection with the recent past. By the EPG-LPG periods, this exclusive tie to the past claimed by one kin group is no longer visible and interest in drawing upon past objects and status symbols dwindled as external contacts became more frequent and emerged as the preferred means of expressing social prestige. From the PGB period onwards, BA objects were once again used to forge a connection with the past. However, rather than reviving BA status symbols and methods of legitimization, antiques were used within the context of existent EIA status structures and burial rituals. Objects reused at this time were valued for their antiquity but also for particular characteristics that made them similar to EIA status symbols and burial offerings.
Thus, throughout the EIA, the BA past changed in accordance with (and as a result of) developments in Knossian EIA society.
113
Chapter 6
CONCLUSIONS
This thesis has proposed a theoretically-informed, contextual, and holistic approach to the use of antiques in a single community. Although the reuse of BA objects in the EIA Aegean has frequently been discussed (see chapter 1), no bottom-up analysis of the full range of antiques use at any one site has previously been undertaken. This thesis offers an analysis by discussing the morphological characteristics, production dates, functions, and spatial and temporal distribution of Minoan objects in EIA Knossian burials. The object biographies of reused Minoan larnakes
(chapter 2), seals (chapter 3), and beads (chapter 4) together with the synthesizing chapter 5 have revealed varying patterns in the significance of antique objects and the past itself at Knossos through different phases of the EIA.
The comparative references to antique use elsewhere in the Aegean, which were introduced in previous chapters, suggest that the scale, form, and variety of Knossian investment in the BA past is unique for the EIA. Throughout the Aegean, interest in the BA past intensified in the 8th century and primarily manifested itself in the form of tomb cult. Although tomb cults varied between regions, the basic practice of depositing offerings at Mycenaean tombs largely remained the same throughout the mainland and the islands. This uniformity in practice contrasts with the earlier, diverse means of connecting with the past evident in EIA Crete. In addition to scattered instances of tomb cult, BA tombs were reused at Knossos and other Cretan sites, and antiques were deposited in several Cretan cemeteries outside of Knossos, including Eleutherna and Prinias, starting from the 11th century.
While antiques were reused at several Cretan sites, the variety and quantity of Minoan objects found at EIA Knossos remains exceptional. Antiques found in other Cretan cemeteries
114
were largely limited to small, portable objects, such as seals and beads (see chapters 3 and 4); however, at Knossos, the range of antiques included larnakes, inlays, ceramic vessels, and other objects, in addition to seals and beads. The quantity of antiques was also significantly higher at
Knossos than at any other Cretan site.
This exceptionalism is partially explained by the plethora of BA material that would have been available at Knossos in the EIA. The site was among the largest and richest Aegean BA palatial centers, and a rich body of Minoan material culture would have been available or easily accessible for EIA Knossians. In contrast to many other Aegean BA palatial centers, Knossos was continuously occupied throughout the EIA, and remained large and prosperous. This prosperity spurred urban development, through which Knossians would have encountered BA material. But, the availability of materials cannot account fully for their appropriation. Many
Aegean sites that were continuously occupied in the BA and the EIA did not yield reused BA objects in any quantity, and other prosperous EIA sites (such as Lefkandi) lack the large number of antiques found at Knossos. Therefore, the large and varied interest of Knossians in BA antiques reflects a very distinct investment in the past that developed alongside the increasing prosperity and expanding settlement size, wealth, and external contacts of Knossos.
The micro-scale analysis of the use of antiques at Knossos has highlighted the diachronic fluctuation in ideas about and investment in the past at the site. Knossian EIA society was particularly dynamic, and broad socio-economic and cultural developments can be associated with changing patterns of antique use. For the Knossians of the EIA, there was no single Minoan past; perhaps this was not even past.
115
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Alberti, L. 2004. “The Late Minoan II-IIIA1 Warrior Graves at Knossos: The Burial
Assemblages,” in Knossos: Palace, City, State (BSA Studies 12), ed. G. Cadogan, E.
Hatzaki, and A. Vasilakis, London, pp. 127-136.
Alcock, S. 2002. Archaeologies of the Greek Past: Landscape, Monuments, and Memories,
Cambridge.
Alexiou, S. 1950. “Παραστάσεις πολύποδος επί πρωτοελληνικών αγγείων Κρήτης,” Kretica
Chronika 4, pp. 294-318.
———. 1958. “Η μινωική θεά μεθ᾽ υψωμένων χειρών,” Kretica Chronika 12, pp. 180-300.
Antonaccio, C. M. 1994. “Contesting the Past: Hero Cult, Tomb Cult, and Epic in Early Greece,”
AJA 98.3, pp. 389-410.
———. 1995. An Archaeology of Ancestors: Tomb Cult and Hero Cult in Early
Greece, Lanham.
Antoniadis, V. 2012. “Early Iron Age Cemeteries at Knossos: The Appreciation of Oriental
Imports and their Imitation by Knossian Society” (diss. Universitat Pompeu Fabra).
Appadurai, A. 1986. “Introduction: Commodities and the Politics of Value,” in The Social Life of
Things: Commodities in Cultural Perspective, ed. A. Appadurai, Cambridge, pp. 3-63.
Barron, A. 2013. “The Value of the Past: Minoan and Minoanizing Larnakes at the Knossos
North Cemetery” (thesis Univ. of Sydney).
Becker, M. J. 1976. “Soft-stone Sources on Crete,” JFA 3.4, pp. 361-374.
Binford, L. R. 1983. In Pursuit of the Past, London.
Bloedow, E. F. 2003. “The Significance of the Goat in Minoan Culture,” Praehistorische
Zeitschrift 78, pp. 1-59.
116
Boardman, J. 1960. “Protogeometric Graves at Agios Ioannis near Knossos (Knossos Survey 3),”
BSA 55, pp. 128-148.
———. 1963. Island Gems: A Study of Greek Seals in the Geometric and Early Archaic
Periods (Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies Suppl. 10), London.
———. 1967. “The Khaniale Tekke Tombs II,” BSA 62, pp. 57-75.
———. 2001. Greek Gems and Finger Rings: Early Bronze Age to Late Classical, London.
———. 2002. The Archaeology of Nostalgia, New York.
———. 2005. “The Knossos Tekke Jewellery Hoards,” in Megalai Nesoi: Studi Dedicati a
Giovanni Rizza, vol. I, ed. R. Gigli, Catania, pp. 163-166.
Bradley, R. 2002. The Past in Prehistoric Societies, London.
Branigan, K. 1993. Dancing with Death: Life and Death in Southern Crete, c. 3000-2000 B.C.,
Amsterdam.
Brock, J. K. 1957. Fortetsa: Early Greek Tombs near Knossos (BSA Suppl. 2), London.
Brown, A. 1993. Before Knossos…Arthur Evans’s Travels in the Balkans and Crete, Oxford.
Cadogan, G. 1976. “Some Faience, Blue Frit and Glass from Fifteenth Century Knossos,” in
Temple University Aegean Symposium, 1st, 1976, ed. P. P. Betancourt, Philadelphia, pp.
18-19.
Cameron, M. 1967. “Notes on some new Joins and Additions to well known Frescoes from
Knossos,” in Europa: Studien zur Geschichte und Epigraphik der Frühen Aegaeis.
Festschrift für Ernst Grumach, ed. W. Brice, Berlin, pp. 45-74.
———. 1975. “A General Study of Minoan Frescoes” (diss. Newcastle University).
Carter, J. 1998. “Egyptian Bronze Jugs from Crete and Lefkandi,” JHS 118, pp. 172-177.
Catling, H. W. 1982-1983. “Archaeology in Greece, 1982-1983,” Archaeological Reports 29, pp.
117
3-62.
———. 1984. “Workshop and Heirloom: Prehistoric Bronze Stands in the East Mediterranean,”
Report of the Department of Antiquities, Cyprus, 1984, pp. 69-91.
———. 1995. “Heroes Returned? Subminoan Burials from Crete,” in The Ages of Homer:
A Tribute to Emily Townsend Vermeule, ed. J. B. Carter and S. P. Morris, Austin, pp.
123-136.
———. 1996a. “The Dark Age and Later Bronzes,” in KNC II, pp. 543-575.
———. 1996b. “The Subminoan Phase in the North Cemetery at Knossos,” in KNC II, pp. 639-
649.
———. 1996c. “The Objects other than Pottery in the Subminoan Tombs,” in KNC II, pp. 517-
537.
Cavanagh, W. 1996. “The Burial Customs,” in KNC II, pp. 651-675.
Chapman, J. 2000. Fragmentation in Archaeology: People, Places, and Broken Objects in the
Prehistory of Southeastern Europe, London.
Christakis, K. S. 2005. Cretan Bronze Age Pithoi: Traditions and Trends in the Production and
Consumption of Storage Containers in Bronze Age Crete, Philadelphia.
Coldstream, J. N. 1973. Knossos: The Sanctuary of Demeter (BSA Suppl. 8), London.
———. 1976a. “Knossian Figured Scenes of the Ninth Century BC,” in Πεπραγμένα Δ´Διεθνούς
Κρητολογικού Συνεδρίου, Herakleion, pp. 67-73.
———. 1976b. “Hero-cults in the Age of Homer,” JHS 96, pp. 8-17.
———. 1984. “A Protogeometric Nature Goddess from Knossos,” BICS 31, pp. 93-104.
———. 1988. “Some Minoan Reflections in Cretan Geometric Art,” in Studies in Honor of
T. B. L. Webster, vol. II, ed. J. H. Betts, J. T. Hooker, and J. R. Green, Bristol, pp. 23-32.
118
———. 1994. “Urns with Lids: The Visible Face of the Knossian Dark Age,” in Knossos, A
Labyrinth of History: Studies in Honor of Sinclair Hood, ed. D. Evely, H. Hughes-
Brock, and N. Momigliano, London, pp. 105-133.
———. 1996a. “The Protogeometric and Geometric Pottery,” in KNC II, pp. 311-420.
———. 1996b. “Minos Redivivus: Some Nostalgic Knossians in the Ninth Century B.C.,”
PraktAkAth 71.2, pp. 236-262.
———. 1998. “Minos Redivivus: Some Nostalgic Knossians in the Ninth Century B.C. (a
summary),” in Post-Minoan Crete (BSA Studies 2), ed. W. G. Cavanagh and M. Curtis,
London, pp. 58-61.
———. 2000. “Knossos: Minoan Larnakes Found in Early Iron Age Contexts,” in Πεπραγμένα
H´Διεθνούς Κρητολογικού Συνεδρίου, Herakleion, pp. 270-281.
———. 2002. “Knossos: ‘Geometric Tombs’ Excavated by D.G. Hogarth, 1900,” BSA 97, pp.
201-216.
———. 2008. Greek Geometric Pottery: A Survey of Ten Local Styles and their Chronology,
Updated Second Edition, Devon.
Coldstream, J. N. and H. W. Catling. 1996. “Epilogue,” in KNC II, pp. 711-723.
CMS = Corpus der Minoischen und Mykenischen Siegel, Berlin.
I = A. Sakellariou, ed., Die Minoischen und Mykenischen Siegel des Nationalmuseums in
Athen, 1964.
II. 2 = N. Platon, I. Pini, and G. Salies, eds., Iraklion Archäologisches Museum. Die
Siegel der Altpalastzeit, 1977.
II.3 = N. Platon and I. Pini, eds., Iraklion Archäologisches Museum. Die Siegel der
Neupalastzeit, 1984.
119
II.4 = N. Platon and I. Pini, eds., Iraklion Archäologisches Museum. A. Die
Siegel der Nachpalastzeit. B. Undatiere Spätminoische Siegel, 1985.
IV = J. A. Sakellarakis and V. E. G. Kenna, eds., Iraklion Archäologisches Museum.
Sammlung Metaxas, 1969.
V = I. Pini, ed., Kleinere griechische Sammlungen, 1975.
V Suppl. 1A = I. Pini, ed., Kleinere griechische Sammlungen. Ägina-Korinth, 1992.
V Suppl. 3 = I. Pini, ed., Neufunde aus Griechenland und der Westliche Türkei, 2004.
VI.1 = H. Hughes-Brock and J. Boardman, eds., Oxford: The Ashmolean Museum, 2009.
VII = V. E. G. Kenna, ed., Die englischen Museen II, 1967.
X = J. H. Betts, ed., Die schweizer Sammlung, 1980.
XII = V. E. G. Kenna, ed., Nordamerika I. New York, The Metropolitan Museum of Art,
1972.
XIII = V. E. G. Kenna and E. Thomas, eds., Nordamerika II. Kleinere Sammlungen,
1974.
Crielaard, J. P. 2003. “The Cultural Biography of Material Goods in Homer’s Epics,” Gaia:
Revue interdisciplinaire sur la Grèce Archaïque 7.1, pp. 49-62.
Davis, J. L. 2007. “Memory Groups and the State: Erasing the Past and Inscribing the Present in
the Landscapes of the Mediterranean Near East,” in Negotiating the Past in the Past:
Identity, Memory, and Landscape in Archaeological Research, Tuscon, pp. 227-256.
Desborough, V. 1952. Protogeometric Pottery, Oxford.
Dickinson, O. 2006. The Aegean from Bronze Age to Iron Age: Continuity and Change between
the Twelfth and Eighth Centuries BC, London.
Dimopoulou, N. 1997. “Workshops and Craftsmen at Poros-Katsambas,” in TEXNH:
120
Craftsmen, Craftswomen, and Craftsmanship in the Aegean Bronze Age, ed. R.
Laffineur and P. Betancourt, Liege, pp. 433-438.
———. 1999. “The Neopalatial Cemetery of the Knossian Harbor-Town at Poros: Mortuary
Behavior and Social Ranking,” in Eliten in der Bronzezeit: Ergebnisse Zweier Kolloquien
in Mainz und Athen (Monographien des Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums 43),
Mainz, pp. 27-36.
———. 2000. “Seals and Scarabs from the Minoan Port Settlement at Poros-Katsambas,” in
CMS Beiheft 6, ed. I. Pini, Berlin, pp. 27-38.
Dimopoulou-Rethemiotaki, N. 2005. The Archaeological Museum of Herakleion, Athens.
Eaby, M. S. 2007. “Mortuary Variability in Early Iron Age Cretan Burials,” (diss. University of
North Carolina at Chapel Hill).
Eckardt, H. and H. Williams. 2003. “Objects without a Past? The Use of Roman Objects in Early
Anglo-Saxon Graves,” in Archaeologies of Remembrance: Death and Memory in Past
Societies, ed. H. Williams, New York, pp. 141-170.
Eiring, J. 2004. “The ‘Knossos Hunt’ and Wild Goats in Ancient Crete,” in Knossos: Palace,
City, State (BSA Studies 12), ed. G. Cadogan, E. Hatzaki, and A. Vasilakis, London, pp.
443-450.
Effinger, M. 1996. Minoischer Schmuck (BAR International Series 646), Oxford.
Evans, A. 1905. The Prehistoric Tombs of Knossos (Archaeologia 59.2), Cambridge.
———. 1914. The 'Tomb of the Double Axes' and Associated Group, and the Pillar Rooms and
Ritual Vessels of the 'Little Palace' at Knossos Tomb of the Double Axes (Archaeologia
LXV), London.
Evely, D. 1996. “The Other Materials,” in KNC II, pp. 621-636.
121
———. 2000. Minoan Crafts: Tools and Techniques, vol. 2 (Studies in Mediterranean
Archaeology, vol. XCII:2), Jonsered.
Forsdyke, E. J. 1926-1927. “The Mavro Spelio Cemetery at Knossos,” BSA 28, pp. 243-296.
Georgiadis, M. and C. Gallou, eds. 2009. The Past in the Past: The Significance of Memory and
Tradition in the Transmission of Culture, Oxford.
Gerola, G. and L. Pigorini. 1902. “Lavori Eseguiti nella Necropoli di Phaestos dalla Missione
Archelogica Italiana dal 10 Febbraio all 22 Marzo 1902,” RendLinc 11, pp. 318-333.
Gesell, G. C. 1985. Town, Palace, and House Cult in Minoan Crete (SIMA 67), Göteborg.
———. 2004. “From Knossos to Kavousi: The Popularizing of the Minoan Palace Goddess,” in
XAPIΣ: Essays in Honor of Sara A. Immerwahr (Hesperia Suppl. 33), ed. A. P. Chapin,
Princeton, pp. 131-150.
Goldstein, S. M. 1979. Pre-Roman and Early Roman Glass, Corning.
Gosden, C. and Y. Marshall. 1999. “The Cultural Biography of Objects,” World Archaeology
31.2, pp. 169-178.
Grose, D. F. 1989. Early Ancient Glass: Core-Formed, Rod-Formed, and Cast Vessels and
Objects from the Late Bronze Age to the Early Roman Empire, 1600 B.C. to A.D. 50,
New York.
Hall, E. H. 1912. Excavations in Eastern Crete, Sphoungaras, Philadelphia.
Hamann, B. E. 2008. “Chronological Pollution: Potsherds, Mosques, and Broken Gods before
and after the Conquest of Mexico,” Current Anthropology 49.5, pp. 803-836.
Hamilakis, Y. 2002. “What Future for the ‘Minoan’ Past? Re-thinking Minoan Archaeology,” in
Labyrinth Revisited: Rethinking Minoan Archaeology, ed. Y. Hamilakis, London, pp. 2-
28.
122
Harding, A., H. Hughes-Brock, and C. W. Beck. 1974. “Amber in the Mycenaean World,” BSA
69, pp. 145-172.
Härke, H. 2000. “The Circulation of Weapons in Anglo-Saxon Society,” in Rituals of Power:
From Late Antiquity to the Early Middle Ages, ed. F. Theuws and J. L. Nelson, Leiden,
pp. 377-399.
Hatzaki, E. 2004. “From Final Palatial to Postpalatial Knossos: A View from the Late Minoan II
to Late Minoan IIIB Town,” in Knossos: Palace, City, State (BSA Studies 12), ed. G.
Cadogan, E. Hatzaki, and A. Vasilikas, London, pp. 121-126.
———. 2005. “Postpalatial Knossos: Town and Cemeteries from LM IIIA2 to LM IIIC,” in
Ariadne’s Threads: Connections between Crete and the Greek Mainland in Late Minoan
III (LM IIIA2-LM IIIC): Proceedings on the International Workshop held at Athens
Scuola Archeologica Italiana, ed. A. D’Agata and J. Moody, Athens, pp. 65-95.
———. 2009. “Structured Deposition as Ritual Action at Knossos,” in Archaeologies
of Cult: Essays on Ritual and Cult in Crete in Honor of Geraldine C. Gesell (Hesperia
Suppl. 42), ed. A. L. D’Agata and A. Van de Moortel, Princeton, pp. 19-30.
———. 2012. “Mortuary Practices and Ideology in Bronze Age and Early Iron Age Crete,” in
Parallel Lives: Ancient Societies in Crete and Cyprus (BSA Studies 20), ed. G. Cadogan,
M. Iacovou, K. Kopaka, and J. Whitley, London, pp. 307-313.
Hatzaki, E. and A. Kotsonas. Forthcoming. “Knossos and North Central Crete,” in A Companion
to the Archaeology of Early Greece and the Mediterranean, ed. I. S. Lemos and A.
Kotsonas, Oxford.
Higgins, R. A. 1980. Greek and Roman Jewellery, Los Angeles.
———. 1996a. “The Jewellery,” in KNC II, pp. 540-542.
123
———. 1996b. “The Terracottas,” in KNC II, p. 611.
Hoffman, G. L. 1997. Import and Immigrants: Near Eastern Contacts with Crete, Ann Arbor.
Hogarth, D. G. 1899-1900. “Knossos: Summary Report of the Excavations in 1900: II. Early
Town and Cemeteries,” BSA 6, pp. 70-85.
Hood, S. 1956. “Another Warrior-Grave at Ayios Ioannis near Knossos,” BSA 51, pp. 81-99.
———. 1960. “Tholos Tombs of the Aegean,” Antiquity 34, pp. 166–176.
———. 2005. “Dating the Knossos Frescoes,” in Aegean Wall Painting: A Tribute to Mark
Cameron (BSA Studies 13), ed. L. Morgan, London, pp. 45-81.
———. 2010. “The Middle Minoan Cemetery on Ailas at Knossos,” in Cretan Offerings:
Studies in Honor of Peter Warren (BSA Studies 18), ed. O. Krzyszkowska, London, pp.
161-168.
Hood, S., G. Huxley, N. Sandars, and A. E. Werner. 1958-1959. “A Minoan Cemetery on Upper
Gypsades (Knossos Survey 156),” BSA 53-54, pp. 194-262.
Hood, S. and D. Smyth. 1981. Archaeological Survey of the Knossos Area (BSA Suppl. 14),
London.
Hoskins, J. 1998. Biographical Objects: How Things Tell the Stories of People’s Lives, London.
Houby-Nielsen, S. H. 1995. “‘Burial language’ in Archaic and Classical Kerameikos,”
Proceedings of the Danish Institute at Athens 1, ed. Søren Dietz, Aarhus, pp. 129–191.
Hughes-Brock, H. 1993. “Amber in the Aegean in the Late Bronze Age: Some Problems and
Perspectives,” in Amber in Archaeology: Proceedings of the Second International
Conference on Amber in Archaeology, Liblice 1990, ed. C. W. Beck, J. Bouzek, D.
Dreslerová, Prague, pp. 219-229.
———. 1998. “Greek Beads of the Mycenaean Period (ca. 1650-1100 B.C.): The Age of
124
the Heroines of Greek Tradition and Mythology,” in Beads and Bead Makers: Gender,
Material Culture and Meaning, pp. 247-272.
———. 1999. “Mycenaean Beads: Gender and Social Contexts,” OJA 18.3, pp. 277-296.
———. 2003. “The Mycenaean Greeks—Master Bead Makers: Major Work since Beck,” in
Ornaments from the Past—Bead Studies after Beck: A Book on Glass and Semiprecious
Stone Beads in History and Archaeology for Archaeologists, Jewelry Historians and
Collectors, ed. I. C. Glover, H. Hughes-Brock, and J. Henderson, London, pp. 10-22.
———. 2005. “Amber and Some Other Travelers in the Bronze Age Aegean and Europe,” in
AUTOCHTHON: Papers Presented to O. T. P. K. Dickinson on the Occasion of his
Retirement, ed. A. Dakouri-Hild and S. Sherratt (BAR International Series 1432),
Oxford, pp. 301-316.
Hutchinson, R. W. and J. Boardman. 1954. “The Khaniale Tekke Tombs,” BSA 49, pp. 215-230.
Iacovou, M, ed. 2012. Cyprus and the Aegean in the Early Iron Age: The Legacy of Nicolas
Coldstream, Nicosia.
Jones, D. W. 2000. External Relations of Early Iron Age Crete, 1100-600 B.C., Philadelphia.
Joy, J. 2009. “Reinvigorating Object Biography: Reproducing the Drama of Object Lives,”
World Archaeology 41.4, pp. 540-556.
Joyce, R. A. 2003. “Concrete Memories: Fragments of the Past in the Classic Maya Present
(500-1000 AD),” in Archaeologies of Memory, ed. R. M. Van Dyke and S. E. Alcock,
Oxford, pp. 104-123.
Kanta, A. 1980. The Late Minoan III Period in Crete: A Survey of Sites, Pottery, and their
Distribution (SIMA vol. 58), Göterborg.
Karadimas, N. and N. Momigliano. 2004. “On the Term ‘Minoan’ before Evans’s Work in Crete
125
(1894),” Studi Micenei ed egeo-anatolici 46.2, pp. 243-258.
Kardara, X. 1977. Απλώματα Νάξου: Κινητά Ευρήματα Ταφική Α και Β, Athens.
Kenna, V. E. G. 1973. “The Minoan Seal Stones,” in Knossos: The Sanctuary of Demeter (BSA
Suppl. 8), London, pp. 124-129.
Kilian-Dirlmeier, I. 1985. “Noch einmal zu den ‘Kriegergräbern’ von Knossos,” Jahrbuch des
Römisch-germanischen Zentralmuseums 32, pp. 196-214.
———. 1988. “Jewelry in Mycenaean and Minoan ‘Warrior Graves,’” in Problems
in Greek Prehistory: Papers Presented at the Centenary Conference of the British School
of Archaeology at Athens, Manchester April 1986, ed. E. B. French and K. A. Wardle,
Manchester, pp. 161-172.
KNC = Knossos North Cemetery: Early Greek Tombs, London.
I = J. N. Coldstream and H. W. Catling, eds., The Tombs and Catalogue of Finds (BSA
Suppl. 28), 1996.
II = J. N. Coldstream and H. W. Catling, eds., Discussion (BSA Suppl. 28), 1996.
III = J. N. Coldstream and H. W. Catling, eds., The Figures (BSA Suppl. 28), 1996.
IV = J. N. Coldstream and H. W. Catling, eds., The Plates (BSA Suppl. 28), 1996.
Konstantinidi, E. M. 2001. Jewelry Revealed in the Burial Contexts of the Greek Bronze Age
(BAR International Series 912), Oxford.
Kopytoff, I. 1986. “The Cultural Biography of Things: Commoditization as Process,” in The
Social Life of Things: Commodities in Cultural Perspective, ed. A. Appadurai,
Cambridge, pp. 64-91.
Kotsonas, A. 2006. “Wealth and Status in Iron Age Knossos,” OJA 25, pp. 149-172.
———. 2008. The Archaeology of Tomb A1K1 of Orthi Petra in Eleutherna: The Early Iron Age
126
Pottery, Athens.
———. 2011. “Quantification of Ceramics from Early Iron Age Tombs,” in Proceedings of the
International Round Table organized by the Swiss School of Archaeology in Greece
(Athens, November 28-30, 2008), ed. S. Verdan, T. Theurillat, and A. Kenzelmann
Pfyffer, Oxford, pp. 129-138.
Kotsonas, A., A. Vasilakis, and T. Whitelaw. 2012. “Η Κνωσός της Πρώιμης Εποχής του
Σιδήρου: τα νέα δεδομένα από το πρόγραμμα επιφανειακής έρευνας (KULP),” in
Proceedings of the 2nd Scientific Meeting for the Archaeological Work in Crete, 26-28
November 2010, ed. M. Andrianakis, P. Varthalitou, and I. Tzachili, Rethymnon, pp. 219-
229.
Kotsonas, A., T. Whitelaw, A. Vasilakis and M. Bredaki. Forthcoming. “Early Iron Age
Knossos: An Overview based on the Surface Investigations of the Knossos Urban
Landscape Project (KULP),” in Proceedings of the 11th International Cretological
Conference, Rethymnon.
Kurtz, D. C. and J. Boardman. 1971. Greek Burial Customs, London.
Krzyszkowska, O. 2003. “The Seals,” in Knossos: The South House (BSA Suppl. 34), ed. P. A.
Mountjoy, London, pp. 199-206.
———. 2005a. Aegean Seals: An Introduction, London.
———. 2005b. “Amethyst in the Aegean Bronze Age: An Archaeological Enigma,” in KRHS
TEXNHS: L’Artisan Crétois, ed. I. Bradfer-Burdet, B. Detournay, and R. Laffineur,
pp. 119-130.
La Rosa, V. 1998. “Nuovi dati sulla tomba del sarcofago dipinto di H. Triada,” in Simposio
italiano di Studi egei dedicato a Luigi Bernabo e Giovanni Pugliese Carratelli, Roma 18-
127
20 febbraio 1998, ed. V. La Rosa, D. Palermo, and L. Vagneti, Rome, pp. 177-188.
Laffineur, R. 1998. “Surveys and Historical Aspects: Bronze Age Traditions in Dark Age and
Orientalizing Jewelry,” in The Art of the Greek Goldsmith, ed. D. Williams, London, pp.
9-13.
Langdon, S. 2001. “Beyond the Grave: Biographies from Early Greece,” AJA 105.4, pp. 579-
606.
Lawall, M. L. and J. Lund, eds. 2011. Pottery in the Archaeological Record: Greece and
Beyond. Acts of the International Colloquium held at the Danish and Canadian Institutes
in Athens, June 20-22, 2008. Gösta Enbom monographs, 1, Aarhus.
Lebessi, A. 1985. Το ιερό του Ερμή και της Αφροδίτης στη Σύμη Βιάννου I.I. Χάλκινα χρητικά
τορεύματα (Βιβλιοθήχη της εν Αθηναις Αρχαιολογικής Εταιρείας 102), Athens.
Legarra Herrero, B. 2012. “The Construction, Deconstruction, and Non-Construction of
Hierarchies in the Funerary Record of Prepalatial Crete,” in Back to the Beginning:
Reassessing Social and Political Complexity on Crete during the Early and Middle
Bronze Age, ed. I. Schoep, P. Tomkins, and J. Driessen, Oxford, pp. 325-357.
Lillios, K. T. 1999. “Objects of Memory: The Ethnography and Archaeology of Heirlooms,”
Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 6, pp. 235-262.
Long, C. R. 1974. The Ayia Triadha Sarcophagus: A Study of Late Minoan and Mycenaean
Funerary Practices and Beliefs (SIMA 41), Göteborg.
Malinowski, B. 1922. Argonauts of the Western Pacific, London.
Maniatis, Y., M. Panagiotaki, and A. Kaczmarczyk. 2008. ‘Faience Production and the Eastern
Mediterranean,” in Production Technology of Faience and Related Early Vitreous
Materials (Oxford University School of Archaeology 72), ed. M. S. Tite and A. J.
128
Shortland, Oxford, pp. 111-127.
Manning, S. W. 2010. “Chronology and Terminology,” in The Oxford Handbook of the Bronze
Age Aegean (ca. 3000-1000 BC), ed. E. H. Cline, New York, pp. 11-30.
Marinatos, N. 1984. Art and Religion in Thera: Reconstructing a Bronze Age Society, Athens.
Matthäus, H. 1988. “Heirloom or Tradition? Bronze Stands of the Second and First Millennium
B.C. in Cyprus, Greece, and Italy,” in Problems in Greek Prehistory: Papers Presented
at the Centenary Conference of the British School at Athens, Manchester, April 1986, ed.
E. B. French and K. A. Wardle, London, pp. 285-300.
Mavriyannaki, C. 1972. Recherches sur les Larnakes Minoennes de la Crète Occidentale, Rome.
Momigliano, N. 2007. “Introduction,” in Knossos Pottery Handbook: Neolithic and Bronze Age
(Minoan), ed. N. Momigliano, London, pp. 1-8.
Morgan, L. 1987. “A Minoan Larnax from Knossos,” BSA 82, pp. 171-200.
———. 2005. “New Discoveries and New Ideas in Aegean Wall Painting,” in Aegean Wall
Painting: A Tribute to Mark Cameron (BSA Studies 13), ed. L. Morgan, London, pp. 21-
44.
Morris, C. 1995. “Fishy Tales from Knossos: A Minoan Larnax and Vase-Painter,” in Klados:
Essays in Honor of J. N. Coldstream, ed. C. Morris, London, pp. 185-193.
Morris, I. 1987. Burial and Ancient Society, Cambridge.
———. 1988. “Tomb Cult and the ‘Greek Renaissance:’ The Past in the Present in the 8th
Century B.C.,” Antiquity 62, pp. 750-761.
———. 2000. Archaeology as Culture History, Oxford.
Muhly, P. 1992. Μινωικός λαξευτός τάφος στον Πόρο Ηρακλείου, Athens.
Murray, A. S. 1900. “Excavations at Enkomi,” in Excavations in Cyprus, ed. A. S. Murray, A. H.
129
Smith and H. B. Walters, London, pp. 1-54.
Musgrave, J. H. 1996. “The Human Bones,” in KNC II, pp. 677-702.
Nightingale, G. 2000. “Mycenaean Glass Beads: Jewellery and Design,” in Annales du 14e
Congrés de l’Association Internationale pour l’Historie du Verre, Venice, pp. 6-10.
———. 2002. “Glass and Faience Beads from Elateia-Alonaki reflecting the relationship
between Center and Periphery,” in Η περιφέρεια του μυκηναϊκού κόσμου, ed. N.
Kyparissi-Apostolika and M. Papakonstantinou, Athens, pp. 311-319.
———. 2008. “Tiny, Fragile, Common, Precious: Mycenaean Glass and Faience Beads and
Other Objects,” in Vitreous Materials in the Late Bronze Age Aegean (Sheffield Studies
in Aegean Archaeology 9), ed. C. M. Jackson and E. C. Wager, Oxford, pp. 64-104.
Niemeier, W. D. 1983. “The Character of Knossian Palace Society in the Second Half of the
Fifteenth Century B.C.,” in Minoan Society: Proceedings of the Cambridge Colloquium
1981, ed. O. Krzyszkowska and L. Nixon, Bristol, pp. 217-236.
Nikita, K. 2003. “Mycenaean Glass Beads: Technology, Forms, and Function,” in Ornaments
from the Past—Bead Studies after Beck: A Book on Glass and Semiprecious Stone Beads
in History and Archaeology for Archaeologists, Jewelry Historians and Collectors, ed.
I. C. Glover, H. Hughes-Brock, and J. Henderson, London, pp. 23-37.
Ogden, J. 1998. “The Jewellery of Dark Age Greece: Construction and Cultural Connections,” in
The Art of the Greek Goldsmith, ed. D. Williams, London, pp. 14-21.
Palaima, T. G. 2003. “The Inscribed Bronze ‘Kessel’ from Shaft Grave IV and Cretan Heirlooms
of the Bronze Artist Named ‘Aigeus’ vel sim. in the Mycenaean Palatial Period,” in
Briciaka: A Tribute to W.C. Brice, ed. Y. Duhoux and L. La Neuve, pp. 187-201.
Palmer, L. R. and J. Boardman. 1963. On the Knossos Tablets, Oxford.
130
Panagiotaki, M. 1999. The Central Palace Sanctuary at Knossos (BSA Suppl. 31), London.
———. 2008. “The Technological Development of Aegean Vitreous Materials in
the Bronze Age,” in Vitreous Materials in the Late Bronze Age Aegean (Sheffield Studies
in Aegean Archaeology 9), ed. C. M. Jackson and E. C. Wager, Oxford, pp. 34-63.
Panagiotaki, M., Y. Maniatis, D. Kavoussanaki, G. Hatton, and M. Tite. 2004. “The Production
Technology of Aegean Bronze Age Vitreous Materials,” in Invention and Innovation:
The Social Context of Technological Change 2: Egypt, the Aegean and the Near East,
1650-1150 B.C., ed. J. Bourriau and J. Phillips, Oxford, pp. 149-175.
Papadatos, Y. 2005. Tholos Tomb Gamma: A Prepalatial Tholos Tomb at Phourni, Archanes,
Philadelphia.
Papadopoulos, A. 2006. “The Iconography of Warfare in the Bronze Age Aegean,” (diss.
University of Liverpool).
———. 2008-2009. “The Distribution of the Late Helladic IIIA-B Ivory Helmeted Heads,”
Talanta 40-41, pp. 7-24.
Papadopoulos, J. K. and E. L. Smithson. 2002. “The Cultural Biography of a Cycladic Geometric
Amphora: Islanders in Athens and the Prehistory of Metics,” Hesperia 71.2, pp.
149-199.
Papasavvas, G. 2001. Χάλκινοι υποστάτες από την Κύπρο και την Κρήτη, Nicosia.
———. 2004. “Cypriot Bronze Stands and their Mediterranean Perspective,” Revista
d’Arqueologia de Ponent 14, pp. 31-59.
———. 2012. “Cretan Bronze Stands of Cypriot Types from Sanctuaries and Cemeteries:
Cretan Society in the Early Iron Age,” in Cyprus and the Aegean in the Early Iron Age:
The Legacy of Nicolas Coldstream, ed. M. Iacovou, Nicosia, pp. 129-154.
131
———. 2014. “Bronze Stands of Cypriot Type from Crete: Rod Tripods and Four-Sided
Stands,” in Kypriaka in Crete: From the Bronze Age to the End of the Archaic Period, ed.
V. Karageorghis, A. Kanta, N. C. Stampolidis, and Y. Sakellarakis, Nicosia, pp. 312-324.
Paribeni, R. 1908. “Il Sarcofago dipinto di Hagia Triada,” Monumenti Antichi 19, pp. 7-86.
Pearson, M. P. 1999. The Archaeology of Death and Burial, Sutton.
Peña, T. 2007. Roman Pottery in the Archaeological Record, Cambridge.
Pendlebury, J. D. S. 1963. The Archaeology of Crete: An Introduction, New York.
Pendlebury, J. D. S., M. Money-Coutts, and E. Eccles. 1935. “Journeys in Crete, 1934,” BSA 33,
pp. 80–100.
Pini, I. 1968. Beiträge zur minoischen Gräberkunde, Weisbaden.
———. 1975. “Eine Gruppe von ‘Inselsteinen?,’” in Marburger Winckelmann-Programm 1975,
pp. 1-10.
Platon, N. 1954. “Χρονικά,” Kretica Chronika 8, pp. 499–517.
PM = The Palace of Minos: A Comparative Account of the Successive Stages of the Early Cretan
Civilization as Illustrated by the Discoveries at Knossos, London
II.1 = A. Evans, Fresh Lights on Origins and External Relations, 1928.
II.2 = A. Evans, Town Houses in Knossos of the New Era and Restored West Palace
Section with its State Approach, 1928.
III = A. Evans, The Great Transitional Age in the Northern and Eastern Sections of the
Palace: The Most Brilliant Records of Minoan Art and the Evidences of an Advanced
Religion, 1930.
PN = The Palace of Nestor at Pylos in Western Messenia, Princeton.
III = C. W. Blegen, M. Rawson, W. Taylour, and W. P. Donovan, Acropolis and Lower
132
Town, Tholoi and Grave Circle, Chamber Tombs, Discoveries outside the Citadel, 1973. de Polignac, F. 1995. Cults, Territory, and the Origins of the Greek City-State, trans. Janet
Lloyd, Chicago.
Popham, M. R. 1970. The Destruction of the Palace at Knossos: Pottery of the Late Minoan IIIA
Period (SIMA 12), Göteborg.
———. 1994. “Late Minoan II to the End of the Bronze Age,” in Knossos: A Labyrinth of
History. Papers Presented in Honor of Sinclair Hood, ed. D. Evely, H. Hughes-Brock,
and N. Momigliano, Oxford, pp. 89-102.
Popham, M. R., E. Touloupa, and L. H. Sackett. 1982. “The Hero of Lefkandi,” Antiquity 56, pp.
169–174.
Popham, M. R., L. H. Sackett, P. G. Themelis. 1980. Lefkandi I: The Iron Age Settlement. The
Cemeteries (BSA Suppl. 29), London.
Popham, M. R., E. A. Catling, and H. W. Catling. 1974. “Sellopoulo Tombs 3 and 4, Two Late
Minoan Graves near Knossos,” BSA 69, pp. 195-257.
Prent, M. 2003. “Glories of the Past in the Past: Ritual Activities at Palatial Ruins in Early Iron
Age Crete,” in Archaeologies of Memory, ed. R. M. Van Dyke and S. E. Alcock, Malden,
pp. 81-103.
———. 2005. Cretan Sanctuaries and Cult: Continuity and Change from Late Minoan IIIC to
the Archaic Period (Religion in the Graeco-Roman World 154), Leiden.
———. 2009. “The Survival of the Goddess with Upraised Arms: Early Iron Age
Representations and Contexts,” in Archaeologies of Cult: Essays on Ritual and Cult in
Crete in Honor of Geraldine C. Gesell (Hesperia Suppl. 42), ed. A. L. D’Agata and A.
Van de Moortel, Princeton, pp. 231-238.
133
Preston, L. 2004a. “A Mortuary Perspective on Political Changes in Late Minoan II-IIIB Crete,”
AJA 108, pp. 321-348.
———. 2004b. “Contextualizing the Larnax: Tradition, Innovation, and Regionalism in Coffin
Use on Late Minoan II-IIIB Crete,” OJA 23.2, pp. 177-197.
———. 2007. “The Isopata Cemetery at Knossos,” BSA 102, pp. 257-314.
———. 2013. Knossos Monastiriako Kephali Tomb and “Deposit’ (BSA Studies 22),” Exeter.
Quartier Mu = Fouilles exécutées à Mallia, Paris.
III = J. C. Poursat, Le Quartier Mu III. Artisans minoens: Les Maisons-Ateliers du
Quartier Mu, 1996.
Rehak, P. 1995. “The Use and Destruction of Minoan Stone Bull’s Head Rhyta,” in POLITEIA:
Society and State in the Aegean Bronze Age. Proceedings of the 5th International Aegean
Conference (Aegaeum 12), ed. R. Laffineur and W. D. Niemeier, Liège, pp. 435–460.
Rehak, P. and J. G. Younger. 1998. “Review of Aegean Prehistory VII: Neopalatial, Final
Palatial, and Postpalatial Crete,” AJA 102.1, pp. 91-173.
Rizza, G. 2008. Priniàs: La Città Arcaica sulla Patela. Scavi condotti negli anni 1969-2000 (vol.
1). Studi e Materiali di Archeologia Greca 8/1, Catania.
Runnels, C. N. 1982. “Flaked-stone Artifacts in Greece during the Historical Period,” JFA 9.3,
pp. 363-373.
Rutkowski, B. 1966. Larnaksy Egejskie, Warsaw.
———. 1968. “The Origin of the Minoan Coffin,” BSA 63, pp. 219-227.
Sackett, L. H. 1976. “A New Figured Krater from Knossos,” BSA 71, pp. 117-150.
Sakellarakis, J. A. 1976. “Kretisch-mykenische Siegel in griechischen Heiligtümern,” in Neue
Forschungen in Griechischen Heiligtümern, ed. U. Jantzen, Tübingen, pp. 283-308.
134
———. 1983. “ Ανασκαφή Ιδαίου Άντρου,” Prakt 1983, pp. 415-500.
———. 1988. “Some Geometric and Archaic Votives from the Idaian Cave,” in Early Greek
Cult Practice. Proceedings of the Fifth International Symposium at the Swedish Institute
at Athens, 26-29 June, 1986, ed. R. Hägg, N. Marinatos, and G. C. Nordquist, Stockholm,
pp. 173-193.
———. 1997. “A Minoan Ringstone from the Idaean Cave,” in Greek Offerings: Essays
on Greek Art in Honor of John Boardman, ed. O. Palagia, Oxford, pp. 23-29.
Sakellarakis, Y. and E. Sapouna-Sakellaraki. 1997. Archanes: Minoan Crete in a New Light,
vol. I, Athens.
SCE = The Swedish Cyprus Expedition: Finds and Results of the Excavations in Cyprus, 1927-
1931, Stockholm.
I = E. Gjerstad, J. Lindros, E. Sjöqvist, and A. Westholm, Vol. I Plates, 1934.
Schiffer, M. B. 1987. Formation Processes of the Archaeological Record, Albuquerque.
Schnapp, A. 1997. The Discovery of the Past, New York.
Seager, R. B. 1916. The Cemetery of Pachyammos, Crete, Philadelphia.
Skon-Jedele, N. J. 1994. “‘Aigyptiaka:’ A Catalogue of Egyptian and Egyptianizing Objects
excavated from Greek Archaeological Sites, ca. 1100-525 B.C., with Historical
Commentary” (diss. University of Michigan).
Sherratt, S. 2008. “Vitreous Materials in the Bronze and Early Iron Ages: Some Questions of
Values,” in Vitreous Materials in the Late Bronze Age Aegean (Sheffield Studies in
Aegean Archaeology 9), ed. C. M. Jackson and E. C. Wager, Oxford, pp. 209-232.
———. 2010. “Greeks and Phoenicians: Perceptions of Trade and Traders in the Early First
Millennium BC,” in Social Archaeologies of Trade and Exchange: Exploring
135
Relationships among People, Places, and Things, ed. A. A. Bauer and A. Agbe Davies,
Walnut Creek, pp. 119-142.
Snodgrass, A. M. 1971. The Dark Age of Greece: An Archaeological Survey of the Eleventh to
the Eighth Centuries BC, Edinburgh.
———. 1980. Archaic Greece: The Age of Experiment, London.
———. 1996. “Iron,” in KNC II, pp. 575-597.
Stampolidis, N. C., ed. 2004. Eleutherna: Polis, Acropolis, Necropolis (Exhibition catalogue,
Museum of Cycladic Art 2004), Athens.
———. 2012. Princesses of the Mediterranean in the Dawn of History (Exhibition catalogue,
Museum of Cycladic Art 2012), Athens.
Stern, E. M. and B. Schlick-Nolte. 1994. Early Glass of the Ancient World, 1600 B.C.-A.D. 50,
Ostfildern.
Strong, D. E. 1966. Catalogue of the Carved Amber in the Department of Greek and Roman
Antiquities, London.
Thomas, E. 1987. “Kretisch-mykenische Siegel in Gräbern geometrischer und orientalisierender
Zeit,” in Forschungen zur Aegaeischen Vorgeschichte: Das Ende der mykenischen Welt.
Akten des internationalen Kolloquiums 7-8 Juli 1984 in Köln, ed. E. Thomas, Köln, pp.
231-239.
Tite, M. S. and A. J. Shortland. 2008. Production Technology of Faience and Related Early
Vitreous Materials, Oxford.
Tomkins, P., P. M. Day, and V. Kilikoglou. 2004. “Knossos and the Earlier Neolithic Settlement
of Knossos: New Light on an Old Picture,” in Knossos: Palace, City, State (BSA Studies
12), ed. G. Cadogan, E. Hatzaki, and A. Vasilikas, London, pp. 51-60.
136
Trigger, B. G. 2006. A History of Archaeological Thought (Second Edition), Cambridge.
Tzedakis, J. 1971. “Λάρνακες Υστερομινωικού Νεκροταφείου Αρμένων Ρεθύμνης,” AAA 4, pp.
216-221.
Van Dyke, R. M. and S. E. Alcock. 2003a. Archaeologies of Memory, Malden.
———. 2003b. “Archaeologies of Memory: An Introduction,” in Archaeologies of Memory, ed.
R. M. Van Dyke and S. E. Alcock, Malden, pp. 1-13.
Van Wijngaarden, G. J. 2005. “Mycenaean Heirlooms, Antiques, and Souvenirs in the Levant
and Cyprus,” in Emporia: Aegeans in the Central and Eastern Mediterranean.
Proceedings of the 10th International Aegean Conference, ed. R. Laffineur and E. Greco,
Liege, pp. 405-413.
Vavouranakis, G. 2014. “Funerary Pithoi in Bronze Age Crete: Their Introduction and
Significance at the Threshold of Minoan Palatial Sociery,” AJA 118.2, pp. 197-222.
Wallace, S. 2003. “The Perpetuated Past: Re-Use or Continuity in Material Culture and the
Structuring of Identity in Early Iron Age Crete,” BSA 98, pp. 251-277.
———. 2010. Ancient Crete: From Successful Collapse to Democracy’s Alternatives,
Twelfth to Fifth Centuries BC, New York.
Warren, P. 1969. Minoan Stone Vases, Cambridge.
Watrous, V. 1991. “The Origin and Iconography of the LM Painted Larnax,” Hesperia 60, pp.
285–307.
Webb, V. E. S. 1996. “Faience and Glass,” in KNC II, pp. 599-610.
Whitley, J. 1991. Style and Society in Dark Age Greece, Cambridge.
———. 1998. Rev. of KNC, in AJA 102, pp. 611-613.
———. 2002. “Objects with Attitude: Biographical Facts and Fallacies in the Study of Late
137
Bronze Age and Early Iron Age Warrior Graves,” CAJ 12.2, pp. 217-232.
———. 2004. “Style Wars: Towards an Explanation of Cretan Exceptionalism,” in Knossos:
Palace, City, State (BSA Studies 12), ed. G. Cadogan, E. Hatzaki, and A. Vasilikas,
London, pp. 433-442.
———. 2006. “The Minoans: A Welsh Invention? A View from East Crete,” in Archaeology
and European Modernity: Producing and Consuming the 'Minoans.' Creta Antica
(Rivista annuale di studi archeologici, storici ed epigrafici, Centro di Archaeologica
Cretese, Università di Catania), 7, ed. Y. Hamilakis and N. Momigliano, Padua, pp.55-
68.
———. 2013. “Homer’s Entangled Objects: Narrative, Agency and Personhood in and out of
Iron Age Texts,” CAJ 23.3, pp. 395-416.
Whittaker, H. 2009. “Memory and Cultural Values in the Middle Helladic Period: Some
Preliminary Thoughts,” in The Past in the Past: The Significance of Memory and
Tradition in the Transmission of Culture, ed. M. Georgiadis and C. Gallou, Oxford, pp.
5-15.
Xanthoudides, S. A. 1907. “Εκ Κρήτης,” AE 46, pp. 141-186.
———. 1918. “Μέγας πρωτομινωικός τάφος Πύργου',” ArchDelt 4, pp. 136-170.
Yoffee, N., ed. 2007a. Negotiating the Past in the Past: Identity, Memory, and Landscape in
Archaeological Research, Tuscon.
———. 2007b. “Peering into the Palimpset: An Introduction to the Volume,” in Negotiating the
Past in the Past: Identity, Memory, and Landscape in Archaeological Research, ed. N.
Yoffee, Tuscon, pp. 1-9.
Yon, M. 1971. Salamine de Chypre II: La Tombe T. I, Paris.
138
Younger, J. G. 1974. “A Glyptic Sketch from Isopata, HM 908,” Kadmos 13, pp. 1-5.
———. 1977. “Non-Sphragistic Uses of Minoan-Mycenaean Sealstones and Rings,”
Kadmos 16, pp. 141-159.
———. 1981. “Creating a Sealstone: A Study of Seals in the Greek Late Bronze Age,”
Expedition 23.4, pp. 31-38.
———. 1992. “Representations of Minoan-Mycenaean Jewelry,” in EIKON Aegean Bronze Age
Iconography: Shaping a Methodology, ed. R. Laffineur and J. L. Crowley, Liege, pp.
257-293.
139
Appendix A
Catalogue of BA Objects in Knossian EIA tombs
Object # Object Class Manufacture Redeposition Material Years between Date Date Production and Redeposition*
KNC 98.19 Larnax LM IIIA2-B SMin-EPG Clay 90-460
KNC Q.116 Larnax LM IIIA2 PGB Clay 510-570
KNC 18.15 Larnax LM IIIA2-B PGB-EG Clay 370-590
KNC 75.225 Larnax LM IIIA2-B PGB-EG/LO Clay 370-740
Khaniale Larnax LM IIIA2-B PGB-EO Clay 370-710 Teke Tomb 3 KNC Larnax LM IIIA2 PGB-LO Clay 510-740 107.214 KNC Larnax LM IIIA2-B PGB-LO Clay 370-740 107.215 KNC Larnax LM IIIA2 PGB-LO Clay 510-740 292.239 KNC 106.42 Larnax LM IIIA2-B PGB-LO Clay 370-740
Fortetsa Larnax LM IIIA2-B MG Clay 420-620 Tomb I/P Fortetsa Larnax LM IIIA2-B MG Clay 420-620 Tomb VII KNC 103.2 Larnax LM IIIA2-B MG-LG Clay 420-660
KNC 134.77 Larnax LM IIIA2-B MG-LG Clay 420-660
KNC 294.63 Larnax LM IIIA2 MG-LG Clay 560-660 KNC 85.1 Larnax LM IIIB LG Clay 450-630
KNC 132.38 Larnax LM IIIA2-B MG-LO Clay 420-740
KNC 31.11 Larnax LM IIIA2-B LG Clay 450-660
KNC 113.1 Larnax LM IIIA2-B LG Clay 450-660
KNC 60.3 Larnax LM IIIA2-B LG-LO Clay 450-740
KNC 294.6 Larnax LM IIIA2-B EO Clay 490-710
KNC 2.f1 Seal --- SMin Steatite ---
KNC J.f10 Seal LM II-IIIB EPG Serpentine 190-530
140
KNC 129.f1 Seal MM III-LM I EG-EO Chlorite 640-1,050
KNC 18.f3 Seal MM III-LM I; Amethyst 600-910 LM IIIA PGB with gold Modification (?) backing Fortetsa Θ Seal -- EPG --- -- no. 137 Fortetsa I/P Seal LM I O Soft Stone 730-980 no. 1168 Fortetsa I/P Seal MM III-LM I O Serpentine 730-1,080 no. 1169 Fortetsa I/P Seal LM I O Serpentine 730-980 no. 1170 Fortetsa I/P Seal MM II O Chlorite 1,000-1,180 no. 1171 KNC Beads LM SMin Faience 50-600 200.f2a/b KNC 200.f6 Bead LM SMin Glass 50-600
KNC 200.f9 Bead LM SMin Faience 50-600
KNC Bead LM SMin Glass 50-600 200.f11 KNC 121.f3 Bead LM SMin Glass 50-600
KNC 78.f28 Bead LM LG/EO Faience 360-950
KNC 201.f1 Four Sided LC II-IIIB SMin Bronze 0-250 Stand KNC Helmet Plates LM II-IIIA SMin Boar’s 230-430 201.f13 Tusk KNC Rosette Inlay LM PG Glass 200-780 219.f12 KNC Q.45 Conical Cup LM PGB Clay 280-810
KNC G Oval Mouthed LM II PG-G Clay 490-730 Jar KNC 132.9 Straight-sided MM I MG-LO Clay 1,030-1,380 Pithos KNC 78.f11 Hairpin LM LG/EO Glass 360-950
*: The dates used for these calculations were based on the Aegean LBA low chronology (Figure 1) and the EIA chronology in Iacovou 2012 (Figure 2).
141
Appendix B
Seals from “Hogarth’s Tombs:” BA or EIA context(s)?
According to Stephanos Xanthoudides and the CMS, eight seals in the Herakleion museum (Figures 61-68) were found in “τάφοι γεωμετρικοί ανασκαφή Hogarth 1900;”640 however, David Hogarth makes no mention of these seals in his publication of the “Geometric” tombs he excavated in 1900.641 In his personal journal for that same year, he also gives no indication that he found seals in the burials.642 This lack of references to the seals is particularly surprising given Hogarth’s interest in BA (rather than EIA) material.643
The “Geometric” tombs are six EIA chamber tombs 500 m east of the KNC that range in date from SMin to LG/EO.644 Hogarth claimed that they were BA tombs reused in the Geometric period,645 though reanalysis of the pottery by Coldstream has shown that this actually dates to various periods of the EIA.646 While Coldstream analyzed the pottery, no one has reanalyzed the small finds, and Hogarth himself makes little mention of them in his publication. Neither
Xanthoudides nor the CMS gives a description of the seals’ findspots, making it impossible to determine if these seals were in fact discovered in the EIA tombs let alone to which of Hogarth’s tombs they belong. The issue is complicated by the fact that Hogarth excavated two Late Minoan tombs in the same year (1900).647
A solution to the mystery of the context may be found in Hogarth’s personal journal from the year 1900. In his entries from March through May, he mentions finding eight seals and
640 They are published in CMS II.3, CMS II.4, and Xanthoudides 1907, which is a catalog of the Heraklion museum seals. 641 Hogarth 1899-1900. 642 I am deeply thankful to Todd Whitelaw for providing me with his transcript of the journal and for providing many helpful suggestions for how to unravel the mystery of these seals. 643 Hogarth describes his project as “intending to probe round the heart of the site until I hit on ‘Mycenaean’ graves ….” As Coldstream emphasizes, Hogarth excavated these tombs in hopes of finding the cemetery associated with the palace—“the tombs of ‘the lords of the Kephala.’” Hogarth 1899-1900, pp. 70, 81-82; Coldstream 2002, p. 201. 644 Coldstream 2002. 645 Hogarth 1899-1900, pp. 82-85. 646 Coldstream 2002. 647 Hood and Smyth 1981, pp. 36-37, nos. 27, 39. 142
buying one, 648 making a total of nine seals—one more than the number of seals which
Xanthoudides and the CMS report were found in Hogarth’s tombs. It is therefore possible that the
“Hogarth’s tombs seals” are eight of the nine seals, which Hogarth gathered over the course of the year 1900, but did not mention in the 1900 summary report of Knossos excavations.
Xanthoudides (and the CMS following suit) may have mistakenly attributed the assemblage to the EIA tombs excavated by Hogarth in the same year. Unfortunately, Hogarth does not give any identifiable characteristics of the seals through which they could be matched with the CMS catalogue; however, he does mention that one is of amethyst and indeed the only hard stone seal in the “Hogarth’s tombs” assemblage is an amethyst one (CMS II.3, no. 74).
There is further reason to suspect that these seals do not come from EIA contexts. In both quantity and imagery, these seals differ from other BA seals found in Knossian EIA mortuary contexts. Eight seals is almost as much as the total number of antique seals found at Cretan sites
(10) other than Knossos (as mentioned in chapter 3) and more than the total number found at either the KNC or Fortetsa, and almost as numerous as the antique seals from both cemeteries.
Furthermore, both Fortetsa and the KNC contained significantly more tombs than the six
Hogarth excavated; therefore, proportionally the number of seals found in Hogarth’s tombs is much more than that at the other cemeteries. Such a plethora of seals is also surprising given that
Hogarth’s tombs do not seem to be among the wealthiest in the Knossos area. Unlike the rich
Fortetsa I/P tomb, where multiple seals were also found, Hogarth’s tombs lacked imports and extensive metal goods.649
648 One was found in a “pit” on 3/22, two came from the “West Building” on 3/31 and another one from the same building on 4/10, two from pits on 4/17, one purchased on 4/22, one from the “café garden” on 5/7, and one in a pit on 5/14. Hogarth always refers to the seals as galopetras. 649 Hogarth 1899-1900, pp. 82-85; Coldstream 2002, pp. 215-216. Though, this is doubtless partially due to later robbing.
143
Of the eight seals from Hogarth’s tombs, four depict animals, two geometric designs, one a hybrid creature, and one a female figure. Two of the four animals are deer (Figures 61 and 62;
CMS II.4, nos. 74, 132). Both are in a similar galloping pose, but they face opposite directions.
Though quadrupeds in general are common on Knossian antique seals, deer are not. Goats, on the other hand, are very popular quadrupeds on the KNC seals, and one of the Hogarth’s tombs’ seals, CMS II.4, no. 7, also features one. This goat has its head turned back in a typical Final
Palatial pose. The large horn may indicate it is an agrimi, although the CMS suggests the animal may even be a cow rather than goat,650 highlighting the difficulty in differentiating quadrupeds.
The final animal motif is one unparalleled among Knossian EIA seals (CMS II.3, no. 75). This is a beautifully symmetric marine image in which fish are pictured with curved bodies, their heads positioned around a central point and their tails rotating outwards to fill the seal’s circular space.
Marine images, particularly realistic ones, are rare on antiques. The now lost flying fish on the
Fortetsa seal (Fortetsa no. 137) is the only other Knossian antique seal with a marine creature.
The two seals with geometric patterns (CMS II.4, nos. 133, 134) do not differ greatly from other Knossian antiques. CMS II.4, no. 133 (Figure 65) has a motif known as the “lancelet leaf,” a symmetrical composition in which the central branches divide the seal into four spaces with each space filled by a leaf. This quartered space resembles that of KNC 129.f1. The second geometric seal, CMS II.4, no. 134 (Figure 66), has a point and circle motif similar to the one on
Fortetsa no. 1169, though it lacks the symmetry of that piece. The final two seal images are unique for antique seals: the griffin (Figure 68; CMS II.3, no. 73) and the skirted woman (Figure
67; CMS II.3, no. 72). No hybrid creatures or human figures appear on the KNC or Fortetsa antique seals.
650 CMS II.4, no. 7.
144
Each seal is dated to LM I-II, except one lentoid depicting a goat (CMS II.4, no. 7) produced in LM IIIA-B. Aside from one amethyst (CMS II.3, no. 74) and one cushion shaped seal (CMS II.3, no. 73), the objects are made of soft stones and have a lentoid shape. Only two seals show evidence for damage: the one with a female (CMS II.3, no. 72) and the LM IIIA-B goat (CMS II.4, no. 7), both of which have surface damage which obscures sections of the imagery.
If the “Hogarth’s tombs” seals are indeed a collection of those found by Hogarth in 1900, there is one seal mentioned in Hogarth’s journal that is not included within the assemblage.
There are several possible explanations for this: 1.) Hogarth may have kept the seal he purchased, 2.) the seal may have been cataloged without a provenience or lost, or 3.) the seal may be CMS II.3, no. 183, which the CMS attributes to “Jypsades; bei Hogarth’ Haüsern.”651 CMS
II.3, no. 183 was highly damaged, so much so that its various pieces had to be glued together.652
Hogarth does not mention the object in his 1900 summary report; however, in his journal, he describes one of the seals as a “bad galopetra.”653 It is possible that Hogarth’s mention of a
“bad” seal refers to this piece, especially since none of the Hogarth’s tombs seals have extensive damage.
651 Hogarth excavated the houses in 1900 (Hogarth 1899-1900; Hood and Smyth 1981, no. 297). Xanthoudides does not mention this seal in his catalogue. 652 CMS II.3, no. 183. 653 This seal was found on 5/14 on the “East slope” in an area near to the Roman theatre.
145
Figures
Figure 1. Knossos Neolithic-BA pottery sequence with dates based on both the high and low chronology (left); Cretan BA palatial periods (right). Momigliano 2007, tbl. 0.2; Manning 2010, tbl. 2.1.
146
Figure 2. Cypriot, Cretan, and mainland Greek EIA chronology. Iacovou 2012, p. 23.
147
Figure 3. Knossos North Cemetery. Figure 4. Ambelikopi Teke sector. KNC III, fig. 1. KNC III, fig. 2.
Figure 5. KNC north sector. KNC III, fig. 3. Figure 6. KNC west sector. KNC III, fig. 4.
148
Figure 7. KNC southwest sector. KNC Figure 8. KNC southeast sector. KNC III, fig. 4. III, fig. 5.
Figure 9. Fortetsa cemetery. Brock 1957, fig. 2.
149
Figure 10. Larnax KNC 85.1. KNC IV, pl . 133. Figure 11. Larnax KNC 113.1. KNC IV, pl. 165.
Figure 12. Straight-sided pithos KNC 132.9. Figure 13. Larnax KNC IV, pl. 170. KNC 294.63. KNC IV, pl. 256.
150
Figure 14. Larnax Fortetsa VII. Figure 15. Larnax KNC 292.239. KNC
Brock 1957, pl. 2f. IV, pl. 250.
Figure 16. Zapher Papoura tomb 8. Evans 1905, fig. 24.
Figure 17. Larnax KNC Q.116. KNC IV, pl. 86.
151
Figure 18. Front side of KNC 107.214. Morgan 1987, fig. 4.
Figure 19. “West” end of larnax KNC Figure 20. KNC 107.214 protomes. Morgan 107.214. Morgan 1987, fig. 3. 1987, fig. 2.
152
Figure 21. KNC 107.214 “east” end.
Morgan 1987, pl. 29c.
Figure 22. KNC 107.214 fragmentation. Morgan 1987, fig. 1.
Figure 23. “East” end of KNC 107.214. Figure 24. KNC 107.214 “west” end.
Morgan 1987, fig. 9. Morgan 1987, pl. 29b.
153
Figure 25. KNC 107.214 front side. Morgan 1987, pl. 29a.
Figure 26. KNC 107.214 back. Morgan 1987, fig. 10.
Figure 27. KNC 107.214 back. Morgan 1987, pl. 29d.
154
Figure 28. PGB straight-sided pithos KNC 107.114. KNC III, fig. 109.
Figure 29. Domed lid KNC 75.45. KNC III, fig. 93.
155
Figure 30. KNC tombs with LBA Figure 31. KNC tombs with larnakes. characteristics. Coldstream 1998, fig. 5.1. Coldstream 1998, fig. 5.2.
156
Figure 32.Seal KNC 2.f1. Figure 33. Seal KNC 18.f3. KNC IV, pl. 264. KNC IV, pl. 302.
Figure 34. Seal KNC 18.f3. KNC III, fig. Figure 35. KNC 18.f3backing. KNC III, 154. fig. 154.
157
Figure 36. Seal KNC 18.f3. KNC IV, pl. 264. Figure 37. Sellopoulo relief bead. Popham, Catling, and Catling 1974, pl. 36a.
Figure 38. Mycenaean relief bead. Figure 39. Khaniale Teke no. 18. Higgins 1980, fig. 13. Boardman 1967, pl. 12.
c.
158
Figure 40. Seal KNC 129.f1. KNC III, Figure 41. KNC J.f10. KNC III, pl. 303. pl. 303.
159
Figure 42. Fortetsa no. 1169. CMS II.3, no. 57.
Figure 43. Fortetsa no. 1170. CMS II.3, no. 58.
Figure 44. Fortetsa no. 1171. CMS II.2, no. 72.
160
Figure 45. Fortetsa no. 1168. CMS II.4, no. 129.
Figure 46. Brock motifs 2l, 9r, and 9s. Brock 1957.
Figure 47. Brock motif 9bp. Brock 1957.
161
Figure 48. KNC 200.f2. KNC III, fig. 164. Figure 49. KNC 200.f2. KNC III, fig. 164.
Figure 52. KNC 200.f2a/b. KNC IV, pl. 275. Figure 50. KNC Figure 51. KNC 200.f6. KNC IV, 200.f9. KNC IV, pl. 275. pl. 275.
Figure 54. KNC 200.f6. KNC III, fig. 164. Figure 55. Sellopoulo Tomb 4, J.14 glass bead. Popham, Figure 53. KNC 200.f6 and Catling, and Catling KNC 200.f9. KNC III, fig. 1974, pl. 36e. 164.
162
Figure 56. KNC 200-202. KNC III, fig. 43. Figure 57. KNC 121.f3. KNC III, fig. 162.
Figure 59. Boar’s tusk plates KNC 201.f13. KNC IV, pl. 278.
Figure 58. Four-sided stand KNC 201.f1. KNC IV, pl. 276.
Figure 60. Rosette inlay KNC 219.f12. KNC IV, pl. 298.
163
Figure 61. CMS II.4, no. 132. Figure 62. CMS II.4, no. 74.
Figure 63. CMS II.4, no. 7. Figure 64. CMS II.3, no. 75.
Figure 65. CMS II.4, no. 133. Figure 66. KNC CMS II.4, no. 134.
164
Figure 67. CMS II.3, no. 72. Figure 68. CMS II.3, no. 73.
165