A Survey of Evidence for Feasting in Mycenaean Society James C
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Bryn Mawr College Scholarship, Research, and Creative Work at Bryn Mawr College Classical and Near Eastern Archaeology Faculty Classical and Near Eastern Archaeology Research and Scholarship 2004 A Survey of Evidence for Feasting in Mycenaean Society James C. Wright Bryn Mawr College, [email protected] Let us know how access to this document benefits ouy . Follow this and additional works at: http://repository.brynmawr.edu/arch_pubs Part of the Classical Archaeology and Art History Commons, and the History of Art, Architecture, and Archaeology Commons Custom Citation Wright, James C. 2004. A Survey of Evidence for Feasting in Mycenaean Society. Hesperia 73:133-178. This paper is posted at Scholarship, Research, and Creative Work at Bryn Mawr College. http://repository.brynmawr.edu/arch_pubs/5 For more information, please contact [email protected]. HESPERIA 73 (2004) A SURVEY OF EVIDENCE Pages 133-178 FOR FEASTING IN MYCENAEANSOCIETY ABSTRACT The study of feasting on the Greek mainland during the Middle and Late Bronze Age provides insights into the nature of Mycenaean society. Grave goods demonstratechanges in feasting and drinking practicesand their im- portancein the formationof an elite identity.Cooking, serving,and drinking vessels are also recordedin Linear B documents. Feasting scenes appearin the frescoes of Crete and the islands, and the Mycenaeans adapt this tradi- tion for representationin their palaces.Feasting iconographyis also found in vase painting,particularly in examplesofthe PictorialStyle. Mycenaean feast- ing is an expressionof the hierarchicalsociopolitical structure of the palaces. INTRODUCTION In this paper I survey the artifactual evidence for Mycenaean feasting, including pottery,bronze vessels, frescoes,Linear B ideograms, and painted representations on pottery and other terracottaartifacts.1 There is no gen- erally accepted definition of feasting: some scholarsprefer a definition that encompasses most occasions of the consumption of food and drink; others argue for a more restrictive one.2 For the purposes of this investigation, I define feasting as the formal ceremony of communal eating and drinking to celebratesignificant occasions. I exclude the quotidian partakingof food and drink that is carried out for biological or fundamental social reasons, such as eating with family or casuallywith acquaintances,friends, and col- leagues-activities that do not include any perceived reciprocity.Material evidence for either eating or drinking may indicate feasting, but one must scrutinize the evidence closely to determine whether the remains are the result of formal and ritual activities not involving feasting. For example, 1. I amindebted to the twoHesperia LyviaMorgan for insightful comments MaryDabney, Paul Halstead, Yannis reviewers,Brian Hayden and Jeremy anduseful bibliography, and Maria Hamilakis,and Dimitri Nakassis for Rutter,for their sharp-eyed criticism Shawfor comments and encourage- suggestionsand help. and manyexcellent suggestions for mentand for providing Figure 8. I am 2. Dietlerand Hayden 2001b, pp. 3- changesand improvements. I thank alsograteful to ElisabettaBorgna, 4; Clarke2001, pp. 150-151. 134 JAMES C. WRIGHT peoplefrequently use vesselsto makeofferings to deitiesor performritu- als, such as toastingor leavingfood remainsfor the dead,and these ves- sels are not apriori evidencefor feasting,unless the remainsare so sub- stantialthat they indicateunusual consumption of food or drink.3I intend to argueclosely on the basis of good evidencefor feastingas a common but variablyperformed ritual, remainsfrom which are recoverableby archaeologists. It is not my purposeto examinethe organicresidues and archaeologi- cal depositsof feasts,especially since that is the subjectof two other ar- ticles in this volume.4Instead, the informationcollected for this research is thatwhich to our eyes presentsconsistent patterns of form and decora- tion, of assemblage,and of contextand deposition,evidence that repre- sentsa stylepeculiar to the practiceof feastingand formal drinking during the erawe define as Mycenaean.By "Mycenaean"I mean the assemblage of artifactsthat constitutesthe characteristicarchaeological culture that originateson the mainlandof Greecein the lateMiddle Bronze Age, finds its fullest expressionin the palacesduring Late Helladic (LH) IIIA-B, and can be tracedthrough the postpalatialLH IIIC period.5Different scholarswill define differentlythe chronologicaland geographicalrange of this culture,but probablywill not disagreethat it takes recognizable form about1600-1550 B.c. and ends about1100-1050 B.c.; is character- ized by settlementswith palacesand writing in LinearB; andin its broad- est extentencompasses coastal Thessaly, central Greece, the Peloponnese, Crete,the Aegean islands,and perhapssome settlementson the western Anatoliancoast. In this article I necessarilyconsider evidence from Crete and the Aegeanislands, since much of what we characterizeas Mycenaeanis de- rivedfrom the earlier societiesof Middle and Late Bronze 3. Although,as a numberof the palace-based authorsin this volume Crete and the islandcultures of the the forma- argue (see esp. Age Aegean.Identifying the articles and Palaima), into by Borgna tive processesthrough which these were incorporated Mycenaean libations and offerings to deities and culture,however, has proven difficult and confusing.6 The essaysby Borgna mortuaryrituals involving drinking and Steel in this volume treat the subject of the Mycenaean feast on Crete vessels may not be distinguishablefrom and where traditionsof canbe docu- the practiceof feasting, in either the Cyprus, previousindigenous feasting or texts. See mented.The authorsconfront the of the of distinc- artifactualrecord below, problem adaptation n. 59. elementsof the feast of tive,perhaps essential, Mycenaean duringperiods 4. See the articlesby Stocker and strongMycenaean influence on these islands.These discussionsconsider Davis; and Dabney,Halstead, and the feastingtradition as an elite one, and that is no less the case for this Thomas. to the study.One can arguethat the consistencyof the elite practiceof feasting 5. There is a long history term from createsa richerand more materialrecord than that by "Mycenaean," Furtwdingler patterned produced and Loeschcke'suse of it (1886; Furt- nonelite practice. wingler 1879) to Davis and Bennet's Feasting, by virtue of its bringing people together in the biological act recent examination(1999, p. 112). For of eating, is a social activity that binds a group through sharing. Feasting is its origins, see Dickinson 1977, pp. 15- reviewed also a formal ceremonial practice that differentiates host from guest, and 16; the issue was also recently Bennet 1999. youth from elder, and affirms other status distinctions. As a social practice by 6. See Vermeule1975, pp. 1-6, 50- is and to reconstruct a feast- feasting dynamic, archaeologists attempting 51; Dickinson 1977, pp. 15-16, 107- ing tradition must also pay attention to the sociopolitical trajectoryof the 110; Kilian-Dirlmeier1986, pp. 159, society under study. I argue here that feasting is an important ceremony 196-198; Kilian 1988, pp. 292-293; instrumental in the forging of cultural identity. Most explanations of the Wright 1995b. FEASTING IN MYCENAEAN SOCIETY 135 formationof pre- andprotohistoric Aegean cultures are based on assump- tions of degreeof interaction,particularly through modes of production and exchange,including exchanges of information.7Hodder, however, ar- gues that in generalsuch interactionmodels have been used mechanisti- callyand that the concentrationon economictransactions has resultedin an inadequateaccount of culturalformation and change.8He maintains that modelsof socialidentity and interactionbetter explain the sourcesof and processesbehind culturalformation and change.Through ethnoar- chaeologicalstudies he demonstratesthat expressionsof groupidentity as manifestin materialculture are highly variable and subjectto manydiffer- ent impetuses,particularly social strategies and conceptual frameworks that rangeacross various orders of sociopoliticalintegration.9 These identities are manipulatedand mutableand resultin materialexpressions that are ephemeral,yet loadedwith meaning.Consequently, the degreeof consis- tency and distributionof materialassemblages cannot be assessedmerely accordingto mechanicalarticulations of economicinteractions, but in- steadhave to be understoodas the materialdisplays of otherkinds of social activity,many of which relateto the expressionand reaffirmationof indi- vidualidentity and membershipin groups.Feasting is one such activity. Archaeologistsattempt to define a cultureby "reading"the material remainsof groupswho have adopteda stylisticvocabulary representing theircommon social customs.10 This materialexpression comes into being largelyas a socialprocess that evolvesas it is practiced.Feasting is a funda- mentalsocial practice that marksmost celebrationsof life stagesand natu- ral cycleswhen people gatherand in varyingways display,reaffirm, and change their identitiesas individualsand as membersof groups.It is an integralpart of ritualand religious practice, occurring nearly universally as a componentof otheractivities; the universalityof its practiceunderscores its importancein the formationof identity.11Wiessner has providedin- sightinto the processof identityformation in severalethnographic studies 7. Dickinson1977; Cherry and that examinethe social and uses of usefulis Davis Bennetand meanings style.12Particularly 1982; Galaty1997,