UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI
Date:______
I, ______, hereby submit this work as part of the requirements for the degree of: in:
It is entitled:
This work and its defense approved by:
Chair: ______
SLAVERY AND DEPENDENT PERSONNEL IN THE LINEAR B ARCHIVES OF MAINLAND GREECE
A thesis submitted to the
Division of Research and Advanced Studies of the University of Cincinnati
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
MASTER OF ARTS
in the Department of Classical Studies of the College of Arts and Sciences
2004
by
Kalliopi Efkleidou
B.A., Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, 2001
Committee Chair: Jack L. Davis ABSTRACT
SLAVERY AND DEPENDENT PERSONNEL IN THE LINEAR B ARCHIVES OF MAINLAND GREECE
by Kalliopi Efkleidou
This work focuses on the relations of dominance as they are demonstrated in the Linear B archives of Mainland Greece (Pylos, Tiryns, Mycenae, and Thebes) and discusses whether the social status of the “slave” can be ascribed to any social group or individual. The analysis of the
Linear B tablets demonstrates that, among the lower-status people, a social group that has been generally treated by scholars as internally undifferentiated, there were differentiations in social status and levels of dependence. A set of conditions that have been recognized as being of central importance to the description of the “slave” status serve as the “unit of measurement”, by which the different statuses can be correlated to the slave status. Of great importance for this work is the examination of a group of people designated as do-e-ro(-a), who have traditionally been interpreted as “slaves.” This thesis, however, is not limited to these do-e-ro(-a), but takes into consideration the entire dependent and lower-status population in the tablets, distinguishes social groups of different levels of ranking and compares these groups both internally and against the criteria describing “slaves.” Finally, a further goal of the discussion concerns the extent to which the different palatial sites on mainland Greece were similarly socially structured.
i ii FOREWORD
This thesis would not be possible without to the generous help of a Louise Taft Semple
Fellowship from the Department of Classics at the University of Cincinnati, Ohio, and a
University Graduate Scholarship from the University of Cincinnati. I would like to extend my profound gratitude to my supervisors, Jack L. Davis, Peter van Minnen, and Lynne Schepartz.
Jack followed my studies closely from the time I arrived in Cincinnati and offered me his academic guidance and experience while I was working on this thesis; but most importantly he stood by me morally and psychologically and encouraged me to continue. Peter offered me long hours of his time to discuss not only his constructive ideas on the topic, but also his very thorough corrections of my text. Finally, I would like to thank Lynne for her quick response in reading, correcting and discussing my thesis, as well as for discussing a topic that was planned for inclusion in this thesis, but never realized. I hope I will have the chance in the future to go back and work on this part too. A special thanks to my professor in Greece, Stelios Andreou, for the extensive and in-depth discussions that we have had every time I have met him and for offering me his insights on the topic.
For the support that my fellow students offered me, for cheering me up, and telling me not to stop writing I would like to thank Evi Gorogianni, Lynne Kvapil, Jen Glaubius, Julie
Hruby, Joanne Murphy, and Jody Gordon. I would never have even started this thesis, if I did not have the encouragement and support of my family in Greece, my mother Anastasia Efklides, my father Ioannis Efklides, and my sisters. Finally, I owe the greatest part of this thesis to Stamatis
Chatzitoulousis, who suffered my anxieties and stress, encouraged me, discussed every part of it with me, and corrected all the text before anyone else saw it.
iii TABLE OF CONTENTS
Abstract______i
Foreword ______iii
Table of Contents ______1
List of Tables ______7
List of Figures ______8
Appendix 1. List of Figures ______9
Appendix 2. List of Tables ______10
Appendix 3. List of Tables ______12
Chapter 1 ______13
Introduction ______13
Chronological and Geographical Scope of the Present Study ______17
Chronological Framework of the Study ______17
Geographical Framework of the Study ______20
Chapter 2 ______24
Approaching and Defining Slavery______24
Introduction ______25
Greco-Roman Antiquity______26
Early Christian Writers ______30
1 18th Century, the Enlightenment ______31
19th Century______33
Antiquarianism ______33
Cultural Evolutionism ______34
Karl Marx ______35
20th Century______38
H.J. Nieboer ______38
Marxist Tradition(s) ______39
Functionalism ______41
Post-Modernism ______43
A Working Hypothesis ______45
Contextualizing Slavery ______55
Chapter 3 ______57
Linear B Tablets and Slavery ______57
Chapter 4 ______64
Methodology for the analysis of the Linear B tablets______64
Principles of the Linear B Tablets Analysis ______64
Database Analysis______68
Chapter 5 ______72
Analysis of the Linear B Tablets of Pylos ______72
Introduction ______72
Population Census ______75
2 Individual do-e-ro(-a) and te-o-jo do-e-ro(-a) ______75
Groups of do-e-ro(-a) and te-o-jo do-e-ro(-a)______80
Individuals Other Than do-e-ro(-a) or te-o-jo do-e-ro(-a) ______81
Groups of People Other Than do-e-ro(-a) and te-o-jo do-e-ro(-a) ______82
Discussion ______86
Onomastics ______88
The Names of the do-e-ro(-a) ______91
The Names of the te-o-jo do-e-ro(-a) ______94
The Names of Individuals Other Than do-e-ro(-a) and te-o-jo do-e-ro(-a) ______97
Ethnic Origin______100
Evidence from the Names ______100
Do-e-ro(-a)______100
Te-o-jo do-e-ro(-a) ______100
Individuals Other Than do-e-ro(-a) or te-o-jo do-e-ro(-a) ______102
Groups of People Other Than do-e-ro(-a) or te-o-jo do-e-ro(-a) ______103
Non-Onomastic Evidence ______106
Do-e-ro(-a)______107
Te-o-jo do-e-ro(-a) ______107
Individuals Other Than do-e-ro(-a) or te-o-jo do-e-ro(-a) ______107
Groups of People Other Than do-e-ro(-a) or te-o-jo do-e-ro(-a) ______108
Occupations______109
Occupations of the do-e-ro(-a) ______110
Occupations of the te-o-jo do-e-ro(-a) ______110
Occupations of Individuals Other Than do-e-ro(-a) or te-o-jo do-e-ro(-a)______111
Occupations of Groups of People Other Than do-e-ro(-a) or te-o-jo do-e-ro(-a)______115
Subsistence ______123
Rations ______123
3 Payment in Kind ______126
Land ______129
Relations of Dominance ______136
Superiors of do-e-ro(-a) ______137
Superiors of te-o-jo do-e-ro(-a)______140
Superiors of Individuals and Groups Other Than do-e-ro(-a) and te-o-jo do-e-ro(-a) ______141
Family Relations ______143
Evidence for Parents and Marital Relations ______144
Evidence for Children ______146
Epilogue ______149
Chapter 6 ______151
Analysis of the Linear B Tablets of Tiryns, Mycenae, and Thebes ______151
Introduction ______151
Tiryns______152
Individuals______152
Groups of People______154
Mycenae______156
Population Census______156
Onomastics ______158
Ethnics as Personal Names______159
Occupational Terms as Personal Names ______161
Ethnic Origin______162
Individuals-Groups of People______162
Occupations______164
Individuals ______164
4 Groups of People ______167
Subsistence ______169
Rations and Handouts______170
Payment in Kind______171
Evidence for Family Relations ______180
Thebes ______182
Population Census______184
Individuals ______186
Groups of People ______187
Onomastics ______187
Ethnics as Personal Names______188
Occupations as Personal Names______193
Occupations______194
Individuals ______194
Groups of People ______195
Subsistence ______199
Epilogue ______205
Chapter 7 ______207
Synthesis______207
Introduction ______207
Criteria for the Definition of Slavery ______208
Pylos ______212
Mycenae______219
Thebes ______224
5 Epilogue ______225
Chapter 8 ______227
Conclusions ______227
Bibliography______235
Appendix 1 ______255
The Database______255
Appendix 2 ______258
Tables of Chapter 5 ______258
Appendix 3 ______315
Tables of Chapter 6 ______315
6 LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Late Helladic chronology for Mainland Greece______20
Table 2. Total counts of individual do-e-ro(-a) and te-o-jo do-e-ro(-a) in Pylos______80
Table 3. Count of collectively recorded do-e-ro(-a), te-o-jo do-e-ro(-a), and do-qe-ja ______81
Table 4. Count of personnel other than do-e-ro(-a) or te-o-jo do-e-ro(-a) individually recorded in the Pylos tablets
(see also Appendix 2, Table 6) ______82
Table 5. Count and mean figure of the members of the Aa, Ab, and Ad series in Pylos______84
Table 6. Count and mean of the number of individuals recorded in groups in all series, except the Aa, Ab, and Ad series______85
Table 7. Total count of individually recorded dependent people ______86
Table 8. Total count of collectively recorded dependent people ______86
Table 9. Connotations of the personal names of the do-e-ro(-a) ______92
Table 10. Ethnics as personal names associated with the actual occupations with which the individuals are recorded ______102
Table 11. The number of people recorded individually or collectively in the Mycenae tablets ______157
Table 12. Relation of tablets to type of commodities- distribution ______170
Table 13. Count of individually recorded people in the Thebes tablets ______186
Table 14. Count of people collectively recorded in groups in the Thebes tablets ______187
Table 15. Individuals in the Thebes tablets who are recorded as recipients of more than one commodity ______203
7 LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Categories of the names of the te-o-jo do-e-ro(-a) based on their connotations ______95
Figure 2. Origin of groups of women in the Aa/Ab series ______105
Figure 3. Percentages of the four different categories of personal names at Mycenae ______158
Figure 4. Percentages of the different types of names in the Thebes tablets ______188
8 APPENDIX 1. LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. The Tablet Database______255
Figure 2. Dependent Personnel Database ______256
Figure 3. Objects and Quantities Database ______257
9 APPENDIX 2. LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Count of named do-e-ro(-a) in Pylos ______258
Table 2. Count of named te-o-jo do-e-ro(-a) in Pylos ______259
Table 3. Individual te-o-jo do-e-ro(-a) for whom we cannot prove they had the same identity______260
Table 4. Anonymous individual do-e-ro(-a) and teo-jo do-e-ro(-a) for whom we cannot conclude with certainty if
they refer to the same individual______261
Table 5. The do-e-ro(-a) recorded in groups and the controversial group of the do-qe-ja women ______262
Table 6. List of the groups recorded in the Aa-Ab series and the correspondence between the two series ______264
Table 7. Records of the Aa and Ab series that do not have corresponding ones ______265
Table 8. The groups of the Ad series with the corresponding tablets from the Aa and Ab ______267
Table 9. Interpretation and connotations of the names of the te-o-jo do-e-ro(-a) ______268
Table 10. Indications of ethnic origin or provenance from the personal names among the te-o-jo do-e-ro(-a) ___269
Table 11. Indications of occupation from personal names of individuals other than do-e-ro(-a) or te-o-jo do-e-ro(-
a)______270
Table 12. Names of bronze-smiths (ka-ke-u) that show some connection to occupational status ______271
Table 13. Indications of ethnic origin from the personal names of individuals other than do-e-ro(-a) or te-o-jo do-e- ro(-a)______272
Table 14. Groups in the Pylos Tablets designated only or primarily by their ethnic origin______273
Table 15. Groups of women in the Aa/Ab series that are defined by their ethnic origin ______274
Table 16. Provenance of military personnel from the o-ka tablets and the e-r-e-ta men ______276
Table 17. Records of do-e-ro with contextual indication of their occupational status ______277
Table 18. Occupational status of the personnel recorded in groups ______285
Table 19. Personnel receiving rations ______289
Table 20. Personnel receiving payment in kind ______295
Table 21. Individuals who receive payment in land ______304
Table 22. Superiors of individual and group do-e-ro(-a) ______306
10 Table 23. Superiors of individuals other than do-e-ro(-a) ______312
Table 24. Superiors of groups other than do-e-ro(-a) ______314
11 APPENDIX 3. LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Individuals and their land-holdings on the Tiryns tablets ______315
Table 2. Groups of people on the Tiryns tablets______315
Table 3. Individuals and one group of women on the Mycenae tablets with ethnic adjectives as personal name/designation ______315
Table 4. Individuals at Mycenae with occupational terms as personal names______316
Table 5. Individuals at Mycenae who are not designated by an occupational term alone ______316
Table 6. Occupations of people at Mycenae who are recorded in groups ______316
Table 7. Individuals at Mycenae who receive rations ______317
Table 8. Individuals at Mycenae who receive possible handouts ______317
Table 9. Individuals and groups of people at Mycenae who receive payment in kind ______318
Table 10. Individuals who are recorded with reference to their parents ______319
Table 11. Individuals at Thebes who use ethnic adjectives as their personal names ______319
Table 12. Groups of people who are defined by ethnic adjectives ______319
Table 13. Individuals at Thebes who use occupational terms as their personal names ______320
Table 14. Individuals at Thebes who are not designated by an occupational term alone ______320
Table 15. Occupations of people at Thebes recorded in groups______321
Table 16. Individuals at Thebes who receive barley (HORDEUM) ______327
Table 17. Individuals at Thebes who receive commodities other than barley (HORDEUM)______328
Table 18. Groups of people at Thebes and the commodities that they receive______330
12 CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
The objective of this thesis is to examine whether slavery existed in the Mycenaean period. The issue of slavery has been dealt with extensively for other historical periods, but remains highly interesting for the understanding of past societies, as well as the ideologies and agendas that underlay cultural and economic decisions and actions. For the Mycenaean period, in particular, there are two further reasons.
The written sources of the period, the Linear B archives found at the palatial centers, include numerous accounts of people designated as do-e-ro, which can be etymologically translated as dou`lo~. Even though the decipherers of Linear B in 1952, John Chadwick and
Michael Ventris,1 had warned scholars against attributing the same conceptual meaning that it had in later times, they themselves did not succeed in avoiding this. Their accounts of the
Mycenaean Bronze Age (as well as those of almost all the Mycenologists) describe a palatial economy, which depends on slaves, procures them from other places and from within the local population, and records their work as well as the means of their subsistence.2 Soon after, Leonard
R. Palmer3 corrected some of the previous interpretations and proposed some new ones that compared the Mycenaean polities to contemporary theocratic states of the Near East. These first works form the foundation for the interpretation of the Linear B tablets and the understanding of the Mycenaean period and its structure as it is reflected in the textual sources.
1 Ventris and Chadwick 1956, pp.123-125; Chadwick 1973, pp. 123-125. 2 Chadwick 1973, pp. 123-12. 3 Palmer 1963.
13 Aegean Bronze Age archaeologists have largely reconsidered the above views, especially
the views concerning the elite, but have not done the same with the lower-status population, and
have not yet critically reviewed the suggestions concerning slaves. They rarely elaborate on this
issue. The different narratives often include brief and rather uncritical mentions of slaves as
existing and working in the different industries of the palace.
A very few small-scale studies treated slaves as an object of study by themselves4 or as part of a wider study of the dependent personnel of the Mycenaean economy.5 These studies, however, suffer from the fact that they had accepted a priori the fact that slaves existed and that slaves were the people designated as do-e-ro. They did not deduce this interpretation directly from the evidence of the tablets, but rather fitted the evidence to suit the interpretation for slaves.
They did not address the issue of slavery in relation either to theoretical discussions, such as the
identities of the persons regarded as slaves, their status and living-conditions in the Mycenaean
community, or to the slaves’ exact function within the Mycenaean economy and palatial system.
This implies, also, that the status that the above scholars attached to the social group of slaves
was understood a priori through the lenses of later historical slave-systems that used the same
word, dou`lo~, as that of Classical Greece.
Furthermore, no study yet has attempted to discuss slavery in palatial centers other than
that of Pylos; this can be attributed to the fact that Pylos has yielded the only archive preserved
almost in its entirety.6 It is interesting, however, to study the archives of the rest of the mainland
palatial centers, Mycenae, Tiryns and Thebes; each one on its own and in comparison to each
4 Lencman 1966; Lejeune 1971; Debord 1973. 5 Chadwick 1973, pp. 155-194; Beringer 1982, pp. 13-32; Hiller 1988, pp. 53-68. 6 Hiller 1988, p.53; Shelmerdine 1997, pp. 566, 570. Very recently, however, the tablets from Thebes were extensively published and a further large archive has become available for study (Aravantinos, Godart, and Sacconi 2001).
14 other. Studies to date have shown that the social and political structures revealed by these
archives are analogous to those of Pylos.7 Bearing this in mind, it is useful to see whether slaves existed in these centers too and examine whether similar social structures existed in all four palatial centers.
My thesis will be structured in the following manner. Chapter 2 examines the theoretical issues involved in the study of any slave-system. Initially I discuss what slavery is, how it can be defined, and how it has been approached by different theoretical and sociological schools. This theoretical discussion leads to the formulation of my own working hypothesis with a set of conditions that generally describe the slave status.
The following chapter is a discussion of the material and some of the most influential studies that have largely formulated the way we perceive of the Mycenaean period today and accept a priori the presence of slavery in the Mycenaean communities.
In the next three chapters I am occupied with the analysis of the textual evidence. Chapter
4 presents the methodology that I followed and the database that I set up for the purposes of the analysis. Chapter 5 deals only with the texts from Pylos and presents the evidence in a thematic order that is dictated by the need to identify in the texts the greatest amount of evidence to compare against my working hypothesis. Chapter 6 deals with the textual evidence from the other three mainland palatial centers that yielded Linear B archives, Tiryns, Mycenae, and
Thebes. The structure of the analysis of these centers is the same as that followed for Pylos.
Chapter 7 constitutes a synthesis and discussion of the evidence from each palatial center.
At this point, I compare the corpus of evidence for every social group against my working hypothesis and examine how appropriate it is to describe them as of “slave status” or not.
7 Shelmerdine 1997, p. 566.
15 To conclude my thesis I review my observations and discuss the contributions that I have made to the study not only of the textual material, Linear B archives, but also to the study of the
Mycenaean period as a whole.
16 Chronological and Geographical Scope of the Present Study
Chronological Framework of the Study
The present study started as an examination of the evidence for the existence of slavery in
the Mycenaean period. The chronological scope, however, is severely limited by the nature of
the material that it studies. This is clear if one considers the nature and purpose of the Linear B
archives. The Linear B archives were written on tablets made of unbaked clay. While they were
still wet, the scribe would inscribe the text that he wanted. The tablets were then left to dry and,
subsequently, they were stored in a dry and closed environment. At the end of the administrative year or during the next administration year when new records were written and gradually replaced the old ones, the scribes would re-use the clay of the old tablets to make the new ones.8
The tablets, therefore, contained the records of only one administrative period. The
chronological extent of the administrative year is not clear to us today.9 The fact that new tablets were written every administrative year and that the old ones were recycled in order to make the new ones is also shown by certain phrases that are found recorded on some of the tablets.
Expressions such as “of this year” (to-to we-to) or “of the last year” (pe-ru-si-no-wo) make this
clear.10
The tablets that have been preserved and we can study today are baked. This was not
done deliberately, but took place during the fire that destroyed the palatial complexes or parts of
them and resulted also in baking the clay tablets that were stored in them. Thus, the tablets that
8 Ruipérez and Melena 1996, p. 41. 9 Palaima 2003, pp. 153-169; Palaima believes the tablets of the Archives Complex at Pylos cover a period between two to five months. 10 Chadwick 1973, p. 114.
17 we study today are not only the product of Mycenaean bureaucracy and human intervention, but also the effect of occasional fires. Consequently, the period that these tablets reflect is the administrative period right before these fires, “the last days of the palaces.”
To be more specific, we should turn now to discuss briefly the date of the destruction of each palatial center that yielded a Linear B archive. According to Cynthia Shelmerdine,11 two major destructions took place during LH IIIB and a continuously rising anxiety was evident in different sites. The first destruction took place around the middle of LH IIIB (ca. 1250 B.C.).
The houses outside the citadel of Mycenae, House of the Oil Merchant, House of the Shields, and
West House, which yielded most of the tablets from Mycenae, were destroyed. At Thebes, in
Boeotia, the sequence of events is not securely understood. Nevertheless, evidence for a first destruction at the area of the so-called Kadmeion, the building-lot Liaga, and the Room of the
Treasure seems to date the tablets unearthed in these areas to the end of the LH IIIB1 period.12
Around the same time, massive constructions took place in Tiryns, Midea and Athens.
The final destruction, according to Shelmerdine,13 took place at the end of LH IIIB2 and early LH IIIC. During that destruction Mycenae suffered from an extensive fire and the palace itself went out of use, but, in other areas within the citadel, habitation continued in the aftermath.
The tablets found at the Citadel House are securely dated by this destruction.14 Thebes and the lots at the Odoi Epameinondos and Pelopidos, which yielded the majority of the Theban tablets, were destroyed also by fire at the same time.15 The destruction of the Palace of Nestor at Pylos
11 Shelmerdine 1997, pp. 580-582. 12 Aravantinos 1999, pp. 50-52. 13 Shelmerdine 1997, p. 582. 14 Treuil et al. 1996, p. 415. 15 Aravantinos 1999, pp. 50-52.
18 happened most likely at the same time as in Mycenae and Thebes.16 Finally, of the tablets found
at Tiryns there are only eighteen found in a refuse pit at the Lower Terrace of the citadel that can
be securely dated to LH IIIB2.17
In conclusion, nearly all the Linear B tablets of the mainland can be divided into two
chronological sets: one dating to about the middle of LH IIIB (ca. 1250 B.C.) and a second one dating to about the end of LH IIIB and early LH IIIC (ca. 1190 B.C.). This makes evident that a scholar of the Mycenaean social and political structure studying the Linear B tablets is forced to limit himself to the study of at most the two administrative years before the destructions occurred. As we have noted already, the presence of sets of tablets that belonged to the administrative year before the last one (such as the Aa series and some of the E series), as well as the presence of expressions, such as “of the last year” or “of this year”, indicate that not only record-keeping practices did not change significantly over the course of the last two administrative years, but also that the social structure remained the same.
The absolute dates of these periods are still under debate. Peter Warren and Vronwy
Hankey’s18 chronological table was significantly modified by Sturt Manning, who based his
work not only on radiocarbon dates and the synchronism between the Aegean and Egypt, but also and mainly on thermoluminescence and calibrated radiocarbon dates.19 A further
modification is discussed in Shelmerdine for the end of LH IIIA2.20 Traditionally, this end has
been dated to 1340/1330 B.C., but evidence indicates that this period is longer and its end must
be lowered to 1310/1300 B.C.
16 Shelmerdine 1997, p. 581; Shelmerdine 1998a, p. 88. 17 Treuil et al. 1996, p. 415; Ruipérez and Melena 1996, p. 47. 18 Warren and Hankey 1989, pp. 146-169 table 3.1. 19 Manning 1995, p. 15. 20 Shelmerdine 1997, pp. 540-541.
19 The following table demonstrates the different dating schemes.21
Warren & Hankey, 1989 Manning, 1995 Shelmerdine, 1997 LH I 1600-1510/1500 B.C. 1680-1600/1580 B.C. LH IIA 1510/1500- 1440 B.C. 1600/1580-1520/1480 B.C. LH IIB 1440- 1390+ B.C. 1520/1480-1445/1415 B.C. LH IIIA1 1390+ - 1370/1360 B.C. LH IIIA2 1370/1360-1340/1330 B.C. 1370-1310/1300 B.C. LH IIIB 1340/1330-1185/1180 B.C. 1310/1300- 1190/1180B.C. LH IIIC 1185/1180- 1065 B.C. Table 1. Late Helladic chronology for Mainland Greece
Geographical Framework of the Study
The geographical extent of this study follows closely the limitations posed by the material at hand. Linear B tablet “archives” were found only in palatial sites of Southern Greece.
The term “palatial sites” refers to sites with architectural remains of a specific type: a building complex with rooms developing around a core area, which consists always of the same parts, a propylon with two columns, a prodomos, and a large square room with a circular hearth in its center and four columns around it. Characteristic of these complexes is their monumental character, their numerous living and storage areas, their elaborate masonry applied in their structure, and their elaborate painted decoration of floors and walls, especially in the core area.22
Such palaces have been unearthed almost to their entirety in three sites, Mycenae, Pylos and
Tiryns, and large parts of one have also been found at Thebes.
The presence and function of these palaces demonstrates a significant development in the social structure, economy and ideology of the communities in these areas. There is a vast
21 The dates for the present study are based on Warren and Hankey (1989) with the modification discussed by Shelmerdine (1997). Nevertheless, the absolute dates are used with caution. 22 Treuil et al. 1996, p. 484.
20 increase of wealth in the production of agricultural goods; the economy is based on the storage
and redistribution of these goods; the society is highly ranked with the palace controlling a large
number of activities; and, finally, there is a significant development in external relations and
trade with other communities.23
The largest Linear B “archive” has been unearthed at the site of Ano Englianos, at Pylos, which is widely referred to as the Palace of Nestor. Tablets from the Palace of Nestor amount to
circa 1100, mostly found in a two-room complex known as the Archives Complex, which had a
central position in the layout of the entire palatial complex. Access to the main storage room was
restricted, with an anti-chamber for the receipt of new tablets, whereas the interior room was
devoted entirely to the filing and storage of the clay tablets. The majority of the tablets were
found there, mostly in coherent sets. The presence also of labels indicates that they were filed in
separate baskets, according to their subject.24
At Mycenae tablets were found in four architectural complexes. The House of the Oil
Merchant yielded thirty-eight tablets, the House of the Shields and the House of the Sphinxes
yielded ten tablets and seven sealings, and, finally, the West House yielded 16 tablets and a
sealing. These buildings stood outside the citadel and the main palatial complex, unlike Pylos.
Initially these buildings were considered to belong to individuals, who kept their own records
and small archives. Today, however, they are considered to be storage areas connected to the
palace.25
At Tiryns eighteen tablets were found in a refuse deposit at the Lower Town. This means
that the tablets were taken out of their primary context and deposited into a secondary one.
23 Treuil et al. 1996, p. 455. 24 Palaima 2003, pp. 177-178. 25 Ruipérez and Melena, 1996, p. 46.
21 Consequently, the primary context of the tablets is completely lost, whereas the secondary one
does not provide any kind of information regarding the way in which they were stored or
regarding the original place of their storage. The context of their discovery indicates that the
archive was not deposited as refuse in its entirety, but only a few of the tablets that comprised it
had been re-deposited. As a consequence, it is considered almost impossible to find any more
tablets from this palatial site.
Finally, the majority of the tablets of Thebes were found in a building lot generally
referred to as Odos Pelopidou or the Arsenal. Other areas that yielded Linear B tablets include
the so-called Room of the Treasure and building lots referred to by the names of the streets
where they are located. The context of the tablets appears to be storage areas and workshops, and
the Arsenal, which is described as an armory because of the large number of weapons, horse and
chariot equipment found there.26
Other sites (such as Orchomenos, Eleusis, and Midea) where Linear B writing has been
found did not yield “archives” but small numbers of random texts, either painted on pottery or
inscribed on sealings and seals. Even though these texts are of great importance for the
understanding of trade and exchange of goods, manufactured objects, and raw materials, they do
not offer any valuable information on the specific subject of the present study.
One may safely assume that the palatial archives provide us with a good reflection of the
social structure of the palatial economy and the organization of the people involved in it, the
personnel dependent on the palace. The information extends also to particular towns and major
centers in the polities, but does not reflect the social organization of the population of the polities in their entirety. The population of the periphery that is not working within the palatial economy
26 Aravantinos 1999, p. 47.
22 and for the palace and the elite is not recorded in the tablets and, thus, we are left with a dearth of information when it comes to discussing the populations in villages, farmsteads, and small towns. For this reason, the scope of this study is limited to only the palatial centers and the major towns that are economically connected to the palaces. The study is limited also to a small part of the population rather than the entire Mycenaean population of each polity.
23 CHAPTER 2
APPROACHING AND DEFINING SLAVERY
Dou`lo~ (A), Cret. Dw`lo~ Leg.Gort.1.1, al., oJ :--prop. born bondman or slave, opp. one made a slave, tav ajndravpoda pavnta, kai; dou`la kai; ejleuvqera Th.8.28 , cf. E.IA330: then, generally, bondman, slave, opp. Despovth~ (q. v.): not in Hom., who twice has fem. douvlh , hJ, bondwoman, Il.3.409, Od.4.12, cf. A.Ag.1326, X.Cyr.5.1.4, Pl.R. 395e, etc.: freq. of Persians and other nations subject to a despot, Hdt., etc.; ou{ tino~ douvloi kevklhntai, of the Greeks, A.Pers.242: metaph., crhmavtwn d. slaves to money, E.Hec.865; ou}tw gnavqou d. Id.Fr. 282.5 ; tw`n aiJei; ajtovpwn Th.3.38 ; licneiw`n, lagneiw`n, X.Oec.1.22, cf. Mem.1.3.11.
II. Adj. (not in A.), dou`lo~, h, on, slavish, servile, subject, d. povli~ S.OC917, X.Mem.4.2.29; gnwvmaisi douvlai~ S.Tr.53 ; d. e[cein bivon ib.302; sw`ma d., opp. nou`~ ejleuvqero~, Id.Fr.940; touv~ trovpou~ douvlou~ parascei`n E.Supp.877 ; d. qavnato~, zugovn, pouv~, Id.Or. 1170, Tr.678,507; d. kai; turannoumevnh povli~ Pl.R.577d ; d. hJdonai;, = douloprepei`~, ib.587c, etc.: Comp. doulovtero~ more enslaved, Ai{gupton d. poiei`n Hdt.7.7 2. to; d., = oiJ dou`loi, E.Ion983, etc.; also, slavery, a slavish life, ib.556 (troch.). 3. ancillary, d. ejpisth`mai Arist. Metaph.996b11
A Greek-English Lexicon. (H. G. Liddell and R. Scott. 1968, rev. H. S. Jones) (emphasis added)
Dou`lo~. II. add ‘Myc. do-e-ro, do-e-ra (fem.)’.
Greek-English Lexicon. Revised Supplement (Liddell, H. G., R. Scott, H. S. Jones, and R. McKenzie. 1996, P.G.W. Glare and A.A. Thomson, ed.)
[Slavery is the] condition in which one human being was owned by another. A slave was considered by law as property, or chattel, and was deprived of most of the rights ordinarily held by free persons.
(Encyclopædia Britannica; http://www.britannica.com/eb/article?eu=117527)
24 Introduction
The above quotes are perhaps the first that any researcher of slavery in antiquity would come across. The first, from the renowned Greek-English Lexicon (LSJ) of Liddell, Scott, and
Jones lists a number of the occurrences of the word dou`lo~ and its meaning; whereas the second is one of the most widely read English-language encyclopedias in the world. Their definitions are not very similar. In LSJ we see that ancient Greeks emphasized the element of domination in the relation between the slave and his master. In Britannica, however, the emphasis is put on another feature, that of property and ownership of one person by another. It is also characteristic for a
“legalistic” definition, such as the one given in Britannica, to refer to the legal status that slaves did not have, the lack of rights within a community.
Admittedly, the task of defining any social, political, economic, or religious institution is seldom easy. A brief overview of the scholarship regarding slavery and the status of a slave illustrates this difficulty very clearly. This is mainly because the features of a slave’s status have rarely been the same in any given period or social system, and, thus, the definition of the “slave” becomes a very subtle and controversial matter. Reviewing, however, the different definitions proposed over time will also show that scholars have generally centered around two basic concepts in their definitions; the element of property, which is very closely connected to the notion of freedom, or, to be precise, the lack of it, and the element of the “outsider” status.
The choice of the writers discussed in the following review was based primarily on chronological criteria, beginning from Classical Greece and ending with our contemporaries’ views on slavery. Each one of the writers, however, presents special interest in the way he approaches slavery, in the theory he proposes for the existence and development of slavery, and the definition he gives. Aristotle, for example, is propagating a theory of natural slavery;
25 Christian writers assert that all Christians are “God’s slaves”; under the influence of the
Enlightenment slavery becomes most prominently an inhuman institution; for Marx slavery is a necessary stage in the development of social orders and serves economic needs; whereas later it is approached as a means for social interaction and a variable in the status/prestige antagonism between members of a community. Consequently, the definition of each one of them is directly related to their approach.
At the end of this review I would like to connect this definitional problem to the present research and, most importantly, attempt to propose a working definition of my own.
Greco-Roman Antiquity
Slave theory in antiquity is widely held to be the work of one man only, Aristotle. Moses
Finley27 in his famous book, Ancient Slavery and Modern Ideology, states that “he [Aristotle] produced not only the first but also the last formal, systematic analysis of the subject in antiquity, so far as we know.” Nonetheless, recent scholarship has been emphasizing that a substantial number of other writers in antiquity made comments regarding slavery, allowing us to have a more holistic view of Aristotle’s contemporaries’ ideas regarding slavery.
Let us review Aristotle’s role in slave theory. First of all it should be noted that Aristotle did not write a treatise on slavery, but rather considered slavery as part of his larger work the
Politics, mainly in Book I, and makes a few remarks in his work Nicomachean Ethics.
Furthermore, Aristotle’s analysis of slavery appears to be only circumstantial in his larger discussion of the polis. The household, according to Aristotle, is the building block of the polis
27 Finley 1980, p. 120.
26 and the relationships developed in the household portray the relationships developed also in the
larger setting of the polis.
In the Politics Aristotle analyzes slavery in three parts. Initially, he discusses slavery as
one of two main hierarchical relationships (domestic and political).28 Then he focuses on the
household relationships, the psychology of the household dependents (slave, female, child), and
their capacity to achieve virtue.29 His main discussion appears in Chapters 3-7 of Book 1 of the
Politics.30
First of all, Aristotle distinguishes all men as free or slaves. A slave is a live piece of
property,31 and, as such, he belongs wholly to his master. In discussing why some men are free
and some slaves, he introduces the notion of “nature” and “law”, and, thus, he distinguishes two
kinds of mastership relationship and two kinds of slaves. On the one hand, there are some men
who are “by nature” slaves, whereas others are “by nature” rulers/masters. On the other hand,
there are men who are slaves even though their nature is not that of a slave. This is the condition
of what he calls slavery “by law”, by human convention.
For a better understanding of the nature of a slave, Aristotle provides us with its basic
characteristics; a man slavish by nature is one “capable of belonging to another”,32 one “who participates in reason so far as to apprehend it, but not to possess it”,33 one whose body is “strong for necessary work”, whereas the body of the freemen is “erect and unserviceable for such occupations, but serviceable for a life of citizenship.”34 Aristotle’s final criterion for
distinguishing men who are slaves by nature relates to the soul and its beauty; beauty of the soul
28 Aristotle, Pol. 1252a24-b15. 29 Aristotle, Pol. 1259a38-60b26. 30 Garnsey 1996, pp. 11-13. 31 Aristotle, Pol. 1253b30. 32 Aristotle, Pol. 1254b20. 33 Aristotle, Pol. 1254b20. 34 Aristotle, Pol. 1254b25-30.
27 exists only in freemen.35 When these characteristics exist in a person, then slavery for this man is not something unjust or cruel, but rather it is to his own advantage, and marks a relationship of
friendship and interest between him as a slave and his master.36
Contrary to the beneficial natural enslavement of a person, such a relationship does not
exist, according to Aristotle, when the slave is made such “by law.” This “law” commands that,
in times of warfare, anyone or anything that is conquered is transformed into property of the
conqueror, whether this involves live human beings or things.37
The idea of natural slavery was not something new in the time of Aristotle or proposed
for the first time by Aristotle.38 Elements of the natural theory of slavery can be found in earlier
writers and, mainly, Plato, though they were not presented in a systematic way as by Aristotle. In
the Republic and the Laws Plato highlights some aspects of the slaveholding in the context of the
general development of ancient Greek history. According to Plato, inequality is inevitable in
human societies. The main dimension of inequality is slavery, without which the Republic
cannot exist. Plato assigns to the citizens of his Republic as many slaves as they need. He regards
them as a kind of property that needs special reference due to the fact that they are difficult to
understand or acquire. For this reason, he continues with guidelines as to how to treat slaves in
the Republic.39
Natural slave theory seems to have been the mainstream belief regarding slavery among
the Athenians of the Classical period. Nonetheless, as Aristotle himself allows us to understand,
35 Aristotle (Pol. 1254b35) himself in the same passage refutes the last two criteria. He admits that in practice one finds more often slaves with bodies suitable to freemen, whereas freemen often have a soul suited to slaves. He also admits (Pol. 1254b30-35) that the criterion of the beauty of the soul is hard to establish, since soul is not as manifest as the state of the body is. 36 Aristotle, Pol. 1255b10. 37 Garnsey 1996, pp. 11-14, 23-24, 107-127. 38 Garnsey 1996, p. 13. 39 Garnsey 1996, p. 24.
28 there were Athenians in his time who considered slavery unjust and contrary to nature, for the
reason that it was based on the sheer superiority of one person’s force over another regardless of
the justice of it.40
The presence of opponents to slavery, however, is not well represented in the ancient
sources.41 The appearance of works justificatory of slavery implies that there were some people
who did not consider slavery necessary or natural. Apart for the one reference to them, as we saw
above, we have one sentence from the rhetor Alcidamas and an echo of Alcidamas in the work of
Philemon. Alcidamas categorically denounced slavery as an unjust and unnatural institution in
his Messenian speech, while defending the liberation of the Messenians by the Thebans in 370
B.C.42 Philemon, in the late fourth century B.C., argued with almost the same words as
Alcidamas that slavery was not natural, but rather an “accident”, something inflicted on man by
fate and externally, not his own nature.43
In the subsequent period, Hellenistic and Early Imperial, the Stoics departed from
Aristotle’s viewpoints of natural slavery. They considered that no man was naturally slavish, but that all humans were rational enough to be free. This was probably the belief of most of the population by that time and in later antiquity. Slavery, however, was well established in the
Greco-Roman society, which, according to Garnsey,44 is demonstrated by the fact that the Stoics
did not challenge slavery, among other established institutions.
40 Aristotle, Pol. 1253b20-23; 1255a3-12. 41 Schlaifer 1968, p. 199. 42 Alcidamas (fragm. 1) writes “ejleuvqerou~ ajfh`ke pavnta~ qeov~. Oujdevna dou`lon hJ fuvsi~ pepoivhken.” 43 Philemon (fragm. 39) writes “ka[n dou`lo~ hj`/ ti~, savrka thvn aujthvn e[cei: fuvsei gavr oujdeiv~ dou`lo~ ejgenhvqh potev, hJ d’ auj` tuvch tov sw`ma katedoulwvsato.” 44 Garnsey 1996, pp. 128-52.
29 Early Christian Writers
It is very interesting to see also the reaction of Early Christian fathers to slavery and the
dynamics of the institution within the early Christian society itself, but also how slavery affected
the relations between the Christian and the secular society.
Christian theologians had two problems to face; they inherited the problem of Biblical
enslavements, which, apparently, had been accepted by God,45 and they also had to define the
stance of the Church towards their contemporary legal slavery. The Christian doctrine preached
that all Christians were equal before God. Thus, a paradox was formed not only between
Christian and secular society, but also within Christian society. What were Christians to do?
Should they keep buying and owning slaves? And what should Christian slaves do? The church
fathers dealt with this paradox based mainly on the words of Paul in the first century A.D. Paul’s
references to slavery, however, are highly problematic, because he used in all his letters to
Christian communities the notion of “slave” and “slavery” metaphorically, as symbols for the
relationship of the Christians to God or Christ and as symbols of salvation.46 Garnsey47
insightfully notes, thus, that “there is a problem in trying to identify specific attitudes to the
practice and ideology of slavery, or a Pauline “world-view”, in occasional letters which were
intended by their author(s) to regulate fledgeling Christian communities and facilitate Christian
discipleship in an alien world.”
45 For example, in Joshua 9 we read that a group of Israelites on their way to the Promised Land ended up in Palestine, where they were confronted with the local population. The locals managed to cheat the Israelites into thinking that they, too, were foreigners to this land and made a pact with them to become allies and agree not to kill each other. When the Israelites found out that they had been cheated, they decided to enslave the locals at the discretion of God. 46 Martin 1990. As Martin (p. xxii) also notes, slavery as a symbol of the Cristians’ relationship to God had more connotations than just salvation. Slavery in the Roman period was also a means of social mobility and a means for acquiring higher status-by-association if a slave’s master was also of higher status. 47 Garnsey 1996, p. 186.
30
Paul’s answer, just as that of many others after him, was that the ways of God were
mysterious, but never unjust. He advised owners to be humane and slaves to be obedient.
Furthermore, the Church Fathers adhered to the idea that everyone should retain the place and
state in society that they had at the time they became Christians. This condescending attitude was
based on the belief that worldly, ephemeral things are not as important as the pursuit of virtue
with regard to salvation in the afterlife.48 One could, however, argue that this view was also an
effort on behalf of the Christian community not to be provocative in their ideas and morals at a
time when society was not open to the Christians.
18th Century, the Enlightenment
The ideas and theories of Aristotle and, especially, the Christian Fathers were used
extensively in the 17th and 18th century, when the slave-trade reached its height in the New
World. In a number of monographs, as Finley notes, slavery was discussed in an effort not only to find and understand its origins, but also to legitimize it. Christianity played a significant role in that and the Church Fathers were commonly cited as justifying the existence of slavery.49
These ideas became particularly popular in the seventeenth century works of antiquarians.50
In the eighteenth century, thinkers were interested in two things: serfdom as it had developed in medieval and later Europe, and slavery as it was practiced in the New World.
Serfdom and slavery were treated as basically the same. Increasingly, slavery was viewed as an
48 Garnsey 1996, pp. 14-19 (Ephesians 6:5-8; Augustine, Enarrationes in Psalmos, 124.7) 49 Garnsey 1996. 50 For examples of such works, see further Finley 1980, p. 23-25.
31 inhuman institution.51 What drove the savants was the desire to understand the origins or internal dynamics of slavery.52
The key figure at this point was Baron de Montesquieu. In his work The Spirit of the
Laws, in the Book entitled In what manner the laws of civil slavery relate to the nature of the
climate, he offered a discussion of slavery and what Finley called a “curious” justification of
slavery in the tropical zones.53 His definition of slavery was based, once again, on the element of
ownership and property, whereby one person is the absolute master of another’s life and goods.54
The Spirit of the Laws was one of the most influential books of its time and served also as the basis for the article on slavery in the Encyclopédie by Denis Diderot. His definition of slavery reproduces that of Montesquieu emphasizing the absolute ownership of the master.
Diderot55 condemned slavery and characterized it as an institution that existed to the shame of
mankind, originating in “the law of the strongest, the rights of war, the thirst for conquest, and
the love of domination and of indolence.”
51 Finley 1980, pp. 19-20. 52 Tsimpoukidis 1999, pp. 26-27. 53 Finley 1980, pp. 19-20; Montesquieu (1909, p. 256) believed that it was the scorn that one society had for another and for the different customs that the other society had that led to the rise of slavery. He gives as an example the case of the aboriginal Americans in the tropics who were enslaved by the Spanish on account of their different customs, the fact that they smoked tobacco, and the fact that they did not cut their beards in the Spanish fashion. Montesquieu (1909, pp. 258-259) connects it also with the excessive heat of the climate in some regions which enervates the body and makes men dispirited and avoid working. There slavery is the most suitable form of labour. 54 Montesquieu 2001, pp. 20-23. 55 Diderot 2001, pp. 26-28.
32 19th Century
Antiquarianism
Antiquarianism reached its height in the nineteenth century. The center of all discussions
on slavery had become the abolitionist movement and most works of the time were obsessed
with criticizing and condemning slavery as an institution. It should be stressed that these were
the years of the abolitionist movement, the brutality of slavery, and the revolutionary
developments in France and the United States and that these events were very vivid in the minds
of scholars, who were greatly influenced by these events in the way they viewed slavery. Though
works by many antiquarians were published, the history of Henry Wallon stands out. Wallon’s
Histoire de l’Esclavage dans l’Antiquité [1879] remains, according to Finley,56 “unrivalled in its
scale and its deployment of the literary and juristic sources.” Wallon, himself, was a member of a
committee for the abolition of slavery in the French colonies. His abolitionist feelings cannot be
ignored in the understanding of his approach to slavery. His greatest criticism of slavery was
based on moral and ethical criteria. His main argument followed Christian teachings of love and
equality, as well as the enmity of the Christian church to the institution of slavery.57 In short,
Wallon58 considered it a violation of natural, political and religious human rights, an opinion popular among the 19th century British and French scholars. This set the grounds for a tradition
of moralistic scholarship regarding slavery.59
56 Finley 1980, p. 13. 57 Wallon 1879. 58 Wallon 1879; Finley 1980, pp. 31-35. 59 Tsimpoukidis 1999, pp. 25-28.
33 Cultural Evolutionism
On the other hand, of serious interest became the wish by some thinkers to understand
and analyze social organization, cultural development, and the steps humanity had taken to reach
the highest cultural level presented by their contemporary society. Influenced by Darwin’s theory
of biological evolution, social evolutionists argued that past societies could be divided into
different stages of a linear development. Amongst these thinkers slavery was also given serious
consideration. Edward Tylor60 saw its origin in the economic use of war captives and Henry
Lewis Morgan,61 in his book Ancient Society [1877], saw it originating in the development of
private property. Even though, according to Igor Kopytoff,62 these writers were aware of the spread and diversity of slavery as an institution, they considered it a phenomenon that could develop only in the early stages of societies. In this scheme it was impossible to fit modern slavery as it developed in USA and the Caribbean. Thus, modern slavery was explained as a historical abnormality. Since slavery was connected to specific evolutionary levels of society, they argued that slavery could not have existed among hunters; the fishing tribes had little use of it, whereas it fully developed in the more “developed” and socially “elaborate” agricultural societies. Their definition of slavery did not focus only on the slaves’ function (or labor-type) or on the property element, because of the numerous differences of status historically presented.
Slavery was seen in its most basic form as “an appropriation of men.”63
60 Tylor 1889, p. 421. 61 Morgan [1877] 1974, pp. 345-352, and especially p. 351. 62 Kopytoff 1982, p. 209. 63 Kopytoff 1982, p. 209.
34 Karl Marx
Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, the founders of Historical Materialism, also made a significant contribution to the understanding of slavery, working mainly with examples from
Classical Greece and Rome. Their remarks on ancient slavery are scattered in different works and notes, and cannot be considered a theoretical corpus or a systematic analysis of the phenomenon.64 On the contrary, they never embarked on a systematic analysis of ancient societies and the dynamics within them, even though they were well versed in the Greco-Latin literature. Their interest reached only to the point that these societies reflected the origins of capitalism.65 Their theory, however, had such a great impact on the scholarly community that it influenced any later approach during the twentieth century.
Contemporaries of Henry Lewis Morgan and the social evolutionists Marx and Engels66 perceived history as a formation of different successive stages as far as the division of labor was concerned (The German Ideology [1844-1845]). Each stage was also characterized by corresponding forms of property; tribal property, ancient property (combining both communal and private property), and feudal property. According to them, slavery historically appeared already at the first stage of tribal property.67 Initially it was the result of the extension of the division of labor within the family and there it was “latent.” Gradually, it developed in the context of the tribe, as the tribal population increased and the need for appropriation of goods for their subsistence was met through exchange and conquest.68
64 Finley 1980, p. 40; Meillassoux 1991, p. 17. 65 Garlan 1988, pp. 3-4. 66 Marx and Engels 1972, pp. 52-57. 67 Garlan 1988, p. 4. 68 Marx 1977, pp. 121-139; Meillassoux 1991, p. 17; Garlan 1988, pp. 4-5.
35 In his Grundrisse [1857-1858], the preparatory manuscript of his major work Capital
[1867], and, especially, in the chapter titled Pre-Capitalist Economic Formations, Marx69 treats slavery in comparison to other modes of production. At this point, as Meillassoux70 remarks,
Marx was associating slavery with serfdom, but gradually one sees in Marx’s writings that he began to differentiate the two phenomena. Marx also argued that slavery could not develop in all modes of production. The different modes of production are paths through which the primitive communities dissolve and step into a more developed social system, each corresponding to different relations of the members of the community with land and property. These modes are the
Asiatic, the Germanic, and the Ancient, and the obscure Slavonic. In Marx’s scheme slavery can develop only within the Ancient mode of production, where there is both communal and private property, and there it becomes the basis of the social system.71
In Das Kapital [1867] Marx72 did not proceed to describe slavery as a separate mode of production in itself, but his historical scheme was simplified. The main focus was on the Ancient mode of production whereas the Asiatic, if not abandoned, was put aside.73 Marx distinguished between two main forms of slavery; subsistence and surplus-producing slavery. In the first type, the slave produces enough for the subsistence of himself and his owner. In the second type, the slave produces surplus/profit for his owner, and, there, exploitation is fiercer.74
Subsequently, Engels (Anti-Dühring [1877]75 and The Origin of the Family, Private
Property and the State [1888]76) worked particularly on the conditions leading to the emergence
69 Marx 1977; a good discussion and analysis can be found in the editor’s introduction by Hobsbawm (1997, pp. 9- 65). 70 Meillassoux 1991, p. 17. 71 Marx 1977; Kopytoff 1982, p. 211; Garlan 1988, pp. 5-6. 72 Marx 1967. 73 Finley 1980, pp. 40-41; Garlan 1988, pp. 6-7. 74 Meillassoux 1991, pp. 18-20. 75 Engels 1966, pp. 106-203.
36 of slavery. Slavery was considered to be the effect of three main divisions of labor: the division between agriculture and pastoralism, the division between craftwork and agriculture, and, finally, the division between town and country.77
Very soon after their appearance Marx’s theories were challenged and criticized for their monolithic focus on economy. Max Weber, setting out from but also criticizing Marx, introduced new notions into Marxist theory; apart from Marx’s economic inequality, Weber brought in two other forms based on the concepts of prestige (distinguishing people into status groups) and power (forming parties within a community striving for the “power” to influence communal action).78
Weber79 discussed slavery in particular in his popular essay “Die sozialen Gründe des
Untergangs der antiken Kultur” [1896], where he made a case that slavery was common in all the ancient civilizations, but it was only in ancient Greece and Rome that it became a definitive element of the social structure and part of the economic basis.
76 Engels 1972, p. 233-237. 77 Meillassoux (1991, p. 16) presents a satisfactory discussion of Engels’s theory on the origins of slavery. 78 Rothman 1993, p. 29. 79 Weber 1924b. Tsimboukidis 1999, pp. 32-33; Finley 1980, pp. 43-44; Patterson 1977, p. 436.
37 20th Century
H.J. Nieboer
By the end of the nineteenth and early twentieth century slavery was seen more as an
economic institution than an issue of morality even by those who were not influenced by the
writings of Marx. One of the most influential figures in the study of slavery demonstrates this
very well. In his work Slavery as an Industrial System: Ethnological Researches [1900/1910] H.
J. Nieboer appears to have been strongly influenced by the classical economists, and ultimately
Adam Smith. At the same time his work is, according to Finley, the first serious anthropological
study of slavery”;80 he departs from the evolutionist paradigm and the quest for the origins of slavery and sees slavery as a structure, a system governed by sociological laws, which he tries to identify. Nieboer81 also consciously distances himself from the moralistic, “philanthropic” earlier
approaches to slavery and, thus becomes one of the first to recognize the epistemological
problems of the study of slavery.
Nieboer’s82 definition puts emphasis on the element of property; a slave is a person “who
is property of another, politically and socially at a lower level than the mass of the people, and
performing compulsory labor.” It emphasized, also, the aspect of the type of labor performed,
which allowed him to distinguish between slavery and other forms of dependent labor.
The emergence of slavery was explained based on a popular framework; labor-land-
capital. Slavery, according to Nieboer, can emerge in societies where there is free land in surplus
80 Finley 1980, p. 150, note 7. 81 Nieboer (1910, p. xvi) makes this remark very clearly in the introduction of the second edition of his book. 82 Nieboer 1910, p. 5.
38 and, at the same time, a shortage of free labor that can be harnessed for the desired purposes.
Under this condition, when free labor is entirely unavailable, coerced labor becomes necessary.
In the opposite situation, when land is restricted and free labor is abundant, then wage labor
emerges. 83
Marxist Tradition(s)
Weber’s ideas were brought to the fore again with the work of another scholar, perhaps
the most prominent figure in the study of slavery in the last 50 years, Moses Finley. Weber had
presented classical antiquity as a slave society, characterized above all by the absolute dichotomy of the population into free and slaves. Later on, however, distinctions within populations were no
longer understood only in economic terms (free/slaves), but also in terms of social recognition
(status/rank).84
Finley’s contribution to the research spans several years; during these years one sees that
his views went through two stages. Finley envisaged the ancient world based not on classes, but
on a spectrum of statuses; among these statuses slavery is only another level between an extreme
lack of rights and power and absolute freedom, a “species” of dependent labor (in contrast to the
“genus” of dependent labor, that encompasses all the different “species” of it).85 One of his most
important aims in this period was to form a typology of statuses and a set of criteria for this
analysis.86 Gradually, Finley understood the futility of examining the individual statuses, which
may lead to endless descriptions of legal statuses.
83 Nieboer 2001, pp. 65-66. 84 Kyrtatas 1987, pp. 72-73. 85 Finley 1981a, pp. 97-115. 86 Finley 1981b, pp. 133-149.
39 By 1980, when he publishes his book Ancient Slavery and Modern Ideology, he admits that to understand how a slave-owning society becomes a true slave-society, where slavery is an institution basic to the maintenance of the current social structure, we need to define the slave in relation to other forms of dependent labor. Thus, he concludes that a slave is, above all, property,
a marketable commodity.87 Another contribution to the scholarship is Finley’s extensive review
of the theoretical works regarding slavery from antiquity to modern times. He concludes that it is
impossible for modern scholars to study slavery impartially. Very insightfully he provides two
reasons for this; firstly, the ethical condemnation of slavery as an inhuman institution, and,
secondly, the rivalry between Marxist and non-Marxist scholars, which had assumed by then a
political character.88
Claude Meillassoux,89 another Marxist economist, in his work of 1975, L’Ésclavage en
Afrique Précoloniale, stresses the fact that scholars up to that point had been empirically
defining slaves according to two main features; the legal subordination of the slaves to the
absolute authority of their owners, and the transformation of slaves into objects and possessions.
He makes the point that in such definitions the emphasis is put solely on the individual
relation of the slave to his owner, and, furthermore, that social reality is not revealed, but rather
concealed or fitted into a frame that suits the needs of those who make and use the laws. The fact
that it is the individual relation to his master that is being actually described indicates that the
state and condition of the slave is rather dependent on the state and condition of the free persons
87 Finley 1980, p. 73; Kyrtatas 1982, pp. 38-48. 88 Finley 1980; Kyrtatas 1987, pp. 72-76; Tsimboukidis 1999, pp. 41-42. It should be noted that Finley had personally experienced the rivalry between Marxist and non-Marxist scholars, as he started his career in the USA in the 1950s and, under the pressure of McCarthyism, chose to move to England where he worked for the rest of his life. 89 Meillassoux 1975.
40 of the community and the limits of their behavior and state. Thus, Meillassoux90 shifts the emphasis to the relation of the slaves to the institutional frameworks of the community in which they live and determine the actual state and condition to which the slaves are put.
Functionalism
Around the same time that Finley and Meillassoux were engaging in their study of slavery, another group of anthropologists/ethnographers shifted their focus from ancient slavery to African slavery and introduced new concepts and variables in the study. It is important to note that their conceptualization of societies differed substantially from that of the previous scholars.
Their ethnographic approach gave them access to a more holistic view of slavery as it developed and functioned within society. Their most important contribution to the study of slavery has been the realization that slavery’s functionality expands into non-economic social sectors, such as politics and ideology. It is a system in society closely connected to other political and cultural systems, such as kinship organization and the politics of status and prestige.91
One of the most influential studies perhaps is that of Suzanne Miers and Igor Kopytoff,
Slavery in Africa: Historical and Anthropological Perspectives [1977]. In their editors’ introduction, Miers and Kopytoff92 stress that the English term “slave” has embedded a range of historical associations that do not necessarily apply to the forms of servitude in Africa.
Miers and Kopytoff93 maintain that in many African societies the individual must be seen not only as a member of the kin group, but also as part of that group’s corporate property.
Members are essentially lineage wealth. Thus, the dichotomy slave (commodity, chattel) v.
90 Meillassoux 1991, pp. 23-40. 91 Watson 1980, p. 3. 92 Miers and Kopytoff 1977, pp. 3-7. 93 Miers and Kopytoff 1977, p. 15.
41 freedom, which is a very common device of Western thought, is rejected. To overcome this problem, James Watson94 notes, “they fall back to another time-honored device”; “‘slaves’ have one thing in common: all are strangers in a new setting.” Based on the theory of transition rituals, rites de passage, they advanced the “slavery-to-kinship continuum” theory. Slavery is essentially a process through which slaves are gradually transformed from outsiders to members of the kinship group, either for financial reasons or sociopolitical reasons.95
Watson,96 too, regards slavery as a system and follows the same principles as Miers and
Kopytoff. He differentiates himself, however, in that he does not accept the slavery-into-kinship continuum. He distinguishes, rather, two types of slavery, based on the institution’s relation to the other social institutions, such as kin groups or patrilineages: open and closed modes, whereby open mode occurs when the community incorporates slaves and gradually assimilates them with the rest of the community, and closed mode occurs when the community never incorporates the slaves, but maintains them as a distinctly separate group.
In the editor’s introduction to Asian and African Systems of Slavery [1980], Watson97 defines “slaves” as humans “acquired by purchase or capture, their labor is extracted through coercion and, as long as they remain slaves, they are never accepted into the kinship group of the master.” Watson admits that the property element should be accepted as a very basic one in the definition of the slave, to distinguish it from different forms of dependency and involuntary labor, but also to stress the outsider aspect and the coercive dimension.
94 Watson 1980, p. 5. 95 Miers and Kopytoff 1977, pp. 14-49. 96 Watson 1980, pp. 9-13. 97 Watson 1980, pp. 8-9.
42 Post-Modernism
The work of Orlando Patterson marks a substantial shift in interest and scholarly
approach. Slavery, according to Patterson,98 is not a static entity, but a “complex interactional
process.”
In Slavery and Social Death: A Comparative Study [1982] Patterson distances himself
from the previous scholars in defining slavery based on either property or the outsider status of
the slave. Patterson makes the jump to the social-psychological superstructure in his approach to
slavery. He returns to the aspect that was stressed in antiquity and mainly in the Roman classical
law, the aspect of domination of one person over another. Following the Weberian paradigm,
domination is based on power, which allows for inequalities within the community to form and
some people to prevail upon the others, even against their will.99 Patterson also notes that there can be different power relations within a community both quantitatively and qualitatively as far as the power element is concerned. Slavery then is a very distinctive power relation both because of the extreme power and powerlessness forced on others and of the way the power relationship functions.
Three “facets” to slavery can be distinguished according to Patterson:100 a social, a
psychological, and a cultural. The social facet entails the use or threat of violence in the control
of another person. The psychological facet involves the persuasion of another person to change
the way he/she perceives of his interests and circumstances. Finally, the cultural is connected to
the authority of a person, the means of transforming force into right and obedience into duty.
Slavery, for Patterson, also consists of three features corresponding to those of power. These are
98 Patterson 1982, p. 13. 99 Weber 1924a. 100 Patterson 1982, pp. 1-14.
43 coercion on the part of the owner, mainly through violence, whereas on the part of the slave it is
“natal” alienation and lack of honor. Taken to their extremes these features distinguish slavery
from other forms of domination and power relations. Consequently, Patterson’s101 definition is
this: “slavery is the permanent, violent domination of natally alienated and generally dishonored
persons.”
Hierarchies and social inequality for the post-modernists are essentially the different
forms that social relations assume.102 Ideological constructs, first and foremost, define the
relations between members of the society, which can take a political, social/cultural, or economic
character or may combine all of these. The ideological paradigms of social relations may stem
from issues of identity, ethnicity, social/cultural dimensions, such as gender or race, or economy, such as wealthy versus poor, menial-workers versus non-workers.103 Post-modernists, thus, make a full circle and return to the basic ideological background of Aristotle, who grounds his analysis on the ideological scheme of his time regarding the concept of “natural” and “by law” situations, relations, and statuses. The ideological constructs and conceptions of a community can be paralleled to the “natural” situations of Aristotle, because natural for every community is the expression of its ideological structure. Ideology proves, thus, that it defines a society, while, at the same time, it constitutes a strongly differentiating mechanism between different societies. By differentiating I mean that each society and the forms of the social relations between its social groups and individuals are in their very basis particular, unique, and, consequently, they should
be studied independently as they are embedded in their own socio-cultural context.
101 Patterson 1982, p. 13. By “natally” alienated people Patterson means people who are considered from their birth to be “outsiders”, because they are born within a specific kin, ethnic, or social group that is not approved by the norms of a community. 102 Miller, Rowlands, and Tilley 1989b, p. 2. 103 Joshel and Murnaghan 1998.
44 A Working Hypothesis
The review above, though far from extensive, aimed at examining the different ways in
which slavery has been historically treated, as well as the different definitions that have been
proposed for it. If we want to summarize the definitions and the proposed definitive elements of
slavery in a cross-temporal and cross-cultural manner, these are the following:
1) Slaves are property, owned by an individual or a social group, and constitute
marketable commodities.
2) Slaves are outsiders; there are two sources for the acquisition of slaves, from groups
outside the community, generally described and viewed as “outsiders”, or from groups within the
community that were marginalized, that were viewed as “outsiders.”
3) Slaves are held to their status by the force of power, whether this entails the use or threat of violence, psychological and mental manipulation, personal degradation, or practices sanctioned by the community’s written or unwritten laws and state institutions.
All authors examined above have noted the difficulty of producing a definition for
slavery, because of the great variability the institution has presented in its organization, in the
way it is perceived by the rest of the community, or in the particular status of slaves over time
and space. A further difficulty, however, is presented now by the fact that they all try to
emphasize a single aspect of slavery that should theoretically be common in all times and in all places. Definitions based on one, or mainly one, feature of slavery can be securely considered as insufficient, because they can neither define holistically the status characteristics of the slave, nor can they distinguish sufficiently between slaves and other “species” or socially defined
45 categories of dependent labor. It is rather a range of features that, combined, may provide a
rather satisfactory definition.104
At this point, however, it is perhaps useful to reflect on the purposes served by such a
definition, especially in the context of the present study. In this chapter one issue has been
extensively stressed: the great differences that slavery presents from one sociopolitical-economic
context to another. Variety has been established in the type of labor slaves were put into, in the
social status of the slaves within the community, in the type of relations between the master and
slave, as well as between the community as a whole and the slave, or in the organization of the
procurement of slaves, or their maintenance and control. A question arises, thus, in relation to the particular question raised in this research; if slavery did exist in the Mycenaean period, should we not accept a priori that it will be different from that of fifth century BC Greece or the
Carribean in the seventeenth century AD?
I believe that if we judge and characterize social relations of the Mycenaean period, or
any period, based on those of later periods, this leads to determinism. Ideally the social relations
of the Mycenaean period, just as those of any other period and society, should be studied on their
own. They should not be studied by a comparative standard based on other contemporary or later
situations, but with sole consideration of the particular characteristics of the broader social
environment at that point in time. This argument is very close to the theory and work of Finley in
104 Any type of status is difficult to definitively describe, because different societies have different ideological constructs that build these statuses. These differences between societies make it difficult for any scholar to reconstruct a framework by which all persons and social groups in a community are fitted into different statuses cognitively arranged in a linear manner. Cases such as that of helots in Classical Greece or slaves in the Roman period, whose status was not definitively described or conceptualized in the past, allow us to understand how ambiguous the status of slaves was in any period. In the case of the helots there is a discussion of whether they were actual slaves or something between slaves and free (Luraghi and Alcock 2003), or of a status variant of slavery (Luraghi 2002) and in the case of Roman slaves we see that they were viewed at the same time and by the same people as both human beings, warranting humane treatment and respect, and items of property and naturally inferior, warranting analogous treatment by their masters –beatings, insults, and absolute power over their bodies and work (Veyne 1987, pp. 51-69).
46 the first years of his research on ancient slavery, when he attempted to identify the many different types of relations and statuses and put them in an order ranging from the lowest of statuses to the highest. Finley himself, however, and after the strong criticisms he received, acknowledged that this endeavor can be endless, and, what is worse, useless, because it does not lead to any further understanding of how different social groups came to interact and function.105
Nonetheless, before we fall into a relativist pitfall, and in order to further pursue the present study, we need to formulate a working hypothesis. The hypothesis formulated as a set of specific conditions, will then be examined against the textual evidence of the Mycenaean period.
The examination of the Linear B texts will provide us with the necessary information to understand the different statuses of social groups as they are reflected in these texts, and the ways the different social groups interact. Then, it will be possible to return to the above findings and see if it is appropriate to apply the description of “slave” to any or all of the social groups identified.
The choice of the conditions (social, economical, ideological, cultural, and cognitive) is based on the scholarship discussed earlier in this chapter. The assessment of all of these theses has led me to distinguish eight elements to be tested in the evidence. The systematic study of the evidence from the Mycenaean period will lead us to formulate a chart of social relations of dependence and subordination, which will consist of some or all these elements, or different combinations or degrees of them. For example, one social relation of dependence may be characterized by the modification of the dependent person into a marketable object, or property
105 Finley 1980, pp. 69-73; Kyrtatas 1982, p. 48.
47 under certain conditions; these conditions may be related to the gender of the dependent, or the age, or can be the means for punishment by the independent party in the relationship.
Let us now review the elements/criteria of this working hypothesis:
1) Ideology of Inequality
The relation between slaves and non-slaves is basically a relation of inequality, whereby one part of the relation is superior and “dominates” the other part. Inequality is an integral part of any community over time and space, but it is a necessary condition for hierarchies to exist and for some people to be considered fit for enslavement or for a community to consider natural that slaves exist amongst its members and produce the physical means to procure folk as slaves.
Sociologists, anthropologists, and archaeologists have been trying for a very long time to explain inequality and hierarchies within societies by proposing that they are based on power differences.106 It is my point, however, that slavery cannot exist in a society if there is no social inequality, though the opposite does not necessarily happen; inequality within a community does not necessarily entail the existence of slavery.
2) Institutionalized Identities
Closely connected to the above argument is the importance of institutionalized social identities within a community. In order, for example, for some persons to be considered
“outsiders”, literally or metaphorically (as we discussed earlier), there need to be firm identities in the consciousness of the members of the community based on ethnicity, class/status/rank, gender, or other variables. If such social identities are not institutionalized and firm in the
106 Miller, Rowlands, and Tilley 1989a; Bender 1989, pp. 84-87. Power differences can be based on different values in different societies in time and space. Power can be forged, for example, in material wealth and access to it, in prestige, or in access to knowledge. Differences can also be based on racial, gender, or even physical criteria.
48 traditions and mores of the community, distinctions cannot be made leading to the appearance of
slavery either as an institution or on an individual level.
3) System of Values and Economy
The system of values in social organizations determines the value of things not only in
terms of economy, or cost, but also in social and psychological terms of personal value and
honor that are directly related to people’s prestige before others. What I mean by this is that
objects, animals, or other objects of appropriation are not considered valuable only because they may help financially their owner, either because he may produce more by using them or because he may sell them. There are also what are generally described as “prestige-objects”, whose value is measured by the effort one has made to make or procure them; it may also be measured in the degree of access one may have to it or, also, in the personal connection one might have with a property item (e.g., heirlooms). A value-defining ideology that considers human beings to be valuable as possessions is needed for slavery to emerge. When such an ideology exists slaves can be also seen as a means to increase one’s prestige and improve one’s status in society.107
4) Economic Property
I regard the feature of property of primary importance for the definition of slave. By
property, in economic terms, I mean that a person is owned, as if he/she were an inanimate
object, by another person. This ownership relation entails that the owner has absolute legal
claims over the body, mind, labor, and production of any kind of the slave. The owner has the
capacity to utilize the slave or not, the right to extract and use the product of the slave’s labor, and they can sell them or buy more through the market.
107 Kopytoff 1986; Appadurai 1986.
49 The property element, as it has been described, in economic terms of labor, production,
and market, is crucial for the definition of the slave, but, alone, it does not differentiate him from
other forms of dependent labor or “non-slaves.” No slave has ever not been described as
property, but non-slaves have been considered as slaves.108 A telling example of property
relation among non-slaves is recorded by Patterson109 and involves the selling of non-slave
groups, such as concubines and children, which continues in some form even today.
There are two kinds of economic conditions that perhaps need to exist to sustain slaves as property. First is the existence of private property rights, limited availability of internal labor, and developed market production as necessary conditions. Second, and equally important, is for the non-slave part of the population to be able to provide for the subsistence and maintenance of the slaves. This can be done whether the slaves work for their own subsistence as well as for the purposes of their masters, or if their masters themselves provide directly for the food and other needs of their slaves.
5) Social Objectification of the Slave
The feature of property as ownership of a person has also cultural implications, apart from economical ones. A person who is considered an object or part of the wealth of another,
belongs in an absolute manner to his owner. Any kind of distinction from other persons ceases to
be personal, but is based on the slave’s relation to his master and assumes the properties of the
master. What I mean by this is that a person who is enslaved is physically and
mentally/psychologically removed from his “natural environment”, his kin – immediate and
extensive family, his community, his past, tradition, and his personal wealth – of any form.110 As
108 See discussion in Patterson 1982, pp. 21-27. 109 Patterson 1982, pp. 23-24. 110 Kopytoff 1986, p. 65; Patterson 1982.
50 a person, however, he does not remain a non-entity, but becomes person A’s slave. The slave
becomes part of the household of person A, his actions reflect on his master, he participates in
rituals, and perhaps even in the master’s religion or social practices.111 He is essentially an
extension of his master. It is also important to note that, during enslavement, slaves were usually
allowed “liberties”, such as to form marriages and their own families, or to own property
perhaps. This, however, should not be conceived as similar to that of the other members of the
community. Associations among slaves could not be institutionalized, because of their primary
status as objects or pieces of property, which meant that they were at all times dependent on the
will of the master, who could break a slave-family apart and sell or move or kill any of its
members at any time. To elaborate on this, one can think of the practices in plantations in the
American South, where slaves lived in small communities and had unions amongst them. These
unions were not legally binding, but left at the discretion of their master to sustain for as long as
he high-handedly wanted.112
6) “Outsider” Origin
Consideration of the original/pre-slave status of the slaves is very important to the
understanding and analysis of slavery. Scholars have extensively argued about the origin or sources of slaves in antiquity and modern times. They have considered institutionalized means of procurement, such as wars and raids with the purpose of capturing folk for slaves, piracy, or trade with other communities. All these methods have been proposed for slaves that originate from outside the community that is actually “using” them.113 On the other hand, there are
111 See Patterson (1982) for historical and ethnographic examples of social and religious practices that demonstrate how slaves participate in their masters’ social mores and rituals. 112 Patterson 1982, pp. 4-6. 113 Finley 1968, pp. 308-310.
51 communities that draw their slaves from within;114 existing slaves mainly, children, women,
indebted persons or criminals, and generally socially marginalized115 groups can be the source for slaves. Importance, at this point, is not put on the exact different origins that slaves may have, but on the general idea that lies within the idea of their “outsider” origin. Slaves tend to be
persons that the community considers to be “outsiders.” The term can be taken literally (from
outside the geographical and political boundaries of a community) and metaphorically (from
within the community, but from marginalized and separated groups based on different reasons
[economical, gender, status, physical condition]). Either way, slavery is connected to an ideology
that separates people between members of a community with full status who cannot be enslaved,
and people who do not belong to the community and thus can be enslaved.
7) Liminal Integration
The conditional integration of slaves within the community, based partly on their
“outsider” original status and partly on the “objectification” of the slaves, appears to be another
114 Finley 1968, pp. 309-10; Patterson (1982, pp. 117-18) mentions the very characteristic case of Nigeria, where the Islamic emirs enslaved not only pagans, but also other Muslims from villages, even though this was forbidden by Islamic law. 115 According to Mousourou (2002, pp. 67-85) the term ‘social marginality or seclusion’ describes social discomfort, social prospects and/or social actions and interactions. The identification of social marginality within a community does not imply that this community is “evil” and should be stigmatized, nor does it mean that the community is in state of defense, but social marginality is the result of a community trying to forge bonds within and boundaries to differentiate itself from others. According to Tsaousis (2002, pp. 87-119), in the process of formulating boundaries certain social groups or sub-groups may be characterized as ‘different’ from what is considered the norm, as bearers of attitudes or social elements that are commonly rejected. Mousourou (2002) argues that marginality can be identified in three different levels: economic, legal, and social. Accordingly it is ‘expressed’ in different ways; in economy, nowadays, it may entail that certain persons are excluded from the job-market, from housing, and from education. In legal terms, marginality entails that persons are deprived of personal and social rights that are generally considered basic, such as the right to protection from the state or the right to be different within the community. Finally, on a social level, marginal persons are excluded from the process of formulating the notion of power, as well as from the exercise of power within the community. It should also be stressed that marginality is both a process and a state of being. The above discussion is based on recent discussions of marginality in modern communities (i.e., Kautantzoglou and Petronote 2000; Hills, Le Grand, and Piachaud 2002). Nonetheless, marginality has been identified as a practice in historical communities, such as Classical Athens, as well as, through ethnographic studies, in African societies and elsewhere (Raybeck 1991, pp. 51-72; very interesting are also the ethnographic essays in Freilich, Raybeck, and Savishinsky 1991).
52 common feature of slaves. This means that slaves cannot be full members of the social web, but
stand on a middle-point (liminal position) between integration and marginality. Their integration
to some extend exists “subconsciously”, because when slaves serve the purpose for which they
were enslaved, they are part of the community, they live among the members of the community,
they work for them, they provide prestige for their masters, and, generally, one can safely say
that their relation to the non-slave members of the community is close and intimate. Nonetheless,
slaves are of lower status. They are “outsiders” –which means they never had the acceptance of
the community-, and they are basically property, non-entities by legal terms.116 Thus, they are in
a marginal position, which can be demonstrated, for example, in the conditional participation of
slaves in communal practices or rituals, as it happened in Classical Greece with certain religious
festivals.117
The degree to which this liminal integration takes place is relative and largely depends on
the “openness” of a society in total and of each one of its members separately.118 The
mechanisms of integration differ from time to time and in different groups and societies.
Between the two extremes of absolute integration and assimilation of the slaves to the rest of the
community and the absolute negation of the slaves and marginalization of them, there can be
many different degrees of integration.119
8) Coerced Status and Labor
Finally, the status of slaves is coerced, which means that their status cannot be revoked on the slaves’ own accord, but it is necessary for the individual owner or group or the society as
116 Patterson (1982, pp. 64-65) points out, however, that the marginalization of slaves is not similar to the very social divisions of the caste system, which are based on professional criteria and connected to notions of pollution if boundaries are stepped over. Slaves were marginalized, but never considered ‘pollution’, because the communities cannot afford to consider them as such if they want to keep exploiting them. 117 Joshel and Murnaghan 1998, pp. 1-21. 118 Watson 1980. 119 Patterson 1982, pp. 45-51; Watson 1980.
53 a whole to change the slave status. It also means that some kind of force is needed to keep slaves
tied to their status. This force can take different forms ranging from pure physical violence, to
psychological (dishonoring) and cultural (marginalization) “violence.”120
The conditions that have been proposed here to formulate a working hypothesis for this
research are all descriptive of slavery and slave status. This does not mean that they have been all
in effect in every instance of the practice of slavery, although in most cases the majority of these issues are present. As we have already stated, however, this study will not use them as constituent elements of a concrete definition. These are testing parameters for the understanding of the social relations in the particular social formation of the Mycenaean period, especially among those who belonged to the lower rank of the hierarchical ladder.121
120 Patterson 1982, pp. 17-77. 121 The practice of formulating a clear-cut definition, based on specific elements that could describe slavery, or any institution, has recently received strong criticisms. The case of the helots in Messenia and Laconia is a “good” example of the discussions regarding the definition of their status (Luraghi and Alcock 2003). Whatever the status of the helots was in Classical Greece, it is clear that it depends on our own definitions of freedom and slavery (Patterson 2003).
54 Contextualizing Slavery
The above discussion developed from the need to understand slavery and its constituent
elements, so that we may be able to successfully distinguish slaves from other social groups and,
especially, from other forms of dependency. In this section I would like to briefly discuss the
context in which slavery functioned.
The Marxist tradition, which has had an extraordinary effect on historians, sociologists,
and anthropologists in social sciences, has led to an examination of slavery only in economic
terms. Thus, slaves were property, means of production, their labor was what their masters
actually aimed for and the only reason for the existence of slavery was the economic
“dependency” of the community on them.
Even though I regard this context as significant, I believe that it is not satisfactory for
understanding the function and use of slavery, or any kind of inequality, within a community. I
believe that slavery, like all forms of dependency and difference in status, is above all an
ideological construct. It is socially “designed” as a means to reproduce, crystallize, and
accentuate social differences. Such strategies have generally been ascribed to elite groups, which
use various means for re-affirming their power over non-elite groups.122 They can take the form
of rituals, such as the Potlatch ritual among the Indians123 and the feasts in the Mycenaean
period,124 or the use of material culture, such as prestige goods (i.e., precious metal objects). In
122 Miller, Rowlands, and Tilley 1989b, pp. 14-17. 123 Mauss 1990. 124 For archaeological evidence of Mycenaean feasts at the Palace of Nestor at Pylos, see Isaakidou et al. 2002; as well as Stocker and Davis (2004); at the site of Tsoungiza at ancient Nemea, see Dabney, Halstead, and Thomas (2004); for feasting generally in Aegean prehistory, see Wright (2004); Hamilakis 2000; and Killen 1994; for the function of feasting as arenas for negotiating social positioning based on ethnographic and archaeological evidence, see discussions in Dietler and Hayden 2001; especially Hayden 2001; and Dietler 2001.
55 my opinion slavery is one such means of assigning prestige and accentuating differences within the social web.
I believe, also, that it is not only the elites that need continuously to re-affirm their status and power, but each individual member of the society in relation to everyone else; elite groups constantly re-establish their power over non-elite groups; while “insiders” or full members of the community need to re-affirm their communal identity by accentuating the “outsider” identity of others.125 In this context slavery can be seen as yet another means for individual members to prove, demonstrate, and strengthen their identity. Slaves directly reflect their master’s standing in relation to the rest of the community; they may demonstrate wealth, power, or control. They can even reflect personal traits of their master towards the rest of the community from the way their master treats them. At the same time, there is something that makes slaves even more interesting; slaves may also address other needs of their master and his kin and household, including economic or even personal (sexual) needs.
In conclusion, I am departing from the Marxist tradition and its variants in proposing that slavery, as all social relations, is a direct consequence of the ideology that binds a community together and stands as a definitive context for the form social relations assume.
125 Joshel and Murnaghan 1998, pp. 1-21.
56 CHAPTER 3
LINEAR B TABLETS AND SLAVERY
In this part of my thesis I discuss the nature of the material that I will study, as well as
very briefly review the scholarship that has largely formulated our views to date regarding
slavery in the Mycenaean period. I refer to two major works that were presented soon after the
decipherment of the Linear B tablets took place in 1952: Michael Ventris and John Chadwick’s
book, Documents in Mycenaean Greek, and Leonard Palmer’s book, The Interpretation of
Mycenaean Greek Texts. These two works, which were the most important general histories of the Mycenaean period based entirely on the evidence from the Linear B tablets, discussed and synthesized the entire corpus of information.
The tablets on which Linear B texts were written were made of unbaked clay in two shapes: in the shape of a book-page and in the shape of a palm-leaf. The texts written on the tablets fell into distinct subjects, which allowed the scribes (or any person responsible for their archiving) to archive them according to subject. The tablets were probably stored in baskets, with their general subject most probably indicated very briefly on a nodule (sealing). Such nodules have been found and verify this type of organization of the archive. For practical reasons scholars today have divided the tablets into series (sets of tablets with a common subject) which seem to correspond to a great degree to the sets into which the Mycenaean archivists themselves had probably divided the tablets. This is evident also from the find-spot of the tablets, whereby
57 many of the tablets uncovered have been found in concentrations that correspond to our
contemporary series division.
As we have noted already the tablets were never intentionally baked, which indicates that
the records were temporary and that the clay on which the texts were written was recycled after the tablets were outdated. When the texts were considered outdated, we cannot answer with certainty. Evidence from certain series, such as the Aa/Ab series, Eb/Ep and Eo/En series, show us that tablets of two administrative “years” could overlap. It has been suggested that the tablets of one administrative “year” were kept, in this case, until they were completely substituted by the tablets of the new administrative “year.” The chronological extent of the administrative “year” is also difficult to calculate, but Palaima126 has calculated based on the number of possible months
or festival names recognizable in the tablets and chronological references to “last year” and “this year”, that the tablets of Pylos remained active from two to five months.
No other kinds of records have ever been found and Martin Ruipérez and José Melena127
believe that if ever the Linear B script was used for other kinds of documents (official contracts,
ownership documents, loans, or literary, historical or private and personal documents) it would
have been used on organic and perishable materials (parchment or papyri).
The subjects of the records in the Linear B tablets are also an issue that affects our interpretations of the social structure and the observations that we make. All tablets record economic activities in which the palace is interested. We do not have evidence on the entire economy of the Mycenaean period, or the Mycenaean polity. It is rather very few distinct activities that we find represented and which will be discussed in detail during the analysis of the
126 Palaima 2003, p. 169, note 26. 127 Ruipérez and Melena 1996, p. 41.
58 records. It appears, however, that the Mycenaean economy functioned on two levels: a palatial
one monitoring the process of manufacturing prestige objects, which were circulated on an interregional level, as well as within the polity in order to propagate the higher status of the elite; and a local level that was staple-financed and beyond the interest of the palace and the scribes who kept the archives.128
The implication of this economic scheme for this thesis is the fact that we do not have
records for the entire population of any of the polities centered on the four palatial sites that
yielded Linear B archives. The largest archive, found at Pylos, records ca. 10% of the entire
polity’s population.129 This means that our observations regarding social structure are very
limited and do not reflect the Mycenaean society of each polity in its entirety. Let us now see
what the general views regarding slavery in the Mycenaean period are.
As stated previously two major works in Linear B studies have largely shaped our ideas
of the Mycenaean social structure. The first one appeared only few years after the decipherment
of 1952 by Ventris and Chadwick.130 In the beginning of their work the two scholars discuss the
evidence of the tablets and, amongst the different issues tackled, the Mycenaean social
organization. This was the first reconstruction of the Mycenaean social structure and the picture
that was clearly painted was that of a society highly hierarchical in its organization.
Ventris and Chadwick131 were able to distinguish one figure that seemed to be of the
greatest importance and economic status in the tablets, the wa-na-ka, whom they identified as
128 Galaty 1999; Galaty and Parkinson 1999; Parkinson 1999; Halstead 1999; and Halstead 2001. 129 The archives of the other sites are not nearly as complete as that of Pylos and I will refrain from making similar observations regarding population trends. 130 Ventris and Chadwick 1959. 131 Ventris and Chadwick 1959, pp. 119-125.
59 analogous to the Homeric a[nax. This person owned a temenos, the largest land unit. The only other man who matched the wa-na-ka in this type of land-holding was the ra-wa-ke-ta. The interpretation of ra-wa-ke-ta has been problematic, but Ventris and Chadwick turned to other models of societies which they considered to have had analogies with the Mycenaean social structures. They envisaged Mycenaean government as monarchical and the economy as feudal.
They believed that a direct analogy could be found between the Mycenaeans and the Germanic tribes of the Roman period. They adopted this later terminology to describe and interpret the social ranks, such as “king”, “military war leader”, “servants of the king” or “barons.” They also turned to Near Eastern societies, contemporary to the Mycenaean, for parallels, especially when they tried to explain the designation “slaves of the god.”
They considered two social groups to be slaves. The first group involves men and women in the texts that are described as do-e-ro (do-e-ra, in the female). The etymology of the word is
dovelo~, dou`lo~, which in Classical Greek signified “slave.” Neumann132 discussed the
etymology of the word do-e-ro, and believes that the first part of the word is related to the word
*dom-, “house”, “household”, even “family.” He reaches, thus, the conclusion that the word do-
e-ro has the meaning of “the person who is brought violently into the house.”133 The explanation
of the designation was clear. These men and women were slaves and, since the etymology of the
word was clear, all information recorded for these men and women could be interpreted in this
132 Neumann 1986, p. 492. 133 Neumann 1986, p. 492-493. According to Neumann’s etymological theory, the word do-e-ro originally came from the form *doselos > *dohelos. The *doselos form can be analysed into do- and selo-, whereby the root *sel- comes from the Greek eJlein, which means “to take somebody or something under my authority/power”. The first part of the word, do-, can be associated with *dom- (“house”, “household”, or even “family”). This brings us to meaning of the word *doselo-, which means “the person who is brough violently into the house”.
60 context. They were the property of individuals, because they were found in the expression “the
do-e-ro of so-and-so”; they followed their masters’ trade and contributed to his revenues.134
The second type of social group that they identified as slaves consisted of a number of groups of women recorded in the Aa/Ab series. They considered these groups to have been the result of raids in which the Mycenaeans captured women and children, brought them to Pylos or
Knossos and taught them their trades. Their argument was supported by the fact that some of the groups were designated by ethnics from outside the “Greek” world and the fact that one group was called ra-wi-ja-ja (captives).135 Finally, Ventris and Chadwick136 were intrigued by the
designation te-o-jo do-e-ro, qeoi`o dou`lo~, “slave of the god.” They observed immediately that
the men and women in this social group were not actually “slaves”, and that the term is
misleading us.
As a response to the work of Ventris and Chadwick came the work of the linguist and
philologist Leonard Palmer in 1963.137 In many places Palmer seems to agree with Ventris and
Chadwick, such as in the general structure and hierarchy of the officials and titles appearing in
the tablets. However, the interpretations of individual titles and offices that he proposed present
some subtle differences. The case of the wa-na-ka, for example, is indicative. Palmer compares
the Mycenaean polities to their contemporary Near Eastern theocratic societies and sees the
Mycenaean wa-na-ka as the divine king of the Pylian society.138
The te-o-jo do-e-ro, according to Palmer, were an early form of the iJerovdouloi of the
Hellenistic period, who lived in villages and areas controlled by temples and the high priests and
134 Ventris and Chadwick 1959, p. 123. 135 Ventris and Chadwick 1959, p. 124. 136 Ventris and Chadwick 1959, p. 124. 137 Palmer 1963. 138 Palmer 1963, p. 83-95.
61 were forced to work “for their divine master or mistress, as attendants of the temple…. as temple
prostitutes, as artisans and artists, as tillers of the soil or in charge of cattle and poultry.”139 Even
though Palmer is highly interested in, and discusses in several places, the te-o-jo do-e-ro, he
considers the case of the do-e-ro very briefly. He regards them to be “assistants” based on the
evidence of the Jn series, which records lists of bronze-smiths and do-e-ro who receive or do not
receive amounts of bronze.140 His suggestion, however, did not make such a significant impact
on Mycenologists as did Ventris and Chadwick’s interpretation.
In the following years several scholars tried to review the evidence, but most came
around to the same observations as Ventris and Chadwick. In the framework of Soviet
historiography, Jakov Lencman devoted an entire book to the study of slavery in Mycenaean
Pylos and in the time of Homer. He acknowledged that the groups of women and children in the
Aa/Ab series did not have any direct indication that they were slaves, but their general condition
leads us to consider them as such. The do-e-ro, and the te-o-jo do-e-ro amongst them, were
slaves, clearly distinguished and divided from the free people. According to Lencman, however,
the te-o-jo do-e-ro practically enjoyed a free status, even though they were clearly inferior to free
people.141
Lejeune142 presented systematically the different kind of information that one finds in the tablets of Pylos and Knossos on slaves, with a brief reference to the particularly problematic
group of the te-o-jo do-e-ro. His presentation, however, suffers from the fact that he accepted a
priori the interpretation of the term do-e-ro as “slave” and because it lacks critical analysis of the
139 Palmer 1963, p. 221. 140 Palmer 1963, p. 279. 141 Lencman 1966, pp. 151-202. 142 Lejeune 1971.
62 information; nonetheless, it is a good presentation of the various pieces of information dispersed in the corpus of the Linear B texts.
Debord143 was the first to essentially raise the question to what extent we can compare
and interpret Mycenaean slaves based on their direct counterparts of the Classical period. His
comparative approach to the material proved that Mycenaean slaves were totally different from
those of Homer, where the word dou`lo~ appears rarely (and only in the feminine) in direct
association to people, as well as in association with the Homeric word for “day”, hJ`mar (to;
douvleion hJ`mar, “the day of enslavement”144). Debord was the first to emphasize that the use of an identical vocabulary from a later period does not imply that the reality behind the word in both periods is the same exactly.145
In the last 20 years no study of texts regarding slavery alone has been presented, and
many Mycenologists, although they have reviewed, refined, and modified many of the opinions
and theories put forth by these first scholars (especially Ventris, Chadwick , and Palmer) have
not done the same with the particular problem of the slaves. This is one of the social groups that
has remained at the periphery of scholarship and that most have usually discussed in one
sentence in their writings. It is evident, thus, that there is need to review not only the evidence
for the slaves alone, but also the evidence for the rest of the low ranked population, in order to
understand the context of social relationships within any social group that can be identified as
“slaves.”
143 Debord 1973. 144 Iliad 6. 463. 145 Debord 1973, p. 225.
63 CHAPTER 4
METHODOLOGY FOR THE ANALYSIS OF THE LINEAR B TABLETS
Principles of the Linear B Tablets Analysis
This chapter presents the methodology used for the examination and analysis of the
Linear B tablets. Four palatial sites of the mainland have yielded Linear B “archives”, Pylos,
Thebes, Mycenae, and Tiryns. A significant number of other Mycenaean sites, such as Midea,
Orchomenos, and Eleusis,146 yielded a number of inscribed pots or seals and sealings with Linear
B writing on them, but these are random texts and cannot be considered as part of an “archive” and, thus, will not be discussed in this thesis. By referring to sets of tablets as archives, I follow
Maria Brosius’147 definition: “Archives are first a physical space within a public space (palace or temple complex, public archive) or within a private building or private complex of buildings, and second a collection of stored documents.”
The evidence that the Mycenaean archives offer may generally be characterized as economic and administrative. The main themes appearing over and over again involve distribution of raw materials to craftsmen and workshops, distribution of agricultural products, manufactured objects, or land to individuals and groups of people; production and storage of goods, such as weapons, chariots, and cloth, livestock and their management; land-ownership of
146 Hooker 1996, p. 78. 147 Brosius 2003, p. 10.
64 individuals and groups of people, and inventories of objects and personnel.148 This means that we
are never told about the military, religious, or legal activities of the wa-na-ka (king),149 or of the
local economies that were functioning relatively independently of the palace and the regional
economies.150 Nonetheless, these records mention individuals and groups who work within the
palatial economy, their occupations and property, and their “transactions.” This allows us to
make inferences regarding their status, kin relations, and social relations. These are some of the
issues that will be raised in this thesis.151
At the end of my second chapter, I proposed criteria or conditions that constitute some
basic principles that have been observed in the slave systems of different societies through time
and space. This does not mean that slavery as an institution was exactly the same everywhere
and at any time, because ethnographic and historical studies have proved that the organization of
the slave systems varies greatly and is highly influenced and dependent on the socioeconomic
and ideological background of the societies that practice slavery.152 Certain general principles are found common to most societies and slave systems, such as the existence of a social ideology of inequality, well defined social identities, and conceptions of people belonging to the group and of people who do not and are, subsequently, marginalized. We find also that slaves are generally humans transformed into objects or commodities that may be exchanged or traded. As property
148 The Linear B tablets have been divided into sets or series (indicated by a capital letter) based on the ideograms that indicate the subject of the record on the tablet and sub-sets (indicated by a small letter). Each tablet is also given an inventory number. The principal series are the following: A: personnel, C: cattle, E: land-tenure, F: allocation of olive oil, J: allocation of metal, L: cloth, M and N: tributes, T: utensils, U: miscellaneous provisions. The identification of each tablet is based on the site where it was found (Pylos-PY, Mycenae-MY, Thebes-TH, Tiryns- TI), the series in which it may be classified written with one of the above capital letters, the type of tablet (leaf- shaped or page-shaped) and the sub-set in which the tablet belongs written with a lower case letter, and the inventory number of the tablets as they were recorded by the excavators who found them. For example: PY An 657. (Tablet no. 657 was found at Pylos, is classified within the personnel series, the sub-set -n-, and it is page-shaped). 149 Shelmerdine 1999, p. 20. 150 Galaty and Parkinson 1999, p. 7. 151 Chadwick 1973, pp. 106-145; Palaima 2003, pp. 166-167. 152 See further chapter 2 in this study.
65 items they do not have individual personal identity and cannot form their own free relations,
except at the discretion of their masters. As property slaves are absolutely dependent on their
masters. Slaves are generally procured from social groups that are considered to be “outsiders” and kept to their slave status with coercion.
These are all issues that have to be investigated in the data that we are provided with from the Linear B archives. Since the tablets as records do not directly disclose such information, we are forced to examine other kinds of information that may indirectly demonstrate such ideologies and socioeconomic practices as we have just described.
The examination of personal names, ethnic designations and notes on the tablets regarding the places where individuals or groups of people came from, provide evidence on the treatment and social approach to “outsiders” in the Mycenaean communities of the four polities.
Onomastics can be a very helpful category of information. Names are signs of identity distinguishing people from each other. Personal names, however, may indicate the way others or the entire community think about an individual or a group and thus personal names signal the identity others attach to an individual or a group. The personal names that appear in the Linear B tablets may be indications of ethnicity (there are names formed from ethnic adjectives, such as ko-ro-ku-ra-i-jo (the man from Corfu, PY Na 396) or ra-ke-da-mi-ni-jo (the Lakedaimonian, TH
Fq 229)).
Occupational status may define also social status, and evidence for this is found again in the personal names that are formed from occupational designations, such as the masculine name pu-ko-wo (a person who is “the guardian of the fire”, PY Ep 705) and from direct designations
66 that supplement the identification of individuals and groups (for example the man named pu-ko-
wo on PY Ep 705 is a “slave of the god”).
Dependence of individuals and groups on the palace or officials is demonstrated in two
ways in the tablets: first, from the mode and the source that provides the subsistence of individuals and groups and, secondly, from reference to superiors in the service of which we find individuals and groups of people working. It should be noted, however, that there are varying degrees of dependence that characterize different types of servants, workers, and craftsmen in the service of individuals or institutions153 (such as the Mycenaean palaces), and absolute dependence, such as slaves would have had.
Finally, it is possible to know from the tablets about the family relations of a small part of the population recorded on the archives. The tablets provide us with information on children, daughters and sons, as well as on the parents of certain individuals and groups. They also provide us with indirect information regarding marital relations and the extent to which these relations are officially recognized and respected as free and permanent relations.
153 Hiller (1988, pp. 53-68) has described two basic types of dependence: dependence from the palace and dependence from individuals. The latter is also a form of indirect dependence from the palace, because of the fact that anyone recorded in the Linear B archives constitutes part of the palatial affairs and interests and, thus, falls under the control of the palace.
67 Database Analysis
Before I proceed with the analysis of the information that the Linear B archives provide us on the dependent personnel working in the Mycenaean polities of mainland Greece, I would like to present the database that I used to manage the volume of information available for my research.
The Linear B archives record a very large number of people, as individuals and groups of people, who are interesting for the purposes of the present study because they belong to the general group described as dependent personnel. For each one of these individuals and groups we have a multitude of information that has to be organized and stored in such a way that it is clear and manageable to retrieve, but also in a way that may be combined to answer complicated queries.
It proved necessary, therefore, for me to design a database where I would store and organize all this information. For the purposes of this study I designed three databases to store three different sets of information: the Tablet Database, the Dependent Personnel Database, and the Objects and Quantities Database. These databases are also linked to each other. This means that a query in one database pulls up the relevant information in the other two databases.
The Tablet Database (Appendix 1, Fig. 1) aims to include general information regarding each tablet recovered in mainland Greece. These include the inventory number of the tablet, the general subject as demonstrated by the type(s) of ideogram(s) that are recorded on it, the site where it was recovered, the building and also the exact room where it was recovered, and, finally, a reference to whether the tablet includes information regarding personnel or not.
68 The purpose of this database is to include information on all the tablets recovered, which
may prove useful for future projects, too,, but also to allow me to distinguish in a quick way
between those tablets that I would examine and record more carefully in the Dependent
Personnel Database.
The Dependent Personnel Database (Appendix 1, Fig. 2) is the main database for this
study. There I record all the available information on individuals and groups. In a very early stage of the recording process it became evident that a set of rules had to be established in order
to avoid the recording of redundant information and to make the storage of information more
manageable for analysis. These rules are the following:
1) Each individual or group of persons is recorded on a separate recording sheet. The fact
that the tablets include multiple records for the same persons is not taken into consideration
during the recording procedure, because the identification of two or more occurrences of the
same name as one person is a very complicated process that takes place during the analysis of the
data.
2) Persons who are generally considered in the scholarship as members of the elite, high
officials or great landowners are not recorded. These “elite” individuals are the following: wa-
na-ka (a[nax, king), ra-wa-ke-ta (laFagevta~, leader of the people?), ko-re-te and po-ro-ko-re-te
(officials), qa-si-re-u (basileuv~, official), te-re-ta (officials), e-qe-ta (eJpevta~, officials), ke-ro-te
(officials), i-e-re-u (iJereuv~, priest), and i-je-re-ja (iJevreia, priestess).
3) Tablets that do not provide us with any concrete and securely translated and interpreted information regarding dependent individuals and/or groups, either because they are broken or illegible, are not recorded.
69 The structure of the recording sheet is divided into four parts. At the top is the general information regarding the tablet that we are dealing with (inventory number, subject and find- spot). In the next part I record general information on the type of information that is going to follow: whether I am dealing with personnel or not, an individual or a group, the number of individuals or groups in the entire tablet, and whether the individual or the group had the designation do-e-ro or not.
Afterwards there follows the part that is relevant to persons individually recorded on the tablets. I record the personal name of the individual, the occupation, the gender, the
“nationality”; information relevant to his/her superior if there was one, and information regarding the place where the individual works. Finally, I record information regarding the kin relations of the individual if such information is recorded on the tablet. A similar kind of information is recorded in the case that a group of people is concerned. Additionally, in the case of groups, I record the number of people involved, the number of dependents (children) that they may have, and missing members if there were any.
The fourth part on the recording sheet involves the particular “transactions” recorded on the tablet for the individual at hand, such as the receipt, offer, or land-holding of the individual or the group, the person from whom he receives and the person to whom he gives. Finally, all the commodities and amounts involved are recorded in a field that is linked and enters the same information into the Objects and Quantities Database.
The Objects and Quantities Database (Appendix 1, Fig. 3) concentrates the information regarding the commodities distributed or offered, or the size of the land that people held. This separate database allows statistical analysis of the amounts recorded on the tablets, which
70 provides significant information for estimating the wealth that was transferred or held by different individuals.
In the next two chapters I proceed with the analysis of the archives of the four palatial sites. I examine first the Pylos archive and then, in the following chapter, the archives of Tiryns,
Mycenae, and Thebes. The analysis follows on the lines described above. Following the analysis
I synthesize the information on different groups into a comprehensive picture that best describes the status of individuals and groups of people.
71 CHAPTER 5
ANALYSIS OF THE LINEAR B TABLETS OF PYLOS
Introduction
In the present chapter I want to establish that the population that was involved in the
palatial economy was hierarchically structured, even within the lowest social levels.
Traditionally, scholars have distinguished between elites and an internally undifferentiated lower
social level that comprised craftsmen, specialized workers and technicians, and finally, “slaves.”
This chapter presents the different information available to us to narrow down the social status of
individuals and groups of people. This will allow me first to proceed to an examination of the
population in the light of the criteria that I set in the second chapter regarding the nature of the
social class of the “slaves” and to identify potential individuals and/or groups of people who
might be described as “slaves”; and secondly to provide other scholars with the entire range of
information that I have used to base my results on and to enable them to test the validity of my
observations.
In order to achieve my goal of reconstructing the social ranking of the lower social class
in the Mycenaean polity of Pylos, I examine the evidence that has been preserved on the Linear
B tablets found at the Palace of Nestor.154 I review different kinds of information sources, viz.,
154 The body of evidence that I used consists of 1098 tablets, in the two-volume publication of 1973, The Pylos Tablets Transcribed (henceforth PTT I-II), edited by Emmett Bennett, Jr. and Jean-Pierre Olivier. As it was stated in chapter 4, the examination of the tablets was realized based on a set of rules, which constrained the number of the tablets to be examined in detail for the purposes of the present study. Thus, from the set of ca. 1100 tablets, I concluded that only 486 tablets included information on dependent personnel and possibly “slaves” and, therefore, were appropriate for closer examination. The excluded tablets record either officials, public, military or religious, or
72 the personal names of individuals, to establish whether some people were outsiders to the Pylian
polity and establish whether they were treated differently or considered to have lower status. I
examine the occupational status of both individuals and groups and establish that those who were
individually recorded were of higher status than those who were collectively recorded. Then, I
proceed to investigate the means by which individuals and groups subsisted. The question of
subsistence is very important because it provides us with the best evidence for distinguishing
levels of dependence on the palace, which range from absolute dependence to very little. I
review the relations of dominance that are evidently important in establishing the relative
hierarchies within the entire group of dependent personnel. Finally, I examine the evidence for
family relations, because they are an indirect source of information demonstrating at times the lack of power within the community and the absolute level of dependence of certain individuals
and/or groups of people from the palace.
In the next chapter I will examine the other mainland sites, Tiryns, Mycenae, and Thebes,
with the same goals in mind. Finally, in the last chapter, I will examine this evidence as a whole
to determine if there were individuals and/or groups of people in this hierarchy who can be
socially characterized as “slaves.”
Before proceeding to the actual discussion of the tablets, I would also like to note that I
divided the entire body of evidence into smaller data-sets in order to make the body of evidence
more manageable for analysis. Thus, I divided, where it was necessary, the records into two main
sets; the first set involves individually recorded persons and the second involves groups of
objects and “transactions” with no reference to particular persons. Furthermore, tablets which have not been satisfactorily interpreted to date and tablets mutilated to such a degree that no information can be deduced with certainty were also excluded from the present analysis. These tablets amount to 612. The total number of records is now 1460. 1124 records involve persons individually recorded, whereas 334 records involve individuals collectively recorded in groups.
73 collectively recorded people.155 Furthermore, I arbitrarily divided each of these two large sets into three sub-sets; one set with those individuals or groups designated specifically in the tablets as do-e-ro(-a); another set with those designated as te-o-jo do-e-ro(-a); and, finally, one more set with all other individuals or groups of personnel dependent on the palace.156
This division of the population allows for significant emphasis to be placed during the analysis on the two groups of the do-e-ro(-a) and the te-o-jo do-e-ro(-a). This is necessary because these are the individuals and groups that have primarily been described as “slaves” in the scholarship157 and constitute the starting point of the present study. Such division allows for these groups to be studied extensively on their own terms, but also for an analysis of those two groups comparative to the rest of the population recorded as dependent personnel.
155 The possibility of an individually recorded person being recorded as a member of a group as well cannot be excluded. Nonetheless, it is impossible to identify such cases, if there are any, because the people recorded in groups are anonymous and defined only by a collective designation of occupation, ethnicity, or status. 156 Hiller 1988, p. 63. Hiller concludes that “more or less all of the persons who appear in the texts belong to the palace and may be described as being personally dependent on the palace.” 157 Ventris and Chadwick 1959, p. 391; Lejeune 1971; but Palmer (1963, p. 221, 279) considers them more as assistants rather than “slaves” and focuses mainly on the te-o-jo do-e-ro as temple “slaves.”
74 Population Census
One of the main purposes of this systematic recording and examination of the tablets is to
ascertain the exact, or at least a very close to realistic, number of the people involved in the
discussion of dependent personnel and “slaves.” This has proved to be a challenge for any
scholar dealing with populations recorded in the Linear B texts.158
The challenge arises from realizing that the same individual and/or the same group may
be mentioned in several different tablets according to the purpose of each record. Thus, for
example, we find very often certain individuals in the A series,159 which, in general terms, record
personnel, and then we find the same individuals recorded in the E series,160 which involves land
tenure and records the amount of land each individual owns. Evidently, these two different
instances cannot be counted separately as different individuals.
Individual do-e-ro(-a) and te-o-jo do-e-ro(-a)
There are 164 instances in the tablets, out of 172 that discuss individually recorded
people, of people with the social designation do-e-ro(-a) and te-o-jo do-e-ro(-a). The scribes
recorded these individuals either by their personal name followed by this specific designation161
or by this designation alone. The scribes may include then an indication of a person in the genitive who appears to be their superior.162 Other information may involve mention of the place
158 Lindgren 1973, II, pp. 200-204; Hiller 1988, pp. 61-63. 159 See above note 148. 160 See above note 148. 161 i.e., PY Eb 156+157: e-u-ru-wo-ta te-o-jo do-e-ro […… 162 i.e., PY Es 703.1 we-da-ne-wo do-e-ro […….
75 where they work or live, mention of the land they own and the raw materials or agricultural
products they may receive.
The do-e-ro(-a) and te-o-jo do-e-ro(-a) appear mostly (145 records) in the E series, which
discuss land tenure at Pylos. There are also some instances in other series; one do-e[-ro/ra is
found in PY Ae110; two do-e-ro are found in PY Cn 1287; two do-e-ro in PY Fn 324 and 867;
and, finally, fourteen individual do-e-ro occur in the J series (four in PY Jn 310, one in PY Jn
413, one in PY Jn 431, two in PY Jn 605, five in PY Jn 706, and one in PY Jn 750).163 For the
do-e-ro of the J series it is possible by context to ascertain that they were occupied in the metal
craft next to ka-ke-u (ka-ke-we in plural) (bronze-smiths).
As was briefly noted earlier, certain individuals appear multiple times in the records. This is evident when we consider the records of named individuals, which appear in their majority at
least two times in different tablets. A pattern can also be recognized immediately. Similar names
appear mostly in the series Eb, Ep, En, and Eo.
The similarity or overlapping of the records as it appears in the case of the Eb, Ep, En,
and Eo series was recognized very early in the examination of the Linear B tablets of Pylos.
Bennett164 discussed the four series and demonstrated that there is an identifiable correspondence
between the tablets of the Eb and Ep series, as well as another identifiable correspondence
between the En and Eo series.165 He argued, furthermore, that the En tablets copied the records
of the Eo tablets, whereas the Ep tablets copied the records of the Eb tablets. It is important also
163 In total, there are forty-four different records that mention an individual with the designation do-e-ro and 114 tablets mentioning an individual designated as te-o-jo do-e-ro. 164 Bennett 1956b. 165 Correspondence list in Bennett 1956b, p. 106; PTT I, pp. 104-107, 114-115; revised list in Bennett 1983, pp. 43- 44.
76 to note that the two copy series (En and Ep) were written by a different hand166 from that of both
the original series (Eo and Eb series).167
Bennett,168 however, noticed also certain failures or disagreements between the two sets of tablets, copies and originals, which were, and still are, difficult to fully understand and
interpret. He tried to explain the differences between original and copy records in two ways; at
first he suggested that the scribe who copied the original tablets deliberately left out or changed
certain elements of the original tablets; the second explanation he proposed was that the two sets,
original and copy tablets, were kept both active at the same time, but any recurring changes were
input only in one of the two corresponding series instead of being input in both corresponding
series.
Therefore, in order to avoid counting double certain persons it was necessary for me to
return to the lists published by Bennett and the PTT and configure a different kind of list with the
correspondences of the individuals themselves (Appendix 2, Tables 1-3). My approach to the
overlapping series and the double or multiple entries of individuals and groups was based, on a
first level, on the actual personal names of the individuals. On a second level, I consulted the
listing of the land-holdings of each individual using the amount of land each individual owned as
a controlling factor for verifying common identity. The records indicate further the person who
holds the land, as well as its original owner.
As a result I was able to produce Tables 1 (Appendix 2), for the do-e-ro(-a), and 2
(Appendix 2), for the te-o-jo do-e-ro(-a). Both tables involve individuals who were mentioned at
166 PTT II, pp. 7-8. Palaeographical studies of the Linear B texts have indicated that the texts were written by different scribes, who can be identified from their hand-writing (shape of signs). In Pylos twenty-six hands have been identified. Palaima (1988, p.172) later refined the classification of scribes at Pylos and concluded that there were thirty-two hands/scribes working at Pylos. 167 Bennett 1956b, p. 104. 168 Bennet 1956b, pp. 108-109.
77 least two times, one in each series of the two overlapping sets in the E series, each pair holding the same size of land from the same original owner. It could be recognized with absolute certainty that these records involved the same physical entity (individual). Forty different names were recognized corresponding to fifty-four individuals, ten do-e-ro and fourty-four te-o-jo do-e- ro.
There are twenty-nine further instances in the tablets of multiple mentions of the same name, but I consider these particular cases as difficult to decide with certainty, whether it was one individual or more that were being referred to. I counted twenty-seven such individuals.169
The differences in the details that describe the latter individuals can be summarized thus:
-Differences in the amount of land-property: this issue involves all the names of Table 3
(Appendix 2), with the exception of ma-re-ku-na (PY En 74 and Eo 276) e-pa-sa-na-ti/i-pa-sa- na-ti (PY En 74, Eo 247, Eb 1350, and Ep 212) and i-do-me-ne-ja/o-do-me-ne-ja (PY Eb 498 and Ep 212). The records in the E series always indicate the person who leases the land, the lessor of the lot, and the amount of land in measure of grain. The differences are found either in the amount of land recorded as being leased by the individuals or in the person from whom they lease the land.
-Differences in the spelling of the names: it involves the cases of e-pa-sa-na-ti/i-pa-sa- na-ti (PY En 74, Eo 247, Eb 1350, and Ep 212) and i-do-me-ne-ja/o-do-me-ne-ja (PY Eb 498 and Ep 212) (Appendix 2, Table 3). Scholars generally agree that these are mere scribal mistakes and should not be taken as an indication of differentiation.170 The differences in the spelling of the name may also indicate different scribes, an argument which appears to be verified by
169 Although one might say that if we had more information on them, we would be able to limit their number to a much smaller one, I reserved these instances in a separate table and kept apart the different instances for statistical reasons (Appendix 2, Table 3). 170 DMic I, p. 222, 272.
78 Bennett’s171 observation that the original and copy series were written by two different “hands”;
series Ep and En were written by Hand 1, whereas series Eb and Eo where written by Hand 41.
-Differences in gender: this issue involves the case of ma-re-ku-na (PY En 74 and Eo
276), who is recorded once as female and once as male (Appendix 2, Table 3). This case, too,
has been generally considered to be a scribal mistake, in this case an ideogram mistake.172 It
could also demonstrate that certain names in the Mycenaean period were used by both men and
women. We could also hypothesize that the scribe did not have in front of him when he was drafting these records the actual persons involved and did not know the actual gender behind the
name, but the later scribe did. The fact that these inconsistencies may be explained variously
leads me to be rather conservative and count the aforementioned individuals as different.
Finally, some names in Table 3 (Appendix 2) appear in the E series that belong to the original-copy set of tablets. These names, however, are not found two or more times in the tablets, even though this would be expected based on the majority of the tablets that belong to these series. Furthermore, some instances do not preserve the name of the individual and, thus, it was impossible for me to associate records amongst them and to distinguish individuals
(Appendix 2, Table 4). I treated both the former and the latter records as designating a different individual in each account.
To conclude, the number of individual do-e-ro(-a) and te-o-jo do-e-ro(-a) in the tablets of
Pylos proves to be much smaller than initially appears to be the case when reviewing the number of the records that exist. In total thirty-five do-e-ro(-a) and seventy-six te-o-jo do-e-ro(-a) were counted with the provision that their number could be even smaller in reality than we calculated in the discussion above.
171 Bennett 1956b, p. 104. 172 DMic I, p. 425.
79 Do-e-ro Men 31 Women 4 Te-o-jo do-e-ro Men 40 Women 36 Total 111
Table 2. Total counts of individual do-e-ro(-a) and te-o-jo do-e-ro(-a) in Pylos
Groups of do-e-ro(-a) and te-o-jo do-e-ro(-a)
A significant part of the population is recorded in the tablets anonymously in groups.173
These groups are usually designated by their members’ occupation, ethnic origin, or place of
work, and rarely mentioned otherwise.174 Some do-e-ro(-a) can be found collectively recorded
and they are listed in Table 5 (Appendix 2). Seven groups are found in the tablets, all recorded
with the general designation of do-e-ro(-a) (some are in the dative, do-e-ro-i). For only one of
these groups we have also, by context, an indication of the more particular occupation of these
groups. This is the group in PY Jn 605, who work as ka-ke-u (bronze-smiths). It is unfortunate
that the particular records of do-e-ro(-a) in groups, except for the instances of PY Ae 303, Ae 26, and Jn 605, have not been preserved intact and do not have an indication of the number of persons. The three records that do preserve the count of their members provide us with a figure of twenty individuals (fourteen women and six men).
In Table 5 (Appendix 2) I have also included five more records of a very peculiar and controversial set of groups; the “do-qe-ja” women, who are found in tablet PY An 607. The “do- qe-ja” are recorded in four groups amounting to thirteen women altogether. The text has not yet been satisfactorily interpreted, partly because most of the words elude translation and
173 For the problem of individuals being also anonymously recorded in groups see discussion above in note 155. 174 The common expression for records of groups involves at the end of each record the inclusion of the ideogram for MAN or WOMAN and a numeral indicating the number of people in the group.
80 interpretation,175 but it is clear that the women are do-e-ra (An 607.3). The tablet will be
discussed in detail later, but I would like to note at this point that, although the term do-qe-ja is
far from being securely interpreted as a social or occupational designation for these women, I use
it conventionally as such to describe these women.
Do-e-ro Men 6+ Women 14 Te-o-jo do-e-ro Men 0 Women 0 Do-qe-ja Men 0 Women 13 Total 33+
Table 3. Count of collectively recorded do-e-ro(-a), te-o-jo do-e-ro(-a), and do-qe-ja
Individuals Other Than do-e-ro(-a) or te-o-jo do-e-ro(-a)
If we turn now to the rest of the individuals mentioned in the tablets, such as craftsmen,
and, in general, personnel dependent on the palace, we see that it is not as easy to deduce a realistic figure of their number. It was stated as a rule in the chapter discussing the recording method that individuals who were designated by administrative or religious titles would not be recorded at all in the personnel database.176 This practice, however, proved difficult when
individual officials were recorded in certain tablets without their designations and could not be
distinguished, thus, from the rest of the population. Because I initially recorded such individuals
in the personnel database, during the analysis I examined all individuals, irrespective of their
having or not having designations, against Lindgren’s177 prosopographical catalogue of
175 Lindgren 1973, II, p. 40. 176 See Chapter 4 above. 177 Lindgren 1973.
81 individuals found in Pylos. I then isolated any officials I had recorded with the craftsmen and the
personnel, and did not include them in my discussion.
A second problem involves the double entries and multiple records of certain individuals.
It was necessary to examine those individuals who appeared multiple times in association with
their occupation, place of work, origin, and superiors in order to identify unique individuals.
Similarly to the individual do-e-ro(-a), a significant number of these individuals are found in the
E series (En, Eo, Eb, Ep, Es, and Ea). The result of this census was the following:
Women 13 Men 753 Unknown gender 5 Total count of individuals 771
Table 4. Count of personnel other than do-e-ro(-a) or te-o-jo do-e-ro(-a) individually recorded in the Pylos
tablets (see also Appendix 2, Table 6)
Groups of People Other Than do-e-ro(-a) and te-o-jo do-e-ro(-a)
The most substantial part of the population dependent on the palace appears to be recorded in groups. These groups are recorded for their occupation, the rations or raw materials and agricultural products they receive or offer, or for the land they own. The most usual way of referring to them appears to have been by their occupation, their ethnic origin, or by their place of work. Very few cases do not conform to this system.
The usual format of these records consists at least of the name of the group, the occupation when this is not indicated in the name and the number of the individuals who belong to each group. Sometimes the scribes record also the children (Aa and Ab series) who stay, and possibly work, with their adult parents (usually their mothers). In total we have 321 instances of groups being recorded.
82 The groups appear mainly in the A series that record personnel (Aa, Ab, Ac, Ad, An
series); five groups in PY Cn 3; one in PY Eb 321+0327+1153, which is also found in the
corresponding tablet of the Ep series, PY Ep704; ten groups in PY Fn 50 and 79 and 867; two in
PY Gn 428, three in PY Jn 431; one in La 632; nineteen in tablets of the Na series; two in PY Pa
398 and 889; finally, two groups are found in PY Vn 10.
Theoretically, to count all the individuals recorded in groups, it would suffice to add the different numbers following all groups in the records. Such an uncritical addition would give us a figure of 4169 adult men and women, 539 young boys (ko-wo), and 581 young girls (ko-wa).
Unfortunately, as it has already been demonstrated, these figures are misleading. The issues that cause this misleading image of the data are the following:
1) The tablets of two series, Aa and Ab series, had been recognized by Bennett178 and,
later, by other scholars179 to be records of two consecutive accounting “years” and in part overlapping each other, because the one was copying the other (Appendix 2, Table 6).180
A quick examination, however, of the lists of groups and the numbers recorded for the
members of each group and its kin-dependents demonstrates in most cases a significant change
that occurred between the drafting of the two sets (Appendix 2, Tables 6 and 7). In most records
the number of adult members is smaller or equal to that of the previous accounting year and the
178 Bennett 1956a. 179 Ventris and Chadwick 1959, pp. 155-162; Chadwick, 1988. 180 Chadwick 1988. The case is instructive because it transforms us into “witnesses” of the Mycenaean archival tradition and their methods for monitoring and creating censuses of the people under the “control” of the palace. More importantly, these records, with the difference in the number of people they include, constitute a significant window on the social mobility that existed at this time. For example, we see that the number of children, boys and girls, recorded in some tablets of the first year is higher than the number of children recorded in the corresponding tablets of the next year. This difference has been interpreted as children growing older and leaving their initial groups to join those of the older men. This example has also been the reason for arguing that this kind of mobility (in these particular tablets) was dependent on the age of the individuals.
83 number of the children varies significantly from tablet to tablet. It increases in some cases,
whereas in some others it decreases significantly.
For the purposes of this study I calculated first the number of individuals in each of the
duplicate series (Aa and Ab series) separately. Subsequently, I calculated the mean of the two
“annual” records for adults, young boys and young girls. The Ad tablets are also treated
separately as they correspond to the records of the Aa and Ab series, but do not have duplicate
records (Appendix 2, Table 8). All other tablets are treated as a different group.
Adults Boys Girls Total Average Men Women Children totals Of adults and children Overlapping Aa tablets 0 603 286 389 675 Aa and Ab Ab tablets 0 370 148 191 339 tablets Average 0 487 217 290 507 994 Ad tablets 213 0 93 0 93 306 Grand Total 1300
Table 5. Count and mean figure of the members of the Aa, Ab, and Ad series in Pylos
By examining Table 5 above, we are able to derive an estimate of the number of people
and their kin-dependents recorded in groups in the Aa and Ab series. It appears that ca. 487
adults were thus recorded, with 217 young boys and 290 young girls. In total, including adults
and children too, we get an approximate figure of ca. 994 individuals, and ca. 1300 including the
Ad records.
2) Similarly to the case of the individuals’ census, it is possible that tablets from different series drafted for different administrative purposes may be recording the same groups. Although it is necessary to take this into account, it is impossible in practice to distinguish similar groups from each other. In only one case was it possible to identify that two instances in the tablets
84 recorded the same group, in PY Eb 321+0327+1153 with the corresponding tablet of the Ep series, PY Ep 704 (Appendix 2, Table 19).
3) Certain records and tablets have not survived intact. Thus, it is possible that some information is missing, such as the number of adult members, or the number of children. Thus, wherever it has been possible to record a group by its name, but the accompanying numbers are missing, I have calculated the group as consisting of a conventional minimum number of two adult individuals (since at least two individuals are necessary to make up a group). I provide in
Table 6 below both the number of individuals as this is preserved in the tablets, as well as their number after restoring the missing values, for the adults only, with a value of two. I consider the mean of the two sums the most approximate value that can be deduced for this part of the population. A figure of ca. 3000 persons appears to belong to this category.
Adults Boys Girls Children Average totals of adults and children
All Preserved 2946 12 0 12 others Restored 3066 12 0 12 Average 3006 12 0 12 3018 Grand total 3018
Table 6. Count and mean of the number of individuals recorded in groups in all series, except the Aa, Ab, and
Ad series
85 Discussion
By adding together all the records of individuals and groups and bearing in mind the
problems discussed above, we are able to calculate satisfactorily the number of persons who are
recorded in the tablets. These individuals and groups amount to a recorded population of 5232 individuals. 882 persons are recorded individually, whereas the rest are recorded collectively in
groups.
Individuals Individual do-e-ro(-a) 35 Individual te-o-jo do-e-ro(-a) 76 Individuals, other than do-e-ro(-a) or te-o-jo do-e-ro(-a) 771 Total of individually recorded dependent people 882
Table 7. Total count of individually recorded dependent people
Adults Children Average totals of adults and Boys Girls Total children Groups of do-e-ro(-a) 20 0 0 0 20 Groups of do-qe-ja 13 0 0 0 13 Groups of te-o-jo do-e-ro(-a) 0 0 0 0 0 Overlapping Aa tablets 603 286 389 675 994 aa and ab Ab tablets 370 148 191 339 tablets Average 487 217 290 507 Ad tablets 213 93 0 93 306 All others Preserved 2946 12 0 12 3018 Restored 3066 12 0 12 Average 3006 12 0 12 Total of collectively recorded dependent people 4351 Grand total of tables 7 and 8 5233
Table 8. Total count of collectively recorded dependent people
It is interesting to note already at this point that the number of individuals specifically
recorded as do-e-ro(-a) (whether individually or collectively recorded and including the do-qe-ja
women) forms a very small percentage within the total number of individuals recorded in the
86 tablets and of interest to the palace, a mere 1.29 % of the total population of dependent personnel
recorded in the Pylos tablets.
The entire population recorded for the purposes of this census survey reaches a minimum
figure of ca. 5200 people. Even though demographic calculations are very tentative for any
society, even when it is as well documented as that of Classical Greece, certain suggestions have
been made. William McDonald and Richard Hope Simpson181 proposed in 1972 a minimum figure of 50,000 for the population of the area of Messenia in the Late Helladic period. John
Chadwick182 estimated that the population of Pylos alone was more than 2,500 persons and that
the population of the centre of the Further Province, a-si-ja-ti-ja, was between 800 and 1,000 persons. A similar figure emerges from Whitelaw’s recent calculations based on the finds and observations of the PRAP survey in the area around the Palace of Nestor. The community around the palace appears to amount to 3,000 people, whereas the population of the entire polity should be calculated to be, at minimum, 50,000 persons distributed in ca. 150 archaeologically identifiable sites.183 This implies that the population that I have calculated as being dependent
(ca. 5,200) on the palace is a quite significant proportion (1/10th) of the entire population. As
evident from Tables 7 and 8, the largest group within this 10% consists of craftsmen, specialists,
and workers who are involved in the industrial activities which are of greatest interest to the
palace, because they produce material that generates and augments the palace’s wealth and feeds
the trade and interaction between the Pylian “state” and other areas of the Mediterranean and the
Mainland.
181 McDonald and Hope Simpson 1972, p. 141. They estimate an average population of 250 persons per settlement. 182 Chadwick 1976, p. 68. 183 Whitelaw (2001, pp. 62-64) has used for his calculations the site recovery rate of the PRAP survey: 150% for an area of 200,000 ha. that the Pylian polity is estimated to cover.
87 Onomastics
The value of personal names as evidence to achieve greater insight into ancient Greek society was argued already in the early 19th century.184 We can discuss briefly the function of personal names in order to prove that names, and the Mycenaean names in turn, may provide us with information regarding the social, occupational or ethnic status of individuals.
As Anna Morpurgo Davies185 observes, personal names appear to have two main functions in daily life. On a basic level personal names provide the means for identifying individuals. Names are the main means at the disposal of a community to differentiate its members from each other and keep their identity clear.
The second, and most important characteristic for the present discussion, is the function of personal names as a subtle means of classifying people into categories of different character.
Names can differentiate people according to their sex, their ethnic origin, physical characteristics, family status, personal status, or even age.186 The emphasis on a certain characteristic may vary from one society to another and from one social group to another, but it is safe to argue that personal names convey ideas, wishes, beliefs, and ideologies of those who give them, i.e., parents giving names to their children or fellow members of the community who give nicknames. This is the connotative function of personal names.187
184 Study of the etymologies of personal names is a controversial type of evidence because the development of names may depend on a variety of beliefs and customs, but studies of this character are popular for later historical periods (i.e., Collins (1969) and Bechtel (1917), for the Classical and Roman period; Forbes (forthcoming), for the Ottoman period). Two studies of this sociological character have already been undertaken for the Mycenaean period: by Lydia Baumbach (1983a) for the names appearing in the Knossos tablets, with main emphasis on the relation of Greek and non-Greek names and the implications of this relation on our understanding of the Minoan society and by Thomas Palaima (1999) for names from the Mycenaean and Classical period with etymologies based on the words damos, lawos,and klewos. 185 Morpurgo Davies 2000, pp. 19-21. 186 Morpurgo Davies 2000, pp. 20-21. 187 Morpurgo Davies 2000, pp. 20-21.
88 Patterson,188 furthermore, has argued that one of the constituent elements of slavery is the state of degradation and dishonor. One of the main means of dishonoring and degrading another
human being is through verbal abuse and the symbolic naming of the individuals upon their
enslavement, even though we cannot argue that this was a regularized practice inflicted on all
slaves everywhere. Names given in this case could be ethnics or diminutives indicating the
“outsider” origin of the slaves as well as the “outsider” status within the community. The name
Graeculus, for example, in the Roman period appeared in exactly such a context of verbal abuse
between Roman masters and Greek slaves.189
Before proceeding to an examination of the Mycenaean names, I would like to discuss a
third point regarding the nature and function of names. It was common practice for parents -and we find such examples in the Linear B tablets as well- to give names such as “Ugly” or “Short” or other analogous diminutive and “insulting” names.190 The function of these names is clearly
related to the ideology and traditions of possibly the parents who gave the name. Insulting and diminutive names were considered talismanic, a means to keep evil away.191 In the case of
“ugly” as a personal name, the name does not necessarily signify that the person with the name
was actually ugly for all or part of his life. These names were usually given at birth, even though
it was possible to change one’s name into such a talismanic one at a later stage of one’s life (i.e.,
188 Other means of dishonoring and psychological force being control over clothing, hairstyle, language, and body marks. Patterson 1982, pp. 8-9. 189 Collins 1969, p. 90; Petrocheilos 1984, pp. 50-56. The name was given to Greek slaves performing the role of tutor. Morphologically it appears to be a diminutive from an ethnic and, as a diminutive, it may express a range of feelings and ideas for the bearer of the particular name, which might range “from the mildly patronizing to the openly contemptuous.” Solin (1971, pp. 156-157) examined the Roman personal names in the imperial inscriptions and reached the conclusion that there was a clear distinction between the names that were given or used by slaves and those used by free men. He also found that first-generation slaves kept their original names in their majority, whereas second generation slaves could have been given either a Latin name from their masters or have kept a Greek name from their parents. 190 These names may possibly be confused with nicknames which have the purpose of subtle mockery and which we cannot distinguish from true personal names without specific indications for the nature of the names. 191 Ilievski 1996, p.64; Oikonomides 1962.
89 after a life-changing experience, such a serious illness from which the person survived, which
could lead the person to change his/her original name to a talismanic one).192 Thus, not all
diminutives should be seen as an indication that the bearer is a “slave.”
Another issue that I would like to raise at this point is the use of ethnic adjectives as
personal names. In Chapter 2, I argued that one of the constituent elements of slavery is the fact
that the people who were transformed into slaves came from social groups that were generally
considered “outsiders.” The ethnics used as personal names, or as secondary designations of
people, constitute our best evidence regarding the descent and origin of people and for
establishing that “outsiders” lived within the communities under discussion. These ethnics, in
association with other kinds of information, also demonstrate how “outsiders” were viewed in the Mycenaean period and in the particular communities of Pylos, Tiryns, Mycenae, and Thebes.
They indicate whether they were kept separated from the “insiders” or if they were considered to be of inferior status. Nonetheless, during the study of these ethnic names, we should keep in mind that the use of ethnics as names does not necessarily designate the origin of the owner of the name. Names can be passed on from generation to generation, which means that the people
with ethnic names in the tablets may not necessarily have been themselves originally “outsiders”,
but their ancestors were. Ethnics have another type of connotation too; they can reflect
communal preconceptions of “outsiders” as they appear different in their work, social structures
or other elements. Subsequently, ethnics in the tablets could possibly designate people in a line of work, for example, that was generally thought to be characteristic of a certain foreign place.
In the Linear B tablets personal names comprise nearly two thirds of the entire set of lexical items found in the tablets’ records.193 In this sub-chapter I would like to examine the
192 In the process of making a “tama” it was common practice to make promises to God or saints, among which was to change the name of the individual to commemorate the saint. Oikonomides 1962, pp. 512-516.
90 names as they are associated with the social designations of do-e-ro(-a), and te-o-jo do-e-ro(-a), as well as with the different occupations that appear; and to identify possible patterns in the choice and function of these names in relation to the persons’ belonging to a specific group or occupation. A key-issue that is raised in this section is the question of who is recorded by name and who is not. I believe it is possible to argue that the scribes of the palace would record by their names those individuals who are personally of interest to the palace. On the contrary, we may assume that collectively recorded people were of lower status and, certainly, of less importance individually for the palace.
Unfortunately, it has to be stressed that this examination is highly inhibited by the fact that a large number of personal names in the Linear B tablets, as well as of the other lexical units, remains beyond interpretation because their etymology is not clear to us. This is due to the fact that some are pre-Hellenic and some resist thoroughly any association or correlation with later Greek names.
The Names of the do-e-ro(-a)
As we have already seen, there are only ten out of thirty-seven individually recorded do- e-ro(-a) in the Pylos tablets with a personal name preserved. These are all men, except for one woman called e-ra-ta-ra (PY En 609 and Eo 224). The men are the following:
a2-ra-ka-wo (PY Cn 1287) mu-ti-ri-ko (PY Cn 1287)
a3-ki-wa-ro (PY Es 644, Es 650, Es 653) te-te-re-u (PY Eb 1176, Ep 539)
e-ni-to-wo (PY Eb 1187, Ep 539 ) to-wa-te-u (PY Eb 1188, Ep 539)
me-re-u (PY Ep 539) wi-dwo-i-jo (PY Eb 1186, Ep 539)
193 Ilievski 1983, p. 202.
91 pu- [ ]-da-ka (PY Ep 539)
If we attempt to examine the existing interpretations proposed for these names, we are faced with a rather disappointing situation. Three names at least have no satisfactory interpretation at all. The rest of the names have been associated with later Greek, at least etymologically, but still we are not sure of their connotations. The etymological interpretations have no connection to either occupational or ethnic status, except for the name te-te-re-u, the interpretation of which is still not secure. We cannot find in the names any direct evidence of the persons’ occupations or status.
Name Occupation Origin Other No Note interpretation A2-ra-ka-wo x A3-ki-wa-ro x AijgiFalov~ (ai[x+ Falivskomai) E-ni-to-wo x x E[n-qoo~ = quick, fast E-ra-ta-ra x x Ejlavtria Me-re-u x x Mhleuv~ (mh`lo) or Meleuv~ (mevlomai) Mu-ti-ri-ko x x Murtilivsko~ Pu-[ ]-da-ka x Te-te-re-u x Teqreuv~ (qestereuv~ = augur, diviner) To-wa-te-u x Wi-dwo-i-jo x Patronymic- wi-do-we-u
Table 9. Connotations of the personal names of the do-e-ro(-a)
None of the names appears in a different context or associated with a different social or occupational designation than do-e-ro. This fact prevents us from making any further associations between names, the type of names used, and the particular social or occupational status of an individual. The only exception to this is the name te-te-re-u, which appears also in
PY Jn 389 as the name of another man who is a ka-ke-u who did not receive ta-ra-si-ja. The interpretation of te-te-re-u in later Greek is teqreuv~, which is related to qestereuv~, an augur or
92 diviner, and implies an occupation with religious associations.194 This appears to be in direct
contrast to the occupational designation that is explicitly recorded in the tablet, ka-ke-u (bronze-
smith), whereas in the case of the do-e-ro text we have no social or occupational context at all to
compare to the etymological interpretation of the name.
A note should be made for the negative information that we are confronted with at this
point. Names are found in the texts that involve land-holdings, whereas the rest of the texts mention the do-e-ro(-a) anonymously. Certain do-e-ro(-a) that appear anonymously in the Eb
series were clearly recorded with their name, but the tablets were found broken and part of the
text, that would normally include the name of the do-e-ro(-a), is missing.195 Another case is the
do-e-ro of a man called we-da-ne-u.196 He is not recorded with his name, but it appears that the mention of his superior is enough to demarcate him from the rest. It appears as though everyone knew who the do-e-ro of we-da-ne-u was. Thus, for those eight individuals we may safely argue that they were recorded by their name.
A similar argument can be made for those anonymous do-e-ro(-a) who appear, based on
context, to be working in the metal industry, because they are recorded together with other
bronze-smiths and because they are listed under a heading that they did not receive ta-ra-si-ja.197
Each one of them is recorded with the name of his superior indicating that this suffices for his
identification. These are eight men, with another five from PY Jn 706, for whom it is clear that
we do not have the names of their superiors because the tablet is broken.
194 Bartonk 1999, p. 129; but Landau (1958, p. 209) interprets it as a “military name” connected to the verb tivtrhmi, pierce through. 195 PY Eb 502, 835, 859, 872, 916, 1347, and 1348. 196 PY Es 644, 650, and 703. 197 Gregersen 1997a, pp. 46-47. Ta-ra-si-ja has been interpreted as the name of a system that regulated and controlled the work for the palace, in the context of which the palace distributes raw materials to craftsmen in its control and receives the manufactured products these craftsmen eventually produce. The system is used in the metal industry (Pylos), the textile industry (Pylos, Knossos, Mycenae), and for the construction of wheels and wagons (Knossos).
93 Thus, it appears that each one of the do-e-ro(-a) was known to the palace and that those
who were known by their own name were also land-owners (E series), whereas the do-e-ro in the
metal industry were unique for each bronze-smith and thus, it sufficed to describe them by the
name of their superior bronze-smith.
The Names of the te-o-jo do-e-ro(-a)
The te-o-jo do-e-ro(-a) recorded in the Linear B tablets amount to seventy-six
individuals, among which fifty-two are women (Appendix 2, Table 9).
Of special interest to the present study are names that have occupational or ethnic connotations, even though names have a wide variety of other connotations also, such as physical attributes (e-u-ru-wo-ta = Eujruwvta~, “wide-eared” in PY Eb 156+157),198 wishful adjectives
(ka-wa-do-ro = Kalivandro~, “loved by men” in PY Eb 976),199 or derivatives from animals,
rivers, or even gods, that could prove useful for other social studies. The practice of using ethnics
as personal names is well attested in classical Greece200 especially in the cases of naming slaves
in order to signify their origin and outsider status,201 and it is also reported by Strabo.202
198 Landau 1958, p. 188. 199 DMic I, p. 333. 200 Fraser 2000, p. 152. 201 Fraser (2000, p. 154) cautions us, however, against taking all ethnics at face value by reporting cases of natives in cities who used as personal names ethnics from cities with which they had a special relationship or affiliation. 202 Strabo, 304.
94 categories of name connotations 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2
no interpretation 0 occupation ethnic other
Figure 1. Categories of the names of the te-o-jo do-e-ro(-a) based on their connotations
Among the names of the te-o-jo do-e-ro(-a) we see that there are both occupational and ethnic names. All other connotations, however, have been gathered into one group under the heading “other”, and all names that have not been interpreted yet in a satisfactory manner have been kept aside as another group.203 The chart in Figure 1 above shows that occupational and
ethnic names comprise the majority of the names (26), even though a significant number (15) of
all the names has to date escaped interpretation.
The majority of the occupations appear to be connected to the interior (of a house, a
palace, or a temple) and the preparation of what could potentially be rituals and feasts. We have
also some references to military associations. These are the following: e-ri-ko-wo (care-taker,
203 Among the “others”, I have included also two names (i-do-me-ne-ja/o-do-me-ne-ja and a3-wa-ja) that may be patronymics, but this interpretation is not secure (for an interpretation of a3-wa-ja also as an ethnic adjective because of its ending, see Ruijgh 1967, pp. 181). The significance of patronymics is made evident mostly from an examination of the names of officials, who have not been recorded for the purposes of this study. Carlier (1999, pp. 191-193) has examined these patronymics, especially when they are found as secondary designations after the personal name of an individual and has argued that the use of the patronymic as a designation is indicative of a higher social status and the descent of an individual from an elite that is based on the hereditary transfer of status from one generation to the other.
95 koevw),204 ko-pi-na (connected to kovfino~= basket),205 po-so-re-ja (yoleiva, yovlo~ = smoke),206 pu-ko-wo (purkovo~ = pur-koevw = fire-kindler, care-taker of the fire),207 re-ka (connected to levsch = lounge),208 ta-ra-mi-ka (connected to qavlamo~= chamber),209 qe-ri-ta (connected to qhr-, wild animal).210 Military associations are evident in two names, ko-sa-ma-to (kosmhvth~, type of military order or title),211 and ta-ra2-to (stratov~ = army).212 Two names, finally, do not seem to conform to a pattern: mi-ra, which seems to be connected to smivlh,213 and du-ni-jo, a hypocoristic derivative of Dunamenov~.214
As far as the names with ethnic connotations are concerned (Appendix 2, Table 10),215 we find that some of these refer to places clearly identifiable in later Greek and also geographically identifiable. These are the five following names: te-qa-ja (Qhbai`a, Theban woman),216 to-ro-ja (Trwiva, Trojan woman),217 ko-ri-si-ja (Korinqiva, Corinthian woman),218 tu- ri-ja-ti (Quriavti~, place: Qurevai),219 and u-wa-mi-ja (place: u}amo~).220 We find also ethnics that derive from toponyms with a pre-Hellenic etymology, which means that they can neither be translated into later Greek, nor can they be identified on a map. There are two such names: i-na
204 Landau 1958, p. 156. 205 Landau 1958, p. 236. 206 Landau 1958, pp. 170, 195; Bartonk 1999, p. 128. 207 DMic II, p. 170; Landau (1958, p. 213) and Bartonk (1999, p.128) accept a cultic interpretation based on Hesychius’ comment for the priests of Delphi (uJpov Delfw`n iJerei`~ di’ ejmpuvrwn manteuovmenoi). 208 Bartonk 1999, p. 128. 209 Landau 1958, pp. 187, 214. 210 Landau 1958, 231. 211 Landau 1958, p. 210; Bartonk (1999, p. 127), interprets it as commander in a military context. 212 Bartonk 1999, p. 129. 213 Landau 1958, p. 235; but Bartonk (1999, p. 127) connects to (s)mi`lax= yew-tree. 214 Ruijgh 1967, p. 145. 215 There are six personal names in the group of the te-o-jo do-e-ro(-a) that will not be discussed now, because their interpretation as ethnics is not absolutely certain. These are the following: a3-wa-ja, e-ri-qi-ja, i-do-me-ne-ja/o-do- me-ne-ja, ka-ta-no, e-do-me-ne-u, ma-*79. 216 DMic II, pp. 333-334. 217 DMic II, pp. 365-366. 218 Ruijgh 1967, pp. 154, 163. 219 DMic II, p. 378. 220 Ruijgh 1967, p. 142.
96 and i-na-ni-ja, which probably have the same origin, the place i-na or i-na-ne.221 One masculine name-case appears to refer to a wider geographical area, rather than a specific settlement (o-re-
a2, hypocoristic from ojreavth~, “of the mountains”).222
A final point should be made regarding the number of people who have the same ethnic as a personal name. Only the women from Corinth, ko-ri-si-ja, appear more than once; there are
three women with this personal name, which leads us to question the efficacy of the particular
ethnic as identifying marker of an individual, especially within such a small group of individuals.
The rest of the ethnics correspond to only one individual in each case.
The Names of Individuals Other Than do-e-ro(-a) and te-o-jo do-e-ro(-a)
The examination of the names of individuals in the Pylos tablets who can be considered
as dependent personnel (i.e., craftsmen, workers, and servants), other than those individuals
specifically designated as do-e-ro or te-o-jo do-e-ro, has not yielded the same kind of results or
any possible pattern. The majority of the names (539) either involve patronymics or names
which have connotations of wishful thinking or physical characteristics and nicknames of the
individuals who bear these names, or scholars have not been able to propose a satisfactory
interpretation for them.
Forty-five different names out of 615 are ethnics (Appendix 2, Table 13). All these names
refer to different localities among which three, possibly four, names refer more to a part of the
landscape rather than a specific place, town viz., a3-ki-a2-ri-jo (aijgiavlio~), a-ka-ta-jo-jo
(ajktai`o~), ka-ra-do-wa-ta (caradroavsta~?), and wo-wi-ja-ta (oJriavta~). One further name has
received an interesting interpretation: pa-pa-ro, barbarian (bavrbaro~), possibly indicating the
221 Ruijgh 1967, p. 143. 222 Landau 1958, p. 214.
97 existence of a sense of identity distinguishing the people of Pylos from those of other regions.
The rest of the names reveal a very large number of place-names, with an almost one to one relationship between individuals and toponyms. The only ethnics used as personal names by more than one individual are: a-*64-jo (no satisfactory interpretation), a-si-wi-jo (a{sio~), ku-pi- ri-jo (kuvprio~), ra-mi-ni-jo (lavmnio~, Lh`mno~), and ti-qa-jo (qisbai`o~, Qivsbh). It should be noted, however, that there is no indication of certain places being preferred as the origin for particular kinds of professionals, such as the shepherds and the bronze-smiths, who make up the majority of the professionals designated both by name and occupation.
Forty out of 615 different names identified among the references to individuals in the tablets make some occupational reference, although they do not reflect directly the occupation of the individuals (Appendix 2, Table 11). In very few cases is there a direct association between the reference of the name to some occupation and the actual occupation specifically recorded for a specific individual. The occupations that mainly appear among those individuals whose names reveal some association to a profession are two: the ka-ke-u (calkeuv~, bronze-smith) and po-me
(poimhvn, shepherd). For the bronze-smiths only two names may be considered relevant to the metal industry, the name ka-ke-u (bronze-smith), and po-so-ra-ko (yovlarco~, which is connected to ash, and possible the ashes produced by the fire in the process of melting bronze)
(for the names of the ka-ke-u, see Appendix 2, Table 12). Among the names of the individuals recorded as po-me (shepherds), we find only one securely connected to the actual profession, the name po-ma-ko (poivmarco~, shepherd leader). The other four names attributed to shepherds make no such relevant indications.
Among the rest of the names with professional connotations we find only one man named tu-we-ta (quevsta~, perfume-maker) who is also recorded as a-re-pa-zo-o (ajleifazovo~, unguent-
98 boiler) belonging to the perfume industry. The rest of the names do not have similar associations.
The lack of direct associations of occupational personal names with the actual occupations recorded with the individuals is an observation that should warn us against considering too literally or strictly the names of individuals as indications of their professions or status.
Only two of the 615 names are found also among the te-o-jo do-e-ro (not the do-e-ro).
These are e-do-me-ne-u and du-ni-jo. As far as e-do-me-ne-u is concerned, we find him as a ka- ke-u (bronze-smith, PY Jn 605) receiving his share of metal ta-ra-si-ja, but for the four individuals named du-ni-jo, we have no information as to their occupation.
99 Ethnic Origin
Evidence from the Names
As has already been demonstrated, personal names may be formed from ethnic adjectives, which are transformed into personal names, thus, indirectly indicating social attitudes towards social and ethnic identities formed within small or wider communities. In considering the personal names that appear in the Linear B tablets of Pylos, it is possible to identify this kind of social practice, but it is not possible, without great speculation, to demonstrate clearly the nature of the social attitudes behind it and whether these ethnics were diminutive as well as identificatory. The results can be summarized thus:
Do-e-ro(-a)
The names that were recorded by the scribes and are preserved today are very few in number. None of the ten names of do-e-ro(-a) that exist indicates ethnic origin or anything related to their provenance from a specific area or region. This may be considered a clear indication that these individuals were born and raised within the Mycenaean community living in the state of Pylos.
Te-o-jo do-e-ro(-a)
There are forty-seven names designating te-o-jo do-e-ro(-a), of which fifteen provide some kind of indication of ethnic origin or association to a particular area or region. A list of the names with the ethnics used to designate te-o-jo do-e-ro(-a) is found in Table 10 (Appendix 2), where it becomes obvious that these individuals come from a variety of places, not all of which
100 have been associated with their classical Greek counterparts. From the places securely identified
we have a woman described as Trojan (to-ro-ja, PY Ep 705) and another one described as
Theban (te-qa-ja, PY Ep 539).223 With the exception of these two ethnics, all others are not
associated with a particular geographical place known from later times, even when we are able to
provide an equivalent of these toponyms in Classical Greek. Such is the case with three women
described as ko-ri-si-ja, coming from ko-ri-to,224 two women designated as tu-ri-ja-ti,225 possibly one woman called a3-wa-ja,226 and two women, i-na and i-ni-ja, both associated with the same
pre-Hellenic toponym, i-na-ne.227 There are two further women designated as u-wa-mi-ja.
Finally, there is the man called o-re-a2 (ojreavth~), of the mountains.
Among these ethnics that are not securely identified with settlements of the later periods,
two have been generally associated to a wider region. Chadwick has argued that ko-ri-to, the provenance of the ko-ri-si-ja women, lies in the area of the Further Province of the Pylian territory.228 The other town is related to the ethnic u-wa-mi-ja, which Chadwick also associates
with a region of Messenia.229
223 The case of Thebes is especially interesting, if we take into account the fact that the archive of Thebes documented affairs closely related to a cultic center, dominant in the area of Thebes. 224 According to DMic (I, p. 383), and Chadwick (1973, p. 556) ko-ri-to corresponds phonetically to Kovrinqo~ or Koruqov~, but cannot be associated with the classical Corinth on the Isthmus, but rather to a place in the Further Province of Pylos. Sainer (1976, p. 43) admits that based on the textual context of Ad 921, whereby ko-ri-to is the location of 11 sons of the te-pe-ja women, ko-ri-to is a toponym within the Pylian polity, but it is impossible to pinpoint its location in either one of the two provinces of Pylos. 225 Interpreted as Qureavti~ by Chadwick (1973, p. 588). 226 Ruijgh 1967, p. 18. Ruijgh interpretes AijFaiva as an ethnic (from the Earth). 227 Ruijgh 1967, p. 143, 169. 228 Chadwick 1973, p. 556; Chadwick 1977, pp.36-39; Shelmerdine 1973; Bennet 1998. The territory controlled by Pylos appears in the tablets to be divided into two wider regions designated in the tablets as de-u-ra3-ko-ra-i-ja and pe-ra-a2-ko-ra-i-ja (conventionally translated in English as Hither and Further Province respectfully). The Hither Province’s “capital” is pu-ro, generally accepted to be Pylos, whereas the Further province appears to have another major town, re-u-ko-to-ro (Leuktron). Both provinces appear in the tablets to be divided into smaller districts centered on a number of important towns (nine in the Hither and seven in the Further Province). No te-o-jo do-e-ro appears to originate from these towns of importance. 229 Chadwick 1973, p. 589.
101 Individuals Other Than do-e-ro(-a) or te-o-jo do-e-ro(-a)
Individuals personally called by their ethnics are few in number. As we have seen already
in the previous section, only forty-five out of 615 names analyzed have proved to be ethnic
adjectives used directly as personal names of individuals (Appendix 2, Table 13). The study of
the place-names from which these ethnics are formed paints a peculiar image. The number of
places compared to the number of individuals with such names appears to be a 1:1 ratio.
In an attempt to detect whether certain places were known and preferred by the palace at
Pylos for their specialized craftsmen or services, I isolated those place names that appear as the place of origin for more than one individual and then compared them to the occupations for which these individuals are being recorded in the tablets.
These are the following ethnics:
Ethnic adjective/ name Occupation Tablet A-*64-jo Ka-ke-u Jn 832 A-ke-ro Cn 1287 ? Fn 324 Ku-pi-ri-jo Tu-ru-pte-ri-ja Un 443+998 Ka-ke-u Jn 320 Po-me Cn 131/719 Ra-mi-ni-jo Ta-te-re An 209 Po-me Cn 719 ? Cn 328 Ru-ki-jo Ka-ke-u Jn 415 ? Gn 720 Ti-qa-jo Po-me En 467/ eo 278 Ka-ke-u Jn 310
Table 10. Ethnics as personal names associated with the actual occupations with which the individuals are
recorded
Table 10 clearly demonstrates that there is no evidence, based on this particular set of
data, for certain places being preferred for a specific type of specialized service or type of
102 craftsmen. On the contrary, a variety of occupations is found, with most prominent the presence
of the ka-ke-u and the po-me, for each place of origin. It is worth noting, furthermore, that the
different occupations may in no way be associated or connected as belonging to the same kind of
industry or type of service. We find ka-ke-u with po-me from the same place, or other analogous
combinations of occupations.
Groups of People Other Than do-e-ro(-a) or te-o-jo do-e-ro(-a)
A similar situation of lack in specialization of different places of origin is found in the
case of people, craftsmen or craftswomen and others, who are anonymously recorded in groups
(Appendix 2, Table 14). Although ethnic designations are not proper personal names, in the strict meaning of personal names, these adjectives define an attribute according to which a number of people are associated, described, and differentiated from others. Thus, ethnic designations of groups can be considered analogous to personal names.
The designations that accompany groups of people are of two kinds. In most cases we find an occupational designation, which is the actual occupation in which the people are employed. In other cases the groups are defined by an ethnic adjective that is generally accepted as designating their place of origin. At present I will discuss the second case of groups being defined with ethnic designations.
One set of groups that is primarily or only designated by its ethnic identity is the Aa/Ab series set, which records women with their children (Appendix 2, Table 15). The records indicate the number of women and boys and girls, the rations that they receive, and the place where they work. The groups of women and children are defined in two ways, either by their occupation or by their origin. Twelve out of forty-nine[+] such groups are defined by their origin. Although it
103 is possible to recognize that their designations are morphologically ethnic adjectives, it is possible only for nine of those ethnic adjectives to propose a satisfactory interpretation in
Classical Greek and to associate them with specific geographical entities on the map.
These nine groups include two from places that have been recognized as belonging to the
wider territory of Pylos. One group of sixteen women (PY Aa 60) is described as e-wi-ri-pi-ja,
an ethnic formed from the toponym e-wi-ri-po, a place in the Hither Province. Nine women, on the other hand, originate from the town of ti-nwa-to (the ti-nwa-si-ja women), which appears to
belong to the Further Province.230 The rest of the ethnics that are securely interpreted belong to
the area outside the territory of Pylos. The closest place to Pylos appears to be the island of
Kythera to the south of the Peloponnesos (ku-te-ra3, twenty-eight women). Another set of
groups of women comes from the Eastern Aegean, from Lemnos (ra-mi-ni-ja, seven women) and
possibly Chios (ki-si-wi-ja, six or seven women). Finally, three groups originate in the area of
Western Asia Minor. One group is generally designated as “Asian” (a-*64-ja, thirty-five
women), one group is securely designated as coming from the town of Knidos (ki-ni-di-ja,
twenty or twenty-one women), and one group is designated as ze-pu2-ra3 (twenty-six women),
which is connected to ancient Halikarnassos.231 The last ethnic designation, mi-ra-ti-ja232
(seventy women), is securely recognized to derive from the toponym Milatos. It is not certain,
230 Chadwick 1988, p. 83. The exact geographical position of the place ti-nwa-to is rather problematic. Although it is reported in PY Jo 438 as having a ko-re-te who offers gold, which indicates that it was one of the districts of the Further Province, ti-nwa-to is not otherwise reported among the major towns of the lists in PY Jn 829 which has the longest list of major towns in the Pylian state. This could be an indication that ti-nwa-to was not so closely “attached” or “absorbed” into the Pylian state. 231 Chadwick (1988, p. 84) based on Strabo, Geog., 14.16 and Stephanus Byzantius, Ethn.; DMic II, 456-457. 232 The ethnic designation mi-ra-ti-ra is found in PY Ab 382, but is considered to be a scribal mistake, DMic I, p. 454.
104 however, whether it involves the actual town of Milatos/Miletos in Asia Minor or the
homonymous place in Crete.233
The predominance of Eastern Aegean toponyms shows a clear connection of Pylos with
that part of the Aegean, although it is not possible to define with certainty the nature of these
relations.
80 70 60 mi-ra-ti-ja 50 40 a-*64-ja ze-pu2-ra3 30 ku-te-ra3 ki-ni-di-ja 20 e-wi-ri-pi-ja ti-nwa-si-ja ra-mi-ni-ja ki-si-wi-ja number of women 10 0 hither further kythera province province Asia Minor Eastern Aegean Py los
Figure 2. Origin of groups of women in the Aa/Ab series
Chadwick,234 in his discussion of the groups of women, argues that these were women originally from the Eastern parts of the Aegean or from the coast of Asia Minor, bought at these places as local “produce” either from wars or from slaving raids and then brought to Pylos as slaves. Chadwick’s theory was also justified by the use of the term ra-wi-ja-ja (captives) as the
designation of another group of women in the same set. Tritsch235 considers them, within the
233 Chadwick 1988, p.81; DMic I, pp. 453-454. 234 Chadwick 1988, pp. 91-92. 235 Tritsch 1958, pp. 431-443. Tritsch’s theory, however, is not convincing, especially since it does not explain satisfactorily the presence of descriptive terms among the groups of women such as “captives” or the presence of groups with ethnics that derive from toponyms outside the mainland of Greece together with ethnics from toponyms within the Pylian polity.
105 context of the invasion and state-of-emergency theories for the end of the Mycenaean period, as
fugitives from various settlements “flocking into the capital by the hundred” and gradually
distributed to other centers and employed for the benefit of the palace.
Although the status of the women is not clear, at least based on the evidence discussed up
to now, we have to be cautious and not make assumptions. Are the women so named because
they themselves had come from these places or because their ancestors had, or because they
themselves or their work had certain characteristics that were conventionally considered to be foreign and associated with specific places outside Pylos?
In examining the rest of the groups recorded with some indication of their provenance,
we find no group designated only by its ethnic origin in the same manner that the women-groups
were. All other groups had a secondary designation indicating their provenance. Among these
groups the groups of men with the occupational designation of e-re-ta (generally accepted
interpretation of rowers236) stand out, because they constitute the greatest numbers of individuals recorded.
Non-Onomastic Evidence
In the Pylos tablets we find some cases of individuals or groups who are described in
more than one way. In these records the individuals and/or groups are described primarily by an
occupational, or, less commonly, by a social designation, and secondarily by an ethnic adjective,
indicating an affiliation of these individuals and/or groups with a certain place. This affiliation,
as we have stated earlier, can be considered to be of various types, the definitive characterization
of which is very seldom possible today. This affiliation may in fact exist because the individuals
236 Lindgren 1973, II, p. 49.
106 and/or groups themselves or their ancestors originally came from these places, or because they themselves or their occupations had some characteristics that were conventionally considered
characteristic of those places.
Do-e-ro(-a)
None of the individuals or the groups designated specifically as do-e-ro(-a) have any
secondary indication of ethnic origin.
Te-o-jo do-e-ro(-a)
None of the individuals designated as te-o-jo do-e-ro(-a), who does not have an ethnic adjective as his personal name, is found with a secondary designation of ethnic origin.
Individuals Other Than do-e-ro(-a) or te-o-jo do-e-ro(-a)
Only three individuals are found in the Pylos tablets recorded with a secondary designation indicating their provenance. Two men, recorded in the same tablet (PY Cn 328), come from the toponym a-ka-na-jo, a place for which we do not have any indications regarding its geographical position. Their names are ko-wa-to and ma-ro and, from the context, it is possible to infer that they have the same occupation too, which must be that of a po-me
(shepherd).237 The third individual is a-ta-o, the ti-nwa-si-jo (toponym ti-nwa-to).238
237 The series to which the specific tablet belongs records animals, their owners, and in most cases the names of the herdsmen or shepherds that herd them. From the sentence word-structure it is possible to argue that this man was a shepherd. 238 See above note 230.
107 Groups of People Other Than do-e-ro(-a) or te-o-jo do-e-ro(-a)
Only a few groups have secondary designations indicating the origin of their members,
but they constitute also the biggest groups (Appendix 2, Table 16). The major group is that of the
e-re-ta (rowers). We have twenty-seven small groups of e-re-ta, with a certain overlapping
between two tablets in the case of three groups, the e-re-ta of te-ta-ra-ne, of ri-jo, and a-po-ne- we. The individual e-re-ta amount to 523 men, even though there is room for increasing this figure with those for whom a figure of men as it was recorded initially has not been preserved.
As we find out from tablet PY An 1, they are sent to pe-re-u-ro-na-de (Pleuron).
The provenance of these men is highly varied. Sixteen places are recorded as the places
of origin for the e-re-ta, and it has been proposed that these are all places along the coast of the
Pylian territory.239 Most of the e-re-ta groups have occupational or social primary designations,
indicating that they were “recruited” from their original status to serve temporarily as e-re-ta. In the case of the few groups that do not have other primary designations, it is possible to argue also that they served on a more permanent basis as e-re-ta.240
The groups of ke-ki-de, o-ka-ra3, ku-re-we, and ko-ro-ku-ra-i-jo are all found recorded in the same context, that of the o-ka tablets.241 These groups have been considered to be types of
troops belonging to a general dispatch called the o-ka and recorded in “lists” of troops to be
239 Chadwick 1973, pp. 125, 183-188. 240 Lindgren 1973, II, pp. 49-50. 241 The o-ka tablets are a set of five tablets, almost certainly complete, (PY An 657, An 654, An 519, An 656, and An 661). The set records groups of men sent from one place to another. The heading of this set is found in An 657, “thus the watchers are guarding the coast” (Chadwick, 1973, p. 56). This indicates that the names of the places, at least those where the men are sent, are coastal ones. The places of their origin, however, cannot be securely located, since the nature of these groups and their “function” is still not clear. Proposed interpretations for these groups vary from military troops (Chadwick 1973, pp. 184-186, Baumbach 1983b) to tax-collectors (Deroy 1968). Recently Palaima (1995, pp. 625-626) re-affirmed the military character of these groups of men, but argued that their movement within the polity was not a response to an immediate external threat from the sea, but rather a “standard operating procedure.”
108 moved from their “base” to other coastal places in Pylos. Thus they all have a secondary
designation indicating their provenance (Appendix 2, Table 16). For twelve such groups, out of
the twenty-three recorded in total in the o-ka tablets, we have the indication that they came from
nine different places.242 Unfortunately, association of these place-names with later Greek ones and pin-pointing them on the map has not yet been accomplished and we cannot make any further observations regarding their provenance.
Occupations
Each individual and/or group in the Pylos tablets is characterized by designations of
various types indicating directly, and sometimes indirectly, their social status and position within
that part of the population that is engaged in the affairs of the palace and its hierarchy and
economy. The most usual type of designation is the occupational one, indicating indirectly the status of the individual.
The difficulty in attributing context (whether they are social terms or occupational or official titles) to the designations found in the Pylos tablets has been stressed already by
Lindgren.243 In this section I examine the occupational designations and their association to
specific social designations, such as do-e-ro, in order to identify possible patterns that might
indicate that social status was dependent or affected by the type of work an individual did.
Another point that needs to be investigated is why scribes chose to record certain people
individually, but others collectively. Does this practice have some significance for the
understanding of social hierarchy in the Pylian state or not?
242 a-pu2-ka-ne, a2-ka-a2-ki-ri-jo, ku-pa-ri-si-jo, me-ta-pi-jo, o-wi-to-no, u-pi-ja-ki-ri-jo, wa-ka-ti-ja-ta, wa-wo-u- de, and wo-wi-ja. 243 Lindgren, 1979, pp. 81-86.
109
Occupations of the do-e-ro(-a)
Among the individuals, we have direct indication of the occupational status of fourteen
men designated as do-e-ro (Appendix 2, Table 17). These are the do-e-ro mentioned in the Jn
series, tablets that record the bronze-smiths working for the Pylos palace and receiving as ta-ra-
si-ja, amounts of bronze to work with. These do-e-ro, in particular, are recorded as not receiving
their due amounts of ta-ra-si-ja. Each do-e-ro is identified with the name of an individual in the genitive who is also a ka-ke-u. Traditionally this kind of sentence structure has been considered to indicate a relationship of mastership, whereby the individual in the genitive is the superior of the individual in the nominative.244 Nonetheless, we cannot be certain within this context
whether the do-e-ro in these relations are “owned”, constitute property of their superiors, or
whether they are dependents or “employees” of some sort.
The same kind of observation is not possible for the rest of the individual do-e-ro,
because there is no direct occupational context for these individuals. Some new results may
appear later245 from the analysis of the domination relations in these records.
Occupations of the te-o-jo do-e-ro(-a)
No direct contextual indication for the occupational status of the te-o-jo do-e-ro is found
in the Pylos tablets. They are all recorded for the amounts of land that they possess or use. The
etymological interpretation, however, of the term te-o-jo do-e-ro(-a) may be considered as a
244 The word-structure may indicate other kind of relations too, such as parenthood, but these are not so common. 245 See below p. 136.
110 direct indication of a cultic connection of these individuals. The term, however, is highly problematic; the meaning of “god” in this term can be taken either literally or metaphorically and, thus, the individuals can be seen either as priests or other kinds of cultic officials in the service of the god and more directly the temple.246
Occupations of Individuals Other Than do-e-ro(-a) or te-o-jo do-e-ro(-a)
As we have already seen, we find in the tablets people designated by occupational,
ethnic, or social designations. The occupational designations involve specialties within general
fields of craft. Such crafts and industries can be considered to be, for example, the “textile craft”,
the “metal craft”, or the “wood craft.”247 We also find certain occupational designations that may
be connected to cult.248 Finally, a major part of the population recorded constitutes part of the
military “machine” of the Pylian state.249
The specialties and crafts we find in the texts do not cover all economic activities in the
Mycenaean period.250 It has been argued rather that we find in texts only these economic
activities that are of interest to the palace. Palatial mobilization, thus, concentrated only on the
procurement of “central defensive and ritual services” and “elaborate prestige goods”, whereas
246 Lindgren 1973, II; Hooker (1990, pp. 166-167) reaches the same conclusion, but does not venture to suggest possible offices that they might have held or their exact social status. 247 A grouping of the designations according to general craft types can be found in Morpurgo Davies (1979) and Lindgren (1973, II). By craft and industry I mean those occupations that take raw material and transform them into objects, which then become commodities and objects of exchange and trade. 248 The connection to the cult for certain occupations is not a characteristic that can be proved beyond any doubt, but rather stems from the etymological interpretation of the occupational designations and the inability to attribute to these occupations a clear industrial or craft character. 249 We find two kinds of military personnel in the tablets: those persons who are recorded in the o-ka tablets and those who are designated as e-re-ta (rowers). 250 Halstead 1999, pp. 38-39. For example, from the entire set of agricultural products that could have been under palatial control we find only wine, oil, and wheat produced, whereas we know from the archaeological record that there was significantly greater diversity of cereal and pulse crops; the extensive monitoring of flocks was important because they provided the wool for the textile industry, which appears to be of great interest to the palace, but archaeologically we find a “more balanced mixture of domestic species and a wider range of ages than the textual emphasis on the adult male sheep.”
111 anything beyond that was not of interest and, subsequently, not recorded.251 These prestige goods were collected through an organized taxation system recorded in the Ma series,252 which involved six specific commodities viz., textiles, worked hides, beeswax, honey, and two further commodities that have not been interpreted yet. Through other means of palatial mobilization
(such as production under the direct control of the palace, as evidenced by the existence of individuals or groups of people who were directly dependent on the palace253) the palace ensured the procurement of other important commodities, such as linen, metals, furniture, and oxen, which are all found recorded in the tablets.
Pottery production, on the other hand, is one of the economic activities that was not of interest to the palace and is not found monitored in the tablets, with the exception of tablet Tn
966, which recorded twelve very specialized ceramic forms, three drainable tubs amongst them.254 We know, however, that pottery production in this period achieved full-time mass- production and regional marketing but this happened on a local level and independently from the palace.255 The only two potters recorded in the tablets were relatively independent from the palace (they received land plots as payment in kind) and it might have been the case that these two potters were the ones who supplied the palace with all the specialized shapes and finewares that it might have needed for its activities. As long as the palace was able to secure its supply in pottery without monitoring the production, there was no need for it to monitor and control production and access, especially to the most prestigious finewares.256
251 Halstead 1999, pp. 39-40. 252 Shelmerdine 1973. 253 Halstead 1999, p. 36. 254 Chadwick 1973, p. 338. 255 Galaty 1999, pp. 81-82. 256 Galaty 1999, pp. 77-80. Parkinson’s study (1999) on obsidian tools provides us with another example of an economic activity that was not monitored by the palace, but appears to have taken place and to have been circulated throughout the Pylian polity.
112 First of all, we find a distinct preference on the part of the scribes and the palatial
bureaucracy for recording individually those persons whose occupations have cultic connections.
Such occupational designations are the following: ke(-u)-po-da (ceuspovnda~, libation pourer),257
tu-ra-te-u (qurateuv~, door-keeper, with cultic connections),258 and di-pte-ra-po-ro
(difqerafovro~, one wearing hides, indicating a title or a cultic connection).
Among the craftsmen, we mainly find individually recorded members of the metal
industry, the ka-ke-u (calkeuv~, bronze-smiths);259 and members of the cattle industry, the po-me
(poimhvn, shepherd), the a3-ki-pa-ta (aijgipavsta~, goatherd), and the qo-u-ko-ro (boukovlo~,
oxherd) who are the most numerous individuals. The same is true for the various specialists
involved in the building “craft”, the te-ko-to (tevktwn, carpenter), to-ko-do-mo (toicodovmo~, wall- builder), pa-te-ko-to (pantevktwn, all-building) and the rather problematic designation of the na- u-do-mo (naudovmo~, ship-builder).260
Specialists in the textile industry are also recorded individually; the three ka-na-pe-u
(knafeuv~, fuller), among which one called pe-ki-ta has a further designation of wa-na-ka-te-ro
indicating that he works for, or belongs to, the wa-na-ka (a[nax, king); one de-ku-tu-wo-ko
(diktuourgov~, net-maker); pe-re-ku-ta; e-pi-we-ti-ri-jo (ejpiFevstrio~, tailor, occupied with over-
261 262 garments ); ra-pte (rJapthvr, tailors); and ri-na-ko-ro (linavgoro~, flax-gatherer).
257 DMic I, pp. 355-356. 258 DMic II, p. 377. 259 Morpurgo Davies 1979, p. 101. In the bronze industry we may include two other occupational designations indicating specialists dealing with metal; the pi-ri-e-te-re (priethvr, sword-maker) and the e-te-do-mo (ejnte(s)dovmo~, armorer). 260 Lindgren 1973, II, p. 100. It has been interpreted also as temple-builder (naodovmo~) based strictly on the etymology of the word which appears to be confusing in this case. 261 Ruijgh 1968, pp. 116-117. ejpiFevstrio~, working with a type of over-garment. 262 Lindgren 1973, II, pp. 115-116. There is also the problematic occupational designation pe-re-ke-u, which has been interpreted as basket-makers or axe-men.
113 Finally, persons from a variety of industrial activities and crafts are recorded individually.
From the perfume industry, the three a-re-pa(po)-zo-o (ajleifazovo~, perfume-boiler) men are
recorded individually; there is one a-to-po-ko (ajrtokovpo~, baker); one individual with some
association to honey, me-ri-te-wo (meliteuv~); one potter, ke-ra-me-u (kerameuv~); one physician,
i-ja-te (ijathvr); and there are, finally, some occupations that cannot be securely interpreted or
contextualized, such as the e-to-wo-ko (ejntourgov~, an armorer or one “working in the interior”),
o-pi-te-ke-e-u (ejpiteuceuv~, one “in charge of the teuvcea”)263, po-qa-te-u (one who appears to
have had some connection to olives264), the o-pi-ti-ni-ja-ta (a supervisor of the shores/ or supervisor of the men of ti-ni-ja265), and the mi-ka-ta (mivkth~, mixer).
Two further designations, po-ti-ni-ja-we-jo (of/for the povtnia)266 and the wa-na-ka-te-ro
(of/ for the a[nax),267 indicate solely the person for whom an individual works or to whom he
belongs. These designations are found either alone or together with more specific occupational designations, such as the ke-ra-me-u (kerameuv~, potter), the ka-na-pe-u (knafeuv~, fuller) and the
e-te-do-mo (ejnte(s)dovmo~, armorer) who are wa-na-ka-te-ro.
The last persons recorded individually are those who belong to the “corporations” called
ke-ro-si-ja, headed by or belonging to the ke-ro-te.268 The fact that the ke-ro-si-ja as a term has
263 We are not yet in a position to interpret what exactly teuvcea is and, thus, what the occupation of this particular individual involved. 264 Lindgren 1973, II, p. 121. 265 Lindgren 1973, II, p. 107-108. 266 Gregersen 1997a, p.46; Palmer, 1963, p. 83. Trümpy 2001. Po-ti-ni-ja is a great goddess of the Pylian state holding her shrine at the area of pa-ki-ja-ne, which seems to be an area entirely devoted to her, and receiving offerings in the same contexts as others gods, such as Poseidon. The designation po-ti-ni-ja-we-jo is found describing alone one we-ra[-jo; others include an unguent-boiler, a man receiving one unit of the *189 (some kind of textile), and a number of bronze-smiths (Lindgren 1973, II, pp. 124-125). 267 Wa-na-ka is the king and he holds one of the largest estates called te-me-no (tevmeno~, temenos) in the tablets. Palmer 1963, p. 83. Three individuals, all craftsmen, have the designation wa-na-ka-te-ro, one potter (ke-ra-me-u), one fuller (ka-na-pe-u), and one most probably armorer (e-te-do-mo, ejnte(s)dovmo~). Of the three craftsmen, only the fuller and the armorer receive an o-na-to (Palaima 1997, p. 407). 268 Ventris and Chadwick (1959) proposed that these are associations of elders (gerousiva), whereas Palmer (1963, pp. 227-229) later argued that these are craftsmen organized into corporations. Lindgren (1973, II, p. 79) attempted
114 not been interpreted does not allow us at this point to make any observations about it, apart from
noting that the men who are found named in the tablets amount to sixteen individuals. The entire
number of people belonging to the ke-ro-si-ja is, however, significantly higher than the number
of those in the ke-ro-si-ja who were recorded by name (the total number of people in the ke-ro-
si-ja is 117 people).269
Occupations of Groups of People Other Than do-e-ro(-a) or te-o-jo do-e-ro(-a)
Next to the persons, craftsmen and other workers, whom we find individually recorded
by their name, we also have people recorded in groups within the same line of work or craft
(Appendix 2, Table 18). The names of the individuals in these groups are nowhere recorded.270
Was this done merely for practical reasons, for those specialties that needed large numbers of workers, or was this a choice of the scribes that indicates the social status of the occupations or of the individuals in the groups? Similarly we need to ask if there are people recorded in groups who have the same occupational designations as those individually recorded. If not, this might be an indication that certain crafts were more important than others and, furthermore, that certain
craftsmen needed to be known by name, whereas others did not need to be. Let us now examine
the evidence (Appendix 2, Tables 11, 18).
In the tablets that record individuals in groups we find all the different crafts that support
the palatial economy. Certain crafts involve a larger number of specialties, as well as a greater
to combine the two theories by proposing that these are corporations of highly specialized, highly competent individuals (“not belonging to the younger groups”). 269 These figures are recorded in tablets An 261 and 616. The structure of the tablet is interesting too; the named persons in the ke-ro-si-ja were written above the group figures that we find for the four different ke-ro-si-ja as a whole. 270 As I have explained already there could exist some overlapping between those recorded individually and those recorded in groups, but this is impossible to prove. For this reason I have considered individuals and groups to be different people.
115 number of people working in them. These facts may indicate extensive specialization in the
particular field, as well as a more extensive control and monitoring on behalf of the palatial
bureaucracy.
At least seven different specialties within the textile craft are found in the Pylos archive.
They all involve groups of women recorded in the Aa/Ab series together with their children. The
character of their work demonstrates that they are occupied with the textile and cloth
manufacture at different stages of the manufacture process. It should be noted, however, that we
do not find in the records evidence for the entire set of stages involved in the productive
process.271 It has been argued rather that we find those specialties of key importance for the
palace and the maintenance of a steady production level.272 The specialties that require the
involvement of the largest numbers are two, the a-ke-ti-ra2/a-ke-ti-ri-ja (ajskhvtriai, finishers),
and the a-ra-ka-te-ja (ajlakavteiai, spinning-women). These two specialties occupy 161 women
out of a total of 187. There are further groups connected to the textile industry, as well as leather
working, who raise the number of women involved to almost double (N=336). The women
appear all concentrated in the two centers of the Pylian state, Pu-ro (Pylos, center of the Hither
Province) and Re-u-ko-to-ro (Leuktron, center of the Further Province), with only a few
exceptions for the women working with flax, the ri-ne-ja (linei`ai) women.
The ri-ne-ja women are found dispersed in several smaller towns, being, according to
John Killen,273 unqualified workers of little importance to the central authority. This is evident from the structure of the records for these women. Only two tablets recording ri-ne-ja follow the
271 Killen 1984, p. 55. 272 Tzachili 1997, pp. 22-23. 273 Killen 1984, p. 55-63.
116 usual sentence structure found in the records for the other women groups.274 Characteristic of the majority of the records regarding the ri-ne-ja is the fact that the women are not designated with their occupation or with their ethnic origin, like the other women, but rather with the place where they work.275 We find a total of eighty-two women accompanied by sixty-one girls and fifty-six boys.276 The occupational status of these women becomes apparent only from the association of the records in question with their corresponding ones in the Ad series.277
Killen278 argued that the term ri-ne-ja (linei`ai, flax-workers) is very general and probably signified that the women were occupied in the entire procedure of growing flax, processing flax into linen, and transforming linen into textiles, rather than with a very specialized step in the entire process. This contrasts with the rest of the groups working in the textile industry, who are specialized in different steps of the transformation of wool. Ethnographic parallels from pre-modern and modern Greece show that the cultivation of flax is not very demanding or difficult. Flax may need abundant supply of water, but in mid 20th century
Messenia elderly farmers consistently said that there was no differentiation between lands suitable for cereals and lands for flax, but rather that anybody was in a position to grow flax anywhere.279 The difficulty of flax is not found then in the growing, but rather on the processing and extraction of the seed and the fibers, which forced farmers to limit their cultivation to small strips or small plots of land near water resources.280 This is consistent with the Linear B evidence
274 PY Ab 745 and Ab 746 refer to the pa-ke-te-ja ri-ne-ja. 275 The formula in these tablets is [toponym (place of work)+ MUL numeral ko-wa numeral ko-wo numeral]. 276 Lindgren 1973, p. 138. 277 From the Ad series that records the sons of the women in the Aa/Ab series we find the sons of the women in each of the places in the Aa series that define these women. There the women have a further designation, of occupational character, ri-ne-ja (linei`ai, flax-workers). 278 Killen 1984, p. 58. 279 Halstead 2001, pp. 44-45. 280 Halstead 2001, pp. 44-45.
117 whereby women working with flax are found working in a large number of sites, contrary to the
other groups of women who are found once or twice in our records.
This is not an indication, however, that flax workers were less specialized than the other
women. The arduous processing of flax made evident that specialized groups of women, who
knew the techniques and subtle difficulties that the plant requires in its processing, were
necessary. This is supported by ethnographic parallels in two other areas of pre-modern Greece,
Macedonia and Thrace. Kiriakidou-Nestoros281 relates that in the 19th century women working
with flax were organized in groups headed by one woman called dragoumavna.282 These women
were occupied with the flax process from the stage of its harvesting to the stage of making the
thread for the textiles. Their work was arduous and demanded patience and skill.
Next to the women in the textile industry we find their children recorded. Different
theories have been proposed for the presence of these children and their involvement in industrial
activities within the palatial economy. Their numbers are significant: the girls number 290 and
the boys 217 individuals (507 in total).
Chadwick283 argued that these are children of young age, probably between three to
fourteen years old, who stay with their mother until their maturity. At that point the boys are
281 Kyriakidou-Nestoros 1965, p. 9-10 282 The meaning of the word dragoumavno~-a is “interpreter, translator” (Vostantzoglou 1986, p. 382). The use of the word in the above context may be idiomatic in the areas of Thrace and Macedonia, but could also signify the role of the head of the group within a ritual activity that used to take place after the harvesting of flax. As Stamouli-Saranti (1921, p. 562) relates, the women would use to divide the flax into so many parts as the number of the women in the group. Each woman would then give a mark of herself to the dragoumavna, who would then shuffle and assign the marks of the women to the different parts of flax. The parts of flax would then signify the “fate” of each woman. The leading woman appears, thus, to be the intermediary link, as a type of interpreter, showing to each woman her fate. 283 Chadwick 1988, pp. 66-67, 91.
118 detached from their mothers and recorded separately in the Ad series, where they were listed
until they were appointed to various industrial activities.284
In the area of metal crafts there are men recorded collectively as bronze-smiths, as well as
one group designated as ka-si-ko-no, a type of bronze-smith. Tablet Jn 431 provides us with an
example of such groups of bronze-smiths. We find a list of individual bronze-smiths recorded by
name according to whether they receive ta-ra-si-ja or not. In the last lines of the text we find,
contrary to usual scribal practice, the mention of three groups of bronze-smiths.
We find, furthermore, collectively recorded individuals in wood crafts, such as the du-ru-
to-mo (drutovmo~) and the very large group of te-ko-to-ne (tevktone~), who alone number 254
men (PY An 218); in the building craft, people such as the na-u-do-mo (naudovmoi, ship-builders)
and the to-ko-do-mo (house-builders); in pottery, two potters (ke-ra-me-we, keramei`~) recorded
together as a group (An 207+360); and specialized craftsmen, such as the to-ko-so-wo-ko
(toxourgoiv, bow-maker), and the men who work within the framework of a ke-ro-si-ja.285
We have collectively recorded people in two other areas. First we find them connected
with animals and the cattle industry. These are the hunters (kunhgevtai, ku-na-ke-ta-i), the horse-
tenders (iJppoforboiv, i-po-po-qo-i), the yoke-men (ze-u-ke-si, c.f. zeu`go~), and, finally, the ox-
herders (qo-u-ko-ro, boukovloi). In agriculture, on the other hand, we find only one group, the
pu2-te-re (futh`rai planters), for whom we do not have any specific number of people recorded.
Food-processing activities occupy small groups, too, such as bakers (a-to-po-qo, ajrtokovpo~),
284 Nixon (1999) has tried to tackle the problem of the children and their possible position within the Pylian society. She argues that the work in the textile industry of these women is incompatible with child-rearing and that the children had to be incorporated in some way into the work and production. The most “helpful” evidence, however, does not come from Pylos but from Knossos. According to Chadwick (1973, p. 162-163) and Killen (1984, p. 53- 55) the children at Knossos are explicitly divided into younger and older ones. Some women there are also found to be under instruction, learning the craft of manufacturing textiles. 285 The men who work within the frame of a ke-ro-si-ja are usually recorded individually and by name. Nevertheless, we find in two tablets records of the entire ke-ro-si-ja as units of men. Their numbers do not vary greatly, and average ca. seventeen men (Appendix 2, Table 18).
119 corn-grinders (me-re-ti-ra2/ me-re-ti-ri-ja, melevtriai, cf. mavleuron), and the si-to-ko-wo
(sitocovoi, grain-measurers?286).
We also have indirect reference to non-specialized persons who are characterized by
designations such as the e-ke-ro-qo-no (wage-laborers, e[gcera is wages), and the pa-wo-ke
(panFovrgoi, of all works) women. There are also certain women that are collectively described as ra-wi-wa-ja (laFiaivai, captives), which is a social description rather than occupational, but could indicate also that the women had no particular specialty in any kind of industrial activity.
Beyond the area of craftsmanship we find also certain men and women as “servants” in the palace. These are the a-pi-qo-ro (ajmfivpoloi), the re-wo-to-ro-wo-ko (loutrocovoi), po-ku-ta, and the mi-ka-ta (mivktai, who may also have some cultic connections).
In reviewing the entire body of evidence we find that there is a clear division within the confines of the same industry and within the confines of the same specialty between those persons who are individually recorded and those collectively. For example we find that within the textile industry certain specialties such as the ka-na-pe-u (knafeuv~, fuller) are recorded only individually, whereas the rest of the specialized personnel are recorded collectively.
In the building craft, we find again the difference in the recording of different specialties within the same craft. The to-ko-do-mo (house-builders) are generally recorded in groups, as they are dispersed in different centers. The na-u-do-mo (ship-builders), however, are recorded individually. Is it possible to argue in this case that because certain specialties were more important to the palatial economy, it required the palace to know the individual craftsmen by name and record them with more detail than the others?
286 Morpurgo Davies 1979, p. 103.
120 The same can be said for the specialties themselves. There are a very few cases where we
find persons of the same specialty recorded in both ways, individually and collectively. Usually, however, a closer look at the data reveals that the scribes in each case diverged from the common recording practice for particular reasons. Sometimes this divergence can be connected to differences in the status among the personnel of the same specialty, differences which may have been based on age, sex, or experience.
In the textile industry, for example, we find that only the tailors (ra-pte) are recorded
sometimes individually and other times collectively. I believe, however, that we would be on the
safe side if we considered the rule to be the collective recording. The few cases of individual ra-
pte (four men) are found in the Ea and An series, recording land-tenure, and these individuals
form only a small portion of the entire ra-pte population.287 Are these four individuals recorded
separately because their status is different, and probably higher than the status of the rest of the
ra-pte?
The case of the ke-ro-si-ja is not so easily explicable. We find in tablets An 261 and 616 records of the ke-ro-si-ja supervised by four different ke-ro-te with the total number of people
involved in them. One tablet, however, provides us with the names of only a small number of
men from each ke-ro-si-ja. The significance of this tablet is not clear. Why did the scribe chose
to record these specific men as belonging to the ke-ro-si-ja and why not all of them? Did they
have a higher status than the rest of the men?
In metal crafts, too, the rule is to record every bronze-smith by name (284 named men).
This is very important in the context of monitoring the ta-ra-si-ja system, by which each bronze-
smith is allocated specific amounts of bronze. Only in the case of Jn 431 do we find after a list of
287 We have at least fourty-three ra-pte, with another four groups recorded for which we do not have a count of members preserved.
121 individual bronze-smiths, three groups of them with a total number of forty-six men. It is difficult, however, to explain why the scribe chose to record these men in groups.
We find bronze-smiths recorded in groups mainly, however, in the Ma series where they appear as not giving (o-u-di-do-si) to the palace the taxes they are supposed to pay. It appears that the entire body of bronze-smiths of certain places is exempt from paying the tax.288 The opposite case, payment of tax, is found in the Na series and there again we find the entire body of bronze-smiths from specific places paying tax in flax that was probably cultivated on their lands.
In the cattle industry, we find that most of the men involved are recorded individually, except for one specialty, that of the oxherd (qo-u-ko-ro). Only in two tablets do we find single oxherders recorded and this is mostly because the subject of the tablet imposes this practice on
289 the scribe.
288 We may argue that it is the entire body of bronze-smiths at each place because no number of men is recorded in any of these records. 289 Ea 781 records the land-holdings of an oxherd, and Nn 831 records the payment of tax in flax. The case of the Nn 831 tablet, however, is not so clear because the tablet is a palimpsest and a significant part of the information that might indicate that this record involves a group rather than an individual is missing.
122 Subsistence
A discussion of slaves in antiquity, and in the Mycenaean period, must fundamentally be
a discussion of dependence, which may in turn be demonstrated in different ways. Especially in a pre-monetary society, such as the Mycenaean, dependence may be demonstrated in ways more subtle than we might imagine today. For example, dependence may be shown in the means that
persons had to procure their subsistence and these means are based on the type of payment that
they receive from their superiors or from their ability to produce on their own the necessary food
and commodities that they need to survive.
In the tablets we find three different types of “payments” for people involved in the palatial economy. The “payments” are provided by the palace either to individuals or groups of people and can be divided into three types: rations, payment in kind (food products, manufactured products), and plots of land.290 The concept of recompense for one’s work is
further attested by terms such as e-ke-ro-qo-no (wage-earners) found designating groups of
women in the Aa/Ab series.
Rations
Rations are normally given to the textile workers (Appendix 2, Table 19). We find rations
in the Ab series291 in the form of amounts of GRANUM (grain) and NI (figs) given to the women
and their children.292 As Chadwick293 proposed very early, the rations in the Aa series (at least in
290 Gregersen 1997a, pp. 46-49. 291 The Ab series is the corresponding tablets to those of the Aa series recording personnel in groups of women and children. 292 The common word structure is the following:
123 what he called the minor Aa set-tablets written by hand 21,294 as opposed to the major Aa set
written by hand 1) are calculated and distributed monthly.
The calculation of the amount of rations per person is very complicated and several
scholars have attempted to argue that there was a relationship between the size of the ration and
the gender of the recipient, as well as the occupation and status, of the persons who receive them.
Chadwick demonstrated that the rations were calculated according to the number of women and
children (with a minimum of T295 2 for each woman and T 1 for each child).296 There is also
always a supplementary quantity of wheat and figs that is related to a formula that appears at the
end of every record: DA 1 TA 1. Emmett Bennet297 associated the supplementary quantities of
wheat and figs with these two syllabograms and Leonard Palmer298 demonstrated that these
“consuming entities” are some kind of supervisors for the women recorded with them, who are
entitled to larger rations.
Ruth Palmer’s299 study of the rations, and in particular the quantities of wheat and figs in
relation to their nutritional value and the nutritional needs of the women and children in the Ab
series, demonstrated that Chadwick’s300 calculations of the absolute value of the Mycenaean
measuring system were the most accurate. Based on this system, Palmer demonstrated that the
Place-name + Occupational term + WOMEN, numeral + girls, numeral + boys, numeral + Grain + quantity/ Figs+quantity, DA and TA. 293 Chadwick (1988, p.73) associated the minor Aa set with the label Wa 114, which reads: me-ni-jo MUL pe-ra2- ko-ra-i-ja. He suggested then that me-ni-jo represents mhvnion (monthly). 294 Palaima, 1988, p. 125. 295 Chadwick, 1973, pp.53-60. T is the second unit of measurement for dry quantities, equal to 1/10th of the first unit which has no symbol but found only as an arithmetic measurement following an ideogram, and, in absolute value, T has been calculated to equal to 12 litres. 296 Ventris and Chadwick, 1959, pp. 156-157. 297 Bennett 1957, pp. 565-568. 298 Palmer 1963, p. 116. Palmer suggested that DA is a man, because he receives 2.5 times as much as a woman receives, and that TA is a woman who receives the normal quantity the other women receive. Chadwick (1973, p. 418), however, argues that both DA and TA are women from within the groups of women recorded in the Aa/Ab tablets who act as supervisors or “charge-hands.” 299 Palmer 1989a, in particular pp. 117-118. 300 Chadwick (1973, pp. 58-60); Palmer 1989a, p. 116.
124 rations the women receive are sufficient for their own subsistence, with the ability to supplement the ration of one further child. The rations of TA and DA demonstrate that they were more than adequate for the subsistence of these individuals. TA and DA rather have an amount of wheat and figs at their disposal to exchange for other food-products to supplement their livelihood.301 It
becomes evident that the women workers and their children in the Aa/Ab series were totally
dependent on the palace for their subsistence, which was regulated in these monthly rations.
Their supervisors, on the other hand, had a clearly higher status, receiving both the rations from
the palace for their subsistence and supplementary amounts that they could exchange with other
products or store and trade.
At this point it becomes interesting to investigate if there are other people, such as
craftsmen, who receive rations from the palace like the women in the textile industry.
Gregersen302 argues that three tablets record craftsmen that may have received rations. On tablets
PY Ae 574 and 765 we find two groups of men with the occupational designation pe-re-ke-we
(plokei`~, basket-makers) and the indication that the record involves 13 men in each case. Tablet
PY An 199, further, records two groups of men with their sons; the first group has the
designation e-ke-ro-qo-no indicating that they are wage-earners and that they are unskilled
workers (twelve men and one son); the second group is designated as a-ro-po showing their
involvement in the oil and perfume industry.303 Even though we do not have amounts of either
wheat or figs recorded for these groups, Gregersen believes that it is very possible that these
301 Palmer 1989a, pp. 103-118. 302 Gregersen 1997b, p. 400. 303 Gregersen 1997b, p. 400; DMic I, p. 105. A-ro-po is connected to a-ro-pa (ajloifav, ajloifhv) and can be interpreted as an anointer.
125 specific groups received some type of rations.304 Nonetheless, we do not have any other tablets
or records that appear connected to the standard remuneration system that exists for the women
workers and their children in the Aa/Ab series.
Payment in Kind
Apart from the groups of women in the Aa/ab series who regularly receive from the
palace quantities of wheat and figs to cover their subsistence needs, we find that other craftsmen and workers receive certain commodities, food products mainly, from the palace. These commodities are not distributed regularly, on a monthly or daily basis, but are exceptional, arising from the need of the palace to pay for random services offered or products exchanged. It
should be noted also that these payments never involve the same commodities as the rations
(wheat and figs) (Appendix 2, Table 20).
Evidence for such remunerations is found in only a few tablets305 in the Pylos archive.
Tablet An 7 records four306 individuals and two groups307 who appear to receive quantities of
olives, and perhaps barley.308 The element that is of greatest interest in this tablet is the
expression following each record of recipients “o-pi-me-ne” that has been interpreted as ejpiv mhniv
304 Gregersen (1997b, p. 400) argues on the basis of four associations of these particular groups to the women workers in the A series. The three tablets are written by the same two scribes as the Aa/Ab series (women workers with recording of their rations) and have the same shape as those of the women, the records follow the same structure (anonymous groups with only an occupational designation to identify them), and they record boys/sons in the same manner (ko-wo); the groups, thus, may be associated with the textiles and oil industries that appear to be of the most importance in the Mycenaean period. 305 See Appendix 2, Table 20. To summarize, the relevant tablets are: An 7, An 128; Fg 253, 368, 374, and 828; Fn 41, 50, 79, 324, and 867; Gn 428, 720, and 1427; Un 443+998, 1321, and 1322. 306 The fact that the personal name pa-te-ko-to is found twice could be an indication that it denotes the same individual in each case but I prefer to count the two occurrences, for methodological reasons, as two different individuals. 307 One group of pi-ri-e-te-si (sword-makers, number of men unknown), and one group of to-ko-do-mo (house- builders, number of men unknown). 308 Gregersen 1997b, p.397; the tablet, however, is very mutilated and we cannot be certain of the kind of ideogram that existed before the quantities that have been preserved until now.
126 (for the period of one month). Chadwick309 considered this expression to be a clear indication of a ration being of monthly distribution (as opposed to daily). Gregersen, however, insightfully proposed that since the amounts and their distribution are not standardized, but rather occasional, o-pi-me-ne is likely to refer to a remuneration that is distributed for one month’s work.310 This fact is clarified and emphasized by the repetition of the expression in every line of the tablet after each record. Craftsmen from the metal craft (five men ka-si-ko-no, sword-makers) are found again in An 128 receiving quantities of wheat and barley.311
The four tablets of the Fg series present us with a parallel situation. Individuals receive
the same kind of commodities as the women, wheat and figs, but the quantities are largely
different. Fg 374 which records only one individual, ko-ka-ro the unguent-boiler, has a quantity
that Gregersen312 has estimated to be five times larger than the typical quantity for an individual.
The other tablets record even larger amounts and one cannot help thinking that these are intended
not only for the individuals who receive them, but also for those subordinate to the recipients.313
The tablets from the Fn series record again individuals and groups of men who receive
quantities of food products, but these products are different from those received by the women in
the Aa/Ab series. These men receive HORDEUM, barley. The amounts recorded for the
309 Chadwick 1988, p. 73. Chadwick’s argument appears to have parallels in practices of later periods. In the Heronimos archive, for example, as Rathbone (1991, pp. 91-102) illustrates, dating to the middle of the third century A.D., we find that slaves and permanent personnel of the estate where he held the post of frontisthv~ received payments in cash, wheat, and vegetable oil on a regular monthly basis. 310 Gregersen 1997b, p. 397 n. 6; p. 398. 311 The quantities, however, in this tablet appear to be calculated for all groups together. Gregersen (1997b, p.397) calculates that every man, of the fifty-two in total, receives a “quantity of T2 of mixed commodities”, whereas Chadwick (1973, p. 59) calculates a quantity of only T 1.5 per person. 312 Gregersen 1997b, p. 399. The usual quantity is T2 for an adult, and here we have one whole unit of wheat (five times as much as T2). 313 Lindgren 1973, I, p. 69. Unfortunately we have no indication of either the occupational or social status of the individuals or of people who are subordinates to them. Only for ko-ka-ro, we may be able to say that e-u-me-de-i and i-pe-se-wa are his subordinates, but the argument is very weak.
127 individuals, as well as the groups,314 are usually small and they have been described as
“handouts”, because they were not sufficient to cover an individual’s subsistence.315 The reason
for the distribution of these “handouts” is not clear to us, but it indicates that the people who
received them were not dependent on them to survive. It is interesting to note that amongst these
people, all men and groups of men, we find not only craftsmen, but also cult personnel and
officials.316
Un 443+998 and 1322 present us with still a different situation: the distribution of wheat,
figs and *146317 is designated with the term o-no. This term is connected to the verb ojnivnhmi (to benefit) and interpreted as “object given in exchange”,318 a payment in kind. The recipients of
the o-no transfers appear to be all individual craftsmen; although we have only for one of the
three an occupational designation viz., de-ku-tu-wo-ko (diktuourgov~, net-maker). The net-maker
works within the textile industry and we may suppose that part of this payment, *146, is
connected to his craft and with providing him perhaps with material for his work.
Finally, a different kind of distribution involves the distribution of wine to both
individuals and groups. The amounts of wine vary from record to record. Thus, in Gn 428 we
have small quantities,319 irrespective of the type of recipient, individual or group. One thing can
be noted; the individual with the largest quantity is listed first, whereas those recorded for
smaller quantities follow. In Gn 720, however, the quantities are significantly larger and
314 Amongst these groups we find also four groups of do-e-ro, for which, unfortunately, we do not have any indication regarding the number of the individuals that comprise them. 315 Palmer 1992, p. 481. 316 Gregersen 1997b, p. 399. 317 Chadwick 1973, p.290. Chadwick describes it as “some textile material.” 318 Chadwick 1973, p. 422. 319 We have three individuals: ka-ra-te-mi-de for a quantity of VINUM 1 S2, o-ro-ke-we and i-do-me-ni-jo for VINUM S1 each. We also have two groups: tu-ra-te-u-si for VINUM S1 and ki-jo-ne-u-si for VINUM S1.
128 distributed to two individuals in different places. Palmer320 suggests that the similarity of these
records to the Fn tablets and distributions may indicate that the two Gn tablets had been set up on
the basis of the same system. Furthermore, the fact that there are only two such tablets indicates
that these distributions were rather exceptional.321
It appears, thus, that different kinds of payments are made on behalf of the palace to compensate the work of the people who are involved in the palatial economy. The payment in kind, however, does not seem to be standardized in the same way that the rations received by the women workers in the Aa/Ab series are.322 Furthermore, it appears from the amounts of the
payments that these individuals and/or groups are not dependent on the palace in the same manner, as completely, as the women workers. We may presume that they could use these
“payments” as commodities for exchange on a private, personal level, which might allow them even to amass wealth of their own, perhaps even a considerable amount. Only the “handouts” do not lead to such a potential conclusion, because of their very small quantities, but we are also not aware of the context in which they were distributed.
Land
The third type of “payment” in the palatial economy appears to be the distribution of plots of land to individuals (Appendix 2, Table 21). These distributions or records of individuals’ land plots are found in the E series. The transfer of the “profit, benefit” produced by a plot of land is never offered to groups. The key-term in this situation is the word o-na-to. O-na-to is
320 Palmer 1989b, pp. 78-79. 321 Palmer (1995, p. 278) concludes that distributions of wine were kept for very few occasions (festivals) and for a very small number of people, who probably were of high rank. 322 Gregersen 1997a, p. 47.
129 another derivative of the verb ojnivnhmi/ojnivnamai indicating the notion of benefit, profit, or
advantage.323
A contextual, as well as etymological, interpretation of the term o-na-to and its
derivatives, o-na-te-re and a-no-no, makes evident that the plots of land that are acquired
according to this “legalistic” system are demonstrations of reciprocal relations of aid between
two people. In simpler terms, person A does work or helps person B, who, in return, transfers the profit of a plot of land to person A.324 The profit of the land is always calculated in the same
manner: in quantities of grain produced by the plot in question.
The parties who hold the o-na-to lands include do-e-ro, te-o-jo do-e-ro, and other
individuals, craftsmen and workers, as well as officials and cult personnel. On the other end of
the relation we find individuals, as well as a particular entity in the Pylos tablets, the da-mo. We
have, however, certain records that do not record any information indicating from whom the land
is given in return for someone’s work.
Let us examine first those who receive the o-na-to lands. We have eighty-three records in
the database with individuals who receive o-na-to, but considering that some of those are double
entries because of the overlapping tablets of the E series the number can be reduced to ca. forty-
three individuals, for more than half of whom we do not have an indication of occupation.
Among those who have an occupational indication we find that only a small number of
the different specialties, examined earlier in this thesis, receive an o-na-to (Appendix 2, Table
21). Thus, from the textiles industry only three ra-pte (e-ro2-qo, ti-ri-da-ro, and ze-pu2-ro)
receive an average of T2 land. From the specialized individual craftsmen we find only one e-te-
do-mo (ejnte(s)dovmo~, armorer), ka-ra-pi; from the perfume industry again only one, e-u-me-de,
323 Duhoux 1976, pp.41-42. 324 Duhoux 1976, pp. 41-46.
130 the a-re-pa-zo-o (ajleifazovo~, the unguent-boiler); and from the cattle industry we find only
three po-me, of whom we know only two names, ko-do and ta-ra-ma-ta.
Certain general and not satisfactorily interpreted occupational designations can be
grouped together; wa-tu-o-ko, the a-ke-ro; ]me-no, the i-ja-te; we-te-re-u, the o-pi-ti-ni-ja-ta; a-
si-wi-jo, the re-qo-na-to-mo; wi-ri-ja-no, the e-pi-we-ti-ri-jo; pe-re-qo-ta, the pa-de-we-u; and o-
ke-u, the di-ra-po-ro.
The quantities that they receive vary among the different industries, but also between
individuals within the same industry. A clear example of this is the case of the po-me: ta-ra-ma-
ta has o-na-to ki-ti-me-na ko-to-na of value in grain, GRANUM 5 T7 V3, whereas the other two
receive a significant smaller plot: ko-do has o-na-to of GRANUM T5 and the anonymous po-me
has an o-na-to of GRANUM T1.
A group of individuals appear prominently in this table:325 the men who have the
designations po-ti-ni-ja-we-jo, wa-na-ka-te-ro, and ra-wa-ke-si-jo. The etymological
interpretation of these designations is clear: pertaining to or of the po-ti-ni-ja,326 pertaining to or
of the wa-na-ka,327 and pertaining to or of the ra-wa-ke-ta328 respectively. Three individuals, all
craftsmen, have the designation wa-na-ka-te-ro, one potter (ke-ra-me-u, kerameuv~), one fuller
(ka-na-pe-u, knafeuv~), and one who most probably is an armorer (e-te-do-mo, ejnte(s)dovmo~). Of
325 Appendix 2, Table 21. 326 See above note 266. Only one individual who receives o-na-to, we-ra[-jo; other po-ti-ni-ja-we-jo include an unguent-boiler, a man receiving one unit of the *189 (some kind of textile), and a number of bronze-smiths (Lindgren 1973, II, pp. 124-125). 327 See above note 267. 328 ra-wa-ke-ta is etymologized as “leader of the laFov~” and, even though we are still not sure of his job description, he appears to be the only one, next to the wa-na-ka, who holds a te-me-no land.; for the status of the ra-wa-ke-ta, see Chadwick (1973, pp. 120), and Palmer (1963, p. 84). Four or five individuals in the tablets and a group of ma-ra-te- we have the designation ra-wa-ke-si-jo, but only one receives an o-na-to, ru-ko-ro (Lindgren 1973, II, pp. 134-135; Hiller 1988, pp. 54-55).
131 the three craftsmen, only the fuller and the armorer receive an o-na-to.329 The quantities that
these individuals receive are generally small and comparable to those that the rest of the
craftsmen receive (average of GRANUM T 3 V 0.33).
At the other side of the reciprocal relation of service and reward expressed in the form of
the o-na-to lands, we find both individuals and the collective entity of the da-mo. Very few
records do not provide an indication of the initial owner of the land. The individuals are
craftsmen as well as officials whom we find receiving o-na-to. Next to these who receive o-na-
to, we find individuals who are land-owners on their own account. These people hold different
kinds of land, ka-ma, ko-to-na ki-ti-me-na, or ko-to-na ke-ke-me-na.330 The lands that they own,
as they are measured in grain yield,331 are on average the 1.1 unit T 3 V 3, with very few cases
that exceed substantially this amount.332
It should be noted also that the land-owners in the Pylos tablets, other than those found
among the do-e-ro and te-o-jo do-e-ro, include no more than ca. 50 individuals. This is a very
small proportion of the entire population examined in this thesis which consists of ca. 5,000
persons.
This brings us to the do-e-ro. We find among the land-holders at least sixteen do-e-ro, of
whom at least eight are known by name.333 The average amount of land that they hold is T2 V3.
The type of land they hold is always an o-na-to, which is given in recompense for service
329 Palaima 1997, p.407. 330 Duhoux 1976. These are different types of land. Ka-ma is considered to be a distinct type of land, as the ko-to-na lands are distinct too, but it is not clear to us what qualifications of these specific lands makes them ka-ma as opposed to ko-to-na. The ko-to-na ke-ke-me-na are generally interpreted as public land, owned by the da-mo, whereas the ko-to-na ki-ti-me-na are held to be private land. 331 The grain that constitutes the unit of land-measurement could have been used as food or as seed to be grown again on the land. 332 Of course, if we engage in a separate investigation of the land-holdings of each individual we may find significant differences, but this is not the scope of the present study. 333 These are: a3-ki-wa-ro, e-ni-to-wo, e-ra-ta-ra, me-re-u, pu-[ ]-da-ka, te-te-re-u, to-wa-te-u, and wi-dwo-i-jo.
132 rendered. Only two cases do not refer to this kind of land, but include a different formula (has so much pe-mo, seed), which again refers to the amount of grain yielded from, or required to be sown at, a plot of land and is an indirect measurement of the size of the plot. It is not clear at this point if the difference in formula holds any promise for helping us to understand the status of these individuals.
We find as well a number of records referring to te-o-jo do-e-ro as land-owners. Seventy- four individuals, men and women, are recorded as holding o-na-to of various sizes. These individuals comprise almost the entire te-o-jo do-e-ro(-a) population.334 The fact that they all have o-na-to supports the notion that people of their status offered services, even though we are not certain of what kind these services were. The average size of the lands they own is T2 V3, which is not very large. The persons from who they receive these o-na-to lands are craftsmen and officials, as well as the da-mo. Very few entries do not provide the name or occupational designation of the original owner.
If we try to examine all the evidence together and investigate whether there were individuals who received a combination of rations, payments in kind, or land for their subsistence, we find that there is no overlap. The situation becomes even more complicated if we take into consideration specific cases of individuals within the same craft who have different means of subsistence, because one would assume that people working in the same craft would receive the same kind of payment from the palace, unless the type of payment depends on factors other than the type of work one performed. For example, in the perfume industry we have three a-re-pa-zo-o (ajleifazovo~, unguent-boilers). One ko-ka-ro receives payment in kind (wheat and
334 I counted earlier in this paper 76 individuals, men and women.
133 figs). He is also found distributing oil (Fr 1184) to another a-re-pa-zo-o, e-u-me-de. E-u-me-de
on his part is found among the land-owners, he has an o-na-to from the da-mo (Ea 773) and one from an individual designated as me-ri-te-wo (meliteuv~) (Ea 820). The third a-re-pa-zo-o, pi-ra- jo, has a further designation po-ti-ni-ja-we-jo. He receives various kinds of products for his use in producing perfume (Un 249).335
If we consider now the evidence for the land-holders we find that the palace does not appear among those who “give out” land. We find, rather, individuals who may be craftsmen or
officials, as well as the collective entity of the da-mo. The land-holding status of individuals has been argued widely as evidence for the dependence of individuals on the palace and the distribution of its estates to people whose services and products the palace needs.336 I suspect,
however, that land-holding status is not indicative of dependence on the palace and its estates.
The o-na-to lands are given/distributed by individuals or the da-mo. We have no indication of the
“palace” as an entity or the wa-na-ka himself giving land. I would argue, therefore, that land- holding is indicative of a person’s relative independence from the palace. He may have to pay and offer products to the gods, or to the wa-na-ka337, but he is not obliged to the palatial officials for a ration or for goods that he needs to subsist. It is questionable whether it was more profitable to own land than receive payment in kind and we cannot know for certain if there is also a different social status that dictates the means of subsistence, but it is clear that occupation was not the criterion by which payment was dictated and that other factors were in play, such as social status, superiority, or working experience. It is possible, therefore, to conclude, as
335 Gregersen 1997a, p.48. 336 Gregersen 1997a; 1997b; Hiller 1988, pp. 60-61. 337 I refer mainly to the Es series where individuals make offerings in the same tablet both to gods, such as po-se-da- o-ne (Poseidon), and officials, such as we-da-ne-u.
134 Gregersen338 herself does, that the distinction between land and ration as payment for the dependent personnel of the palace is determined “on an individual level.”
Only in the case of the women workers, who receive monthly rations, is it possible to argue that they had a low status within the palatial economy. Their rations are regularized and carefully calculated to cover exactly what their nutritional needs are in order to do their work.
Nothing beyond what they actually need is provided to them or their children. Therefore, these women appear to be absolutely dependent on the palace, whereas for other craftsmen and workers it appears, as we see from the example of the unguent-boilers of the perfume industry, that there were different levels of dependence on the palace.
A final note should be made at this point. Any observations and conclusions drawn from this investigation of the subsistence of people come from a small number of tablets. The records
of individuals amount to less than 50% of the total number of records for the Pylian personnel
and they involve only a portion of the entire dependent personnel. Therefore, our conclusions are
limited to those for whom we have records and information, but not the entire population
recorded in the archive. For example, we have no direct indication for the subsistence of the
bronze-smiths. Only indirectly we might venture a hypothesis that the bronze-smiths, together
with some of the troops339 in the o-ka tablets, and certain craftsmen,340 are land-holders, because
they are found in the Na tablets as not paying, or being exempt from, the tax in flax that is
possibly grown in the lands they hold.341
338 Gregersen 1997a, pp. 47-48. 339 The ko-ro-ku-ra-i-jo, the u-ru-pi-ja-jo, and the ke-ki-de. 340 The na-u-do-mo and the pu2-te-re, and the ku-na-ke-ta-i. 341 Hiller 1988, p. 60.
135 Relations of Dominance
Up to this point we have focused on information about individuals recorded in the tablets concerning their work, their services, and the products that they produce and offer, in an attempt to decipher their social and economic status. Here we focus on those who are recorded “at the side” as superiors of the part of the population that we have been discussing.
Relations of dominance are not defined in any clear way in the tablets. We often have to deduce such relations from the exiguous clues the records give us. My aim is to understand how many people were directly dependent on individuals, and only indirectly dependent on the palace, and how many people had such a superior status over others. Most importantly I wish to determine the proportion of superiors to subordinates and to clarify the terms under which these relations exist.
Following Lindgren, I define the following word structures (formulas) as indicating relations of mastership:
1. Personal name/designation in genitive + personal name/designation in nominative
e.g., [..] a-pi-me-de-o do-e-ro […..] (PY Eb 1187)
2. Personal name in genitive + o-ka/ ke-ro-si-ja / qa-si-re-wi-ja + list of personal names/designations in nominative. The names in the nominative are generally interpreted as being members of “corporations” and subordinates of the persons in the genitive.
3. Pa-ro + personal name/designation in dative + personal names/designations of those
“with him.”
e.g., .1 ..]pa-ro ti-ki-jo with Tikijo (PN)
.2 a-ta-ro-we VIR 1 Atarowe (PN) MAN 1
.3 pe-re-wa-ta VIR 1 etc. Perewata (PN) MAN 1 etc.
136 4. Adjectives such as wa-na-ka-te-ro/ ra-wa-ke-si-jo/ po-ti-ni-ja-we-jo342
Superiors of do-e-ro(-a)
We find as superiors of do-e-ro(-a) cultic personnel, administrative officials, as well as
“simple” individuals, craftsmen or people of other occupational status (Appendix 2, Table 22).
We also find the name of one goddess, di-u-ja, amongst them. It is interesting to see that very
few individuals are found in the records as being superiors of more than one do-e-ro(-a).
Let us start from those individuals with more than one do-e-ro(-a). There are definitely two, possibly three or more, individuals in this category: a-pi-me-de and an anonymous i-je-re-
ja, who might not be the same person in every occurrence. A-pi-me-de, together with one other
individual who is found as a superior of a slave, has been the center of an extended discussion
regarding the so-called “collectors” in the Pylos archives.343 These individuals are found in
several contexts344 and, most importantly, they are found in the Es series among divinities and
officials receiving goods from individuals. Their status is certainly higher than the average, but is
otherwise not clear to us.
A-pi-me-de’s do-e-ro, all men, are three: e-ni-to-wo, to-wa-te-u, and wi-dwo-i-jo. All
three are holders of o-na-to ke-ke-me-na ko-to-na received from the da-mo, not a-pi-me-de
himself. The significance of this is not clear, but one might suggest that a-pi-me-de’s do-e-ro did
342 Examples of this group have been discussed already earlier in this chapter; see notes 266-267 and 328. 343 Ventris and Chadwick 1959, p.200; Rougemont 2001, pp.129-138. Together with a-pi-me-de and we-da-ne-u, we find also a-ko-so and a-ke-o. These four are generally described as the “collectors.” The term was first proposed by Ventris and Chadwick, because the names of these four individuals were usually found in association to the term a- ko-ra (collect, gathering). As far as their function and social status, however, Rougemont concludes that “the economic function of these ‘collectors’ remains obscure.” 344 Olivier 2001, p.141. We-da-ne-u is found in An 610, in several tablets of the Cn series, in the Es series, in Na 856, and Un 1193. a-pi-me-de is found in Cn 655, in Eb 473, 1186, 1187, and 1188, and in Ep 539.
137 not provide services only to him or, otherwise, that a-pi-me-de offered the services of his do-e-ro
to others too, such as the da-mo.345
The other “collector” associated with a do-e-ro is we-da-ne-u. His do-e-ro is found among the land-owners, as well as among individuals in the Es series who make offerings to divinities and thirteen individuals who makes offerings to his superior we-da-ne-u as well.
The other person with more than one do-e-ro is i-je-re-ja, known only by her
occupational designation. She is recorded with three individual do-e-ro: me-re-u, e-ra-ta-ra, and
te-te-re-u. For the last two we also have the indication that they work at pa-ki-ja-na, the area
where the shrine of the goddess po-ti-ni-ja is found. All three hold o-na-to or o-na-to ke-ke-me-
na ko-to-na, which they receive from different sources. E-ra-ta-ra holds an o-na-to from a man
called a-ma-ru-ta, who is a te-re-ta.346 Me-re-u holds o-na-to ke-ke-me-na ko-to-na from a man
whose name has not been entirely preserved, ]re-ma-ta who is also a ka-ma-e-we (holder of a ka-
ma type of land). Finally te-te-re-u receives o-na-to ke-ke-me-na ko-to-na from the da-mo.
The i-je-re-ja is also connected with a group of fourteen, possibly more, women. The
significance of the record is not clear to us. Tablet Ae 303 reads:
.a i-je-ro-jo
pu-ro i-je-re-ja do-e-ra e-ne-ka ku-ru-so-jo MUL 14[
At Pylos, the do-e-ra of the priestess on account of the sacred gold WOMEN 14[
345 Perhaps it is possible to suggest even a third possibility: a-pi-me-de might not have been the one to dictate to whom the do-e-ro might offer their services. It might be the case that the three individuals are defined by their relation to a-pi-me-de only for the reason that they worked temporarily or for a longer time with him. 346 Lindgren 1973, I, p.25. The term te-re-ta designates some kind of official. Recently it was proposed by Vanda Kazanskiene (1997, pp. 607-611) that the te-re-ta were men that “hold in guard, keep safe”, “to protect land and people”, or “to guard religiously the country” as they were closely connected to the religious area of pa-ki-ja-na.
138 Even though we do not know the context or purpose of this tablet, nonetheless we note that the i-je-re-ja is the superior of at least seventeen individual do-e-ro(-a). For three of them we have clear records that they were land-owners and that they had rendered services to others than the i-je-re-ja. Concerning the economic status of the rest, however, we do not know anything.
From the cultic area we also find two individuals, both with the title ka-ra-wi-po-ro, who own each one do-e-ro. We also find a divinity, di-u-ja, who is the superior of one do-e-ro. This particular do-e-ro is associated with one she-goat, but apart from that the purpose of this record is not clear.
Turning to the rest of the individuals who appear as superiors of do-e-ro we find that the majority of them are bronze-smiths. Except for two cases, each bronze-smith is associated with only one do-e-ro. These do-e-ro are all recorded for the fact that they did not receive ta-ra-si-ja.
This could be an indication that, like their superiors, these do-e-ro customarily receive ta-ra-si- ja. Furthermore, since we do not have any do-e-ro recorded for the fact that they did receive ta- ra-si-ja, we might be in a position to argue that there were more who received ta-ra-si-ja as accustomed and thus they were not considered worthy of being recorded.
Eight more individuals, of unknown occupational, economic, or social status are associated with do-e-ro. Three of them, a-te-mi-to, e-u-ru-po-to-re-mo, and ke-re-ta, have only one do-e-ro, like the bronze-smiths. Only the man called mi-jo-qa is associated with both an individual and a group of do-e-ro. The rest are all associated with groups of do-e-ro, who receive, as a group, small quantities of barley, “handouts.”
139 Superiors of te-o-jo do-e-ro(-a)
Unless we consider te-o-jo (god) as a superior for the te-o-jo do-e-ro(-a), I have observed that there is no other individual in the records who appears to be superior to these people. Even though we do not know with certainty that these individuals were completely independent, we find that they are not associated with anyone who might have been their superior.
Ventris and Chadwick proposed two explanations for this social designation. Either certain persons became the property of a god instead of a man, or the designation is camouflaging a title and the bearers of this title had a higher status than ordinary “slaves.” They actually preferred the second alternative, because they had correctly observed that the te-o-jo do- e-ro(-a) lived more or less on the same terms as the “free” men did.347
Palmer348 compared the evidence for the te-o-jo do-e-ro(-a) to the theocratic states of the
Hellenistic period, where high priests and cultic personnel were “masters” of wider areas and all the inhabitants living in those areas. Thus, anyone living in the area controlled by the temple was officially a “slave of the god” and all the products of his/her labor belonged to the god and his representatives on earth, the cultic personnel.
Palmer’s suggestion is not supported in any way from the evidence of the tablets. There is no reason to assume that entire populations in certain areas were working and serving the temple of a god, because if that was the case there would not be any need to differentiate those craftsmen who are distinctly described as working for the po-ti-ni-ja goddess. The suggestion that some “slaves” could have been owned by a god instead of a man is also challenged by the presence of a simple do-e-ro (not a te-o-jo do-e-ro) who serves the goddess di-u-ja. Finally,
347 Ventris and Chadwick (1959, p. 124) noticed also that certain ordinary do-e-ro(-a) enjoyed the same status as the te-o-jo do-e-ro(-a). 348 Palmer 1963, p. 221.
140 Ruipérez and Melena349 seem to agree, as I do too, with the theory that the “slaves of the god”
were not actually “slaves” or servants, but persons with a particular kind of relation to the
divinity. I would argue that these are persons of a particular kind of service in the temple and
probably of equal probably status with the priests and priestesses.
Superiors of Individuals and Groups Other Than do-e-ro(-a) and te-o-jo do-e-ro(-a)
The superiors of the rest of the population are numerous (Tables 23-24). They include
high officials, such as the wa-na-ka and the ra-wa-ke-ta, and divinities, such as po-ti-ni-ja, who have been discussed already; lower officials, such as the ke-ro-te and the qa-si-re-u; and men who are possibly military officers, such as those found in the o-ka tablets.
Seventeen men belong to the corporations called ke-ro-si-ja. These are headed by four
different men, ke-ro-te, whose names are known to us: a-pi-jo-to, a-pi-qo-ta, o-two-we-o, and ta-
we-si-jo-jo. Apart from these individuals the tablets record the total number of men in these
corporations, which include eighteen, twenty, seventeen, and fourteen men respectively. We do not know why only a small number of them is recorded by name and this lack of understanding is further inhibited by the fact that we do not know yet what the functions of these corporations were.350
The other type of corporation is called qa-si-re-wi-ja. Stephan Hiller351 argues that it is
very similar to the ke-ro-si-ja, since one of the ke-ro-te is also found as one of the qa-si-re-u who
lead these corporations. Both types can be seen as corporations of craftsmen.352 There are five
349 Ruipérez and Melena 1996, p. 197. 350 Lindgren 1973, II, pp. 78-79. Lindgren provides a comprehensive discussion of the scholarship regarding the ke- ro-si-ja. 351 Hiller 1988, pp. 55-56. 352 For a discussion of the ke-ro-si-ja, see above note 268.
141 qa-si-re-wi-ja in Pylos.353 The numbers of people in them have not been preserved for us, but we
know that some of them received “handouts” of barley. We do not know if the same applied to
the men of the ke-ro-si-ja and we do not know either with what other means these men
supplemented the means of their subsistence, since, as we have already discussed, the handouts
were not sufficient to cover basic subsistence needs.
Other officials who have personnel dependent on them are: a-ko-so-ta, with twelve po-me
(poimevnai, shepherds) and one a-re-pa-zo-o (ajleifazovo~, unguent-boiler) dependent on him; a-
pi-me-de and a-so-ta-o with only one po-me each; a-ke-o with twenty-six po-me; ta-ra-ma-ta has one po-me and two a3-ki-pa-ta (goatherds); we-da-ne-u , again, is the superior of seventeen po- me; and, finally, du-ni-jo is superior of one a3-ki-pa-ta and two tu-ra-te-u. Unfortunately we do not have any indication of the kind of subsistence that these men depended on and no other indication of social or economic status.
We find superiors also in the o-ka tablets354 who act also as intermediaries between the
men of the troops and the palace, which controls their whereabouts, numbers, and, most
probably, subsistence. The fact that certain of the names that are found in the o-ka tablets are
interpreted as those of superiors is based on their relative position in the tablets. The highest
ranking superior gives his name to the entire o-ka,355 then follow three or four names among
which we find also one e-qe-ta,356 whose exact position and function is not clear; finally we have
the list of troops in each o-ka.
353 The qa-si-re-u are the following: a-ki-to-jo, ke-ko-jo, a-ta-no-ro, a-pi-ka-ra-do-jo, and a-ta-wo-no. 354 A set of five tablets: An 657, 519, 654, 656, 661. 355 We have seven different o-ka: the o-ka of du-wo-jo-jo at a-ke-re-wa; the o-ka of e-ki-no-jo; the o-ka of ku-ru-me- no-jo; the o-ka of ma-re-wo at o-wi-to-no; the o-ka of ne-da-wa-te-o; the o-ka of ta-ti-qo-we-wo at to-wa; the o-ka of wa-pa-ro-jo at ne-wo-ki-to. 356 Lindgren 1973, II, pp. 46-48. There are twelve or thirteen e-qe-ta in the records. The generally accepted interpretation is “eJpevta~, followers”, but their function is still subject of great debate. They are probably officials of
142 Family Relations
The final question that needs investigation is the evidence for familial relations and, especially, the close-kin relations of those designated as do-e-ro(-a) who have been traditionally considered to be slaves. As we saw in Chapter 2, slaves in most periods and historical contexts were not allowed to form official families of their own. It was very common to find slaves living together with their partners and the children produced by such partnerships, but these relations were not legally recognized or binding for the persons involved. Often such relations were broken without remorse by the masters of slaves in order to transfer some to other places and jobs or to sell them to other slave-owners. Those who remained had no justification to claim the return of their kin and no means to protect them from such events. Can we find any evidence of the same practice among the Mycenaeans?
Family relations in the Pylos tablets can be identified in several ways:
1. direct mention of pa-te (father), ma-te (mother)
i.e., An 607 .5 do-qe-ja, do-e-ro pa-te, ma-te-de di-wi-ja do-e-ra
.6 MUL 3 […………………………..
.5 do-qe-ja357 women, father a do-e-ro, but the mother a do-e-ra of the goddess
di-wi-ja
.6 WOMEN 3
2. Personal name/designation in genitive + ko-wo (son)
i.e., Ad 690 .1 pu-ro a-pi-qo-ro ko-wo VIR 10 ko-wo 4 o VIR 3
the central administration connected to the o-ka tablets and the military force of Pylos, but they have also been connected to cultic activities. 357 The term do-qe-ja has caused great debate, which will be touched on in the next pages.
143 .1 At Pylos, the sons of the attendants (a-pi-qo-ro) MEN 10 sons 4 missing MEN 3
Evidence for Parents and Marital Relations
The terms pa-te (father) and ma-te (mother) are found only in one tablet in the Pylos archive, PY An 607. This tablet has generated much scholarship and speculation, mainly because
out of the thirteen words that occur in the text, four are hapax legomena and two have not been
interpreted at all. The text follows:
.1 -ja me-ta-pa ke-ri-mi-ja do-qe-ja ki-ri-te-wi .2 do-qe-ja do-e-ro pa-te ma-te-de ku-te-re-u-pi .3 MUL 6 do-qe-ja do-e-ra e-qe-ta-i e-e-to .4 te-re-te-we MUL 13 .5 do-qe-ja do-e-ro pa-te ma-te-de di-wi-ja do-e-ra .6 MUL 3 do-qe-ja do-e-ra ma-te pa-te-de ka-ke-u .7 MUL 1 do-qe-ja do-e-ra ma-te pa-te-de ka-ke-u .8 MUL 3 .9-10 vacant .11 -ka .12-14 vacant
Without discussing in detail the entire history of scholarship on this text, I would like to
focus on information that is relative to the present study. Thirteen women at the town of Me-ta-
pa, organized in four groups, are recorded in this tablet. For some reason, unclear to us today, the
scribes chose for these particular women to be recorded with information about their parentage.
One of the parents in each case has the designation do-e-ro, whereas the other may have the
designation do-e-ro(-a), di-wi-ja do-e-ro(-a), ka-ke-u, or ku-te-re-u-pi. The order in which the
parents are mentioned is not fixed (i.e., father first, mother second or vice versa), but it seems
that the first one mentioned is always the one designated as do-e-ro(-a), and probably transfers
144 his own status to the daughters, who are also described as do-e-ra in line 3. It is possible that the
women of each group are sisters, but this remains to be argued further.358
One key term is the word do-qe-ja found in the beginning of each group’s record. Three
main interpretations have been proposed: do-qe-ja is a descriptive term for the women;359 do-qe-
ja is the dative of a divinity’s name, to whom the women are offered;360 do-qe-ja is the genitive
of a divinity’s name for whom the first parent in each record serves.361 The significance of understanding the meaning of this word, and therefore the status of the first parent, is very important for the understanding of the status of these women.
The significance is made more evident by the following discussion. The women hold the designation do-e-ra (line 3), which they receive from one of their parents. The fact that one of the parents has the designation do-e-ro whereas the other in three of the four groups does not
(he/she is either a ka-ke-u or a ku-te-re-u-pi) has led scholars to argue that marriages were allowed and legally recognized between free and un-free, as well as between “slaves of the god”
and common “slaves.”362 Sigrid Deger-Jalkotzy363 has investigated this issue in comparison to
the evidence we have from societies of the Near East contemporary to the Mycenaean and has
suggested that both parents “were, in fact, unfree.”
It is difficult at this point to reach a conclusion regarding the status of each parent and
understand beyond a doubt the means by which status was transferred in the Mycenaean period.
Where these marital connections legally recognized and binding?
358 Bennett 1961, p. 9. 359 Chadwick 1973, 167. 360 Bennett 1961, pp. 10-11. 361 Palmer 1963, p. 128. 362 Of course, this is dependent on the interpretation they give to the do-e-ro as a “slave”, which remains to be proved in the present study. 363 Deger-Jalkotzy 1972-1973, pp. 140-153. Deger-Jalkotzy makes the valid observation that anyone recorded in the Pylos tablets is dependent on the palace and, thus, not entirely free. Even though, however, she recognizes levels of dependence and un-freedom, she arbitrarily considers both the ka-ke-u and the ku-te-re-u-pi as being slaves.
145 The fact that they are recorded on a tablet of official character to be kept in the palace
archives should give us an indication that the unions were indeed recognized. Deger-Jalkotzy364
also argued on the basis of the text structure alone that the women of lines 6-8 were sisters with
parents of similar status. The opposite picture emerges from an examination of the family
relations of the Aa/Ab/Ad series, as discussed next.
Evidence for Children
We have indirect indications of familial relations in the Ad series tablets. In these
records, we find recorded the sons of the women who are recorded in the Aa/Ab series.365 The
persons recorded are all men, recorded collectively with only a description of the status
(occupational, social, or economic) of their mothers. Together with them, we find recorded also a
second group of ko-wo. The general interpretation of these ko-wo groups takes both groups as the sons of the women workers in the Aa series, but the first one refers to the oldest boys (just before they enter manhood and need not anymore be defined by their association with their mothers), whereas the second refers to the youngest boys who must have just been separated from their mothers (probably upon the time they reached a certain age).
Tablet Ad 684 is very important for the further reason that it is unique in providing us with information about the fathers of these boys: they are the sons of the e-re-ta men at the place
364 Deger-Jalkotzy 1972-1973, pp. 155-156. Deger-Jalkotzy, however, could not argue the same for the group of six women in lines 2-3 because of the large number of women and the palaeographical observation that the first four lines were meant to conclude and summarize a statement, whereas the other entries were subsequent additions. 365 The common structure of these records is the following: Designation in the genitive (belonging to the women of the Aa/Ab series) ko-wo MAN numeral + ko-wo numeral.
146 of a-pu-ne-we and the i-te-ja women from the place ti-nwa-to. This set of tablets allows us to
make two observations:
The women workers were able to form “marital” partnerships, which were recognized,
“monitored” and recorded by the palace bureaucracy, although there are no records on their
“marriages” per se. It is evident from tablet Ad 684, however, that these unions did not also
imply that the men and women lived together or that the parents lived with their children. On the contrary, the palace seems to follow a practice of separating families according to sex, as well as according to age.366 In the case of Ad 684 it appears that the boys are grouped and located at pu-
ro (Pylos); their mothers, too, (PY Ab 190) are located at pu-ro (Pylos) but do not stay with the
boys after a certain age. The fathers of the boys, who have become e-re-ta (rowers) after they
entered manhood themselves, are located at a-pu-ne-we.367 This means that men, at least the
rowers, were dependent on the palace’s will to dispose of them in any way that suited it. The
additional fact that both parents and children are recorded in groups, anonymously, indicates that
the palace is not interested in maintaining or protecting individual relations, even though it
“profits” from the production and rearing of children to cover its needs in a human workforce.
The same practice cannot be argued for the entire population. We have indications in the
tablets that certain parents stayed close to their children and probably initiated them, at least the
boys, into their own profession or status. This is the case of a bronze-smith next to whom we find
366 If we accept the interpretations suggested to date regarding the ko-wa (daughters until they reach womanhood) and ko-wo (sons of three age-stages: those of a very young age who live with their mothers, those that have just reached an age when they can be separated from their mothers, and those of a rather older age, but not yet manhood). 367 Chadwick 1988, p. 87. This is a place known from other tablets, too, (with the variant spelling a-po-ne-we, An 1 and An 610) for providing men as rowers.
147 his son368 being recorded as receiving ta-ra-si-ja. The word that has been interpreted for son is i-
*65.369 The same word is found in other contexts, too, such as in Aq 64 as the son of pe-ri-me-
de, a high official/ e-qe-ta.
There are four occurrences of this word in the Pylos archive and two of the four (Aq 64,
Aq 218) are associated with texts involving officials whose patronymics seem to have interested
the palace.370 Of similar word-structure is the occurrence of the man pi-ro-wo-na in PY Ae 344.
The father is called wi-do-wo-i-jo, whose name we find in three other contexts: as ka-ke-u,371 as
te-ko-to-a-pe (the ending –a-pe indicates that the carpenter is missing, he is absent),372 and as the do-e-ro of a-pi-me-de.373
It is clear that only for the first case can we argue that the father and the son work
together and, therefore, are recorded together. For the rest, however, it is safe to argue that for
certain individuals it was very important and indicative of their status to be recorded with their
patronymic, as signifying their membership in an important family. The same thing can be
argued for the large number of patronymics and, especially, for the records in which these
individuals are attested.374
368 The text in Jn 725.8 follows: ko-ma-do-ro 1 [[po-so-ra-ko 1]] wa-ti-ko-ro 1 i-*65-qe 1. 369 Lindgren 1973, II, p. 59-60. *65 is the number of the syllabograms that has been written on the tablet, but the phonetic value of this sign has not been yet identified. I will not dwell into the specialized discussions and linguistics of the word i-*65, but there is general consensus that the term signifies “son.” 370 Lingren 1973, II, pp. 59-60. 371 Jn 415.3. 372 An 5.2. 373 Ep 539.12. 374 Carlier 1999, pp. 189-190.
148 Epilogue
At this point I would like to review my observations. My examination of the population recorded on the tablets has resulted, I believe, in a fairly accurate reconstruction of the personnel dependent on the Palace of Pylos. In this population I distinguished between different groups of people viz., do-e-ro, te-o-jo do-e-ro, and other craftsmen. Then, I examined the evidence based each time on a different type of evidence (i.e., the names or the evidence for ethnic origin) that has proved to provide information regarding the status of these people. The names and evidence for ethnic origin establish that certain individuals and groups at Pylos were essentially outsiders, but their status varied between those individually and those collectively recorded. Through a review of the occupations that individuals and groups practiced I was able to establish that certain specialties were considered by the palace as more important and that the people who practiced them were of higher status. I was also able to show that there were clear distinctions regarding the type of payment they received for their work and services. Certain groups of women appear to be completely dependent on the palace for their everyday survival, but others appear less dependent. They owned land or had other means of procuring their living. I was also able to show that the family relations of certain individuals and/or groups were recognized by the palace and respected, whereas the marriages and kin relations of others were not officially recognized as permanent and were susceptible to the will of the palace or its officials, who could separate families and marriages. This is a clear indication that the status of certain people was lower than that of other craftsmen and workers. In conclusion I have proved that there were different hierarchical levels within the pool of Mycenaean craftsmen and dependents.
All the criteria investigated and the evidence discussed in this chapter constitute a response to the questions that my criteria in the second chapter raised with regard to the
149 definition of the slave. In the next chapter I review the evidence from the other palatial sites on mainland Greece, Tiryns, Mycenae, and Thebes, and establish whether or not the same social organization existed. Most importantly, I will try to “decipher” the hierarchical relations, if there are any.
Finally, in my last chapter I return to the material from all sites, examine all the evidence together, synthesize what we know for each social and occupational group, and discuss my observations in the light of the criteria regarding the nature of the slave and the identification of this social group in an ancient community.
150 CHAPTER 6
ANALYSIS OF THE LINEAR B TABLETS OF TIRYNS, MYCENAE,
AND THEBES
Introduction
Other than Pylos there are three palatial sites on mainland Greece that have yielded
Linear B archives, Tiryns, Mycenae, and Thebes. Compared to that of Pylos, the archives of
these three are very small and, probably, only a fragment of what must have been originally
produced. In this chapter, I will examine these archives following the same structure that I
followed in my analysis of the Pylos tablets.375 The aim is again the same; to identify the
information available in the texts regarding the status of the people recorded, and distinguish
among them those individuals and groups that might be considered to have been “slaves.”
Before I proceed, I would also like to note that, contrary to the case of Pylos, here I do
not examine separately the do-e-ro(-a), te-o-jo do-e-ro(-a), and the rest of the population, for the
reason that we do not find these terms anywhere in the texts of those three sites. The significance
375 For the sites of Tiryns and Mycenae I used the latest publication of the tablets, TITHEMY, the Tablets and Nodules in Linear B from Tiryns, Thebes, and Mycenae, a revised transliteration and edition by José Meléna and Jean-Pierre Olivier in 1991. The set of tablets examined from Tiryns amounts to twenty-four tablets, from which only three tablets contained information relative to this research (TI Al 7+7c+7f+frr.+7b, Ef 2, and Ef 3). There are more tablets from Mycenae: I examined sixty-five tablets, but extracted information from only thirty-four of them. For the examination of the texts of Thebes I used the most recent publication of 2001, Les Tablettes on Linéaire B de la Odos Pelopidou, edited by Vassilis Aravantinos, Louis Godart, and Anna Sacconi, which includes the majority of the tablets found in Thebes and, in particular, in the area of the building lot of Pelopidos street. For the rest of the tablets of Thebes I used the edition of 2002, Corpus des Documents d'Archives en Linéaire B de Thèbes (1-433), edited by the same authors as the 2001 volume. The set of tablets that I examined (I did not examine the texts on pottery and on sealings) consisted of 360 tablets, which were analyzed in 416 records (one record for each individual or group of people).
151 of this fact is great, but I will discuss it in more detail below in evaluating the results of the examination that follows.
Tiryns
Individuals
We have only two individuals recorded in the texts of Tiryns. They are both found in the same series (Ef), which records the land-holdings of people in Tiryns. Both tablets are mutilated and, thus, substantial information escapes us.
The first person (TI Ef 2) is a man whose occupational designation is known; he is a qo- u-ko-ro (boukovlo~, an oxherd). His name was probably recorded, but it was in the part that was broken off from the tablet. Next to him we find the enigmatic syllabogram DA with the numeral
1 right afterwards. The significance of this DA is still not clear to us.376 Louis Godart and Jean-
Pierre Olivier,377 who published the material, argued, based on similar finds from Pylos and
Knossos,378 that DA is an abbreviation for davmarte~ interpreted as a term describing the total number of all the land parcels that an individual holds. As a result this text records the extent and size of the land-holdings of one person alone, the qo-u-ko-ro.
376 Ruijgh 1987, pp. 299-322. The syllabogram DA is an abbreviation found mainly in the A series of Pylos and Knossos together with the women-workers recorded with their children and the rations that they receive for their work. In these tablets, DA (together with another syllabogram/abbreviation, TA) has been interpreted as signifying the supervisor of these women. There are, however, some further instances in the texts that cannot be interpreted so easily. 377 Godart and Olivier 1975, p. 44-46. 378 Godart and Olivier 1975, p. 45-46. Apart from the instances of DA in the A series indicating very clearly that it refers to a superior monitoring the work of the groups recorded, we find the abbreviation also on tablets An 830.6, 9 and En 609.1 of Pylos and tablets Uf 835, Uf 1031, among others, of Knossos. The context in these cases appears to be entirely different from that of the A series and demands further interpretation.
152 The second record involves most probably a woman designated as di-ko-na-re-ja. The
term is an hapax legomenon and its interpretation is not yet certain.379 The interpretation,
furthermore, of the term is very difficult whether we argue based on the etymology of the word
or the context of the text. It is impossible, thus, to make inferences regarding the occupation or
any other aspect of the social status of this person.
The only evidence that we have and need to discuss is the fact that both these individuals
are land-holders (Appendix 3, Table 1). The oxherd is recorded for the seed that he owns,380
which amounts to GRAIN 6. The woman holds ke-ke-me[-na ko-to-na, but the amount of land
that she owns has not been preserved to date. The records do not provide any indication whether
the land was given to them by other individuals or the palace and, at least in the oxherd’s record,
there is no space for this kind of information to have been recorded if necessary. It should be
noted also that these are the only records in Tiryns that involve land-holding and we cannot even
be certain that similar transactions, such as the o-na-to at Pylos, existed. Subsequently, it is
difficult to evaluate the significance of this information regarding the social status of these
individuals as opposed to others who were most probably recorded, but their records were never
recovered.
379 DMic I, p. 174; Godart and Olivier (1975, p. 49-50) note the difficulty and the possibility that the term may be a feminine personal name, or a feminine occupational term. Lejeune, (1997b, pp. 192-193) argued, based on the probable correspondence of the word to the Pylian masculine personal name di-ko-na-ro, that it might be a possessive adjective designating the women that belong to a man named di-ko-na-ro in Tiryns. Killen (1979, p. 179) argues that the term is in the plural and designates a group of women-workers, but it should be noted against this argument that a group in the context of the E series and as land-holders is highly irregular if we compare it to the extensive records that we have from Pylos. 380 The measurement for land is the same in Tiryns as is in Pylos and is expressed in the amount of GRAIN that a plot of land produces.
153 Groups of People
We have information for six groups of people at Tiryns and they all come from the same
tablet, TI Al 7+7c+7f+frr.+7b.381 The entire record was a list of different groups of men and the
number of men in them (Appendix 3, Table 2).382 We have indications for at least nine groups,
but more may have been recorded once in this list.383 If we attempt to discuss the information
that we are provided with, we see that the designation of only one group has been preserved in its entirety. The rest of the designations are fragmentary or have not been preserved at all.384
The one word that is preserved in its entirety presents us with a good view of the difficulties that we are faced with in attempting to interpret this text, e-wo-ro-qe (l. 12). The
word follows the grammatical form of some of the other words in the text ending in –qe. This ending in Mycenaean is the copulative of later Greek –te, placed at the end of words that have similar grammatical and syntactical nature. Five such words are found in the text, but although they are all in the nominative, it is not certain if they are all in the plural or the singular; it is certain that the first three words are in the plural because they are followed by the ideogram for
MAN and a numeral, but the other two words (including e-wo-ro-qe) do not have a numeral preserved and do not clarify whether they designate an individual alone or a group of men.385
381 The tablet was found broken in eight fragments, of which only five had writing. Only these fragments are discussed here. 382 It is possible, however, that certain entries may not involve groups, but individuals. This uncertainty stems from the fact that we do not have preserved for all of the entries the number of people next to the ideogram for MAN, indicating how many men were in a group. 383 It should be noted also that the tablet is broken on the upper part, clearly indicating that there were more groups and/or individuals recorded and perhaps also a title regarding the function of this particular list. Godart, Killen, and Olivier (1983, p. 416) estimate that only a fourth of the original text has been preserved. 384 The level of their preservation ranges from only one syllabogram to almost the entire word. 385 Godart, Killen, and Olivier 1983, p. 417.
154 The etymological interpretation of the words is equally difficult and does not provide us with any
further information.386
Another word, preserved almost in its entirety, is ]ra-to-po-ro (l.7), a group of at least
seven men. This may be restored as ka-]ra-to-po-ro (kalaqofovroi, basket carriers), but this etymological interpretation is not absolutely certain.387 The ending of the word leads us to
compare it with terms such as ka-ra-wi-po-ro (klaFifovro~, key-bearer) and di-pte-ra-po-ro
(difqerafovro~, hide-wearer), which are found in Pylos; there both have cultic associations, but
the parallelism is very risky considering that there are also personal names that have the same
ending.388 The context, again, does not provide us with any indications concerning the context of
these groups’ work or their social status.
Finally, we do not have any indication regarding the means of subsistence of these groups
nor any information as to the existence of someone who was superior to them or monitored their
work.
The fragmentary nature of the Tiryns tablets, as well as the very small number of tablets
recovered at the site, prohibits us from making any observations regarding even the few
individuals and groups that we actually have recorded. Keeping in mind the number of tablets
recovered at Pylos, the case of Tiryns appears very incomplete and the evidence too random to
lead to any concrete observations regarding social hierarchy.
386 Godart, Killen, and Olivier (1983, p. 418) propose the interpretation eujrwv~ (mould). 387 There is a parallel for this word in the same degree of preservation at Knossos, but there too the context of the record is totally lost. 388 Godart, Killen, and Olivier 1983, p. 418.
155 Mycenae
Population Census
The records recovered at the site of Mycenae are more abundant than in Tiryns and provide a range of different kinds of information that may prove helpful in understanding the social hierarchy in society’s lower “strata.”
I have recorded 144 instances of individuals in the Mycenae texts, but, just as in Pylos, I found that there is a certain overlapping between different records and that the same individuals may appear twice or more in different texts. Distinguishing, however, these individuals who appear in multiple texts from individuals who share the same name but not the same identity has been very difficult, because in most cases we are missing secondary information regarding these persons (i.e., occupational designations, names or titles of his/her superior, or landholding statuses). To provide a solution to this dilemma, I considered all the individuals who shared names to be the same person, unless there was some secondary indication that they are not.
The analysis of the records indicates that there are 112 individuals recorded in the
Mycenae tablets, of whom forty-three individuals are women and sixty-nine are men. It is interesting to note also that we have clear indication of the daughters, younger (ki-ra) and older
(tu-ka-te), of some of the women recorded. There are only four girls described as such, but this is a kind of information that does not exist in Pylos, at least in this form. We also have a single record of the “son” of a man called wa-ra-pi-si-ro.389
If we turn, now, to those persons recorded collectively we find that it is very difficult to make an assessment of their numbers, basically because we do not have preserved the numbers
389 The record (MY Au 102.1) has the form wa-ra-pi-si-ro i-jo-qe VIR 2 (=wa-ra-pi-si-ro and [his] son MEN 2).
156 of the people in these groups. The only exception consists of two groups of bread-makers (a-to- po-qo, ajrtokovpo~) both in MY Au 102 with two and three members respectively.390 The rest of the groups that we find in the texts do not provide any indication of the number of their
“members”, but if we restore the minimum number of people possibly belonging to each group
(that is two persons per group) we arrive at a figure of nineteen men, and twenty-seven men if we add the two groups of a-to-po-qo.
Inidividuals Groups of people Men 68 19[+ Women 39 8 Children Girls 4 0 Boys 1 0 Total 112 27[+ Grand total 139[+
Table 11. The number of people recorded individually or collectively in the Mycenae tablets
The figure is very small in comparison to that calculated for the site of Pylos, but is consistent with the very small number of tablets recovered at Mycenae.391 The limited number of tablets may be also a reflection of the type of archives that we find in the particular findspots at
Mycenae.
390 The group with the three a-to-po-qo has also a secondary designation of o-ri-ko, which has been interpreted as the adjective ojlivgo~ (small, young, of lesser status?), but the exact meaning in Mycenaean Greek escapes us. The other group has presented an even greater problem. The adjective ke-re-no that qualifies the two a-to-po-qo has been considered to be a masculine personal name (Gerh`no~) by Chadwick (1973, p. 553), who has argued also that the numeral two in the end of the record was a scribal mistake. On the other hand, Morpurgo (1963) and Lingren (1973, p. 206; based on Morpurgo) consider it to be the nominative dual of an adjective that they do not define. 391 Sixty-five tablets were found in Mycenae, the majority of which was found in an area just outside the acropolis, in the House of the Oil Merchant, the House of the Sphinxes, and the West House. The only area that yielded tablets within the Acropolis is the Citadel House, but they are very few in numbers.
157 Onomastics
We find at Mycenae that the names of all individuals recorded in the tablets have been
preserved. This makes the analysis of the names representative of the entire part of the
population that is recorded individually in the texts. Following the same method that we used for
the Pylos texts, I divided the names (108 names) into four categories based on their etymological
interpretation: ethnics, occupations, other (nicknames, names showing wishful thinking, names of physical characteristics and others), and names for which no satisfactory interpretation has been proposed.
70
65
60
55
50
45
40
35
30 percentage 25
20
15
10
5
0 occupations no interpretation ethnics other
Figure 3. Percentages of the four different categories of personal names at Mycenae
158 Ethnics as Personal Names
Ethnics used for names constitute a very significant kind of information because they may, to some degree,392 indicate that the individuals who use them are of a particular “outsider” status that is announced in this way, is kept vivid in memories, and affect the social relations of those individuals. Similarly, occupations used as personal names of individuals may be significant for the status of these individuals and the way they are viewed and confronted by the rest of the members of the society.
In Mycenae, we find only seven ethnics used as personal names (Appendix 3, Table 3).393
Three of them are of special interest for the reason that they derive from place-names that are situated within the territory controlled by the palace of Pylos at Messenia. The ethnic a-ke-re-wi- jo derives from the place-name a-ke-re-wa, which is one of the major towns of the Hither
Province394 recorded in the list of the nine major towns of the Pylian state (PY Jn 829).395 The ethnic pi-we-ri-di, the name of a woman at Mycenae, is also found in Pylos as a masculine personal name in the form of pi-we-ri-ja-ta and derives from the toponym pi-we-re.396 Pi-we-re is situated in the Hither Province also and is one of the places were a group of seven women with two boys is situated.397 Finally, the ethnic wa-a2-ta, the personal name of an a-to-po-qo
392 Ethnics as personal names may indicate the place of origin of a certain individual, but we have to keep in mind, as noted above, that personal names are often passed on from one generation to the other as family names. 393 a-ke-re-wi-jo, a-si-wi-jo, e-ke-ne, ko-ma-ta, pi-we-ri-di, wa-a2-ta, za-ku-si-jo. Ruijgh (1967, p. 152) has argued that there is one further name that may be an ethnic: qa-ra-si-jo (Praivsio~, which is attested later in Crete). Ruijgh, however, notes that it could also be a patronymic from the name qa-ra-i-so, which is also found in the Knossos tablets (Kn V 466.1). 394 On the meaning of Hither and Further Province, see above note 228. 395 Sainer 1976, pp. 31-32. 396 Seiner 1976, p. 50. 397 The women are probably working in the textile industry as ri-ne-ja (flax-workers); this observation is based on the word structure of the record and the fact that the women are designated only by the place where they work. This recording practice was identified by Killen (1984) as taking place primarily, if not only, in the case of women working as ri-ne-ja.
159 (ajrtokovpo~, bakers), is found in Pylos as producing 10 units of flax (PY Na 1009) and as the place where ten po-ku-ta398 are working (PY An 207+360). The exact geographical position of the site is not clear, but is certainly within the Pylian territory and control, since it is recorded for paying tax in the form of flax.
Two other ethnics belong to the area outside mainland Greece. The name a-si-wi-jo is a derivative of a-si-wi-ja, which has been interpreted as “Asian.”399 The name za-ku-si-jo, on the other hand, is an ethnic adjective from Zakynthos, the island in the Ionian Sea to the west of mainland Greece.400
Finally, I would like to discuss, together with the ethnic adjectives, two further names.
These are the names ko-ma-ta (kwmhvth~/villager)401 and e-ke-ne (ejggenhv~, local).402 The adjectives are not typical ethnics, because they are not derivatives of place-names, but rather descriptive terms or nick-names based on the general provenance of the two men. The first, if it is the word for villager, demonstrates that the ideological distinction between large or palatial settlements and smaller settlements or villagers existed in a very clear way in this period. The second name indicates also the existence of an ideology that clearly distinguishes between locals and outsiders, foreigners, but it indicates also a distinction among “insiders”, because it was not all “insiders” that were called e-ke-ne, but only a single individual. This is especially important in establishing that in the Mycenaean period there were ideologies of differentiation based on origin and ethnicity, even though we cannot define the exact value that was put to each one of
398 Lindgren 1973, II, p. 118. po-ku-ta is an occupational term designating a group of ten men in tablet PY An 207+360. No satisfactory interpretation has been proposed to date. 399 Chadwick (1973, pp. 534-535) gives the term an even more precise geographical context “Lydian”; Seiner 1976, p. 34. 400 Seiner 1976, p. 61; the adjective is found also in Pylos describing a type of wheel (PY Sa 751 and Sa 787). 401 Bartonk 1999, p. 126. The term can also be interpreted as komhvth~/long-haired, which should be kept in mind in the process of making any final observations. 402 Bartonk 1999, p. 125.
160 these terms (we do not know if the reason of differentiating is merely practical or if it had further social implications, ascribing lower social status to “outsiders”).403
It would be interesting at this point to examine whether the ethnics of these men are associated with particular characteristics of their status and, most prominently, their occupational status. We are faced, however, with the difficulty of dealing with “fragmentary” information from the texts and, thus, our observations are greatly limited. Only two of the men with ethnics as personal names, e-ke-ne and wa-a2-ta, have indications of their occupational status; they are both a-to-po-qo (ajrtokovpoi, bakers), but it appears that there is no direct link between their occupation and their origin. In the case of wa-a2-ta, especially, which is a name formed from a toponym at Pylos, we do not have any knowledge of professional specialties practiced on that site other than flax cultivation and working. Consequently, we cannot argue that they came to work at Mycenae because the place where they came from was known for its specialized bakers.
Occupational Terms as Personal Names
Occupational terms used as personal names or nicknames may be associated with a cultural practice of indirectly, but very clearly, ascribing and communicating social status. At
Mycenae we find five such cases among the individuals recorded in the archive (Appendix 3,
Table 4). It is also interesting to note that each case is unique as far as the type of occupation that is used as a personal name. One man is called a-ko-ro-ta (ajgrovth~, farmer) (MY Go 610 and Oe
115); one is called ka-ke-u (calkeuv~, bronze-smith); one further is a-to-po-qo (ajrtokovpo~, baker/bread-maker); one more is a ke-ra-me-u (kerameuv~, potter); and finally there is one who is called e-ke-ro[, which is associated with the later Greek word for wages (e{gcera) (MY Au
403 It would be of great interest if there were more names preserved and, amongst them, names with the opposite connotation of “foreigner” or “city person.”
161 609+frr).404 Compared to the total number of names found at Mycenae the occupational terms
used as personal names are very few. Nonetheless, they are very significant.
The fact that five individuals, out of the ca. 300 persons recorded, are named, defined and
recognized by their occupations alone is direct evidence that they were conspicuous in the community for their jobs. One would assume that in order for a person to be known for his job,
this job should be unique within the community where this person lives; otherwise, the
functional value of the name as a personal marker would be negated. The only
occupation/personal name that does not conform to this assumption is the personal name a-to-po-
qo. In his case, it is not just one man in Mycenae who works as a-to-po-qo, but, on the contrary,
we find at least seventeen others, who worked as such and were recorded by their name, and
another five who were recorded in two groups of two and three men respectively.
Ethnic Origin
Individuals-Groups of People
Contrary to the situation in Pylos, where in some records ethnics were used in a
secondary position in the sentence to indicate the place of origin of individuals, in Mycenae we
do not find the same practice. No individual has such an indication. This observation might be
interpreted as a lack at Mycenae of the kind of mobility that we find at Pylos, with groups and
individuals being constantly moved around.
Among the groups we find a similar situation. There is only one group of women (with
an unknown number of women in it) who are recorded as pi-we-ri-si, the women from pi-we-re
404 Bartonk 1999, pp. 125-126.
162 (MY Fo 101). As it was discussed above, pi-we-re is a place within the territory of Pylos. It should also be noted that this place is recorded at both sites as the origin of a group of women with no other occupational designation. In the case of Pylos, it is highly possible that the women are ri-ne-ja (linei`ai, flax-workers); perhaps the same can be argued for the women at Mycenae.
The rest of the text in the tablet of the pi-we-ri-si women includes records of two further groups: a group of e-ro-pa-ke-ja and a group of a-ke-ti-ri-ja (ajskhvtriai, finishers). Both groups work within the textile industry.405 It is very possible, therefore, that the third group of the tablet, pi-
we-ri-si, is also working in the textiles. This is a very important indication, also, for associating a
particular place with a specific type of services that its people specialize in and they are wanted
and called for by different sites to cover their needs. Perhaps this is an indication of “exchanges”
between different palatial sites of people working in the textile industry.406
405 DMic I, pp. 248-248. The interpretation of a-ke-ti-ri-ja as ajskhvtria, finisher, is certain, but the interpretation of e-ro-pa-ke-ja is still not satisfactory. It is generally agreed that this is the term signifying a type of work within the textile industry, but the exact nature of this work eludes us. 406 The text could also reflect, of course, a casual or chance movement of a certain group of women; a lack of other evidence of this kind should keep us from generalizing, based on this one case, concerning the entire Mycenaean textile industry.
163 Occupations
Individuals
We have direct407 indications of the occupational status of very few individuals compared
to the total number of individuals recorded in the tablets at Mycenae (Appendix 3, Table 5). We have already discussed five of these individuals because they used as their personal name the
type of their occupation. These men included a farmer, a bronze-smith, a potter, and a baker;
they are specialized craftsmen and workers in different types of economic activities - the metal
industry, pottery, farming/agriculture, and food production. We also have a unique case of a man
who is not specialized and this is made evident by his name e-ke-ro[-qo-no, wage-earner. This
man is recorded for the general services that he might have provided in return for wages, but
these services are not defined in any way and they were probably not specific until he learned a
“trade” or because he met with his services any type of need that arose at different times (as a
“jack-of-all-trades”).408
Apart from these five individuals, we have a number of others who are recorded by their name and a secondary designation that indicates their occupation. These individuals are only
sixteen out of a total of 102 men and women. They are all men and they are found in only five
tablets. Tablet MY Au 102 records twelve men in a list who appear to be all a-to-po-qo
(ajrtokovpoi, bakers). The indication of their occupation is found at the bottom of the tablet (l.
14), but there is the problem of how it is exactly associated with the individuals that are
mentioned in the lines above the occupational designation (l. 1-9).
407 As opposed to indications based on the general context of the text on the tablets, which at times can provide us with such information. 408 Lingren 1973, II, pp. 43-44.
164 The rest of the individuals whose occupations we know include a ka-na-pe-u (knafeuv~,
fuller409) named di-du-mo and a pe-re-ke-u (plekh`Fe~, pelekh`Fe~, basket-maker410) named qa-
da-wa-so. Both of these two specialties constitute parts of the textile industry.
At this point, I believe we should add into the discussion the personnel lists that were
found in the Ivory Houses, just outside the citadel at Mycenae. Six tablets were found in this
group of houses that contained lists of individuals recorded by name. One of them, Au 102,
found in the House of the Oil Merchant, we discussed already because it records seventeen men
who are all bakers (a-to-po-qo, ajrtokovpoi). One other tablet, Au 609+frr., was recovered in the
House of the Sphinxes. This tablet is very badly preserved and the information recorded is very
fragmentary, but it is evident that the tablet lists individual men. No title line, that might provide
some indication about the function of this list, is preserved; the last line that might be a summary
line does not include any information at all. The fact, however, that these men are recorded
without any occupational designation may prove to be of significance. Two different scenarios
may be proposed, even though these are mere speculations. The tablet may be recording the men
working in this particular house on a very specific trade or craft which is superfluous to record
because everyone knows what it is; or, the men may be non-specialized workers filling a range
of needs and may again constitute the labor-force of the particular house.
The find-context does not provide any further insights. The tablet was found in the same
house as the spice-tablets (Ge and Go series that record some kind of payment or tax of
409 Lindgren 1973, II, pp. 71-72. 410 Lindgren 1973, II, pp. 115-116. The interpretation of this term is problematic; it has been interpreted as plekh`Fe~, plaiters or basket-makers, but also as pelekh`Fe~, axe-men. The context in the case of the tablet at Mycenae associates the man with a wool disbursement (probably within the system of ta-ra-si-ja) and subsequently with the textiles industry. For a discussion of the ta-ra-si-ja, see above note 197.
165 individuals in the form of spices411) and two tablets, Ue 611 and Ui 709, which have been
interpreted as records of rations.412 None of the names that occur in these sets of tablets occurs in
the list of men that we have been discussing and, therefore, we are not able to associate these
men with the spices and payments.
The same situation stands for the four tablets found in the West House. These, too,
involve lists of men whose occupational status we do not know. Only one tablet (Au 657) has a
title line indicating that these men are sent to another place (i-jo-te = i{onte~, to go), but nothing
else on their status is mentioned. Two of the other tablets (Au 653 and 658) may be part of the
same tablet and for those we have a summary line at the end of Au 658 totaling up the
individuals listed. The sum is then followed by the phrase “si-to GRA 4.” This phrase may
indicate the amount of grain that these men receive all together, but, compared to the usual
structure of other ration lists, this list is atypical in its structure.
Finally, two further lists of individuals have been found, but they do not include any
ideogram in order for us to place them within a particular subject group. One of them, V 659, is
of particular interest; it records twenty-four women (sometimes we find mothers and daughters
amongst them) under the heading de-mi-ni-ja. This word has been interpreted as d;evmniai
(bedding/ bedsteads413 or portable beds414) and initially the whole tablet was considered to be a record of delivery and distribution of beds to these women, but it has been argued recently that
411 Killen 1981, pp. 216-232. 412 Tournavitou 1995, pp. 263-264. I would argue that these are not rations, but payments in kind, because the quantities are large and the commodities distributed are not the usual wheat and barley, but olives and wine and figs as well as two commodities the nature of which we do not understand today (KU and DU). These commodities alone do not cover the subsistence needs of workers. We find them, however, at Pylos as payments in kind given occasionally to craftsmen, but not systematically as rations are considered to have been. 413 Chadwick 1973, p. 539. 414 Ruiperez and Melena 1996, p. 266.
166 the numbers in each line refer to the women who share a bed rather than to the beds that are
delivered.415
The occupational status of these women is unclear, since it is not of interest to this
particular recording. A few facts, however, can be deduced from it: these women are recorded all
together, they all live together, they share beds that they receive from the palace or whoever is
their superior and monitors their lives, they are obviously separated from men, but not from their
daughters. All these facts remind us closely of the women in the Aa/Ab series of Pylos, who are
recorded in groups and appear all to have lived together with their young children.
Groups of People
The image that we get from the examination of the groups of people is more varied
(Appendix 3, Table 6). We have twelve groups divided into six different specialties, but they
appear to cluster mainly within the textiles industry. There are two groups of women, one working as a-ke-ti-ri-ja (ajskhvtriai, finishers) and one as e-ro-pa-ke-ja (both on MY Fo 101);416
and then we have two groups of men working as ka-na-pe-u-si (knafei`~, fullers) within the
textile industry.
Three further specialties appear also: the a-to-po-qo (ajrtokovpoi, baker), the ku-wa-no-
wo-ko-i, and the po-ro-po-i. These are two groups of men, possibly five men total. The
interpretation of the ku-wa-no-wo-ko-i is based on the etymology of the word, kuanourgov~ (it appears to be connected to the word kuvano~, dark blue).417 The dark-blue substance that these
specialized craftsmen worked could have been either a simple blue color or the precious stone
415 Ruiperez and Melena 1996, p. 266. 416 For a discussion of these groups, see above note 405. 417 Lindgren 1973, II, p. 207.
167 lapis lazuli, but the exact nature of the kuvano~ or the work of these men escapes us at present.418
The other occupational term, po-ro-po-i, is even more problematic (Oi 701 and 702). No
satisfactory interpretation has been proposed as yet and the general context of the text does not
provide any help in understanding the term. The text is a list of individuals and groups that give
quantities of an unidentified as yet commodity, *190. It would be easy to identify these texts (Oi
series) as records of tax-payments or payments for some other reason, but the presence of
goddess po-ti-ni-ja amongst the individuals and workgroups recorded complicates things. Po-ti-
ni-ja is also recorded for a quantity of *190, but it is not clear if she receives or offers it.419
In conclusion, we see that the main emphasis at Mycenae is put on the textiles industry,
where we find a great variety in specialties and also the largest numbers of people. Nonetheless,
we do not find the great variety in specialties that we find at Pylos and that we would expect also
if the entire process of producing textiles was recorded. On the contrary, we find only three
specialties (a-ke-ti-ri-ja, ka-na-pe-u, and e-ro-pa-ke-ja); added to these we may include the
women from pi-we-re, who were probably ri-ne-ja (linei`ai, flax-workers); and the pe-re-ke-u
(plokeuv~, basket-maker) if we accept the interpretation of the basket-maker. Tzachili,420 argues
that the palace monitored the activities of only those specialties that appear to be of strategic
importance for the entire process of the production to exist, but I find difficult to distinguish
these particular specialties as more important than others. On the other hand, we might argue, at
least for the case of Mycenae, that these are activities that actually take place within the palatial
site or in the house where most of the wool tablets (Oe series) were found (the House of the Oil
Merchant).
418 Chadwick 1973, p. 559. 419 Chadwick 1973, pp. 506-507. 420 Tzachili 1997, p. 23; Lemonnier 1986, pp. 154-155.
168 The other “craftsmen” that appear to be of great importance to the palace at Mycenae are the a-to-po-qo (ajrtokovpoi, bakers). There are seventeen men working as bakers at Mycenae, whereas at Pylos we find only seven. The difference becomes even more prominent if we associate these numbers with the total number of tablets found in each of these sites: Mycenae with 65 tablets, only 34 of which contained information on personnel, and Pylos with 1100 tablets, 486 of which contained similar kind of information. The relation of the number of a-to- po-qo (ajrtokovpoi, bakers) to the total number of tablets found indicates that these “craftsmen” played a significant role in the economy of Mycenae.
Subsistence
We have evidence at Mycenae for individuals and groups of people who receive raw materials and fresh products, probably as compensation for their work. Nonetheless, we do not have direct indications whether the disbursements were rations, payments in kind, or handouts such as the indications that we have at Pylos. We do not have, for example, sealings referring to monthly distributions such as we have at Pylos or Knossos.421
Our examination, therefore, of the disbursements at Mycenae is based solely on the type of commodities distributed and the quantities of these distributions. Based on these criteria and the analogy with Pylos, it is possible to distinguish between payments in the form of rations, distributed to cover the subsistence needs of certain individuals and/or groups, handouts of commodities in very small quantities, and payments in kind that supplemented the subsistence of individuals and/or groups and were perhaps exchanged for other food products or luxury objects.
421 Palmer 1963, pp. 233-234; Chadwick 1988, pp. 73-74.
169 Rations Handouts Payment in kind Au 653 (+)422 Au 658 Fu 711 Go 610 Eu 654 (+) Eu 655 Fo 101 Oe series423 Oi series Ue 611 Ui 651 Ui 709
Table 12. Relation of tablets to type of commodities- distribution
Rations and Handouts
It is possible to consider the distribution of wheat recorded on tablets Au 653 (+) Au 658 and Eu 654 (+) Eu 655 as distributions of rations (Appendix 3, Table 7). The records involve individuals recorded by name and receiving amounts of wheat. The first set (Au tablets) includes a summary line that demonstrates that twenty people were recorded in total on this tablet and that all together these individuals receive 4 units of wheat. This quantity divided by 20 (the number of the individuals) gives us a figure of T2 per man.424
This is the same quantity as the women at Pylos received as a monthly ration. Similar quantities are found on the second set of tablets (Eu tablets). The tablets are very fragmentary, but parts of two names have been preserved together with the quantities of wheat that they receive. The first one (Eu 654.2) receives a quantity of T2, which is exactly the same as those of the previous record. The second man (l. 3) received a slightly smaller quantity of T1 V2. We do not know why this man received less, but the amount is very close to the quantity distributed at
Pylos.425 Furthermore, even though we do not have any indication that these are regularized and
422 (+) connects tablet fragments that possibly belong to the same tablet. 423 Tournavitou 1995, p. 271 table 21. Except for tablets: Oe 108, 109, 120, 127, 111+136, 133, 137, and 140. 424 Tournavitou 1995, p. 263. 425 Chadwick 1962, p. 56.
170 systematic distributions, the type of the commodity, which constitutes the basic food-product consumed, and the quantity, which has been proved by R. Palmer426 to cover the daily subsistence needs of an adult, lead us to consider these distributions to be rations.
Evidence for handouts is not any clearer than those for rations (Appendix 3, Table 8).
Nonetheless, tablet Fu 711 records the distribution of barley, flour and/or figs in very small quantities. The recipients of the barley have not been preserved, but we have three individuals who receive flour and figs. The quantities are very small and cannot be considered to be enough to satisfy the nutritional needs of any adult.
Payment in Kind
Finally, we have a substantial number of tablets that record payments in kind (Appendix
3, Table 9). These payments do not involve only distributions of food-products, but also materials such as wool.
Tablet Fo 101 is unique at Mycenae for the commodity that it records; it records the disbursement of oil (OLEUM) to thirteen individuals and three groups of people. The oil is of the
OLEUM + WE type, which might be an indication that it was used to produce perfumed oil.
Analogous types of oil we find at Pylos with varieties such as OLEUM+ A or OLEUM+ PA or
OLEUM PO. One tablet at Pylos mentions the type OLEUM+WE (Fr 1184). The quantities for the individuals appear to be small; they all receive a quantity of V 1, except one woman who is also the first one recorded and receives V 3. The groups receive larger amounts, which were presumably re-distributed among the members of the group.
426 Palmer 1989a.
171 Compared to the quantities we find distributed at Pylos, the quantities of Fo 101 appear to
be relatively small and not enough to cover industrial needs. If we compare especially the record
of OLEUM+ WE from Pylos (18 units) with the one at Mycenae (V1 per person, V 3 for a-ne-a2,
and the highest amount recorded being 1 full unit for the e-ro-pa-ke-ja group), we find that there
is actually a very wide discrepancy in the quantities distributed. The large quantity at Pylos is
probably destined for industrial use rather than for personal and this is further supported by the fact that the two individuals involved are both working as a-re-pa-zo-o (unguent-boilers) who
used the oil as the basis for the manufacture of perfumes.427 The rest of the records at Pylos
record the disbursement of a variety of quantities, large and small, “mainly but not exclusively”,
according to Shelmerdine,428 “for religious purposes.” The oil at Mycenae, on the other hand, is
disbursed in smaller quantities than the average of those at Pylos and to individuals who do not
appear to be in any way connected to the religious sector.
Thus, I believe it is possible to argue that the oil disbursements at Mycenae are payments
in kind to individuals and groups of people. The quantities are too small to be used for industrial
purposes, but may cover the personal needs of the individuals or the people recorded in the
groups. Individuals may be using them for nutrition, in their work, or as goods to trade for other
commodities. The groups of people may give us further ideas of the use to which this oil might
have been put: the three groups, a-ke-ti-ri-ja-i (ajskhvtriai, finishers), e-ro-pa-ke-ja, and pi-we-
ri-si (pierivsi, from the place pi-we-re), have already been discussed with regard to their work
within the textiles industry. Shelmerdine429 has demonstrated, based on historical evidence,430
that oil was used for the anointment of clothes and for the finishing, softening, and making,
427 Shelmerdine 1984, pp. 82-83; Shelmerdine 1998, p. 104. 428 Shelmerdine 1984, p. 88. 429 Shelmerdine 1984, p. 94; Shelmerdine 1998, pp. 109. 430 Iliad 18.596-597; Odyssey.5.264; 7. 105-107.
172 especially the linen, textiles to shine. If the rest of the individuals work in the textiles industry or
use oil on their domestically produced textiles we do not know, but it is very possible that they
used it for their own personal uses.
The next type of records that I would like to discuss concerns the distribution of wool (Oe series). Tournavitou431 argued that all the distributions found in the records of the Oe series at
Mycenae were organized and performed within the system of ta-ra-si-ja that is well attested in
other sites, viz. Pylos and Knossos, and involved the distribution of raw materials from the
palace to craftsmen and the receipt in return of the finished goods. The word ta-ra-si-ja,
however, appears at Mycenae only once on tablet MY Oe 110. The text itself presents a small
problem:
MY Oe 110:
.1 re-ka-sa ta-ra-si-ja LANA 14[
.2 a-ti-ke-ne-ja LANA 10
The names of two individuals are recorded, re-ka-sa and a-ti-ke-ne-ja, but the term ta-ra-
si-ja is recorded against only the first individual. The structure of the record appears to be rather
dubious as far as the second person is involved and whether this woman as well receives wool as
part of a ta-ra-si-ja arrangement or not. Equally dubious is the structure of the rest of the records
in the Oe series that do not include and probably never were intended to include the term ta-ra-
si-ja.432 On the contrary, the tablets of the Oe series at Mycenae (except Oe 110) do not seem to
431 Tournavitou 1995, p. 260 table 21. 432 I make this observation based on the apparent fact that the term is not found on any other tablet, but also on the structure of the records and the state of preservation of the remaining tablets that prohibit us from restoring the term on these records, since they do not appear to be missing words where the word ta-ra-si-ja would have been recorded by the scribe.
173 have any relation to the ta-ra-si-ja system.433 Furthermore, it appears that these distributions do
not involve only men and women working in the textiles industry, as one would expect if all
these records involved such disbursements as they are generally thought to have; we see rather
that three different craftsmen receive such commodities, an a-to-po-qo (ajrtokovpo~, baker), a ke-
ra-me-u (kerameuv~, potter), and a ka-ke-u (calkeuv~, bronze-smith), who are in no way directly
connected to the manufacture of textiles. The presence of these craftsmen among the records
with the wool-distributions allows us to argue that these were not regular payments to textiles-
workers, but rather payments in kind to individuals and/or groups of people. We do not know the
specific use to which they put this wool, but they might have been using it for their personal
needs, as accessories in their own craft, or for the manufacture of textiles and clothes,
independently of the palace, within their own homes and produced by their own family.
Apart from these distributions in raw materials that might have been used for personal or
for industrial consumption, we also find a record of a distribution to an individual of olives, a
second type of olives+ TI, figs, and wine. The record is found on tablet Ue 611 among tablets
that list distributions of aromatic substances as well as wheat and figs. Chadwick434 and most recently Tournavitou435 have argued that these are ration lists which consisted of wheat, olives of
two kinds, and wine. I have observed, however, that this is not a typical ration in the form and
nature of goods, as the ones at Pylos; it involves rather food products that even today are
considered supplementary and not primary for the nutrition of people. In the Mycenaean
communities, furthermore, in which subsistence was based primarily in food products such as
barley and wheat, olives and wine should be considered exceptional and almost luxury food
433 Bech Nosch 2000, p. 47. 434 Chadwick 1962, pp. 61-62. 435 Tournavitou 1995, pp. 263-264.
174 items. For this reason I believe that Ue 611 is a record of an occasional rather than a systematic distribution to a particular individual for his services. The same kind of distribution is not found with reference to groups of people or individuals in lists.
What remains to be answered now is in what manner commodities such as oil and wine constitute a type of prestige objects. The answer is not easily found. Nevertheless, a combination of factors may provide us with some fairly accurate indications. Let us begin with wine.
In the most extensive examination of wine in the Mycenaean palatial economy, Palmer436 describes wine as a valued commodity, of which the palace monitored the collection and distribution. Based on Renfrew,437 Palmer considers viticulture and wine making as a well- known practice by the late Helladic period, which would imply that it was becoming an increasingly widespread and common commodity.438 The texts, however, provide us with a different view of reality, whereby not all persons had free access to wine, but rather only significant land-owners with the capacity to ensure that they would have the necessary labor force in their fields to cope with the demanding caretaking of the vines. Foxhall,439 too, has demonstrated that
...] wine producing is a risky business. Under pre-industrial conditions quality
control is difficult. Vines are highly sensitive to inter-annual variability in weather
conditions. This affects not only the quantities of grapes produced, but also the
sugar content and thus the quality and flavour of the wine produced (as well as the
quantity)…. Large holdings of vines, then are not practicable for a small-scale,
436 Palmer 1994, pp. 187-195. 437 Renfrew 1972, pp. 265-307, and especially pp. 280-307. 438 Palmer’s assumption that viticulture begun as early as in the Late Neolithic/ Early Helladic period has been recently convincingly refuted by Hamilakis (1996, pp. 24-25), who demonstrated that viticulture started in the First Palace Period (MM period) in Crete and was systematized in the Second Palace Period (MM III-LM I/II). 439 Foxhall 1990.
175 subsistence-based farming operation. But for large proprietors, especially when
the main form of agricultural labour is slavery, vines were usually very profitable.
Viticulture, thus, must be seen as a high-status operation that produces what is a high-
status or prestige commodity. According to Palmer,440 wine was ranked as having the same value
and importance as other high-status food products, such as meat, dairy products, and honey. For
the palaces, which monitored very closely the collection and the distribution of wine, wine was
the means to propagate their authority and power to the local population through ceremonies and
feasts441 where the entire population was probably involved.442 In this context, it becomes
evident that to receive wine from the palace was an exceptional favor that was made to
compensate an individual’s services. These persons were not ordinary low-status servants or
dependent personnel, but rather significant persons, officials or highly-qualified craftsmen.
The olive trees are similarly a very important crop both for nutritional and industrial use,
but they produce also a very unstable and unpredictable crop. Foxhall443 discusses the evidence
and has also described the olives and olive oil as having prestige-value. The olive trees yield fruit
every two years, in a biennial cycle, with “on” and “off” years. The trees, further, require a
significant number of years to start producing fruit and even more to reach maximum yield
levels. According to Foxhall,444 “if a landowner planted olives on land that he intended to keep, it was his children and his grandchildren who would harvest the fruit.” The yields, thus, are clearly varying and unpredictable, making specialization in olive agriculture inefficient, if not
440 Palmer 1994, p. 195. 441 Palmer 1994, p. 195; Wright 1995, pp. 293-307; Galaty 1999, p. 18. During feasts and other ritual activities the chief and perhaps the elite too offered substantial quantities of prestige goods, mainly meat, in order to re-affirm their power. 442 Julie Hruby, pers. comm. 443 Foxhall 1990; Foxhall 1995, p. 242. 444 Foxhall 1990.
176 damaging. Other disadvantageous factors include the demands of olive crops for a large labor
force. Human labor is necessary only during the pruning and harvest. During the rest of the year
the olive trees have the capacity to survive and yield a crop equally large as they would if they
were watered and cared for daily. The period when human labor is necessary overlaps, however,
with the period when most cereals are sown. This makes it necessary for a land-owner to procure
extra workers.
Two farming strategies were probably employed by the farmers: specialization in olive-
tree cultivation was clearly unprofitable. Thus, farmers probably tended to combine olive trees
and other crops in the same plot of land, and, furthermore, the farmers were probably forced to
plant a lot more trees than they would have if the yields were at least predictable.445
Palynological analysis of the region of Messenia conducted by the Pylos Regional
Archaeological Project446 has estimated that 10% of the total surface was used for the cultivation of olives in the Mycenaean period, which is a large percentage of the land and appears to be in agreement with the above agricultural practce. It also appears from the small quantities of oil distributed to individuals and the very large, on the contrary, quantities given to the oil-perfume industry, that a very small portion of the year’s supply was available for personal distribution and use. As a result, olives and olive oil would have been prestige commodities. Accordingly, distributions of these commodities must have had as their target higher-status persons.
Finally, neither wine nor olives or olive oil were staples in the Mycenaean diet, which must have been largely based on the consumption of cereals, fruits (which are attested in the tablets), and other food products, such as pulses and legumes.447 The distributions of the palaces
445 Foxhall 1990. 446 Zangger et al. 1997, p. 589. 447 Halstead 1995; 1999; 2001.
177 were, thus, supplementing the ordinary nutrition and subsistence of individuals and/or groups.
This supplement could have been put to personal use in the households of the people who
received it, but it could also have been traded or exchanged for other commodities.
Finally, records that have also been described as ration lists constitute tablets of the Oi
and Go series at Mycenae (distribution of an unidentified commodity *190), and the tablets of
the Ui series (Ui 651 involves the distribution of the commodity RE and tablet Ui 709 involves the distribution of two further unknown commodities KU and DU). The identification of the above mentioned ideograms and syllabograms/abbreviations is not clear,448 but the fact that the
quantities are not those that typically filled the basic nutritional needs of people might lead us
again to consider these distributions as further payments in kind rather than rations.
It is worth investigating also whether individuals are recorded as receiving both rations and payments in kind or for receiving two or more different kinds of payment in kind to understand whether the forms of payment are standardized based on a certain condition, such as
the social or the occupational status of the recipients. The examination of the names of the
individuals and their correlation to the different tablets has shown that there is no overlap, viz.
men receiving both rations and payments, and very few who receive more than one type of
payment in kind.
The only individuals who receive a combination of different commodities are two men,
a-ko-ro-ta (ajgrovth~, farmer) and ka-sa-to, who receive quantities of both wool and the
unidentified product *190. The same is not, however, found for all the individuals who receive
448 Chadwick 1962, pp. 57, 63. The ideogram *190 is very similar to *134, and initially it was transcribed as such by Chadwick (1958, p. 110). The similarity, even though substantial, to *134, which has been found in Knossos in association with ewes and the measuring unit for liquids (milk?), and the lack of satisfactory evidence on the exact nature of *190 (liquid or not) prevent us from making an equation between the two signs. The signs RE, KU, and DU are presumably abbreviations. KU is found also in the Ge series (spice tablets) as the abbreviation for cumin, but the context in our case is very different and probably involves a different kind of commodity.
178 wool or *190 and we cannot make any suggestions regarding these two men and why they
receive more than the others. Fifty-one individuals, including a-ko-ro-ta and ka-sa-to, are found
receiving payments in kind; 5 receive *190; 24 wool; 2 men receive both wool and *190; 13
individuals receive OLEUM+WE; 2 individuals receive KU and DU respectively; and 7 persons
receive amounts of the RE substance. All these commodities constitute payments in kind, but we
are totally ignorant of the way that these people procured the means for their subsistence, since they do not receive rations and, since we have not found any land-tenure tablets, they do not appear to own land that they could farm.449
Unfortunately, it is very difficult to associate the fact that these individuals receive payments in kind rather than rations with their occupation or their general social status, because we lack this kind of information in most instances. Of the forty-five individuals, we know the occupations of only six. One a-to-po-qo (ajrtokovpo~, baker) receives wool;450 a-ko-ro-ta, who is
a farmer (ajgrovth~), receives both wool and *190; the ka-ke-u (calkeuv~, bronze-smith) and the
ke-ra-me-u (kerameuv~, potter) receive wool as well; the ka-na-pe-u (knafeuv~, fuller) called di-
du-mo and the pe-re-ke-u (plokeuv~, basket-maker) named qa-da-wa-so , finally, receive wool
too; from all these, only the last two work in the broadly defined textile industry and for the rest
of the records we have no indication what the occupation or status of the persons was.
The only argument that we can make is that these individuals, contrary to those who
receive rations, are not dependent on the palace, at least not absolutely, since they obviously
procured their subsistence from elsewhere. The individuals who receive rations, on the other
449 It may be coincidental that we have not found any land-tenure tablets at Mycenae, but it can also be an indication that the individuals who received these payments in kind had turned to the exchange of the commodities that they received for others of nutritional value. 450 Unfortunately the name of this individual has not been preserved and we do not know if he is also recorded for rations or handouts.
179 hand, are not independent. Of the nine individuals, we are able to pinpoint the occupation of only one man, te-ra-wo, who is an a-to-po-qo (ajrtokovpo~, baker), since he is also found on Au 102, which records seventeen a-to-po-qo. We cannot, however, assume the same for the rest of the individuals who receive rations, based on this one piece of evidence. Subsequently, we are not in a position to argue, based on these tablets alone, that certain groups or occupations at Mycenae are more dependent on the palace than other individuals and/or groups.
Evidence for Family Relations
The texts at Mycenae are very clear in their recordings of children of individuals
(Appendix 3, Table 10).451 The sons (i-jo or ko-wo) and daughters (tu-ka-te-re or ki-ra) of individuals are usually recorded anonymously, but against the names of either their mother or their father. We observe a pattern based on the gender of the children, whereby, daughters are recorded with their mothers, whereas sons with their fathers. The evidence is very limited but it appears that we can safely argue that, wherever children are mentioned, they are done so because they work with one of their parents. This is in no way indicative of the state of the family relations or whether the men were separated from the women and their children on demand of the palace or some other superior.
One tablet alone may prove to demonstrate the separation of families on demand of a higher authority, tablet V 659. The key-word on this tablet is de-mi-ni-ja (devmnia, beds). The purpose of the text is not clear and depends on the interpretation of the numerals that follow
451 Sons are found on tablets Au 102.1 and Oe 121.2; Older daughters (tu-ka-te-re, qugatevrai) are found on tablets Oe 106.2 and V 659.5-6; and younger daughters (ki-ra, ghla`) are found only on one tablet, V 659.7 and on the right side of the tablet. We should also note that the word ko-wa, which is used at Pylos to signify female children, does not appear in any of the tablets at Mycenae. Unfortunately, we are not in a position at present to suggest whether this difference in vocabulary is due to subtle differences in meaning among terms or other linguistic reasons.
180 every record in the list of women. Two different interpretations have been discussed already;452 either the beds are distributed to the women, thus the numerals refer to the number of beds given to the women of every record; or the women are distributed to the beds, whereby the numerals refer to the number of women who share a bed. Either way, it is evident that women of this group, some of whom have their daughters with them, live and sleep together, and, probably, also work together. They are, furthermore, separated from the men, some of whom were possibly the fathers of the daughters in question, and the young boys. Subsequently, I believe it is possible to argue that these women had family relations that, although they were recognized and recorded by the palace, had no legal standing and were not binding. It is arguable that the palace or the superior of these women gathered these women and controlled where they were living and, based on the monitoring of the bed situation, supervised very closely their living conditions.
452 See above pages 166-167, notes 413-415.
181 Thebes
Before we begin the analysis of the Thebes tablets, a few things about them should be
discussed. The tablets from Thebes received a complete publication with commentary and
synthesis only recently.453 In this recent publication, the editors proposed several new
interpretations and discussions both of Linear B words, previously known from other sites, and
new words that appear for the first time in Thebes. It should be noted also that the editors of the
Thebes tablets based their discussions on the interpretation of a significant word ma-ka that they
believe signifies the goddess Demeter as Mother-Earth.454 Based on this interpretation, a
religious and cultic context has been attributed to almost the entirety of the archive, which is then
approached as the archive of a religious centre at Thebes rather than of a political or
administrative center, such as a palace.455
Several critiques456 of these interpretations have started to appear in the last years
including valid comments and corrections to the interpretations proposed by the editors of the
Thebes tablets. It is still too soon, however, to decide between interpretations, especially in the case of those that concern names of divinities and cultic personnel. Some of these criticisms, nonetheless, have significant implications to this thesis and need some further discussion.
Palaima’s457 review of the evidence is the most comprehensive reconsideration of the
evidence published to date. Among the most important notes he makes are those that involve the
re-interpretation of the so-called divine names, which he considers to be anthroponymics instead
453 Aravantinos, Godart, and Sacconi, 2001. The interpretations and translations of the words discussed in this thesis are based primarily on those discussed in this edition of the Thebes tablets. 454 Aravantinos, Godart, and Sacconi, 2001, p. 317; Godart 2001, p. 463-464. 455 Aravantinos, Godart, and Sacconi, 2001, pp. 317-325. 456 Palaima, 2001; Palaima 2003b; Kyriakides, 2003. 457 Palaima, 2001.
182 of names of gods.458 Similarly, other terms, mainly those with cultic associations, are proposed
as simple occupational terms.459
The most important comment, nonetheless, involves the transliteration and interpretation
of sign *65. This sign appears both as a phonetic sign and as an ideogram. The phonetic value of
*65 has been tentatively interpreted as –ju,460 whereas the ideogram *65 has been connected to
me-re-u-ro (flour) and, thus, with bread wheat.461 Palaima462 demonstrated that in most of the
cases where the editors of the Thebes tablets transliterated sign *65 as the ideogram for flour
(FARINA) they were wrong. Palaima463 demonstrated that sign *65 is the ending of a
patronymic or personal name, which represents in this manner the expression “son of X.” The
implications of this conclusion are significant and will become even clearer below when we
discuss the commodities transferred and distributed to individuals and groups in the Thebes
tablets and, especially, series Fq and Gp.
The religious character of the Thebes tablets, as this is pronounced in the latest edition of
the tablets, has thus been seriously challenged. A more secular and administrative function
458 Aravantinos, Godart, and Sacconi, 2001. Names of divinities as they have been interpreted by the editors of the Thebes tablets include the following: ma-ka (Mother Earth, Demeter), si-to (goddess Sito, equivalent of Demeter?), o-po-re-i (Zeus, protector of fruits), and ko-wa (Kore, Persephone); Palaima (2001, pp. 478-481) proposes different interpretations, among which is the interpretation of ma-ka as a common noun for “meal”, like de-qo-no the common noun for dinner (dei`pno~); for si-to Palaima convincingly demonstrates that it is more appropriate to interpret the noun as sivto~, wheat; for o-po-re-i Palaima suggests that it is an anthroponymic with an etymology of ejpiv + o{ro~;and for the divinity ko-wa Palaima suggests that the traditional interpretation of the word is more acceptable as daughter. 459 Aravantinos, Godart, and Sacconi, 2001. The titles of “desservants de sanctuaire”, servants of the temple, a-ko- da-mo/ a-ko-ro-da-mo (“rassembleur des fidèles”), de-qo-no (“chargé de preparer le repas sacré”), and to-pa-po-ro-i (“porteurs de torches”), a-ke-ne-u-si (“les purs”). Palaima (2001) suggests that a-ko-da-mo is a regular personal name; de-qo-no is a common noun for dinner; to-pa-po-ro-i is an occupational term for those who bear the to-pa; and a-ke-ne-u-si is another occupational term for “winnowers.” 460 Palmer (1963, pp. 19-20) was one of the first to suggest this phonetic value. This value has been generally accepted (Melena 1996, p. 84; Palaima 2001, p. 483), even though Chadwick (1973, p. 387) noted that “no compelling proof has appeared” to support this phonetic value and Hooker (1980) does not include *65 among those signs with a secure transliteration. 461 Palmer 1992, pp. 481, 484; Halstead (1995, pp. 232-233) explains that the association with flour indicates that *65 involved “either a finely grained cereal product or cereal grain suitable for making flour.” 462 Palaima 2001, pp. 483-484; Palaima 2003b, p. 115. 463 Palaima 2003b, p. 115.
183 should rather be sought.464 Nonetheless, the discussion has only been initiated and further
discussion is needed before any definitive conclusions are reached, at least in so far as the
controversial interpretation of these terms is concerned. I here follow Palaima’s interpretations of
the occupational terms of the “desservants.” I agree with him that the religious meaning of these texts is not certain, with the exception of a very small number of tablets; most can be easily associated with the palatial archives of the mainland that have a clear administrative character. In the course of the following examination and analysis of the tablets I discuss the terms where they are relevant to my discussion. I make an effort to take into account the religious interpretations as well and discuss the effect of these interpretations on our understanding of the nature and function of the records.
Population Census
The process of making a population census of the people recorded in the Thebes is inhibited by two main issues. First, because of the very fragmentary condition of the tablets, many words, and especially personal names, are not preserved in their entirety and their reconstruction is very difficult. Many of these words preserve combinations of signs that are found in personal names and in other terms, but we cannot associate with certainty these fragments of words with more complete words, because the combinations of signs that we have may be found in more than one entire word (for example, we find on tablet Ug 8 the cluster of signs ]-wa-o, which is the genitive ending of a personal name ending in –a; although elsewhere we find another cluster –]to-wa[ (Ug 19), we cannot be certain that they are part of the name a- ka-to-wa-o that we find on tablet Ug 6+frr). This forces me to count the individuals with
464 Kyriakidis 2003, p. 198.
184 fragmentary names as separate individuals, even though it would be easy in some cases to
associate their names with other complete names.
A second obstacle that I was faced with involved the presence of a significant number of
the same names in multiple records. The same thing is found also in Pylos and, to a smaller degree, in Mycenae. Nonetheless, it has been possible at Pylos to connect these multiple occurrences of names to specific situations, scribal choices, and archival processes, such as the copying of one set of tablets onto another and not disposing of the first until the second was complete.465
The same has not been demonstrated in Thebes and the number of multiple records for
each name is much higher than that at Pylos. In the case of Thebes multiple records range from a
minimum of three to a maximum of ca. twenty or more, whereas at Pylos multiple records rarely
exceed two. It is difficult, furthermore, to establish at this point that the overlap in the records is
caused by scribal and archival practices of the Theban bureaucracy, similar to those at Pylos,
because the archive has only recently been published and few analyses of it other than those in
the primary publication have yet appeared. It should also be noted that not all personal names
appear multiple times, but only a part of them. The significance of this observation, however, is
unclear and, I believe, it would be dangerous to assume that the small number of names that
appear the most times in the records belonged to persons of higher social status.
465 For example Chadwick (1988) demonstrated this practice in the case of the Aa/Ab series, which record groups of women with their children and the rations that they receive.
185 Individuals
The individuals of the Thebes tablets were recorded in a total of 355 records, but the actual number of individuals may be largely reduced if we consider all the occurrences of the same name as representing one only individual. I calculated, thus, the number of people individually recorded (by their name) as 142 men and women. There are seven (7) further people whose personal names were either not recorded (because they were defined by reference to another individual who might have been their superior) or because their names have not been preserved to date.
These 149 persons comprise 12 women and 137 men. It is also important to note that
Thebes has yielded a number of records of children, and in particular the sons of certain individuals. We have six such sons, for whom the indication that they are “sons” has been recognized by Palaima on the basis of the interpretation of sign *65 (with the phonetic value of – ju).466 No other indication for family relations (daughters, young boys, or girls) is found in
Thebes.
Adults Children Men 131 6 Women 12 0 Total 143 6
Table 13. Count of individually recorded people in the Thebes tablets
466 Palaima 2001, pp. 483-484.
186 Groups of People
In Thebes we find a number of groups of people recorded, but the number of people in
each group is rarely preserved. Thus, it is very difficult to calculate correctly the number of
people involved. The groups recorded are fifty-eight and we have numerals indicating the
number of people in them for only eight of these groups. These numerals provide us with a figure of fifty-eight persons. If I restore for the rest of the groups a minimum figure of two persons for each, I get a figure of 156 persons. I would like to stress, nonetheless, that this is only a minimum figure and that in reality this number might have been significantly higher.
Adults Children Number of people Preserved Restored Preserved Restored Men 58 132 0 0 Women 0 24 0 0 Total 58 156 0 0
Table 14. Count of people collectively recorded in groups in the Thebes tablets
Onomastics
The examination of the personal names in the Thebes tablets is also very difficult,
especially because the tablets have not been extensively studied to date. A substantial part of the
set of personal names recorded either has not been interpreted yet or has not been associated with
later Greek names, because its etymology is not clear. I was able to distinguish among 136 names 93 which have not been interpreted. This corresponds to ca. 68% of the total number of personal names (Figure 4). Among the rest of the personal names: 24 names are of various interpretations and etymologies (patronymics, names related to personal traits or social
187 characteristics and others); 6 names signify occupations; and 13 names appear to be ethnic adjectives.
80
70 60
50 40
30 percentage 20
10
0 ethnics occupations other no interpretation
Figure 4. Percentages of the different types of names in the Thebes tablets
Ethnics as Personal Names
Ethnics as personal names have been discussed already for the fact that they indicate mobility of persons between polities and settlements, but also because they provide indirect evidence for the social status of these individuals within the settlements and communities where they lived.467 Ethnics, for example, used as personal names may show that locals wished to make sure that the persons of outsider status were distinguished clearly from them.
In Thebes we find thirteen ethnics used as personal names for fifteen different individuals
(Appendix 3, Tables 11-12). The examination of these ethnics indicates that Thebes had associations with three areas: the area around Thebes, possibly under its control or influence; the
467 See discussion above pp. 88-90.
188 Peloponnese in Southern Greece; and Asia Minor.468 It should be noted also that the ethnics used
as personal names constitute the only kind of evidence for different descent or geographical
origin of people or groups of people. Unlike Pylos, we do not have at Thebes individuals or
groups with secondary designations demonstrating their movement from a certain place towards
another.
The ethnics formed from different toponyms in the region around Thebes, include JAlaiv
(two men, a-ra-o and a-ra-o-ju, father and son respectively), Grai`a469 (one woman, ka-ra-wi-
ja), Petewvn (one man, pe-ta-o-ni-jo), {Ulh (one man, u-re-we), Kreu`si~ (one man, ke-re-u-so), and, finally, a man from the coastal area, o-pi-ja-ro.470 We also find a group of people recorded
in the tablets: they come from the town of {Iso~ (i-si-wi-jo-i).
These are all toponyms that are found in Boeotia and it is very possible that we are faced
with a situation for Thebes similar to that of Pylos. Thebes, like Pylos, may have been the major
center in a wider area or polity, within which people moved around for political or economic
reasons.471 As the ethnics at Thebes demonstrate, the people moved from the smaller towns to
the center, Thebes. The people who moved around within Boeotia or within the area under the
control of Thebes might have been associated with and generally confused with the Thebans
proper and it is possible that distinctions between actual Thebans and those from its hinterland
might not have been easy to make even by the officials that created this archive. In this context
we are able to understand a little better the existence of an ethnic, such as au-to-te-qa-jo,
468 Aravantinos, Godart, and Sacconi 2001. There are further two ethnics that are not securely interpreted: pa-pa-ra- ki (connected to pa-pa-ra-ko = Paphlagon) and i-da-i-jo (connected to Ida in Crete?). 469 Godart and Sacconi 1999, p. 540. The ancient name of the town Tanagra at Boeotia. 470 Aravantinos, Godart, and Sacconi 2001; Godart and Sacconi 1999, pp. 539-541. 471 Forbes (forthcoming) argues that movements for economic and political reasons are observed in later historical periods, such as in the Ottoman period in the area of Methana. Friedl’s (1962, pp. 14-17) ethnographic account of Vasilika, a village in Boeotia, illustrates similar patterns of movement between people from different villages. The case of Vasilika shows that movement can come as the result of trading and political activities, but also religious activities, such as festivities for the celebration of a saint’s birthday.
189 auJtoqhbai`o~, “Theban himself”, as well as a group of people that are recorded as te-qa-jo-i
(Qhbai`oi, Thebans). This is evidently an attempt to emphasize the Theban descent of an
individual and to differentiate him from others who lived probably in the polity of Thebes, but
not in the center itself. A similar kind of situation is found also at Mycenae, where we find as a
personal name the ethnic ko-ma-ta (villager) thus emphasizing the other end of the residential hierarchy, the periphery.
Nonetheless, as I have stated already, these names are very few and in the case of
“Boeotians” there is generally only a single individual from a particular place. The only exceptions are the men from JAlaiv, a man and his son. The small number of people with ethnics as personal names is consistent with the particular use of the ethnic as personal name. The ethnic adjective would not be suitable for a personal name if there were more than a few men from the same place, because then it would lose its function to identify and distinguish. We can thus argue that it is only these few men that interest the Theban bureaucracy and that it is for this reason that they are found recorded in the tablets, whereas numerous others are not recorded or monitored at all. The lack of any occupational designations, however, for any of these individuals prohibits us from making any assumptions regarding their status. The only observation that we can safely make is that these men are very well known to the palace at Thebes, they offer services of some kind, and for this reason they are recorded in the tablets and receive some commodities; finally, they are very few in numbers. From within the small group of people whose descent matters to the palatial bureaucracy these men are also very distinct from the one man who is from Thebes proper. By this I mean that the palace and the community were most probably interested in knowing and propagating knowledge not only of the descent of outsiders, but also of the certain
190 individuals who were from Thebes itself or did some kind of work that was perhaps distinctive to
Thebes or had some particular social status based on their Theban descent.
Individuals coming from other places in mainland Greece include one man and his son from Lacedaimon (Sparta), ra-ke-da-mi-ni-jo472 (his son being ra-ke-da-mi-ni-jo-ju) who appear
the most frequently in the tablets. It is possible that one other man is from that area. His name is
a-ka-de and the editors473 of the Thebes tablets have proposed the interpretation Arcadian
(Arkavdh~), which corresponds to the central area of The Peloponnesus (Arcadia).474
Finally, the reference to another man, who appears multiple times in the records,
indicates a clear connection with the East. Mi-ra-ti-jo is a derivative of the toponym Mivlato~
(Miletus) in south-western Asia Minor.475 The ethnic appears also in Pylos as the place of origin of women recorded in groups and probably employed in the textile industry. In Thebes, however, we have no indication of the work or social status of this man. Louis Godart and Anna Sacconi476
have argued that yet another name has connections with Asia Minor. Si-mi-te-u (Sminqeuv~) is an
ethnic that derives from the toponym Smivnqh, which, according to Godart and Sacconi, is situated in the Troad, near Troy. The toponym to-ro-wa is also considered to indicate Troy477 in the Thebes tablets making the case, thus, for arguing that there were close connections of Thebes with that general area in northwest Asia Minor.478 I was able to identify connections of some kind at Pylos also, where some of the groups of women who received rations and were
472 Ra-ke-mi-ni-jo is a variant spelling of this ethnic and the words ra-ke-da-mi-ni-jo-u-jo or ra-ke-da-mi-ni-jo-ju signify the son of this man. 473 Aravantinos, Godart, and Sacconi 2001, p. 219. 474 Bartonk (1999, p. 125) has argued that a-ka-de should be interpreted as ajkhdhv~, careless, rather than as an ethnic. 475 For a discussion of mi-ra-ti-jo, see also above p. 104. 476 Godart and Sacconi 1999, p. 541, 543-544. 477 This interpretation has been proposed so far only by Aravantinos, Godart, and Sacconi (2001, p. 356). 478 Godart and Sacconi 1999, pp. 541-544.
191 absolutely dependent on the palace came from Mivlato~ (Miletus) in south-western Asia Minor,
Troy, and other locations in Asia Minor.
The significance of these ethnics as personal names is, I believe, twofold. First they
indicate a very clearly formulated social ideology of ethnic differentiation. It is evident that, in
Thebes at least, it is not enough to distinguish the foreigners from the locals, but it is also
important to make these differences pronounced by emphasizing the descent of particular people
as being local, Theban. Secondly, these individuals are found among the recipients of a variety of
commodities that are distributed by a superior institution, either a palace or a temple, which
indicates that they were in some manner and degree dependent on this institution. Ra-ke-da-mi-
ni-jo with his son and mi-ra-ti-jo appear most often in the Fq and Gp series that record these
distributions. Godart and Sacconi,479 however, interpret their presence in the context of the
general religious atmosphere that is reflected in the tablets: “il est probable qu’à l’occasion des
fêtes organisées par le palais de Cadmos en l’honneur des divinités thébaines que nous avons
citées, des envoyés provenant de Milet et de Lacédémone aient été invités à s’associer aux
habitants de Béotie et aient participé ainsi au culte dont nos textes rendent témoignage.”
If we accept, however, Palaima’s480 and Kyriakidis’481 objections to the religious character of these texts, we are left with viewing these individuals as of a status similar to that of the rest of the population that is presumed to be local, since they do not use ethnics for their identification.
479 Godart and Sacconi 1999, pp. 544. 480 Palaima 2001; 2003. 481 Kyriakides 2003.
192 Occupations as Personal Names
Individuals recognized and addressed by their occupation are not many in Thebes
(Appendix 3, Table 13). I have found in the texts only six such individuals.482 Three persons belong to the textiles industry, a woman who is also an a-ra-ka-te-ja (ajlakavteiai, spinning- women, Of 34), and two men with the designation no-ri-wo-ki-de (Of 36), which is associated
with the textiles industry because of the rest of the entries with it are associated with that activity,
and o-nu-ke-wi (Oh 206), a maker of o-nu-ka textiles. Two other occupations are connected with
the care-taking of animals: the i-qo-po-qo (Fq198) are horse-tenders and the ka-ne-jo
(Fq254+255) who has been interpreted as a tender of geese.483
These occupations are unique in that there is only one individual who practices these
kinds of professions. The same stands for the groups of people, except for the case of i-qo-po-qo.
We find several different groups of people who are described as i-qo-po-qo-i and we will discuss
in the next section. A-ra-ka-te-ja, in particular, stands out, because the designation appears also
in Pylos as a description of groups of women. The women are at least seventy in number there,
where the textile industry is one of the most important activities within the palatial economy. In
Thebes, on the contrary, only one woman exists and this leads us to question the extent and
significance of the textile industry in this center.
482 Two of these terms are problematic: ku-ro2 (Fq 205) has been interpreted by Bartonk (1999, p. 127) as kuvrio~, master; to-jo (Gp235, Fq214, Fq239, Fq240, Fq241, Fq253, Fq254+255, Fq284, Fq258, Fq369, Fq370, Gp150) has been interpreted by Aravantinos, Godart, and Sacconi (2001, p. 211) as Stoi`o~, a derivative of stoi`a, shop. Thus, the man may have been a shop-keeper. Both interpretations, I believe, are problematic; especially the second, to-jo, may prove to be only part of a larger name since in several cases the tablet is broken in such a way that part of the word with to-jo may have been cut off. 483 Aravantinos, Godart, and Sacconi 2001, p. 226.
193 Occupations
Individuals
The occupations of the rest of the individuals recorded in the Thebes tablets are almost
entirely unknown to us. There only six individuals for whom we have occupational designations
(Appendix 3, Table 14). Four of these individuals work within the textiles industry: one woman
working as te-pe-ja (maker of te-pa, a type of textile484), two women working as a-ke-ti-ra2
(ajskhvtriai, finishers), and one man who works as a pe-re-ke-u (plokeuv~, basket-maker). The a-
ke-ti-ra2 women both have the same identification marker, but they are distinguished very
clearly because they have a further designation indicating their superiors. One superior is the wa-
na-ka himself, the other is the goddess po-ti-ni-ja or, perhaps more accurately, the house/temple
of po-ti-ni-ja. There are no other persons working in the same specialty as these two women and
this fact renders great significance to their social position. They can be compared to the wa-na-
ka-te-ro and po-ti-ni-ja-we-jo craftsmen found in Pylos, whose social status is significantly
higher than that of other craftsmen in the same industry.485
Finally, we have another man, ko-tu-ro2, who works as an a-pi-qo-ro (ajmfipovlo~,
servant) and one further woman who is designated as pu2-ke-qi-ri-ne-ja. This latter designation is a derivative of a masculine personal name (pu2-ke-qi-ri), which could disguise an occupational term, just as a-da-ra-te-ja at Pylos has been interpreted as an occupational term as well. This woman also has a superior named a-ka-i-je-u, but apart from that we do not have any knowledge of the exact nature of her work.
484 Chadwick (1975, p. 106) considers the te-pa to be “a very heavy textile.” 485 See discussion above in notes 266-267 and 328.
194 Groups of People
Most of the groups that we find recorded are described with an occupational designation,
rather than an ethnic adjective or other social designation (Appendix 3, Table 15). Only eight out
of the fifty-eight groups do not conform to this pattern. The occupations cover a variety of
specialties, but not a variety of different industries.
People working in the textiles industry are found occupied in two specialties; either as o-
ti-ri-ja (Fq 247, Fq 249+339+352+353?, Fq 306, Fq 229, Fq 276, Fq 275; no satisfactory
interpretation has been suggested yet, but there is general agreement that the are textile
workers486) or as ka-na-pe-we (Av 106; knafeiv~, fullers). The majority, as is evident, consists of
the former specialty, but unfortunately their numbers are lost. We only know that there were six
groups and they all involved women.
The ka-na-pe-we, on the contrary, are fewer in number but provide us with an interesting
piece of information. We have only one group formed by six men. This is the only site on the
mainland that has so many ka-na-pe-we. Pylos had three, one of whom worked for the wa-na-ka;
and Mycenae had only one man.
In these two sites, also, the ka-na-pe-we were very well known craftsmen and important
to the palatial bureaucracy, but at Thebes, they do not seem to be so interesting. They are
recorded only as a group of anonymous craftsmen, together with other persons recorded
individually. The purpose of the text and the associations of the men recorded in them are two
things that elude us today and prevent us from understanding the nature of their social status and specializations.
486 Lindgren 1973, II, p. 109; DMic II, pp. 53-54; Aravantinos, Godart, and Sacconi 2001, p. 215.
195 One other group might have been connected to the textiles industry. These are the two
groups of to-pa-po-ro-i. Palaima487 has argued, convincingly in my opinion, that this occupational designation is not a cultic title, but rather a simple occupational designation, which could be related to the textiles industry, just like the pe-re-ke-u (plokeuv~, basket-maker).
Among the records connected to the textiles industry we find also a particular kind of
recipients of wool. We find in three tablets only an expression that most possibly refers in a
general manner to a group of people. This expression includes a personal name (in all three cases
it is a masculine name) in the genitive and the term do-de, which has been interpreted as dw`nde,
to the house of person X. The phrase to the house may represent an indirect reference to the
person in the genitive, or it may refer to the persons who live or work in his house. In Classical
Greece production was normally performed at a household level488 and it is possible to argue that
in the Mycenaean period part of the economic activities was performed at the household level.
These phrases are found in two tablets (Of 26- di-u-ja-wo do-de, ko-de-wa-o do-de, and Of 33-
o-*34-ta-o do-de) which record the distribution of wool. This is a significant indication that the
people described with these general expressions, the households, were involved in the textiles
production. We do not know how many people were involved, what their sex was, or their social
status. It is possible that the entire family of the men in the genitive was involved, the women
and the children as well as the men, but the expression may rather refer to the servants or
dependent personnel of these men.
In the food-processing “industry” we find groups of si-to-ko-wo (sitocovo~) and a-ke-ne-
u-si (ajgneuvsi or ajcneuvsi). The si-to-ko-wo is a well-attested occupational term at Pylos and
487 Palaima 2001, p. 115. 488 Austin and Vidal-Naquet 1977, pp. 8-19; Kyrtatas 2002, p. 142.
196 involves personnel in the service of the palace who deal with grain.489 The si-to-ko-wo at Thebes
number at least 50 persons, all men, whereas at Pylos we find similar number of si-to-ko-wo, but
there it is women who are involved in this specialty.
The a-ke-ne-u-si, the number of whom we do not know,490 constitute a rather problematic
term. The editors provided a clearly religious interpretations following an etymology for the
word based on ajgnov~, pure or purified. This interpretations has also been contested and
Palaima,491 who has proposed that the etymology of the word is based on a{cnh, which means
“the chaff that comes off in winnowing.” Thus, we are faced with individuals who are occupied
with the processing and preparation of the grains and crops for food.
The rest of the specialties that appear in Thebes involve two po-me-ne (oxherders).492 The very small number of po-me-ne, compared to Pylos or Knossos, indicates that Thebes was not involved as much in the cattle industry as Pylos or Knossos. We also have a significant number of i-qo-po-qo (horse-tenders), but we do not know the exact numbers of the people in their groups.493 The fact that more people work with horses rather than cattle is perhaps an indication
of the shift in interest that Thebes puts on horses on the expense of cattle or sheep. The shift of
focus on economic activities different from those of Pylos is also demonstrated by the small
number of textiles-workers that we find at Thebes and who are involved in specific very
489 Lindgren 1973, II, p. 139. Among the different interpretations that have been proposed we find: “grain-pourers”, “grain-measurers”, “bread-makers”, and “bakerswomen.” Aravantinos, Godart, and Sacconi (2001) have interpreted the term in a cultic context, as some kind of temple servants for the goddess Sito, but their interpretations have been severely contested by Palaima 2001, 2003. 490 The a-ke-ne-u-si are found in nine groups on tablets Fq169, Fq305, Fq125, Fq136+Fq137, Fq130, Fq214, Fq239, Fq240, Fq241, Fq254+255, Fq284. 491 Palaima 2001, p. 482. 492 They are found on one only tablet, Av 101. 493 There are nine groups of i-qo-po-qo on tablets Fq247, Fq252, Fq254+255, Gp199, Fq272, Fq367, Fq214, Fq276, Fq305.
197 specialized stages of the production of textiles, such as the finishers and the fullers who are
concerned with the last stages of the production.494
Various other persons are working as carpenters, te-ka-ta-si;495 as lyre-players, ru-ra-ta-
e;496 and a number of women who are recorded just as ku-na-ki-si (gunaixiv, women).497 We do
not know how many these women were, but their generalized and vague description might lead
us to consider them to be unspecialized personnel or of general duties. At last, I would like to
discuss the presence of e-pi-qo-i, who have been interpreted as e{fippoi, horse-riders. The nature
of their status and social role is not clearly, but I believe we can make two suggestions.
The term e-pi-qo-i can be interpreted either as an occupational or a social designation. If
the term is occupational, it is possible to connect these groups with the military, as being part of
the military force of Thebes. If the term, on the other hand, is social, we may connect it to the
increasing importance of horses and horse-owning, which reaches its culmination in the
historical period. Palaima498 has discussed the increased importance of the horse in the historical period, and relates that this importance is very well demonstrated also in the corpus of personal
names of the period, which includes ca. 183 different types of compounds with the word i{ppo~, horse. The importance of the horse in the Theban community is demonstrated by the large number of i-qo-po-qo, who must have been involved in its care.
494 We cannot, however, argue with certainty that each palatial center focused on different economic activities, because the images that we get from the archives both in Thebes and in Mycenae are very small and fragmentary in comparison to the archive of Pylos. 495 There are five groups of carpenters on tablets Gp175, Gp147, Gp112, Gp114, Fq247. 496 There are two men working as lyre-players on tablet Av106. 497 There are two groups of ku-na-ki-si on tablets Av 100 and Fq 200. Aravantinos, Godart, and Sacconi (2001) have proposed the interpretation “women-hunters” based on the term ku-na-ke-ta, found at Pylos, designating men- hunters. The interpretation simply as “women” was proposed by Palaima (2001, p. 485) and appears to be more plausible. 498 Palaima 1999, p. 372.
198 The number of craftsmen and workers who are recorded in the Thebes tablets is very
small and covers a small number of activities. It is not possible to argue that these are the only
dependent workers at Thebes, since these specialties are not nearly sufficient to cover the needs
either of a palace or a temple. This may be explained by the very fragmentary nature of the
archive as a whole, but also by different bureaucratic choices regarding who is recorded and who
is not.
Subsistence
The examination of the evidence for the subsistence of the persons recorded in the
Thebes tablets may shed light on their social status. More than 90% of the tablets that have
survived at Thebes record the distribution of various commodities to individuals and groups of
people. Most of these distributions involve barley (HORDEUM) and wine (VINUM) and a
smaller number of tablets list olives (OLIVA), grain (GRANUM), and flour (FARINA). The editors499 of the tablets have noted that the same individuals appear in different series and, thus,
that they receive a variety of different commodities. Closer examination, however, demonstrates
that the same individuals are commonly found in multiple records of the same series, rather than
on tablets of different series and, thus, within distribution systems of different commodities. It
becomes evident, then, that there is a very clear distinction between the persons and the type of
commodity that they are entitled to receive. There are very few individuals and groups of people
that receive more than one commodity and this practice is possibly connected to the social status
of these particular persons.
499 Aravantinos, Godart, and Sacconi 2001, p. 369.
199 The nature of these distributions is not clear. We do not have any clear indication of the purpose that they served and any suggestion of this is dependent on the translation and interpretation of the words ma-ka, o-po-re-i, and ko-wa. Their interpretation as divinities- recipients500 would provide, as noted already, a religious context for the entire set of the Fw and
Gp series and distributions, whereas their interpretation as simple humans or the word ma-ka as a
noun for meal501 provides a secular context for distributions as payments.
Three tablets begin with a temporal clause that may provide some indication of the
context of the distributions that they list. These clauses may provide context not only for the
texts on these three tablets, but, possibly, for the all the rest of the texts within the Fq series. The
three temporal clauses relate to us that the texts are connected to a ritual that develops in three
phases: o-te tu-we-te-to / ma-ka HORD T 1 V [ ] 2 [ ] (Fq 126, o{te quvo~ qevto, “when he had
placed the sacrifice (on the altar)”); o-te o-je-ke-te-to / ma-ka HORD T 2 4 (Fq 130, o{te o[y
e[ksqeto, when he had exposed the tree-fruits); and o-te a-pi-e-ke ke-ro-ta / pa-ta ma-ka HORD
T 1 V2 Z2 (Fq 254, o{te amfivúeske gevronta~ pavnta~, when he had made all the elders follow him in a procession).502
It is evident that these temporal clauses provide a relative date for the texts, but we do not
know how the two connect. Lejeune503 has argued that the Fq tablettes record daily distributions
of barley and Ruijgh504 has added to this suggestion that the three tablets with the temporal
clauses might have corresponded to a multitude of tablets and records in the manner of a title
record for a set of tablets and, subsequently, to three sets of days (each day represented by a
500 Aravantinos, Godart, and Sacconi 2001; Lejeune 1997c; Ruijgh 2004. 501 Palaima 2001. 502 Ruijgh 2004, pp. 23-36. 503 Lejeune 1997d, pp. 179-180. At the very minimum the records were drafted, according to Lejeune, twice a week in the course of one year. 504 Ruijgh 2004, p. 36; Aravantinos, Godart, and Sacconi 2001, p. 17.
200 single Fq tablet) of one or more religious celebrations in the year. Ruijgh505 argues further for the possibility that each of the three sets of tablets might have corresponded to ten days in each month, assuming that the Mycenaeans divided the months in three periods of ten days.
A different suggestion is made by Sacconi,506 who argues that the distributions of barley in the Fq series are distributions made in the context of religious and state festivals and meals
(“agapes”), which took place during the festivities introduced by the three temporal clauses above and lasted several days. During these festivities, barley was distributed on a daily basis to the same people until they were over, which explains why certain people appear more times in the tablets than others
The daily distributions, regularly delivered to individuals (and divinities if we follow the editors of the Thebes tablets) constitute a plausible suggestion, but the fact that the quantities recorded are not the same in every tablet for each individual demonstrates that the records are more complicated. Similarly the tripartite division of the month, and, thus, the entire set of the Fq tablets, is not supported by the fact that the same individual is found in more than three tablets, which would imply that the set as a whole extends to more than one month, but the title tablets do not.
It is evident that we do not know the “formation processes” of these particular tablets and that further examination of them is necessary. I believe we may assume that the tablets correspond to different events of distribution, but it is impossible to define the temporal interval between them or whether they were periodical or regularized. The fact that the quantities are not
505 Ruijgh 2004, p. 36. Even though, in my opinion, we cannot assume that the division of time in the Mycenaean period followed so closely our contemporary divisions, I believe that Ruijgh’s suggestion has some fundamental validity. 506 Sacconi 2001, pp. 469-470.
201 always the same is a substantial indication that they were not rations and that they were not
regularized payments.
On the other hand, we find a clear distinction between the recipients and what type of
commodities they receive. Very few individuals or groups do not conform to this practice and
they are the same ones that appear in the most records. This practice demonstrates that the
commodities distributed were tied to conditions that were most probably dependent on the status
of these individuals.
The quantities, furthermore, that are being distributed are very small and may be
compared to the quantities delivered at Pylos as “handouts.” In most cases, the quantities in
Thebes are even smaller, averaging ca. the quantity of V 1 Z 1 of barley.507 This suggests that the distributions were not provided to cover the subsistence needs of the people in question, but for particular needs that arose at specific times or events, such as the religious event described in the three title tablets.508
In addition, there are very few individuals who receive quantities of commodities other
than barley. These commodities constitute items that we have seen from other sites as being
more important and not regularly distributed to lower status persons; they are given to higher
officials or dependent personal and in exceptional events. A similar case can be argued for
Thebes.
If we examine the individuals more carefully, we find that the vast majority (85.5%)
receive quantities of barley alone (Appendix 3, Table 16). Those who receive other commodities
are comparatively very few (Appendix 3, Table 17): 23 individuals receive wine; 5 persons
507 This figure is very tentative, however, because we lack the figures from the majority of the records which were recovered in a very mutilated state. 508 Palmer 1992, p. 185. Evidence from Classical and Roman periods shows that barley was used as a common offering to the gods.
202 receive flour; 4 receive wheat; and only one man receives olives. Among these persons there are eight individuals who are more conspicuous, because these individuals receive more than one commodity (Table 15).
Names Hordeum Vinum Granum Farina Oliva (barley) (wine) (wheat) (flour) (olives) *56-ru-we x x A-ko-da-mo x x x x ]a-me-ro x x Ma-di-je x x Mo-ne-we x x Qe-re-ma-o x x Ra-ke-da-mi-ni- x x jo ]to-jo x x
Table 15. Individuals in the Thebes tablets who are recorded as recipients of more than one commodity
These are eight individuals, all men, who receive what is most probably the basic and most common product, barley, and who receive in addition at least one other commodity. Almost all the cases show that they receive one additional commodity, whether this is wine or wheat, or flour. One man, however, a-ko-da-mo, receives alone four different types of commodities. Thus, he emerges as the recipient with not only the largest total amounts of products, but also as the recipient of the largest variety. This, I believe, is a very strong indication of his higher status, even though we cannot at this point attach this pattern of distributions to other social parameters such as the occupation of individuals.
Following a-ko-da-mo and the other individuals who receive mixed commodities, we may presume that the few who receive wine, flour, or wheat alone are socially higher than those who receive regular amounts of barley. Their increased importance may be associated either with the particular role that they played in the events described by the three temporal clauses, or it may be associated with their general social status in the community.
203 We find a similar situation with regard to those persons who are recorded collectively in
the tablets (Appendix 3, Table 18). Certain groups receive a greater variety of products than
others. The extra commodity supplementing the delivery of barley (HORDEUM) in most cases is
wine.
Were oil and wine, among these supplementary commodities that these people received,
some kind of prestige commodity? Do we imagine that lower status persons received staple
commodities to cover their subsistence needs, whereas persons of relatively higher status and
who possibly covered their subsistence needs on their own received commodities that were
themselves more valuable?
The same question was raised in the analysis of the Mycenae tablets, where again we
found that certain people received wine and oil instead of grain that is the most typical and most
often distributed commodity and distributed to the majority of the people recorded. Ethnographic as well as economic reasons have proved that oil and wine were not common commodities to trade or distribute. On one hand, oil and wine are difficult to grow, need a lot of investment in time and effort and the production depends on many factors beyond human control. On the other hand, both oil and wine are connected to activities of great importance to the palaces. Oil was used in the oil-perfume industry, which was one of the most important economic activities of the palace producing a commodity that was largely interregionally traded. Wine on the other hand had cultural and social associations. It was consumed in ceremonial feasts and drinking parties, where, beyond a drinking product, it was also a means to demonstrate the generosity of the people who organized the feasts and re-affirm the higher social status of some as opposed to other members of the community.509 In this context, I believe, we can argue that the distributions
509 Hamilakis 2000, p. 58.
204 of Thebes that contain wine and oil were not simple, subsistence distributions, but rather a consequence of the higher status of certain individuals, as well as a means to demonstrate social differences.
Epilogue
In concluding this chapter I would like to review the contributions that I believe I have
made. I examined the three mainland palatial sites other than Pylos that have yielded Linear B
tablets, Tiryns, Mycenae, and Thebes. Most Mycenologists have accepted a priori that the
various Mycenaean polities had more or less the same political and economic organization,
which is demonstrated by the rather homogeneous material culture that has come today to signify
the Mycenaean period.
Closer examination, however, of the Linear B archives, in the light of social relations and
hierarchies, shows that the organization of the palatial centers was not exactly the same and that
emphasis was put on different economic activities. Thus, the persons who constituted the elite
and the different ranks of lower status dependent personnel were significantly different from place to place.
The evidence from Tiryns is admittedly very limited and fragmentary. Although we find individuals and groups of people being recorded, we lack context and crucial details that would
possibly offer some insights regarding the status of these people.
At Mycenae, however, the number of tablets recovered was substantially greater than at
Tiryns, although far from reaching the size of the Pylos archive of ca. 1100 tablets. At Mycenae I
was able to establish that outsiders lived and worked with the locals, but their status was not very
different from that of the locals. Differences in status were based on the occupations of
205 individuals and were reflected very clearly in the means of subsistence. The distributions of food products and the means of subsistence that we find recorded in the tablets constitute indirect evidence for social stratification within the ranks of the dependent personnel, whereby some receive more prestigious commodities and some others receive less or none at all. Three different levels of dependence on a superior authority are established, based on the nature of their subsistence, but further distinctions and ranks may have existed that are not observable by us.
Thebes has yielded a large archive, but the results of my examination are very tentative due to the unclear context of these tablets that could be either religious or administrative.
Although there is a substantial lack of information crucial for us to understand the social status of individuals and groups, I was able to establish that certain individuals in the tablets had a higher status than the majority of the individuals recorded.
206 CHAPTER 7
SYNTHESIS
Introduction
In the present chapter I review my observations on the social organization of the lower ranked part of the population in the Mycenaean polities, as it is reflected in the Linear B archives, in the light of the criteria regarding the definition of “slavery” that I established in the second chapter of this thesis. I suggest that we are not in fact in a position to make general comments regarding Mycenaean social organization based on the Linear B archives, because of the limited scope of the information and the limited extent of the population they record. I also conclude that the group of people at Pylos who are described as do-e-ro and traditionally interpreted as “slaves” are not actually slaves, but dependent personnel of some higher status than slaves. On the contrary, groups of women who are never described as do-e-ro in the records are probably closer to the status that my definition describes and may be viewed as such. The evidence from the rest of the mainland sites is not conclusive, mainly because we lack the extended information that the Pylos archive provides.
In order to reach these conclusions I return to the criteria that I set in the second chapter regarding the definition of “slave” and examine to what extent we are able to answer the issues these conditions raise. As a next step, I synthesize the information about individuals and groups at each site to provide a comprehensive picture of their socioeconomic status. Finally, I discuss to what extent they satisfy the conditions that I consider definitive of the “slave” status.
207 Criteria for the Definition of Slavery
As I discussed extensively in my second chapter, a wide variety of definitions and criteria
have been proposed through time in order to define what a “slave” is and who can justifiably be
considered a “slave” and who cannot. In the second chapter I reviewed these theories from
antiquity to modern times and I was able then to argue that there is never just one characteristic
or criterion that suffices to describe the status of slaves. It is rather a set of conditions that
describe not only the social status of the slave himself, but also the socioeconomic and cultural
structure of the community within which the slave lives, as well as the relationship that a slave
has with his master. These criteria are the following:
The community that holds humans as slaves needs to be structured by an ideology of
inequality, whereby some people are considered of lower status either for socioeconomic reasons
(wealth, occupation) or for cultural reasons (descent or physical and other personal
characteristics). This is not enough, however, and it should be stressed also that a community
needs to have well-defined and institutionalized social identities that distinguish the different
levels within hierarchies from each other, as well as cultural groups such as “outsiders” and
“insiders”, “normal” and marginalized people.
Equally important is the need for the community as a whole to have assigned value to
humans that they consider as having lower status or being “outsiders” as commodities. This
value could be expressed in the labor that they produce or it could also be social value in that slaves can demonstrate the wealth of people and their prestige. This is clearly shown by the fact that slaves are traded or exchanged as inanimate objects. The value of humans as objects is not only defined by the labor that they may provide for their owner and, thus, produce profit in the form of production and the amassing of wealth, but also by the highly positive effect they may
208 have on the prestige or social status of their masters. Owning a slave demonstrates the wealth of the master, his ability to obtain a slave by paying or exchanging goods for him/her, and the master’s financial affluence to secure the slaves’ subsistence.
When we turn to the condition of slaves themselves, it is important to note that their definitive characteristic is the fact that they are the property of their masters. They are absolutely dependent on their masters, who have absolute legal claims over the body, mind, labor, and production of any kind of the slave. As objects and property of another man slaves lose any kind of personal identity and they are defined by their relationship to their master, by the fact that they are slaves. It suffices to state that slave X is the slave of person Y. Another implication of the transformation of humans into objects is the fact that they are detached from their own cultural entourage, their kin lineage, personal traditions, customs, and ideas. A further implication of slaves’ objectification is the fact that the slaves do not have the liberty to form their own relations, marital and familial, but they can do so only at the discretion of their masters. Even when they are allowed to form such personal relationships the masters have the liberty to break these ties, because they are not officially recognized as legal and permanent.
It has also been universally and diachronically demonstrated that slaves were not normally procured from the members of the community within which they are found to live and work. They are “outsiders.” The term “outsiders”, however, encloses two different conditions. It can either involve people who live outside the community that uses them as slaves or it may involve members of the same community who are considered to be socially outsiders or outcasts, such as indebted persons. Consequently, slaves as “outsiders” are never completely integrated in the socioeconomic and cultural practices of the society. Ideologically, slaves are always
“outsiders” and never full members of the community, but in practice, slaves work and interact
209 with the members of the community daily or on a regular basis and often very intimately. This
inconsistency puts slaves on the margin between full members and “outcasts.”
Finally, the status of slaves is coerced, which means that their status cannot be revoked on the slaves’ own accord, but it is inflicted to the benefit of the owner. This coercion is maintained by force. This force can take different forms ranging from pure physical violence, to psychological (dishonoring) and cultural (marginalization) behaviors.
I would like to note at this point that slavery as an institution is not static and unchanging over time or over different socioeconomic and cultural conditions. On the contrary, it appears to be very diverse in the manner that it is viewed and organized within different societies. There appear, however, certain principles that remain common and constitute the ideological core around which this institution is built and organized.
Not all of the above issues can be discussed based on the evidence of the Linear B tablets.
One of the issues that we have to bear in mind is the fact that the archives provide us with information for only that part of the population in the palatial polities that is involved in the palatial economy. We do not have any information regarding the rest of the population, who might have had slaves. Secondly, the nature of the archive as administrative book keeping records does not provide us with extensive descriptions of the peoples’ way of living, nor extensive details regarding their social status. The archives themselves have not been preserved in their entirety and information that might have been recorded may be missing today either because the scribes had not recorded it yet or because it was lost during recovery and excavation of the palatial sites. Thus, any observations that we make is through comparison of each group to the others of the dependent personnel within the palatial economy.
210 Before I start discussing the individuals and groups I would also like to summarize some
general observations I have made regarding Mycenaean communities as they are reflected in the
Linear B archives. The archives of all mainland palatial sites show clear signs of a hierarchical
organization and a clear-cut ideology of inequality that divided the population into multiple
social levels. This is demonstrated by the differences in the occupations, subsistence, and
economic dependence of individuals and groups from the palace. I have considered these two
conditions as necessary for the development of the sanctioning of slavery in a community, but these alone do not imply that slavery was indeed practiced in the Mycenaean period. I have also considered necessary the presence of the ideological condition that humans may be converted to commodities. We do not have such evidence in the Linear B archives of any of the mainland palatial sites. There is no mention of humans being sold, bought, or exchanged. We do not have any indication either that people are purposefully taken from other places because they were a valued workforce, or that people have any value measured in any manner.
Finally, we do not have in any archive any record directly recording punishment or force being exercised to maintain the delivery of services owed by individuals and/or groups of people.
Coercion is not discussed either directly or indirectly. We may assume that there were ways the
palace could apply force to guarantee the supply of products and services that it needed, but
these were not normally recorded. This does not happen, however, not even when the scribes
record deficiencies in personnel (i.e., the lists of te-ko-to-a-pe, absent carpenters at certain
centers) or in tax payments (i.e., the Na tablets that record bronze-smiths who do not pay the tax
in flax).
It is possible that the evidence may not have been preserved, but even the Pylos archive,
which is one of the most extensive and is almost complete, does not include any relevant
211 indications. To the contrary, we are in a position to answer the questions that the rest of the criteria set: the “outsider” status, the anonymity/lack of personal identity, the lack of recognized kin relations, and the marginal status of slaves.
Let us proceed now to review the evidence that exists for the individuals and groups themselves.
Pylos
I will begin with the do-e-ro who have traditionally been considered to be “slaves.” First
of all my reconstruction of the dependent personnel population shows that the do-e-ro(-a) were
very few in number: 68 persons in a population of c. 5200 persons. We do not know the names
of all of the individually recorded do-e-ro(-a), but evidence shows that the palace knew all of
them by name or by the name of their superior and monitored the activities of each one of them.
Their individual identities were clearly not lost.510 We also understand from studying their names
and investigating any evidence for their descent that these men and women were locals in the
Pylian polity; none of them had any indication of having a geographical outsider status.
Their occupational status is not clear, at least not for all of them. None of the individuals
recorded is directly followed by an occupational designation that would inform us directly of
their work. Nevertheless, it is possible from context to argue that the do-e-ro(-a) recorded in the
Jn series tablets were working as bronze-smiths. This is based on the fact that the do-e-ro(-a) are
recorded as not receiving the amount of bronze as ta-ra-si-ja that they were commonly receiving
510 The only exception to this were the do-e-ro of the bronze-smiths who were identified in the lists of those who receive or do not receive ta-ra-si-ja in the name of their superior. This practice alone, however, does not indicate that they had lost their individual identity. It may be assumed that this recording method was more practical for the scribes, because they were more interested to record the amounts for each workshop headed by the superiors of the do-e-ro.
212 along with their superiors who were bronze-smiths. For the other do-e-ro(-a), however, we do
not have any indications, direct or indirect, of their occupational status.
As far as their subsistence is concerned, we see that at least sixteen do-e-ro(-a) were
land-owners. They received land in the form of o-na-to, as recompense for services that they
offered. It appears, however, that they were given these lands not by their superiors, but by
different individuals, a practice that either demonstrates a relative independence from the people
who benefit from the services that they offered, or shows that their superiors directed or allowed
the do-e-ro(-a) to work for others. The subsistence mode of the rest of the do-e-ro(-a) is not
clear, but could be directly dependent on their work and the exploitation of their work’s
products.
Another issue of interest is the relationship between the number of do-e-ro(-a) and
superiors. It appears that only very few individuals had more than one do-e-ro(-a) as subordinate.
These are the “collectors”, a group of higher status men who, among divinities, are found as the
recipients of offerings from other individuals, and the i-je-re-ja (ijevreia, priestess), who appears
in a number of different tablets. The rest of the individuals who are recorded as superiors of do-
e-ro(-a) all have one subordinate do-e-ro(-a) only.
The fact that the do-e-ro participate in the ta-ra-si-ja system next to their superiors and
that they offer their services not only to their superiors, but also to other members of the community shows that they are fully integrated in the community. On the other hand, the fact that the do-e-ro(-a) owned land of their own shows that they were not fully dependent on their immediate superiors or the palace. On the contrary they were able to cultivate their plots and produce enough food to provide for their subsistence. The “strongest” evidence, however, for the relative independence of the do-e-ro at Pylos comes from the complete absence in the tablets of
213 any mention of the do-e-ro being bought or sold by other individuals or the palace. This contrasts
the situation at the site of Knossos, on Crete, where one tablet has been found relating the act of buying a do-e-ro by one man from another.511
Finally, one tablet alone, An 607, gives us information regarding the family relations of
the do-e-ro(-a). The tablet records women do-e-ra together with their parents. Beyond
interpretational problems regarding this record, we see that the marital relation of the parents was
officially recognized and respected by the palace. Furthermore, it has been argued that the
women who are recorded in the groups were actually sisters. If we accept this interpretation,
which is very plausible, it means that these families were kept together to the extent that it was
possible and their ties were recognized.
The evidence, in conclusion, demonstrates that the group of people defined as do-e-ro at
Pylos does not strictly follow the conditions that I have considered indicative of the status of the
“slave.” One could argue that we are in fact dealing with different degrees of status even among
slaves and, thus, that the do-e-ro represent a social group of higher status and privileged
“slaves.” The accuracy of this assumption, however, cannot be satisfactorily proved by the data
at hand.
If we turn now to the group of the te-o-jo do-e-ro, the study of the names shows us that a
relatively small number of these individuals (15 out of the 76 te-o-jo do-e-ro) used ethnic
adjectives as their personal names. Not all of these ethnics can be associated with particular
locations, but nine of them refer to areas outside the Pylian polity with a predominance of
toponyms from Asia Minor. The majority of the persons, however, appear to be local to the
511 I am referring to tablet KN B 822, which records the verb qi-ri-ja-to (privato, bought) and includes the name of a do-e-ro, as well as the names of the two men who make the transaction.
214 polity of Pylos. Their occupation is not clarified by any kind of direct occupational designation, except for their main social designation te-o-jo do-e-ro. The names of some clarify this image.
We find a predominance of names that derive from types of work that are performed in the interior of a house, a temple, or a palace, and that are related to the preparation of rituals, festivities, or feasts. We also find in the tablets that all the te-o-jo do-e-ro were land-owners, holding o-na-to lands that they get as recompense for services that they rendered. It is important to note too that the people who give to the te-o-jo do-e-ro the o-na-to are craftsmen and officials, as well as the da-mo. This situation indicates that the te-o-jo do-e-ro are not tied to some higher authority for their subsistence or their work. Their relationship subsequently with te-o (god) needs to be seen in this light. The te-o-jo do-e-ro are in no way connected to the conditions of the slave, but we should rather envisage their status analogous to that of the rest of the cultic personnel.
Let us move now to the rest of the dependent population that is recorded in the Pylos tablets. We find based on the names and ethnic designations in the tablets that 45 out of 615 individually recorded persons used ethnics as personal names. At least seven ethnics derive from toponyms outside the Pylian polity. These seven ethnics alone, out of the forty-three different ethnics that appear in the tablets, are found to be used by more than one individual, but we have no indication that groups of people traveled to Pylos to practice the same kind of work. On the contrary, each of the persons who comes from the same place appears in most cases to do a different job. Therefore, there is no basis for arguing about the reason that they came to Pylos or how they came to the polity.
215 These outsiders are also found working in the same industries and crafts as locals (in
metal-working, textiles, cattle-herding and as specialized craftsmen). Their means of subsistence
did not differ from that of the majority of individually recorded craftsmen and workers. They receive either handouts or o-na-to, which indicates a relative independence from the palace as far as procuring the necessities for their livelihood. We have seen already that the mode of payment was not dependent strictly on the type of work people practiced, but now we find that the type of payment is also not dictated by the descent of the people. It appears that factors, such as experience, age, gender, and productivity, are related to the kind of payment the personnel received. Evidently, these individually recorded “outsiders” were far from marginalized. They not only kept their ethnic identities, but they were also integrated into the economy of the palace.
They were also independent of the palace for their subsistence.
Whereas we find that the outsiders individually recorded were not of lower status than the rest of the population, the same is not true for groups that were described by ethnics originating from outside the Pylian polity. We find that the only groups of outsiders were among the groups of women in the Aa/Ab series. These groups of women were recorded with their children, boys and girls, and the rations that they received daily from the palace. They were absolutely dependent on the palace for their living and the palace monitored not only their work, but also their private lives. The women were separated from their men and their children were allowed to live with them until they reached a certain age. At that point the sons of the women were separated from the women and were moved to work elsewhere in other occupations.
These outsider groups were seven in number and mainly from Asia Minor, but we do not
have any indication of how they came to Pylos -if they were violently brought at Pylos or if they
were in agreement with those who brought them. We are not sure whether they were named with
216 these ethnics because they themselves originally came from these locations, because their
ancestors did, or because their work was traditionally tied to these locations in peoples’ minds.
There are another 42 groups of such women. Altogether these women fit the closest our
definition of “slave”: loss of personal identity, absolute dependence, no recognized kin
relations.512
The local population individually recorded is found practicing a range of industrial
occupations (in metal, textile, perfume industries, and specialized crafts, such as wood-working, baking, potting, armoring and a large number of other specialties). These persons appear to be individually recorded either because they practice a unique specialized occupation or because they are very few in the entire polity of Pylos. Their occupations are almost never found among those people who are recorded collectively, a practice that indicates that the status of those who are individually recorded is probably higher or more important to the palace than that of the
people in groups. Their subsistence indicates the same: they receive either handouts or o-na-to
lands, whereas some appear to be independent land-owners owning ko-to-na ki-ti-me-na or ke- ke-me-na or even ka-ma lands. This indicates that these people were relatively independent of the palace, even though they enjoyed favors in the form of handouts or payments in land.
Finally, as we noted already, the type of payment is not directly related to the type of work the individuals practiced. In the same craft and specialty we have found that handouts and land payments are made to different people. This means that there were refined distinctions between craftsmen and workers and, therefore, refined differences in social status that we are not in a position today to entirely comprehend.
512 We do not know if the rest of the women had some type of “outsider” status, like the seven groups from places outside Pylos.
217 The groups of local craftsmen and workers are found working in the same industries but also in the military structures of Pylos, in the o-ka tablets and also as e-re-ta (rowers). We do not have indications regarding their subsistence, with the only exceptions being the groups of women in the Aa/Ab series who were discussed above with the outsider groups.
Apart from these groups of women, we find a very few other groups of people who receive commodities or handouts, such as barley and wine. We do not have indications of the social status of the people in the groups. We know the superiors of some of them, who include high officials such as the ra-wa-ke-ta, the ke-ro-te, the e-qe-ta, and military officials in the o-ka tablets. I believe we can safely argue that the status of these groups of people was lower than that of the individually recorded craftsmen, but there is no conclusive evidence that would justify identifying these groups as “slaves.”
To conclude, the only persons who may have been slaves are the groups of women in the
Aa/Ab series. No other individual or group of persons appears to satisfy the conditions that I established at the beginning of this thesis. Even so, however, we must retain a degree of skepticism, since we do not have the most compelling piece of information that would permit us conclusively to identify these women as slaves. We cannot show that they were commodities, objects of value that could be sold or exchanged.
218 Mycenae
At Mycenae the archive is significantly smaller than that of Pylos and we do not have any
mention of do-e-ro or te-o-jo do-e-ro. This smaller size of the archive is not evident only in the number of tablets themselves, but also in the size of the population recorded. I was able in this
thesis to reconstruct the size of the population recorded (ca. 140 persons), but I believe this small
number of people partly reflects the fact that the majority of these tablets was found in the so-
called “Ivory Houses.” The archive at Pylos, on the other hand, was found entirely within the
palace, in the “archives room” and in several rooms at the palace that were workshops.513 Hence,
the nature and purpose of the tablets at Mycenae are related to the function of the “Ivory Houses”
themselves, as well as the relationship between these houses and the palace within the acropolis.
It is possible that these tablets constitute the archives of each one of the “Ivory Houses”, but we need to understand further how these archives and records are connected to the palace and its affairs, what percentage of the entire population in the polity they represent, and most importantly who monitored their work and enjoyed their products.
Based on the personal names of individuals and other indications of ethnic descent, I was
also able to establish that outsiders lived and worked at Mycenae. What is more, the people of
Mycenae had a very clear notion of who was a local and who was not and was, therefore,
considered to be an “outsider”; the people who were not local were so conspicuous as to be
identified by an ethnic adjective alone, which was enough of an identification marker.
513 Shelmerdine 1985, pp. 41ff; 1997, pp. 394-395. Tablets (Fr series dealing with commodities used in the perfume industry) were found in situ at Pylos in the area of the palace that is described as the “Northeast Workshop.”
219 The status of outsiders is not very clear and it appears that the people at Mycenae or the
authorities did not have an established system for their treatment. On the contrary we find that
they work in the same industries as the locals, in textiles and food-processing (as a-to-po-qo,
bakers). The means of their subsistence were also not different or determined by the fact that
they were outsiders. I believe that the mode of their subsistence was dependent on their occupation rather than their different ethnic descent. Thus, we find that the two men who are bakers receive rations, whereas the rest who work most probably in the textile industry receive payment in kind (either wool or oil). They appear thus to be integrated into the community.
Some are absolutely dependent on the palace, but some are independent as far as procuring their subsistence is concerned. There is nothing that compels us to consider any of these persons as
“slaves.”
If we turn to the local craftsmen working in the service of the “Ivory Houses” or the palace of Mycenae, we see that the main demonstration of hierarchy involves the manner in which people are recorded. Persons are either individually or collectively recorded and from those who are individually recorded we can further distinguish those who are recorded with a clear (and deliberate) reference to their occupational status. These divisions will be clarified as we proceed with this synthesis.
We find at Mycenae a large number of people recorded individually (four times the number of people collectively recorded), but we know the occupations of only twenty
individuals. For the rest we can see that the scribes deliberately omitted in most cases
information regarding their occupations, even though it is not possible for us to explain this practice in every case. The tablets in the Oe and Ge series constitute one such case: they record distributions of wool to individuals and taxation of, or payments to, individuals respectively. We
220 may assume that the individuals on these records are working in the textile and perfume oil
industry respectively, but with no further information for them, I do not believe we are in a
position to establish with certainty their occupation or social status.
Nonetheless, the twenty individuals whose occupations we know provide us with the only
safe information regarding the organization of the labor force at Mycenae. We see at Mycenae an
emphasis on the work of the a-to-po-qo (ajrtokovpoi, bakers), who are all recorded by name.
Some of them appear also in a list of individuals who are sent elsewhere (Au 657), as well as in a
list of bakers who receive rations. The bakers constitute the only specialized groups of men who
receive rations. Next to the bakers we find a number of specialties that are represented in the
records by only one individual. Four of them are so conspicuous, as far as their work is
concerned, that they are named after their occupation: a-ko-ro-ta (ajgrovth~, farmer); ka-ke-u
(calkeuv~, bronze-smith); e-ke-ro[-qo-no, wage-earner; and ke-ra-me-u, potter. Of similar importance must have been two other men: one ka-na-pe-u (knafeuv~, fuller); and one pe-re-ke-u
(plokeuv~, basket-maker). All of these individuals receive payment in kind and, in particular, payment in wool. This means that they are independent to a great degree from the palace, because they procure on their own the means for their subsistence. The form and quantity of the payment further indicate that they could not use the commodity, wool, for industrial manufacture of textiles, but rather for their own personal use, as accessories in their work or for garments for themselves. The latter suggestion is very interesting if we take into consideration that textiles were a very important activity in the Mycenaean palaces, with no exception, and that the textiles produced were of high quality destined to be traded or exchanged with other centers.514 In this
514 Killen 1985, pp. 263-264; Halstead 1999, p. 37; Galaty 1999, p. 17.
221 context a payment in the form of a prestige commodity should be seen as an honor made to higher-status craftsmen and also as a means to re-assert the status of these individuals.
On the other hand, we have people collectively recorded in groups. This fact alone should indicate a lower status for the individuals involved, because this mode of recording has proven at
Pylos to involve lower status dependent personnel. But this is not exactly the case at Mycenae.
Three groups work in the textile industry and two of them receive payment in oil. It would be sensible to argue that the oil would be used in the manufacture of textiles and, thus, for industrial purposes. The quantities, however, are small and not enough to cover industrial needs. Oil, a kind of prestige commodity, was hence offered as a payment in kind for the services of these people, to honor them by providing them not with a subsistence commodity, but a luxury product that could be used as a food supplement, “soap”, or otherwise.
Other groups, such as the a-to-po-qo (ajrtokovpo~, baker) and the highly specialized groups of ku-wa-no-wo-ko-i, received quantities of a commodity that was signified with the sign
*190, the value of which is not clear today. Nonetheless, the groups do not receive staple food- products as they do at Pylos, and, thus, the level of their dependence on the palace is not as low as that of the majority of groups at Pylos.
Last, I would like to discuss the status of a particular group of women. These women were recorded on tablet V 659, each one by her name and some recorded together with their daughters. This is the only record of women workers at Mycenae that resembles so closely the groups of women at Pylos (Aa/Ab series) who appear to have had the lowest status and to have been the most dependent on the palace for their subsistence. We lack, however, important information concerning the identity of their superiors and the relationship of these women to the palace and their superiors. We also do not have exact information about their occupation and
222 type of subsistence. We merely speculate that they had low status based on one record that is not very clear to us today, but shows that someone monitored and organized in detail (the beds that they would use) their living and sleeping arrangements. Therefore, we cannot argue conclusively that these women were “slaves.”
The mode of subsistence is perhaps the most important indication of the status and level of dependence of the craftsmen on a higher authority. At Mycenae, we saw that rations (absolute dependence) are given to the bakers. Handouts (small quantities of food products that indicate a smaller degree of dependence) were given to three individuals recorded on tablet Fu 711, whose occupation, however, we do not know. Finally, payment in kind (representing very small degree of dependence) is given to groups of craftsmen and to the six individual craftsmen whose occupations were unique at Mycenae. At Pylos, I have associated the rations and the groups that receive them with “slaves”, but this is not possible at Mycenae. The bakers were among the most important craftsmen at Mycenae, to be known by name, with no superiors except most probably the palace. Nothing of these features is compatible with my criteria for “slaves.”
223 Thebes
The evidence from Thebes does not present as clear a picture regarding the social status of the people recorded in the tablets as the data from Pylos and Mycenae do. To a great extent this is due to the interpretational problem that we are faced with at Thebes. The editors
Aravantinos, Godart, and Sacconi515 argue for a religious context for the entire set of the tablets, whereby everyone is implicated in temple affairs and all distributions are made on the occasion of religious festivities. On the other hand, Palaima516 and Kyriakides517 have argued for a more administrative nature for the set, whereby the persons recorded are dependent personnel and the distributions are similar to the distributions at Pylos and Mycenae.
Another difficulty arises from the fragmentary nature of the records, as well as from the fact that we do not know how this archive was formed, or its chronological extent. For example, my examination of the personal names showed that ethnics were also used at Thebes as personal names. We lack, however, further information regarding the occupational status of these people that would provide us with some indication of their status. We know also for some of these outsiders that they received quantities of wine or barley, but the nature of these distributions is not clear.
A similar situation is observed for the rest of the population recorded in the tablets. We know the names of 158 persons, but we have occupational information for only 12 persons. As far as the distributions of commodities that the individuals and groups receive, we are able to make only one observation, even though we cannot establish whether we are dealing with
515 Aravantinos, Godart, and Sacconi 2001. 516 Palaima 2001; 2003. 517 Kyriakides 2003.
224 rations, handouts, or payments in kind. The majority of the population receives barley, but a small percentage (15%) receives other commodities altogether or a combination of barley and other commodities such as wine, flour, or olives. These commodities were valued and access to them must have been limited to the wealthy persons who had the affluence to commit to such demanding crops. Similarly to Mycenae, to receive such commodities must have meant that the recipients were of higher status and through the receipt of such distributions they succeeded further in demonstrating their higher status. It is impossible, however, to tie these advantageous distributions to the occupational status or social standing of these persons and it is impossible, further, to identify anyone as a “slave.”
Epilogue
We have seen that a “slave” status can be tentatively associated only with a number of
groups of women at Pylos who have some of the characteristic features of “slaves”, but we are missing crucial indications that they were considered as objects and/or commodities. The group of the do-e-ro that has been traditionally interpreted as “slaves”, because in Classical Greek the word dou`lo~ signifies a “slave”, has proven to signify higher status dependent personnel rather
than “slaves.” This observation leads us to the conclusion that same titles or designations in
Mycenaean and Classical Greece did not necessarily have the same meaning and did not signify
exactly the same social practices.518 The rest of the population at Pylos, as well as the people
recorded at Mycenae, Tiryns, and Thebes, do not appear to have enjoyed “slave” status, even
518 An example of this inconsistency in meaning is found in the word qa-si-re-u, which is compared to the later basileuv~. In Mycenaean times this title appears to designate minor officials. In later Greece (Iron age period) the word is reserved for the highest official, taking over the earlier meaning of the word wa-na-ka, the supreme king of Mycenaean times. In even later times (archaic and classical periods), basileuv~ is a title that loses its significance and power in most city-states and represents again a superior type of officer or magistrate. Morpurgo-Davies 1979, p. 96.
225 though we see very clearly that there was significant difference in ranking between individuals
and groups.
As we stated, however, at the start of this thesis, the information at hand comes from
palatial archives and does not reflect the social practices of the entire population of the
Mycenaean polities. We cannot exclude the possibility that slavery might have existed in the
households on the periphery of the large palatial sites. If it did exist, it is logical that the palace did not record it, because, although any such slaves would have been of interest to their masters
who provided for their livelihood, they would have been of no particular interest to the palace.
We may suspect, furthermore, their presence from records that refer to farming and to the
large quantities of wheat, barley, olives, wine, and flax that was produced for the needs of the
palatial economy. We do not have any lists of persons directly involved in this kind of
production, except from the references in the E (landholding) series at Pylos, where the owners
of the lands where these crops were probably grown were recorded.
226 CHAPTER 8
CONCLUSIONS
The central theme of this thesis has been the examination of the evidence in the Linear B archives regarding slaves. In the socially stratified communities of the Mycenaean period on mainland Greece the presence of slaves has been assumed on the basis of the presence of a group of people at Pylos described as do-e-ro(-a) (dou`lo~-h, slave) and from comparisons of the
Mycenaean polities with societies contemporary to the Mycenaean in the Near East and Egypt.
This assumption has been accepted a priori in many discussions of Mycenaean social structure and stratification.
In the process of studying, analyzing, and discussing the available evidence from the
Linear B tablets, this thesis has raised several issues in previous scholarship that appear to be problematic when it comes to the interpretation of social and occupational designations. The most relevant case for this thesis is that of the designation do-e-ro, which has been generally interpreted as signifying “slaves”, but the analysis of the Pylos evidence in this thesis has demonstrated that this is not supported by the texts.
One of the first things I took issue with was the interpretation of “do-e-ro” as a social designation with the same meaning that the word had in Classical Greece. The definition in the
Liddell-Scott Greek-English Lexicon clearly states that the word signified “slave” in Classical
Greece. My analysis, however, proved that this word did not have the same connotations as it had in later historical periods. The do-e-ro of Mycenaean times are found only at Pylos and they
227 appear to be dependent personnel of some higher status. They were relatively independent from their superiors as far as their subsistence is concerned, but probably very closely attached to them
in their work so as to be defined always as the do-e-ro of person X. They form a very small
fraction of the entire population that is dependent on the palace, and they are all known by name
to the officials of the palatial bureaucracy. The fact that only one is associated with each person
who appears as superior to a do-e-ro leads me to envisage them as first assistants or supervisors
of the personnel that might have been employed in the workshop where the do-e-ro and their
superiors worked. These are mere observations and, if we had more information, this image
concerning the individuals described as do-e-ro might be entirely negated. But it is evident that
the do-e-ro do not constitute personnel of the lowest status in the Pylian polity.
The only groups that appear to have had a very low status and to have been the most
dependent on the palace of Pylos for their livelihood and work were the groups of women
recorded in the Aa/Ab series. These women were working mainly in the textile industry. They
were highly monitored by the palace and the textiles that they produced constituted one type of
prestige object that the palace distributed on an interregional level. These women received daily
rations from the palace to live on, which means that they were absolutely dependent on the
palace for their survival. They lived and worked organized in groups, having lost any kind of
personal/ individual identity. Their children lived with them until they reached maturity and then
the boys were separated from their mothers and organized in groups of men who were put to
work in other fields monitored by the palace. The girls do not appear to have been separated and
it appears that they were put to work in the same groups as their mothers.
A similar kind of group of women has been identified at Mycenae (MY V 659). The
women are recorded by name, probably because the subject of the record itself is very
228 specialized. Nonetheless, the picture that is reflected by the record as a whole is that of a number of women living together, with the palace monitoring even the details of their accommodation
(e.g., the distribution of beds amongst them); and they live together with their daughters. They appear to be separated from the men and any male children that they might have had. The occupational status of the women or the means of their subsistence are totally unclear to us.
Nevertheless, I would argue that the social status of these women, as it is implied by this particular record, is very close to that of the women at Pylos, and fits to the conditions that characterize the status of “slaves.”
These groups are only a small percentage of the population that I have examined and although I have demonstrated that there were various social statuses in existence amongst the craftsmen, workers, and servants within the very large group that I have been referring to as
“dependent personnel”, I have not been able to identify any other individual or group that approximates to such an extent the “slave” status based on the criteria that I have developed (i.e., the treatment of people as property, the loss of individual identity, the “outsiders” status, lack of personal relationships).
I would like to note, also, that I have not designated anywhere in this thesis any individual or group as being definitively of “slave status.” This is due to two reasons. First, I have to take into account that slavery, as an institution, is dynamic and that there is a danger of oversimplifying the nature of slavery and the Mycenaean perception of it by rigidly following the criteria of my definition and not allowing room for some level of discrepancy. Secondly, we lack substantial information that would make definite any identification of individuals or social groups with “slaves”; except for one group of women with their children at Pylos who are described as ra-wi-ja-ja (captives), we miss any kind of information that would demonstrate that
229 people were objects or that they were traded from outside the Mycenaean polities. We also lack
any information that the women were constrained in their status, work, and lifestyle by force and
the threat of violent punishment.
Another issue that I raise concerns the scope of the Linear B archives and the extent to
which we are allowed to make inferences about the social structure of the entire population of the
Mycenaean polities. My reconstruction of the populations that are recorded in the tablets showed
that the people in the tablets constitute only a small percentage of the entire population estimated for the polities. I have also demonstrated that these are the men and women who work in the industries and crafts that the palace needs and that feed the wealth-financed economic system that supported the elites, and reinforced and reproduced the social divisions.519 The major part of
the population, however, is textually invisible. The palatial archives do not contain any kind of
information that relates to the local economies that were of no interest to the affairs of the palace and the elite. There is no reason for us not to assume that “slaves” were used in the homesteads and small towns and farmsteads of the periphery of Pylos, Mycenae, Tiryns, or Thebes. It remains for scholars to investigate the material culture recovered from the periphery to recover the evidence that might make “slaves” visible to us.
Finally, a third issue was indirectly touched upon in this thesis. The reconstructions of
most scholars of the well-identified hierarchical structure of the Mycenaean period are
characterized by two attitudes. First, scholars tend to make a dualistic division of the population
in the context of the population’s hierarchical organization, whereby they recognize two basic
519 Galaty and Parkinson 1999, p. 7.
230 divisions: elite and “all others” (the “low-ranked part of the population” as I have been referring
to them in this thesis). Secondly, scholars have the tendency to combine information from
different palatial centers as if they all had the same social structure and functioned in a similar
way. My analysis has indicated that both of these scholarly tendencies are not supported by the textual evidence from the four mainland palatial centers. Numerous status levels have been identified during the analysis of the entire body of the “low-ranked part of the population”, such as status differences between craftsmen individually recorded and those collectively recorded; between those who work for the wa-na-ka, the ra-wa-ke-ta, and the goddess Potnia, and those
craftsmen who work for other individuals of lower status; and between those people who receive rations, handouts, or payment in kind and land from the palace. These are only some of the divisions that I was able to identify and they prove that our reconstructions of the Mycenaean social organization must become more complex to acknowledge the many differences identified here and the many more that might have existed.
We have seen, furthermore, that there were pronounced differences in the organization of the dependent population in each palatial center and differences in the forms of payment that the palace made to the people working in various crafts and industries; but we saw also that the various palaces focused their attention on different specialized crafts and occupations, which leads us to argue that there were different standards with regard to the individuals and groups of people that each center valued and considered to be of higher status. For example, rations are given at Pylos to the groups of women that I have argued were of a status very close to that of
“slave.” At Mycenae, however, rations are given to the bakers (a-to-po-qo), who are numerous, but all known by name and of significant importance to the palace, even though we are not familiar today with the reasons for the importance of the a-to-po-qo in the economy or social
231 practices of Mycenae. These differences demonstrate that the Mycenaean polities were
significantly more individualized than we gave them credit for.
The study of social structures is inherently difficult when we are dealing with societies
for which we do not have literary evidence that discusses, directly or indirectly, such issues of
social order. The study, however, becomes even more difficult when we are dealing with a social
group, such as slaves, who are invisible even when we do have general social histories and other
literary works in our disposition.520 Such a society was the Athenian society of the Classical
period, for which we know from various literary sources that slaves existed, but the slaves
themselves are invisible either in the texts, where references to this social group are very sparse,
or in material culture, where scholars have found that it is very difficult to associate slaves with
particular classes of objects.521 In the Mycenaean period the invisibility of the slaves is even
more pronounced. Considering the fact that the word do-e-ro did not signify the same thing that
it did in the Classical period, we become very skeptical not only of how different the notion of slavery might have been in the Mycenaean and the Classical period, but also of other institutions
and social statuses.
The nature, furthermore, of the material that I have studied hinders this study. The tablets
are not literary texts that might have provided us with more and clearer references describing the
social order of the Mycenaean polities. On the contrary, the Linear B tablets are administrative
texts, with lists, inventories, and records of transaction, which provide no direct illustrations of
the Mycenaean social practices, laws, or ideologies. Consequently, we are forced to combine a
520 Only few of the many scholars who have worked on the literary and textual evidence for slavery are Finley (1981a and 1981b), Garnsey (1996), Garlan (1988). 521 Some of the scholars who have begun to work with material culture in association with slaves are Morris (1998), Thompson (2003), and Dubois (2003).
232 variety of different kinds of evidence, such as the ethnics, the occupations, or the subsistence mode, to deduce information concerning the social or economic status of the individuals and groups of people recorded.
Furthermore, a large number of tablets have not been preserved well, with some being entirely illegible and others being recovered in small fragments. The fragmentation of the tablets is especially frustrating, because we know sometimes that they refer to people, but we do not have any further evidence to reconstruct the context in which these records were written. Finally, the archives of Mycenae, Tiryns, and Thebes are clearly fractions of what must have executed in the Mycenaean period. This is well illustrated if we compare them to the very large archive of
Pylos. The implications of the poor preservation and very partial recovery of these archives makes it clear that we are missing substantial information regarding the socioeconomic organization of these three polities, information that would help us to reconstruct the social status of the individuals and groups of people that we find recorded. This is especially evident in the case of Tiryns where only eighteen tablets were recovered by the excavators. Only three of these tablets provided information relevant to this thesis, but, even though we have found references to individuals and groups there, we lack any kind of context for them, and are at a loss to understand the reasons for which these records were made.
To the extent that it was possible, this thesis has made one basic contribution. It has emphasized the need for scholars to turn to the study of social groups other than elites and higher officials, to examine evidence for the “invisible people” who constitute the foundation of what we call today the Mycenaean society. “Slaves” are only one such group; further studies of groups
233 such as children, families, and the lower ranked population of the periphery of the Mycenaean
palatial centers are all needed.
Such studies should not be limited to the study of the textual evidence alone, but should
attempt to combine both textual and archaeological evidence for a more comprehensive
examination of the “simple people”, the “lower-ranked people” and the way that they lived and
functioned in the Mycenaean polities. I believe that as a next step in the study of slavery in the
Mycenaean period we should turn to a part of the material culture that has proved to substantially
demonstrate social ranking and divisions, the mortuary data. Mortuary evidence is not limited to
the demonstration of the ideologies and social order of the elites alone, but constitutes the result of practices of all social groups. I believe it will be possible in the future to find in the mortuary evidence, as well as in other kinds of archaeological material evidence, facts to support the same observations that I have come to make in the present study.
Another direction towards which we should turn in the future is also the textual evidence from Crete. The corpus of Linear B texts at Knossos is very large and contains interesting details that might support my observations for the mainland social structure and “slaves.” For example, the text on tablet KN B 822 relates the sale of a do-e-ro ([……]-ro si-ra-ko qi-ri-ja-to ku-te-ro ku-ro2-jo po-[…]-qe-re [….]-je-wo do-e-ro MAN 1). The key word in this text is qi-ri-ja-to
(privato, bought); we also have the names of the buyer and the seller, as well as that of the do-e- ro.522 This is the only tablet that shows that the do-e-ro could be bought and sold as
commodities. We cannot be certain that the same processes occurred on the mainland, and it remains to compare the Knossos tablets against those of mainland Greece.
522 Lejeune 1971, p. 67.
234 BIBLIOGRAPHY
Appadurai, A. 1986. “Introduction: Commodities and the Politics of Value,” in The Social Life of
Things: Commodities in Cultural Perspective, A. Appadurai, ed., Cambridge, pp. 3-63.
Aravantinos, V. L. 1999. “Mycenaean Texts and Contexts at Thebes: The Discovery of New
Linear B Archives on the Kadmeia,” in Floreant Studia Mycenaea: Akten des X.
Internationalen Mykenologischen Colloquiums in Salzburg vom 1-5 Mai 1995, I, S.
Deger-Jalkotzy, S. Hiller, and O. Panagl, eds., Vienna, pp. 45-78.
Aravantinos, V. L., L. Godart, and A. Sacconi. 2001. Thèbes. Fouilles de la Cadmée I: Les
Tablettes en Linéaire B de la Odos Pelopidou, Pisa/Rome.
Aravantinos, V. L., L. Godart, and A. Sacconi. 2002. Thèbes. Fouilles de la Cadmée III: Corpus
des Documents d' Archives en Linéaire B de Thèbes (1-433), Pisa/Rome.
Austin, M. M. and P. Vidal-Naquet. 1977. Economic and Social History of Ancient Greece: An
Introduction, M. M. Austin, trans., Berkeley/Los Angeles.
Aura Jorro, F. 1985. Diccionario Micénico, I, Madrid.
Aura Jorro, F. 1993. Diccionario Micénico, II, Madrid.
Bartonk, A. 1999. “Mycenaean Common Nouns in the Disguise of Proper Names,” in Floreant
Studia Mycenaea: Akten des X. Internationalen Mykenologischen Colloquiums in
Salzburg vom 1.-5. Mai 1995, II, S. Deger-Jalkotzy, S. Hiller, and O. Panagl, eds.,
Vienna, pp. 121-129.
Baumbach, L. 1983a. “An Examination of the Personal Names in the Knossos Tablets as
Evidence for the Social Structure of Crete in the Late Minoan II Period,” in Minoan
235 Society: Proceedings of the Cambridge Colloquium 1981, O. Krzyszkowska and L.
Nixon, eds., Bristol, pp. 3-6.
Baumbach, L. 1983b. “An Examination of the Evidence for a State of Emergency at Pylos c.
1200 BC from the Linear B Tablets,” in Res Mycenaeae: Akten des VII. Internationalen
Mykenologischen Colloquiums in Nurnberg vom 6.-10. April 1981, A. Heubeck and G.
Neumann, eds., Göttingen, pp. 28-40.
Bech Nosh, M. L. 2000. “Acquisition and Distribution: ta-ra-si-ja in the Mycenaean Textile
Industry,” in Trade and Production in Premonetary Greece: Acquisition and Distribution
of Raw Materials and Finished Products. Proceedings of the 6th International Workshop,
Athens 1996, C. Gillis, C. Risberg, and B. Sjoberg, eds., Jonsered, pp. 43-61.
Bechtel, F. 1917. Die Historischen Personennamen des Griechischen bis zur Kaiserzeit, Halle.
Bender, B. 1989. “The Roots of Inequality,” in Domination and Resistance, D. Miller, M.
Rowlands, and C. Tilley, eds., London, pp. 83-95.
Bennet, J. 1998. “The Linear B Archives and the Kingdom of Nestor,” in Sandy Pylos: An
Archaeological History from Nestor to Navarino, J. L. Davis, ed., Austin, Texas, pp. 111-
133.
Bennett, E. L. 1956a. “Correspondances entre les Textes des Tablettes Pyliennes des Séries Aa,
Ab, et Ad,” in Études Mycéniennes: Actes du Colloque International de Gif-sur-Yvette
(Avril 1956), M. Lejeune, ed., Paris, pp. 121-136.
Bennett, E. L. 1956b. “The Landholders of Pylos,” AJA 60, pp. 103-133.
Bennett, E. L. 1957. Rev. of M. G. F. Ventris and J. Chadwick, Documents in Mycenaean Greek,
in Language 33, pp. 553-568.
Bennett, E. L. 1961. “Textual Notes: PY An 607,” Minos 7, pp. 5-13.
236 Bennett, E. L. and J.-P. Olivier. 1973. The Pylos Tablets Transcribed, I., Rome.
Bennett, E. L. and J.-P. Olivier. 1976. The Pylos Tablets Transcribed, II, Rome.
Brosius, M. 2003. “Ancient Archives and Concepts of Record-Keeping: An Introduction,” in
Ancient Archives and Archival Traditions: Concepts of Record-Keeping in the Ancient
World, M. Brosius, ed., Oxford, pp. 1-16.
Carlier, P. 1999. “Les Mentions de la Parenté dans les Textes Mycéniens,” in Floreant Studia
Mycenaea: Akten Des X. Internationalen Mykenologischen Colloquiums in Salzburg vom
1-5 Mai 1995, I, S. Deger-Jalkotzy, S. Hiller, and O. Panagl, eds., Vienna, pp. 185-194.
Chadwick, J. 1958. “Translations and Linguistic Commentary,” in The Mycenae Tablets II, J.
Chadwick, ed., Philadelphia, pp. 106-112.
Chadwick, J. 1962. “Texts and Commentary,” in The Mycenae Tablets III, J. Chadwick, ed.,
Philadelphia, pp. 54-67.
Chadwick, J. 1973. Documents in Mycenaean Greek, 2nd ed., Cambridge.
Chadwick, J. 1976. The Mycenaean World, Cambridge.
Chadwick, J. 1977. “The Interpretation of Mycenaean Documents and Pylian Geography,” in
Mycenaean Geography: Proceedings of the Cambridge Colloquium September 1976, J.
Bintliff, ed., Cambridge, pp. 36-39.
Chadwick, J. 1988. “The Women of Pylos,” in Texts, Tablets, and Scribes: Studies in Mycenaean
Epigraphy and Economy, J.-P. Olivier and T. G. Palaima, eds. (Minos Supplement 10),
Salamanca, pp. 42-95.
Collins, L. 1969. “Greek Slave Names” (diss. The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore).
Dabney, M. K., P. Halstead, and P. Thomas. 2004. “Mycenaean Feasting on Tsoungiza at
Ancient Nemea,” in The Mycenaean Feast, J. C. Wright, ed., Oxford, pp. 77-95.
237 Deger-Jalkotzy, S. 1972-73. “The Women of PY An 607,” Minos 13, pp. 137-160.
Deroy, L. 1968. Les Leveurs d' Impôts dans le Royaume Mycénien de Pylos, Rome.
Deroy, L. and M. Gerard. 1965. Le Cadastre Mycénien de Pylos, Rome.
Diderot, D. 2001. “Slavery,” in Slavery, S. Engerman, S. Drescher, and R. Paquette, eds., S.
Drescher, trans., Oxford, pp. 26-28.
Dietler, M. 2001. “Theorizing the Feast: Rituals of Consumption, Commensal Politics, and
Power in African Contexts,” in Feasts: Archaeological and Ethnographic Perspectives
on Food, Politics, and Power, M. Dietler and B. Hayden, eds., Washington, D.C., pp. 65-
114.
Dietler, M. and B. Hayden, eds. 2001. Feasts: Archaeological and Ethnographic Perspectives on
Food, Politics, and Power, Washington, D.C.
Duhoux, Y. 1976. Aspects du Vocabulaire Économique Mycénien (Cadastre-Artisanat-
Fiscalité), Amsterdam.
Engels, F. 1966. Herr Eugen Dühring's Revolution in Science (Anti-Dühring), C. P. Dutt, ed., E.
Burns, trans., New York.
Engels, F. 1972. The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State in the Light of the
Researches of Lewis H. Morgan, E. B. Leacock, ed., New York.
Engerman, S., S. Drescher, and R. Paquette, eds. 2001, Slavery, Oxford.
Finley, M. I. 1968. “Slavery,” in International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences, XIV, D. L.
Sills, ed., New York, pp. 307-313.
Finley, M. I. 1980. Ancient Slavery and Modern Ideology. New York.
Finley, M. I. 1981a. “Was Greek Civilisation Based on Slave Labour?,” in Economy and Society
in Ancient Greece, B. D. Shaw and R. P. Saller, eds., New York, pp. 97-115.
238 Finley, M. I. 1981b. “The Servile Statuses of Ancient Greece,” in Economy and Society in
Ancient Greece, B. D. Shaw and R. P. Saller, eds., New York, pp. 133-149.
Forbes, H. (forthcoming). Early Modern Greece: Liquid Landscapes and Fluid Populations.
Foxhall, L. 1990. “Olive Cultivation within Greek and Roman Agriculture: The Ancient
Economy Revisited” (diss. University of Liverpool, Liverpool).
Foxhall, L. 1995. “Bronze to Iron: Agricultural Systems and Political Structures in Late Bronze
Age and Early Iron Age Greece,” ABSA 90, pp. 239-250.
Fraser, P. 2000. “Ethnics as Personal Names,” in Greek Personal Names: Their Value as
Evidence, S. Hornblower and E. Matthews, eds., Proceedings of the British Academy
104, Oxford, pp. 149-157.
Freilich, M., D. Raybeck, J. Savishinsky, eds. 1991, Deviance: Anthropological Perspectives,
New York.
Friedl, E. 1962. Vasilika: A Village in Modern Greece, New York.
Galaty, M. L. 1999. Nestor's Wine Cups: Investigating Ceramic Manufacture and Exchange in a
Late Bronze Age “Mycenaean” State, Oxford.
Galaty, M. L. and W. A. Parkinson. 1999. “Putting Mycenaean Palaces in Their Place: An
Introduction,” in Rethinking Mycenaean Palaces: New Interpretations of an Old Idea, M.
L. Galaty and W. A. Parkinson, eds., Los Angeles, pp. 1-8.
Garlan, Y. 1988. Slavery in Ancient Greece, J. Lloyd, trans., Ithaca/London.
Garnsey, P. 1996. Ideas of Slavery from Aristotle to Augustine, Cambridge.
Godart, L. 2001. “La Terre Mère et le Monde Égéen,” in Potnia: Deities and Religion in the
Aegean Bronze Age. Proceedings of the 8th International Aegean Conference/ 8e
239 Rencontre Égéenne Internationale, Göteborg, Göteborg University, 12-15 April 2000, R.
Laffineur and R. Hagg, eds., Liège/Austin, Texas, pp. 463-466.
Godart, L. and J.-P. Olivier. 1975. “Nouveaux Textes en Linéaire B de Tirynthe,” in Tiryns:
Forschungen und Berichte, VIII, Mainz am Rhein, pp. 37-53.
Godart, L. and A. Sacconi. 1999. “La Géographie des États Mycéniens,” CRAIBL 1999, pp. 527-
546.
Godart, L., J. T. Killen, and J.-P. Olivier. 1983. “Eighteen More Fragments of Linear B Tablet
from Tiryns; Ausgrabungen in Tiryns 1981,” AA 1983, pp. 413-426.
Gregersen, M. L. B. 1997a. “Craftsmen in the Linear B Archives,” in Trade and Production in
Premonetary Greece: Production and the Craftsman. Proceedings of the 4th and 5th
International Workshops, Athens 1994 and 1995, C. Gillis, C. Risberg, and B. Sjoberg,
eds., Göteborg, pp. 43-56.
Gregersen, M. L. B. 1997b. “Pylian Craftsmen: Payment in Kind/Rations or Land?,” in Tevcnh:
Craftsmen, Craftswomen, and Craftsmanship in the Aegean Bronze Age. Proceedings of
the 6th International Aegean Conference/6e Rencontre Égéenne Internationale,
Philadelphia, Temple University, 18-21 April 1996 (Aegaeum 16), R. Laffineur and P. P.
Betancourt, eds., Liège/Austin, Texas, pp. 397-405.
Halstead, P. 1995. “Late Bronze Age Grain Crops and Linear B Ideograms *65, *120, and
*121,” ABSA 90, pp. 229-234.
Halstead, P. 1999. “Towards a Model of Mycenaean Palatial Mobilization,” in Rethinking
Mycenaean Palaces: New Interpretations of an Old Idea, M. L. Galaty and W. A.
Parkinson, eds., Los Angeles, pp. 35-42.
240 Halstead, P. 2001. “Mycenaean Wheat, Flax, and Sheep: Palatial Intervention in Farming and Its
Implications for Rural Society,” in Economy and Politics in the Mycenaean Palace
States: Proceedings of a Conference Held on 1-3 July 1999 in the Faculty of Classics,
Cambridge, S. Voutsaki and J. Killen, eds., Cambridge, pp. 38-50.
Hamilakis, Y. 1996. “Wine, Oil, and the Dialectics of Power in Bronze Age Crete: A Review of
the Evidence,” OJA 15, pp. 1-32.
Hamilakis, Y. 2000. “The Anthropology of Food and Drink Consumption and Aegean
Archaeology,” in Palaeodiet in the Aegean: Papers from a Colloquium Held at the 1993
Meeting of the Archaeological Institute of America in Washington D.C., S. J. Vaughan
and W. D. E. Coulson, eds., Oxford, pp. 55-64.
Hayden, B. 2001. “Fabulous Feasts: A Prolegomenon to the Importance of Feasting,” in Feasts:
Archaeological and Ethnographic Perspectives on Food, Politics, and Power, M. Dietler
and B. Hayden, eds., Washington, D.C., pp. 23-64.
Hiller, S. 1988. “Dependent Personnel in Mycenaean Texts,” in Society and Economy in the
Eastern Mediterranean (c. 1500-1000 BC), M. Heltzer and E. Lipinski, eds., Leuven, pp.
53-68.
Hills, J., J. le Grand, and D. Piachaud, eds. 2002. Understanding Social Exclusion, Oxford/ New
York.
Hobsbawm, E. J. 1977. “Introduction,” in Pre-Capitalist Economic Formations, E. J.
Hobsbawm, ed., New York, pp. 9-66.
Hooker, J. T. 1980. Linear B: An Introduction, Bristol.
241 Hooker, J. T. 1990. “Cult-Personnel in the Linear B Texts from Pylos,” in Pagan Priests;
Religion and Power in the Ancient World, M. Beard and J. North, eds., London, pp. 157-
176.
Hooker, J. T. 1996. Eisagwghv sth Grammikhv B, 2nd ed., Ch. E. Maravelias, trans., Athens
Ilievski, P. Hr. 1996. “The Mycenaean Personal Names in -to,” in Atti e Memorie del Secondo
Congresso Internazionale di Micenologia: Roma-Napoli, 14-20 Ottobre 1991, I. E. de
Miro, L. Godart, and A. Sacconi, eds., Rome, pp. 51-67.
Ilievski, P. Hr. 1983. “Some Structural Peculiarities of Mycenaean-Greek Personal Names,” in
Res Mycenaeae: Akten Des VII. Internationalen Mykenologischen Colloquiums in
Nurnberg vom 6.-10. April 1981, A. Heubeck and G. Neumann, eds., Göttingen, pp. 202-
215.
Isaakidou, V., P. Halstead, J. L. Davis, and S. R. Stocker. 2002. “Burnt Animal Sacrifice at the
Mycenaean ‘Palace of Nestor’, Pylos,” Antiquity 76, pp. 86-92.
Joshel, S. R. and S. Murnaghan. 1998. “Introduction: Differential Equations,” in Women and
Slaves in Greco-Roman Culture: Differential Equations, S. R. Joshel and S. Murnaghan,
eds., London/ New York, pp.1-21.
Kautantzoglou, R. and M. Petronote. 2000. Oria kai Periqwvria: Entavxei~ kai Apokleismoiv,
Athens.
Kazanskiene, V. 1997. “Land Tenure and Social Position in Mycenaean Greece,” in Tevcnh:
Craftsmen, Craftswomen, and Craftsmanship in the Aegean Bronze Age. Proceedings of
the 6th International Aegean Conference/6e Rencontre Égéenne Internationale,
Philadelphia, Temple University, 18-21 April 1996 (Aegaeum 16), R. Laffineur and P. P.
Betancourt, eds., Liège/Austin, Texas, pp. 603-611.
242 Killen, J. T. 1979. “The Knossos Ld(1) Tablets,” in Colloquium Mycenaeum: Actes du Sixième
Colloque International sur les Textes Mycéniens et Égéens Tenu à Chaumont sur
Neuchatel du 7 au 13 Septembre 1975, R. Ernst and H. Mühlestein, eds., Neuchatel/
Geneva, pp. 151-181.
Killen, J. T. 1981. “On the Mycenae Ge Tablets,” in Res Mycenaeae: Akten Des VII.
Internationalen Mykenologischen Colloquiums in Nurnberg vom 6.-10. April 1981, A.
Heubeck and G. Neumann, eds., Göttingen, pp. 216-233.
Killen, J. T. 1984. “The Textile Industries at Pylos and Knossos,” in Pylos Comes Alive: Industry
and Administration in a Mycenaean Palace, C. W. Shelmerdine and T. G. Palaima, eds.,
New York, pp. 49-63.
Killen, J. T. 1985. “The Linear B Tablets and the Mycenaean Economy,” in Linear B: A 1984
Survey. Proceedings of the Mycenaean Collloquium of the VIIIth Congress of the
International Federation of the Societies of Classical Studies (Dublin, 27 August-1st
September 1984), A. Morpurgo Davies and Y. Duhoux, eds., Louvain-la-Neuve, pp. 241-
305.
Killen, J. T. 1994. “Thebes Sealings, Knossos Tablets and Mycenaean Banquets,” BICS 39, pp.
67-84.
Kopytoff, I. 1982. “Slavery,” Ann. Rev. Anthr. 11, pp. 207-30.
Kopytoff, I. 1986. “The Cultural Biography of Things: Commoditization as Process,” in The
Social Life of Things: Commodities in Cultural Perspective, A. Appadurai, ed.,
Cambridge, pp. 64-91.
243 Kyriakidis, E. 2003. Rev. of V. L. Aravantinos, L. Godart, A. Sacconi, Thèbes. Fouilles de la
Cadmée I: Les Tablettes en Linéaire B de la Odos Pelopidou. Édition et Commentaire, in
JHS 123, pp. 197-198.
Kyriakidou-Nestoros, A. 1965. Ta Ufantav th~ Makedoniva~ kai th~ Qravkh~, Athens.
Kyrtatas, D. J. 1982, “H Sumbolhv tou M. I. Fivnleu> sth Melevth th~ Douleiva~ sthn
Arcaiovthta,” Polivth~ 54, pp. 38-48.
Kyrtatas, D. J. 1987, Douvloi, Douleiva kai Doulokthtikov~ Trovpo~ Paragwghv~, Athens.
Kyrtatas, D. J. 2002. “Domination and Exploitation,” in Money, Labour, and Land: Approaches
to the Economies of Ancient Greece, P. Cartledge, E. E. Cohen, and L. Foxhall, eds.,
London/ New York, pp. 140-155.
Landau, O. 1958. Mykenisch-Griechische Personennamen, Göteborg.
Lejeune, M. 1971. “Textes Mycéniens Relatifs aux Esclaves,” in Mémoires de Philologie
Mycénienne, II (1958-1963), M. Lejeune, ed., Rome, pp. 65-81.
Lejeune, M. 1997a. “Sur l' Intitulé de la Tablette Pylienne En 609,” in Mémoires de Philologie
Mycénienne, IV (1969-1996), M. Lejeune, ed., Rome, pp. 155-174.
Lejeune, M. 1997b. “En Marge des Tablettes de Tirynthe,” in Mémoires de Philologie
Mycénienne, IV (1969-1996), M. Lejeune, ed., Rome, pp. 155-174.
Lejeune, M. 1997c. “Bureaucratie Thébaine: Intitulés et Sommations,” in Mémoires de
Philologie Mycénienne, IV (1969-1996), M. Lejeune, ed., Rome, pp. 273-276.
Lejeune, M. 1997d. “Sur les Offrandes Thébaines à Mère Terre,” in Mémoires de Philologie
Mycénienne, IV (1969-1996), M. Lejeune, ed., Rome, pp. 273-276.
Lemonnier, P. 1986. “The Study of Material Culture Today: Toward an Anthropology of
Technical Systems,” JAA 5, pp. 147-186.
244 Lencman, J. A. 1966. Die Sklaverei im Mykenischen und Homerischen Griechenland, M. Bräuer-
Pospelova, trans., Wiesbaden.
Liddell, H. G. and R. Scott. 1968. A Greek-English Lexicon, rev. H. S. Jones, Oxford.
Liddell, H. G., R. Scott, H. S. Jones, and R. McKenzie. 1996. Greek-English Lexicon. Revised
Supplement, P. G. W. Glare and A. A. Thomson, eds., Oxford.
Lindgren, M. 1973. The People of Pylos. Prosopographical and Methodological Studies in the
Pylos Archives, 2 vols., Uppsala.
Lindgren, M. 1979. “The Interpretation of Personal Designations in Linear B: Methodological
Problems,” in Colloquium Mycenaeum: Actes du Sixième Colloque International sur les
Textes Mycéniens et Égéens Tenu à Chaumont sur Neuchatel du 7 au 13 Septembre 1975,
R. Ernst and H. Muhlestein, eds., Neuchatel/ Geneva, pp. 81-86.
Luraghi, N. 2002. “Helotic Slavery Reconsidered,” in Sparta: Beyond the Mirage, A. Powell and
S. Hodkinson, eds., London, pp. 229-250.
Luraghi, N. and S. E. Alcock, eds. 2003. Helots and Their Masters in Laconia and Messenia:
Histories, Ideologies, Structures, Cambridge, Mass./ London.
Manning, S. W. 1995. The Absolute Chronology of the Aegean Bronze Age: Archaeology,
Radiocarbon, and History, Sheffield.
Martin, D. B. 1990. Slavery as Salvation: The Metaphor of Slavery in Pauline Christianity, New
Haven/ London.
Marx, K. 1967. Capital, a Critique of Political Economy, F. Engels, ed., New York.
Marx, K. 1977. Precapitalist Economic Formations, E. J. Hobsbawm, ed., J. Cohen, trans., New
York.
245 Marx, K. and F. Engels. 1972. The German Ideology. Part One, with Selections from Parts Two
and Three, Together with Marx's Introduction to a Critique of Political Economy, C. J.
Arthur, ed., New York.
Mauss, M. 1990. The Gift: The Form and Reason for Exchange in Archaic Societies, W. D.
Halls, trans., London.
McDonald, W. A. and R. Hope Simpson. 1972. “Archaeological Exploration,” in The Minnesota
Messenia Expedition: Reconstructing a Bronze Age Regional Environment, W. A.
McDonald and R. Hope Simpson, eds., Minneapolis, pp. 117-147.
Meillassoux, C., 1975, L’Esclavage en Afrique Précoloniale, Paris.
Meillassoux, C. 1991. The Anthropology of Slavery: The Womb of Iron and Gold, A. Dasnois,
trans., Chicago.
Melena, J. L. and J.-P. Olivier. 1991. TITHEMY, the Tablets and Nodules in Linear B from
Tiryns, Thebes and Mycenae (a Revised Transliteration), Salamanca.
Miers, S. and I. Kopytoff. 1977. “African ‘Slavery’ as an Institution of Marginality,” in Slavery
in Africa: Historical and Anthropological Perspectives, S. Miers and I. Kopytoff, eds.,
Madison, pp. 3-84.
Miller, D., M. Rowlands, and C. Tilley, eds. 1989a. Domination and Resistance, London.
Miller, D., M. Rowlands and C. Tilley, 1989b, “Introduction,” in Domination and Resistance, D.
Miller, M. Rowlands and C. Tilley, eds., London, pp. 1-28. baron de Montesquieu. 1909. The Spirit of the Laws, I, T. Nugent, trans., New York. baron de Montesquieu. 2001. “The Spirit of the Laws,” in Slavery, S. Engerman, S. Drescher,
and R. Paquette, eds., Oxford, pp. 20-23.
246 Morgan, L. H. [1877] 1974. Ancient Society or Researches in the Lines of Human Progress from
Savagery through Barbarism to Civilization, repr. Gloucester, Mass.
Morpurgo, A. 1963. Mycenae Graecitatis Lexicon, Rome.
Morpurgo Davies, A. 1979. “Terminology of Power and Terminology of Work in Greek and
Linear B,” in Colloquium Mycenaeum: Actes du Sixième Colloque International sur les
Textes Mycéniens et Égéens Tenu à Chaumont sur Neuchatel du 7 au 13 Septembre 1975,
E. Risch and H. Muhlestein, eds., Neuchatel/Geneva, pp. 87-108.
Morpurgo Davies, A. 2000. “Personal Names and Linguistic Continuity,” in Greek Personal
Names: Their Value as Evidence, S. Hornblower and E. Matthews, eds., Oxford, pp. 15-
39.
Morris, I. 1998. “Remaining Invisible: The Archaeology of the Excluded in Classical Athens,” in
Women and Slaves in Greco-Roman Culture, S. R. Joshel and S. Murnaghan, eds.,
London/ New York, pp. 193-220.
Mousourou, L. M., 2002, “Koinwnikov~ Apokleismov~ kai Koinwnikhv Prostasiva,” in
Koinwnikov~ Apokleismov~: H Ellhnikhv Empeiriva, K. Kasimati, ed., Athens, pp. 67-86.
Neumann, G. 1986. “Griechisch dou`lo~ ‘Sklave’,” in O-o-pe-ro-si. Festschrift für Ernst Risch
Zum 75. Geburtstag, A. Etter, ed., Berlin/New York, pp. 489-496.
Nieboer, H. J. 1910. Slavery as an Industrial System: Ethnological Researches, 2nd ed., The
Hague.
Nieboer, H. J. 2001. “Slavery as an Industrial System,” in Slavery, S. Engerman, S. Drescher,
and R. Paquette, eds., Oxford, pp. 65-68.
Nixon, L. 1999. “Women, Children, and Weaving,” in Meletemata: Studies in Aegean
Archaeology Presented to Malcolm H. Wiener as he Enters his 65th Year, II, P. P.
247 Betancourt, V. Karageorghis, R. Laffineur, and W.-D. Niemeier, eds., Liège/Austin,
Texas, pp. 561-567.
Oikonomides, D. B. 1962. “Onovmata kai Onomatoqesiva ei~ ta~ Doxasiva~ kai Sunhvqeia~ tou
Ellhnikouv Laouv,” Laografiva 20, pp. 446-542.
Olivier, J.-P. 2001. “Les Collecteurs: Leur Distribution Spatialle et Temporelle,” in Economy
and Politics in the Mycenaean Palace States: Proceedings of a Conference Held on 1-3
July 1999 in the Faculty of Classics, Cambridge, S. Voutsaki and J. T. Killen, eds.,
Cambridge, pp. 139-159.
Palaima, T. G. 1988. The Scribes of Pylos, Rome.
Palaima, T. G. 1995. “The Last Days of the Pylos Polity,” in Politeia: Society and State in the
Aegean Bronze Age. Proceedings of the 5th International Aegean Conference/ 5e
Rencontre Égéenne Internationale, University of Heidelberg, Archäologisches Institut
10-13 April 1994, II, R. Laffineur and W.-D. Niemeier, eds., Liège/Austin, Texas, pp.
623-632.
Palaima, T. G. 1997. “Potter and Fuller: The Royal Craftsmen,” in Tevcnh. Craftsmen,
Craftswomen, and Craftsmanship in the Aegean Bronze Age. Proceedings of the 6th
International Aegean Conference/6e Rencontre Égéenne Internationale, Philadelphia,
Temple University, 18-21 April 1996 (Aegaeum 16), R. Laffineur and P. P. Betancourt,
eds., Liège/Austin, Texas, pp. 407-412.
Palaima, T. G. 1999. “Mycenaean Militarism from a Textual Perspective. Onomastics in
Context: Lawos, Damos, Klewos,” in Polemos. Le Contexte Guerrier en Égée à l'Âge du
Bronze, II, R. Laffineur, ed., Liège/Austin, Texas, pp. 367-378.
248 Palaima, T. G. 2001. Rev. of V. L. Aravantinos, L. Godart, A. Sacconi, Thèbes. Fouilles de la
Cadmée I. Les Tablettes en Linéaire B de la Odos Pelopidou. Édition et Commentaire, in
Minos 35-36, pp. 475-486.
Palaima, T. G. 2003a. “‘Archives’ and ‘Scribes’ in Mycenaean Linear B Records,” in Ancient
Archives and Archival Traditions: Concepts of Record-Keeping in the Ancient World, M.
Brosius, ed., Oxford, pp. 153-194.
Palaima, T. G. 2003b. Rev. of V. L. Aravantinos, L. Godart, A. Sacconi, Thèbes. Fouilles de la
Cadmée I: Les Tablettes en Linéaire B de la Odos Pelopidou. Édition et Commentaire, in
AJA 107, pp. 113-115.
Palmer, L. R. 1963. The Interpretation of Mycenaean Greek Texts, Oxford.
Palmer, R. 1989a. “Subsistence Rations at Pylos and Knossos,” Minos 24, pp. 89-124.
Palmer, R. 1989b. “Wine in the Mycenaean Palace Economy (Bronze Age, Greece)” (diss.
University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati).
Palmer, R. 1992. “Wheat and Barley in Mycenaean Society,” in Mykenaika: Actes du IXe
Colloque International sur les Textes Mycéniens et Égéens Organisé par le Centre de l'
Antiquité Grecque et Romaine de la Fondation Hellénique des Recherches Scientifiques
et l'École Française d' Athènes (Athènes, 2-6 Octobre 1990), J.-P. Olivier, ed., Paris, pp.
475-497.
Palmer, R. 1994. Wine in the Mycenaean Palatial Economy, Liège/Austin, Texas.
Palmer, R. 1995. “Wine and Viticulture in the Linear a and B Texts of the Bronze Age Aegean,”
in The Origins and Ancient History of Wine: Food and Nutrition in History and
Anthropology, P. E. McGovern, S. J. Fleming, and S. H. Katz, eds., Philadelphia, pp.
269-258.
249 Parkinson, W. A. 1999. “Chipping Away at a Mycenaean Economy: Obsidian Exchange, Linear
B, and Palatial Control in Late Bronze Age Messenia,” in Rethinking Mycenaean
Palaces: New Interpretations of an Old Idea, M. L. Galaty and W. A. Parkinson, eds.,
Los Angeles, pp. 73-85.
Patterson, O. 1977. “Slavery,” Ann. Rev. Soc. 3, pp. 407-449.
Patterson, O. 1982. Slavery and Social Death: A Comparative Study, Cambridge, Mass./London.
Patterson, O. 2003. “Reflections on Helotic Slavery and Freedom,” in Helots and Their Masters
in Laconia and Messenia: Histories, Ideologies, Structures, N. Luraghi and S. E. Alcock,
eds., Cambridge, Mass./London, pp. 289-309.
Petrocheilos, N. 1984. Rwmaivoi kai Ellhnismov~: Mia Dialektikhv Scevsh, E. Peraki-Kiriakidou
and S. Kiriakidis, trans., Athens.
Rathbone, D. 1991. Economic Rationalism and Rural Society in Third-Century A.D. Egypt,
Cambridge.
Raybeck, D. 1991. “Hard versus Soft Deviance: Anthropology and Labeling Theory,” in
Deviance: Anthropological Perspectives, M. Freilich, D. Raybeck, and J. Savishinsky,
eds., New York, pp. 51-72.
Renfrew, C. 1972. The Emergence of Civilisation: The Cyclades and the Aegean in the Third
Millenium B.C., London.
Rothman, R. A. 1993. Inequality and Stratification: Class, Color, and Gender, 2nd ed., New
Jersey.
Rougemont, F. 2001. “Some Thoughts on the Identification of the ‘Collectors’ in the Linear B
Tablets,” in Economy and Politics in the Mycenaean Palace States: Proceedings of a
250 Conference held on 1-3 July 1999 in the Faculty of Classics, Cambridge, S. Voutsaki and
J. Killen, eds., Cambridge, pp. 129-138.
Ruijgh, C. J. 1967. Études sur la Grammaire et le Vocabulaire du Grec Mycénien or Études sur
le Grec Mycénien. Amsterdam
Ruijgh, C. J. 1987. “da-ma/du-ma Davmar/Duvmar et l'Abbreviation DA, Notamment en PY En
609.1,” in Tractata Mycenaea: Proceedings of the Eighth International Colloquium on
Mycenaean Studies, Held in Ohrid, 15-20 September 1985, P.H. Ilievski and L. Crepajac,
eds., Scopje, pp. 299-322.
Ruijgh, C. J. 2004. “À Propos des Nouvelles Tablettes de Thèbes, I: Les Trois Divinités ma-ka,
o-po-re-i et ko-wa et les Trois Subordonnées Temporelles de la Série Fq,” Mnemosyne
57, pp. 1-44.
Ruipérez, M. S. and J. L. Melena. 1996. Oi Mukhnaivoi Ellhne~, M. Panagiotidou, trans.,
Athens.
Sacconi, A. 2001. “Les Repas Sacrés dans les Textes Mycéniens,” in Potnia: Deities and
Religion in the Aegean Bronze Age. Proceedings of the 8th International Aegean
Conference/, 12-15 April 2000/8e Rencontre Égéenne Internationale, Göteborg,
Göteborg University, 12-15 April 2000, R. Laffineur and R. Hagg, eds., Liège/Austin,
Texas, pp. 466-470.
Sainer, A. P. 1976. “An Index of the Place Names at Pylos,” SMEA 17, pp. 17-63.
Schlaifer, R. 1968. “Greek Theories of Slavery from Homer to Aristotle,” in Slavery in Classical
Antiquity: Views and Controversies, M.I. Finley, ed., Cambridge/ New York, pp. 93-132.
Shelmerdine, C. W. 1973. “The Pylos Ma Tablets Reconsidered,” AJA 77, pp. 261-275.
251 Shelmerdine, C. W. 1984. “The Perfumed Oil Industry at Pylos,” in Pylos Comes Alive: Industry
and Administration in a Mycenaean Palace, C. W. Shelmerdine and T. G. Palaima, eds.,
New York, pp. 81-95.
Shelmerdine, C. W. 1997. “Review of Aegean Prehistory VI: The Palatial Bronze Age of the
Southern and Central Greek Mainland,” AJA 101, pp. 537-585
Shelmerdine, C. W. 1998a. “The Palace and its Operations,” in Sandy Pylos: An Archaeological
History from Nestor to Navarino, J. L. Davis, ed., Austin, Texas, pp. 81-96
Shelmerdine, C. W. 1998b. “The Perfumed-Oil Industry,” in Sandy Pylos: An Archaeological
History from Nestor to Navarino, J. L. Davis, ed., Austin, Texas, pp. 101-109.
Shelmerdine, C. W. 1999. “Administration in the Mycenaean Palaces,” in Rethinking Mycenaean
Palaces: New Interpretations of an Old Idea, M. L. Galaty and W. A. Parkinson, eds.,
Los Angeles, pp. 19-24.
Solin, H. 1971. Beitrage zur Kenntnis der Griechischen Personennamen in Rom, Helsinki.
Stamouli-Saranti, E. 1921. “Pw~ Katergavzontai tov Linavri eiv~ thvn Tzatwv,” Laografiva 8, pp.
561-563.
Stocker, S. R. and J. L. Davis. 2004. “Animal Sacrifice, Archives, and Feasting at the Palace of
Nestor,” in The Mycenaean Feast, J. C. Wright, ed., Oxford, pp. 59-75.
Tournavitou, I. 1995. The “Ivory Houses” at Mycenae (BSA Supplement 24), London.
Treuil, R., P. Darcque, J.-Cl. Poursat, and G. Touchais. 1996. Oi Politismoiv tou Aigaivou katav
th Neoliqikhv kai thn Epochv tou Calkouv, O. Polichronopoulou and A. F. Touchais,
trans., Athens.
252 Tritsch, F. J. 1958. “The Women of Pylos,” in Minoica: Festschrift zum 80. Geburtstag von
Johannes Sundwall. Deutsche Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin. Schriften der
Sektion für Altertumswissenschaften, 12, E. Grumach, ed., Berlin, pp. 406-445.
Trümpy, C. 2001. "Potnia dans les Tablettes Mycéniennes: Quelques Problèmes
d'Interprétation," in Potnia: Deities and Religion in the Aegean Bronze Age. Proceedings
of the 8th International Aegean Conference, 12-15 April 2000/8e Rencontre Égéenne
Internationale, Göteborg, Göteborg University, 12-15 April 2000, R. Laffineur and R.
Hagg, eds., Liège/Austin, Texas, pp. 411-421.
Tsaousis, D. G., 2002, “Politismov~, Eleuvqero~ Crovno~ kai Koinwnikov~ Apokleismov~,” in
Koinwnikov~ Apokleismov~: H Ellhnikhv Empeiriva, K. Kasimati, ed., Athens, pp. 87-120.
Tsimboukidis, D. 1999. Anatomiva th~ Doulokthtikhv~ Koinwnikhv~ Skevyh~: Eleuvqeroi kai
Douvloi. Athens.
Tylor, E. B. 1889. Anthropology: An Introduction to the Study of Man and Civilization, New
York.
Tzachili, I. 1997. Ufantikhv kai Ufavntre~ sto Proi>storikov Aigaivo. 2000-1000 p.C.
Heracleion.
Ventris, M. and J. Chadwick. 1959. Documents in Mycenaean Greek. Three Hundred Selected
Tablets from Knossos, Pylos and Mycenae with Commentary and Vocabulary,
Cambridge.
Veyne, P. 1987. “The Roman Empire,” in A History of Private Life: From Pagan Rome to
Byzantium, P. Veyne, ed., A. Goldhammer, trans., Cambridge, Mass./London, pp. 5-234.
Vostantzoglou, T. 1986. Antilexikojn hv Onomastikovn th~ Neoellhnikhv~ Glwvssh~, Athens.
Wallon, H. A. 1879. Histoire de l' Esclavage dans l' Antiquité, 3 vols., 2nd ed., Paris.
253 Warren, P. and V. Hankey. 1989. Aegean Bronze Age Chronology, Bristol.
Watson, J. L. 1980. “Introduction. Slavery as an Institution: Open and Closed Systems,” in Asian
and African Systems of Slavery, J. L. Watson, ed., Berkeley/Los Angeles, pp. 1-15.
Weber, M. (ed.) 1924a. Gesammelte Aufsätze zur Sozial- und Wirtschafts-Geschichte, Tübingen.
Weber, M. 1924b. “Die Sozialen Gründe des Untergangs der Antiken Kultur,” in Gesammelte
Aufsätze zur Sozial- und Wirtschafts-Geschichte, M. Weber, ed., Tübingen, pp. 289-311.
Whitelaw, T. 2001. “Reading Between the Tablets: Assessing Mycenaean Palatial Involvement
in Ceramic Production and Consumption,” in Economy and Politics in the Mycenaean
Palace States: Proceedings of a Conference Held on 1-3 July 1999 in the Faculty of
Classics, Cambridge, S. Voutsaki and J. Killen, eds., Cambridge, pp. 51-79.
Wright, J. C. 1995. “Empty Cups and Empty Jugs: The Social Role of Wine in Minoan and
Mycenaean Societies,” in The Origins and Ancient History of Wine, P. E. McGovern, S.
J. Fleming, and S. H. Katz, eds., Luxembourg, pp. 287-308.
Wright, J. C. 2004. “A Survey of Evidence for Feasting in Mycenaean Society,” in The
Mycenaean Feast, J. C. Wright, ed., Oxford, pp. 13-58.
Zangger, E., M. E. Timpson, S. B. Yazvenko, F. Kuhnke, and J. Knauss. 1997. “The Pylos
Regional Archaeological Project: Part II: Landscape Evolution and Site Preservation,”
Hesperia 66, pp. 549-641.
254 APPENDIX 1
The Database
Figure 1. The Tablet Database
255
Figure 2. Dependent Personnel Database
256
Figure 3. Objects and Quantities Database
257 APPENDIX 2
Tables of Chapter 5
Tablet # Name Designation Sex 1 Cn1287 a2-ra-ka-wo do-e-ro M 2 Es644/650/653 a3-ki-wa-ro do-e-ro M 3 Eb1187/Ep539 e-ni-to-wo do-e-ro M 4 En609/Eo224 e-ra-ta-ra do-e-ra F 5 Ep539 me-re-u do-e-ro M 6 Cn1287 mu-ti-ri-ko do-e-ro M 7 Ep539 pu-[]-da-ka do-e-ro M 8 Eb1176/Ep539 te-te-re-u do-e-ro M 9 Eb1188/Ep539 to-wa-te-u do-e-ro M 10 Eb1186/Ep539 wi-dwo-i-jo do-e-ro M Total count 10 Table 1. Count of named do-e-ro(-a) in Pylos
258 Tablet # Name Designation Sex 25 Eb915/Ep212 ko-sa-ma-to te-o-jo do-e-ro M 1 Ep613+1131 ]ra-so te-o-jo do-e-ro M 26 En74/Eo247 ku-*63-so te-o-jo do-e-ro M 2 En74/Eo160 a3-wa-ja te-o-jo do-e-ra F 27 En74/Eo276 ma-*79 te-o-jo do-e-ra F 3 Eb169/Ep705 du-ni-jo te-o-jo do-e-ro M 28 Eb866/Ep705 ma-ra3-wa te-o-jo do-e-ra F 4 En74/Eo276 e-*65-to te-o-jo do-e-ro M 29 En74/Eo276 mi-ra te-o-jo do-e-ra F 5 En609/Eo211 e-*65-to te-o-jo do-e-ro M 30 Eb905/ mi-ra te-o-jo do-e-ra F 6 Eb913/Ep212 e-ko-to te-o-jo do-e-ro M Ep613+1131 7 En74/Eo276 e-ko-to te-o-jo do-e-ro M 31 Eb858/Ep212 mu-ti-ri te-o-jo do-e-ra F 8 En74/Eo247 e-ko-to te-o-jo do-e-ro M 32 Ep705 o-re-a2 te-o-jo do-e-ro M 9 Ep212 e-ri-ko-wo te-o-jo do-e-ro M 33 Ep539 pi-ro-na te-o-jo do-e-ra F 10 Eb1440/Ep539 e-ri-qi-ja te-o-jo do-e-ra F 34 Eb173/ po-so-re-ja te-o-jo do-e-ra F Ep613+1131 11 En609/Eo224 e-sa-ro te-o-jo do-e-ro M 35 Ep705 pu-ko-wo te-o-jo do-e-ro M 12 Ep705 e-sa-ro te-o-jo do-e-ro M 36 Eb900/ qe-ri-ta te-o-jo do-e-ra F 13 Eb156+157/ e-u-ru-wo-ta te-o-jo do-e-ro M Ep613+1131 Ep613+1131 37 Eb1174/Ep212 ra-su-ro te-o-jo do-e-ro M 14 Eb885/Ep539 i-na te-o-jo do-e-ro M 38 En74/Eo247 ta-ra2-to te-o-jo do-e-ro M 15 En609/Eo211 i-ni-ja te-o-jo do-e-ra F 39 En659/ ta-ra2-to te-o-jo do-e-ro M 16 En659/Eo281 i-ra-ta te-o-jo do-e-ro M Eo471+855 17 En659/Eo269 ka-ra-*56-so te-o-jo do-e-ro M 40 En659/Eo351 ta-ra2-to te-o-jo do-e-ro M 18 Eb838/Ep705 ka-ra-u-du-ro te-o-jo do-e-ro M 41 Eb464/Ep705 ta-ra-mi-ka te-o-jo do-e-ra F 19 Eb890+898+933/ ka-ta-no te-o-jo do-e-ro M 42 Ep539 te-qa-ja te-o-jo do-e-ra F Ep705 43 En74/Eo276 te-se-u te-o-jo do-e-ro M 20 Eb976/Ep212 ka-wa-do-ro te-o-jo do-e-ro M 44 Ep705 to-ro-ja te-o-jo do-e-ra F 21 Ep613+1131 ko-pi-na te-o-jo do-e-ra F Total count 44 22 Eb347/Ep212 ko-ri-si-ja te-o-jo do-e-ra F 23 En74/Eo247 ko-ri-si-ja te-o-jo do-e-ra F Table 2. Count of named te-o-jo do-e-ro(-a) in Pylos 24 En74/Eo160 ko-ri-si-ja te-o-jo do-e-ra F
259 Ta blet # Name Designation Sex 16 Eb886/ re-ka te-o-jo do-e-ra F 1 En609 e-do-me-ne-u te-o-jo do-e-ro M Ep212 2 Eo224 e-do-me-ne-u te-o-jo do-e-ro M 17 Eb1344 re-ka te-o-jo do-e-ra F 3 Ep705 e-ko-to te-o-jo do-e-ro M 18 En609 si-ma te-o-jo do-e-ra F 4 En74/ e-pa-sa-na-ti/ te-o-jo do-e-ra F 19 Eo211 si-ma te-o-jo do-e-ra F Eo247 i-pa-sa-na-ti 20 En609 so-u-ro te-o-jo do-e-ro M 5 Eb1350/ e-pa-sa-na-ti/ te-o-jo do-e-ra F 21 Eo224 so-u-ro te-o-jo do-e-ro M Ep212 i-pa-sa-na-ti 22 En659 ta-ra2-to te-o-jo do-e-ro M 6 Eb498 i-do-me-ne-ja te-o-jo do-e-ra F 23 Eo444 ta-ra2-to te-o-jo do-e-ro M 7 En74 ma-re-ku-na te-o-jo do-e-ro M 24 En659 tu-ri-ja-ti te-o-jo do-e-ra F 8 Eo276 ma-re-ku-na te-o-jo do-e-ra F 25 Eo444 tu-ri-ja-ti te-o-jo do-e-ra F 9 Ep212 o-do-me-ne-ja te-o-jo do-e-ra F 26 Eb416 u-wa-mi-ja te-o-jo do-e-ra F 10 En609 po-so-re-ja te-o-jo do-e-ra F 27 Ep704 u-wa-mi-ja te-o-jo do-e-ra F 11 Eo224 po-so-re-ja te-o-jo do-e-ra F Total count 27 12 Ep539 po-so-re-ja te-o-jo do-e-ra F Table 3. Individual te-o-jo do-e-ro(-a) for whom we cannot prove they 13 Ep539 po-so-re-ja te-o-jo do-e-ra F had the same identity 14 En659 ra-su-ro te-o-jo do-e-ro M 15 Eo444 ra-su-ro te-o-jo do-e-ro M
260
Site Tablet # Name Designation Sex 17 Pylos Jn431 do-e-ro, ka-ke-u M 1 Pylos Ae110 do-e[ 18 Pylos Jn605 do-e-ro, ka-ke-u M 2 Pylos Eb502 do-e-ra F 19 Pylos Jn605 do-e-ro, ka-ke-u M 3 Pylos Eb859 do-e-ra F 20 Pylos Jn706 do-e-ro, ka-ke-u M 4 Pylos Eb916 do-e-ra F 21 Pylos Jn706 do-e-ro, ka-ke-u M 5 Pylos Eb835 do-e-ro M 22 Pylos Jn706 do-e-ro, ka-ke-u M 6 Pylos Eb872 do-e-ro M 23 Pylos Jn706 do-e-ro, ka-ke-u M 7 Pylos Eb1347 do-e-ro M 24 Pylos Jn706 do-e-ro, ka-ke-u M 8 Pylos Eb1348 do-e-ro M 25 Pylos Jn750 do-e-ro, ka-ke-u M 9 Pylos Es644/Es650/ do-e-ro M 26 Pylos Eb981 te-o-jo Es703 27 Pylos Eb636 te-o-jo do-e-[ 10 Pylos Fn324 do-e-ro M 28 Pylos Ep613+1131 te-o-jo do-e-ra F 11 Pylos Fn867 do-e-ro M 29 Pylos Eb884 te-o-jo do-e-ro M 12 Pylos Jn310 do-e-ro, ka-ke-u M 30 Pylos Ep613+1131 te-o-jo do-e-ro M 13 Pylos Jn310 do-e-ro, ka-ke-u M Total count (do-e-ro/a) 25 14 Pylos Jn310 do-e-ro, ka-ke-u M Total count (te-o-jo do-e-ro/a) 5 15 Pylos Jn310 do-e-ro, ka-ke-u M 16 Pylos Jn413 do-e-ro, ka-ke-u M Table 4. Anonymous individual do-e-ro(-a) and teo-jo do-e-ro(-a) for whom we cannot conclude with certainty if they refer to the same individual
261 Tablet Name Sex Occupation Adult Children Place An607 do-qe-ja F do-qe-ja 6 0 me-ta-pa of work An607 do-qe-ja F do-qe-ja 13 0 me-ta-pa Ae303 do-e-ra F do-e-ra 14 0 pu-ro An607 do-qe-ja F do-qe-ja 3 0 me-ta-pa Ae26 do-e-ro M do-e-ro 4 0 An607 do-qe-ja F do-qe-ja 1 0 me-ta-pa Jn605 do-e-ro M do-e-ro, 2 0 a-pi-no- An607 do-qe-ja F do-qe-ja 3 0 me-ta-pa ka-ke-u e-wi-jo Total do-e-ro/a 20 0 Fn50 do-e-ro-i M do-e-ro-i 0 Total do-qe-ja 26 0 Fn50 do-e-ro-i M do-e-ro-i 0 Grand total 46 0 Fn50 do-e-ro-i M do-e-ro-i 0 Fn50 do-e-ro-i M do-e-ro-i 0 Table 5. The do-e-ro(-a) recorded in groups and the controversial group of the do-qe-ja women
262
Tablet Adult Boys Girls Total Name of group o-pi-ro-qo Children Ab899 8 3 3 6 Aa313 21 8 12 20 o-ti-ri-ja Ab563 Ab417 21 8 8 Ab1100 +1050 Aa779 3 1 0 1 me-ta-pa Aa354 8 1 4 5 ko-ro-ki-ja Ab355 5 Ab372 9 2 2 Aa783 38 15 13 28 re-wo-to-ro-wo-ko Aa506 28 ku-te-ra3 Ab553 37 15 13 28 Ab562 Aa785 1 0 0 0 a-da-ra-te-ja Aa662 9 11 5 16 pa-ke-te-ja Ab388 1 0 0 0 Ab745 2 1 0 1 Aa786 8 2 3 5 ne-wo-pe-o Ab746 2 0 1 1 Ab554 7 5 5 10 Aa695 21 6 10 16 ne-we-wi-ja Aa792 21 10 12 22 ki-ni-di-ja Ab560 Ab189 20 10 10 20 Aa699 9 3 4 7 ti-nwa-si-ja Aa795 4 1 2 3 pa-wo-ke Ab190 9 1 2 3 Ab558 4 1 2 3 Aa701 35 14 11 25 a-*64-ja Aa798 54 22 35 57 ro-u-so Ab515 35 11 12 23 Ab382 54 20 31 51 Aa717 32 8 18 26 ro-u-so Aa807 26 7 7 14 ke-re-za Ab1099 Ab586 28 5 9 14 Aa752 7 3 3 6 me-ta-pa Aa815 38 16 33 49 a-ke-ti-ra2 Ab379 8 3 2 5 Ab564 Aa762 22 11 6 17 ke-re-za Aa854 e-ke-ro-qo-no Ab217 16 7 5 12 Ab563 Aa764 6 1 8 9 me-re-ti-ri-ja Ab1100 Ab789 6 3 6 9 Aa891 pe-ki-ti[ Aa770 6 6 4 10 ki-si-wi-ja Ab578 7 4 4 8 Ab194 7 6 3 9 Aa955 me-ki-to-ki-ri-ta Aa772 6 4 0 4 e-u-de-we-ro Ab575 1 0 Ab379 Aa987 Aa775 ]2 10 2 12 o-wi-to-no[ +956 Aa1180 mi-ra-ti-ja Ab277 8 2 5 7 Ab573 16 7 3 10 Aa777 7 4 3 7 e-ke-ro-qo-no Total Aa 410 164 195 359
263 Total Ab 311 112 117 229 Average 360.5 138 156 294 Total 410 164 195 359 Table 6. List of the groups recorded in the Aa-Ab series and the correspondence between the two series
264
Tablet Adult Boys Girls Total Name of group Aa863 4 4 Members Children Aa1178 3 Aa60 16 7 11 18 e-wi-ri-pi-ja Total 193 122 194 316 Aa61 26 10 15 25 ze-pu2-ra3 Ab186 7 2 1 3 ra-mi-ni-ja Aa62 7 6 10 16 me-re-ti-ri-ja Ab210 8 8 7 15 a-pu-ko-wo-ko Aa63 3 4 5 9 ki-ma-ra Ab356+ 6 1 3 4 ra-qi-ti-ra2 Aa76 4 3 4 7 po-to-ro-wa-pi 1049 Aa85 12 8 16 24 a-ke-ti-ri-ja Ab468 Aa89 37 16 26 42 a-ra-ka-te-ja Ab555 38 19 20 39 ra-pi-ti-ra2 Aa93 6 6 9 15 ke-e Ab559 3 3 Aa94 14 8 5 13 e-pi-ko-o Ab580 Aa95 8 7 8 15 e-pi-jo-ta-na Ab582 Aa96 13 13 da-mi-ni-ja Ab584 Aa98 8 5 10 15 no-ri-wo-ko Ab978 3 4 7 Aa240 21 4 25 29 a-ra-ka-te-ja Ab1103 Aa1182 7 2 0 2 pi-we-re Ab1105 34 34 Aa788 24 12 8 20 ka-pa-ra2-de Ab1112 5 5 Aa759 4 2 6 Total 59 36 74 110 Aa804 32 15 26 41 a-pi-qo-ro Aa860 1 1 2 Table 7. Records of the Aa and Ab series that do not have corresponding ones
265
Tablet Aa Ab Name Sex Adults Boys Girls Ad1450 M 1 6 0 Ad290 Aa85 a-ke-ti-ra2-o ko-wo M 2 0 Ad295 Aa93 ri-ne-ja-o ko-wo M 8 5 0 Ad308 Aa62 me-re-ti-ra2[-o ko-wo M 0 Ad315 Aa701 Ab515 a-*64-ja-o ko-wo M 0 Ad318+420 Aa762 Ab217 we-we-si-je-ja-o ko-wo M 8 7 0 Ad326 ri-ne-ja-o a-*64-ja-o ko-wo M 3 9 0 Ad357 Aa695 Ab560 ne-we-wi-ja-o ko-wo M 6 0 0 Ad380 Aa1180 Ab573 mi-ra-ti-ja-o a-ra-te-ja-o M 3 0 0 ko-wo Ad390 Aa506 Ab562 ku-te-rao ko-wo M 0 Ad663 Aa313 Ab417 o-ti-ra2-o ko-wo M 0 Ad664 Aa61 ze-pu2-ra-o ko-wo ri-ne-ja-o M 4 3 0 Ad666 Aa815 Ab564 a-ke-ti-ra2-o ko-wo M 20 7 0 Ad667 Ab356 ra-qi-ti-ra2-o ko-wo M 2 0 0 Ad668 Aa63 ki-ma-ra-o ko-wo M 4 0 0 Ad669 Aa98 no-ri-wo-ko-jo ko-wo M 5 0 0 Ad670 Aa772 Ab379 ri-ne-ja-o ko-wo M 4 0 Ad671 Aa662 Ab210/ ka-ru-ti-je-ja-o pa-ke-te-ja-o M 3 4 0 745/ 746
266 Ad686 Aa807 Ab586 ra-wi-ja-ja-o ko-wo M 15 0 0 Ad687 Aa95 ri-ne-ja-o ko-wo M 0 0 Ad688 Aa786 Ab554 ko-wo M 4 2 0 Ad689 Aa1180 Ab573 a-so-qi- mi-ra-ti-ja-o ko-wo M 2 0 Ad690 Aa804 a-pi-qo-ro ko-wo M 10 4 0 Ad691 Aa795/854/ Ab558/ 563/ e-ke-ro-qo-no-qe pa-wo-ko-qe M 9 0 0 777 1100/ 899 o-pi-ro-qo ko-wo 9 Ad694 Aa891 Ab578 pe-ki-ti-ra2-o ko-wo M 4 3 0 Ad697 Aa96 ri-ne-ja-o ko-wo M 0 0 Ad700 ]o ko-wo M 4 0 Ad921 te-pe-ja-o ko-wo M 1 0 Total count of members 213 93 0 Table 8. The groups of the Ad series with the corresponding tablets from the Aa and Ab
267 Name Occupation Origin Other ko-sa-ma-to x ]e-ko-to x ku-*63-so x ]I-na x ma-*79 x? ]ra-so x ma-ra3-wa x? a3-wa-ja x x ma-re-ku-na x du-ni-jo x? x mi-ra x e-*65-to x mu-ti x e-do-me-ne-u x? x? mu-ti-ri x e-ko-to x o-re-a2 x e-pa-sa-na-ti/ x pi-ro-na x I-pa-sa-na-ti po-so-re-ja x e-ri-ko-wo x pu-ko-wo x e-ri-qi-ja x? x qe-ri-ta x x e-sa-ro x ra-su-ro x e-u-ru-wo-ta x re-ka x I-do-me-ne-ja/ x x si-ma x o-do-me-ne-ja so-u-ro x I-na x ta-ra2-to x I-ni-ja x ta-ra-mi-ka x I-ra-ta x te-qa-ja x ka-ra-*56-so x te-se-u x ka-ra-u-du-ro x to-ro-ja x ka-ta-no x tu-ri-ja-ti x ka-wa-do-ro x u-wa-mi-ja x ko-pi-na x Table 9. Interpretation and connotations of the names of the te-o-jo do- ko-ri-si-ja x e-ro(-a)
268
Site Tabletnum Name Sex Designation Origin Pylos En74/Eo160 a3-wa-ja F te-o-jo do-e-ra a3-wa-ja Pylos En609 e-do-me-ne-u M te-o-jo do-e-ro e-do-me-ne-u? Pylos Eo224 e-do-me-ne-u M te-o-jo do-e-ro e-do-me-ne-u? Pylos Eb1440/ Ep539 e-ri-qi-ja F te-o-jo do-e-ra e-ri-qi-ja Pylos Ep539 i-na M te-o-jo do-e-ro i-na Pylos En609/ Eo211 i-ni-ja F te-o-jo do-e-ra i-ni-ja Pylos Eb347/ Ep212 ko-ri-si-ja F te-o-jo do-e-ra ko-ri-si-ja Pylos En74/ Eo160 ko-ri-si-ja F te-o-jo do-e-ra ko-ri-si-ja Pylos En74/ Eo247 ko-ri-si-ja F te-o-jo do-e-ra ko-ri-si-ja Pylos Ep705 o-re-a2 M te-o-jo do-e-ro o-re-a2 Pylos Ep539 te-qa-ja F te-o-jo do-e-ra te-qa-ja Pylos Ep705 to-ro-ja F te-o-jo do-e-ra to-ro-ja Pylos En659 tu-ri-ja-ti F te-o-jo do-e-ra tu-ri-ja-ti Pylos Eo444 tu-ri-ja-ti F te-o-jo do-e-ra tu-ri-ja-ti Pylos Eb416 u-wa-mi-ja F te-o-jo do-e-ra u-wa-mi-ja Pylos Ep704 u-wa-mi-ja F te-o-jo do-e-ra u-wa-mi-ja Table 10. Indications of ethnic origin or provenance from the personal names among the te-o-jo do-e-ro(-a)
269
Name Occupation Origin Other No satisfactory o-qa-wo-ni x x interpretation o-ro-do-ko x x a-ke-ta x o-ti-na-wo x x a-ko-ro[ x pi-ri-ta-wo-no x x a-ko-te-u x x po-ma-ko x a-ro-je-u x x po-ro-qa-ta-jo x x x do-ro-me-u x x po-so-ra-ko x x e-ke-ro x po-te-u x x e-ni-ja-u-si-jo x x po-to-re-ma-ta x x e-re-e-u x pu-ko-ro x x i-te-we x pu-ra-ta x ka-ke-u x pu-te-u x x ke-ro-u-te x pu-wa-ne x x ke-to x ra-pa-do x x ma-ka-ta x x ra-wo-do-ko x x ma-ka-wo x ta-mi-je-u x o-ka-ri-jo x x ta-ra-ma-ta x x o-ke-te-u x x ta-ta-ke-u x o-na-jo x x te-te-re-u x o-na-se-u x x tu-we-ta x o-pe-te-re-u x o-po-ro-me-no x x Table 11. Indications of occupation from personal names of individuals other than do-e-ro(-a) or te-o-jo do-e-ro(-a)
270
Name Occupation Origin Other No satisfactory interpretation ka-ke-u x ma-ka-ta x x o-ke-te-u x x o-na-jo x x po-so-ra-ko x x po-to-re-ma-ta x x pu-ra-ta x pu-te-u x x ta-mi-je-u x te-te-re-u x Table 12. Names of bronze-smiths (ka-ke-u) that show some connection to occupational status
271
Nationality Occup. Name Tablet o-ko-me-ne-u o-ko-me-ne-u Ea780 a-*64-ja a-*64-ja Vn1191 o-ku-ka po-me o-ku-ka Cn131/719 o-wo-ta? ka-ke-u o-wo-ta Jn725 a-*64-jo a-*64-jo Fn324 pa-pa-ra-ko ka-ke-u pa-pa-ra-ko Jn845 a-ke-ro a-*64-jo Cn1287 pi-we-ri-ja-ta ka-ke-u pi-we-ri-ja-ta Jn389 ka-ke-u a-*64-jo Jn832 po-ke-we po-ke-we Cn131 a3-ki-a2-ri-jo a3-ki-a2-ri-jo Fn50/79 ra-mi-ni-jo ra-mi-ni-jo Cn328 a-ka-ta-jo ka-na-pe-u a-ka-ta-jo-jo En659/Eo26 po-me ra-mi-ni-jo Cn719 9 ta-te-re ra-mi-ni-jo An209 a-pa-je-u ka-ke-u a-pa-je-u Jn845 ra-pa-sa-ko po-me ra-pa-sa-ko Cn131/655 a-si-wi-jo a-si-wi-jo Cn285 re-pi-ri-jo re-pi-ri-jo Eq146 re-qo-na-to-mo a-si-wi-jo Eq146 re-u-ka-so? re-u-ka-so Pa53 a-ta-ma-ne-u po-me a-ta-ma-ne-u Cn655 ru-ki-jo ru-ki-jo Gn720 do-ri-je-we do-ri-je-we Fn867 ka-ke-u ru-ki-jo Jn415 e-do-me-ne-u? ka-ke-u e-do-me-ne-u Jn605 ru-ko-u-ro ru-ko-u-ro Es729/644 e-ta-je-u te-ko-to-a-pe e-ta-je-u An5 ta-ra-ma-ta-o po-me ta-ra-ma-ta-o Ea821 i-wa-so po-me i-wa-so Cn655 ti-nwa-si-jo ti-nwa-si-jo Ea810 ka-pa-ra2 ka-ke-u ka-pa-ra2 Jn706 ti-qa-jo ka-ke-u ti-qa-jo Jn310 ka-ra-do-wa-ta ka-ra-do-wa-ta Ea57 po-me ti-qa-jo En467/ ko-ro-ja-ta tu-ra-te-u, ko-ro-ja-ta Ae72 Eo278 su-ra-te tu-ri-jo? ka-ke-u tu-ri-jo Jn693 ko-ro-ku-ra-i-jo ko-ro-ku-ra-i-jo An614 tu-ri-si-jo-jo tu-ri-si-jo-jo Sa758 ko-ro-tu-no ka-ke-u ko-ro-tu-no Jn478 tu-ru-we-u ke-ro-si-ja tu-ru-we-u An261 ku-pi-ri-jo ka-ke-u ku-pi-ri-jo Jn320 wi-ti-mi-jo ka-ke-u wi-ti-mi-jo Jn605 po-me ku-pi-ri-jo Cn131/719 wo-wi-ja-ta ka-ke-u wo-wi-ja-ta Jn658/725 tu-ru-pte-ri-ja ku-pi-ri-jo Un443+998 ze-pu2-ro? ra-pte ze-pu2-ro Ea56 ku-te-re-u ke-ro-si-ja ku-te-re-u An261 ma-ra-ni-jo po-me ma-ra-ni-jo Cn643/719 o-ka-ri-jo? po-me? o-ka-ri-jo Cn655 Table 13. Indications of ethnic origin from the personal names of individuals other than do-e-ro(-a) or te-o-jo do-e-ro(-a)
272
Nationality Group Name Occupation Tablet ko-ro-ku-ra-i-jo Na405 e-wi-ri-po e-wi-ri-po e-re-ta An610 ko-ro-ku-ra-i-jo Na543 ]-ku-si-jo ]-ku-si-jo e-re-ta An610 ku-te-ra3 ku-te-ra3 Aa506 a-*64-ja a-*64-ja Ab515 ku-te-ra3 Ab562 a-*64-ja Aa701 ma-ra-ne-nu-we ma-ra-ne-nu-we e-re-ta An610 a-ke-re-wa a-ke-re-wa e-re-ta An610 mi-ra-ti-ja mi-ra-ti-ja Aa1180 a-po-ne-we a-po-ne-we e-re-ta An610 mi-ra-ti-ja Ab573 da-mi-ni-jo da-mi-ni-jo e-re-ta An610 mi-ra-ti-ja Aa798 e-wi-ri-po? e-wi-ri-pi-ja Aa60 mi-ra-ti-ra mi-ra-ti-ra Ab382 ka-pa-ra2-de ka-pa-ra2-de Aa788 po-ti-ja-ke-e po-ti-ja-ke-e e-re-ta An610 ke-re-te ke-re-te ka-si-ko-no ka-si-ko-no An128 ra-mi-ni-ja ra-mi-ni-ja Ab186 ki-ma-ra ki-ma-ra Aa63 ri-jo ri-jo e-re-ta An610 ki-ni-di-ja ki-ni-di-ja Aa792 ro-o-wa e-re-ta e-re-ta An1 ki-ni-di-ja Ab189 te-ta-ra-ne e-re-ta e-re-ta An1 ki-si-wi-ja ki-si-wi-ja Aa770 te-ta-ra-ne e-re-ta An610 ki-si-wi-ja o-nu-ke-ja Ab194 ti-nwa-to ti-nwa-si-ja Ab190 ko-ni-jo ko-ni-jo e-re-ta An610 ti-nwa-si-ja Aa699 ko-ro-ki-ja ko-ro-ki-ja Ab372 wi-nu-ri-jo wi-nu-ri-jo e-re-ta An610 ko-ro-ki-ja Aa354 wo-qe-we wo-qe-we e-re-ta An610 ko-ro-ku-ra-i-jo ko-ro-ku-ra-i-jo Na516 ze-pu2-ra3 ze-pu2-ra3 Aa61 ko-ro-ku-ra-i-jo Na396 Table 14. Groups in the Pylos Tablets designated only or primarily by their ethnic origin
273
Nationality Occupation Group Tablet Members ko-ro-ki-ja Aa354 8 a-*64-ja a-*64-ja Ab515 35 ku-te-ra3 ku-te-ra3 Aa506 28 a-*64-ja Aa701 35 ku-te-ra3 Ab562 e-wi-ri-po e-wi-ri-pi-ja Aa60 16 mi-ra-ti-ja mi-ra-ti-ja Aa1180 ka-pa-ra2-de ka-pa-ra2-de Aa788 24 mi-ra-ti-ja Ab573 16 ki-ma-ra ki-ma-ra Aa63 3 mi-ra-ti-ja Aa798 54 ki-ni-di-ja ki-ni-di-ja Aa792 21 mi-ra-ti-ra mi-ra-ti-ra Ab382 54 ki-ni-di-ja Ab189 20 ra-mi-ni-ja ra-mi-ni-ja Ab186 7 ki-si-wi-ja ki-si-wi-ja Aa770 6 ti-nwa-si-ja ti-nwa-si-ja Ab190 9 o-nu-ke-ja ki-si-wi-ja Ab194 7 ti-nwa-si-ja Aa699 9 o-nu-ke-ja ze-pu2-ra3 ze-pu2-ra3 Aa61 26 ko-ro-ki-ja ko-ro-ki-ja Ab372 9 Table 15. Groups of women in the Aa/Ab series that are defined by their ethnic origin
274
Nationality Group Name Occupation Tablet Members e-ke-ra2-wo-no e-re-ta An610 40 me-ta[ e-re-ta An610 me-ta-ki-ti-ta e-re-ta An610 me-ta-ki-ti-ta e-re-ta An610 26 po-ku-ta e-re-ta An610 10 po-si-ke-te-re e-re-ta An610 we-da-ne-wo e-re-ta An610 20 we-re-ka-ra te-qa-ta-qe e-re-ta An610 20 za-e-to-ro e-re-ta An610 3 ]e me-ta-ki-ti-ta e-re-ta An610 19 ]e ki-ti-ta e-re-ta An610 46 ]wa ki-ti-ta e-re-ta An610 36 ]wa me-ta-ki-ti-ta e-re-ta An610 3 e-wi-ri-po (H) e-wi-ri-po e-re-ta An610 9 ]-ku-si-jo ]-ku-si-jo e-re-ta An610 8 a-ke-re-wa (H) a-ke-re-wa e-re-ta An610 25 a-po-ne-we a-po-ne-we e-re-ta An610 37 a-po-ne-we e-re-ta e-re-ta An1 7 da-mi-ni-jo da-mi-ni-jo e-re-ta An610 40 ko-ni-jo ko-ni-jo e-re-ta An610 126 ma-ra-ne-nu-we ma-ra-ne-nu-we e-re-ta An610 40 po-ra-pi e-re-ta e-re-ta An1 4 po-ti-ja-ke-e po-ti-ja-ke-e e-re-ta An610 6 ri-jo (H) e-re-ta e-re-ta An1 5 i-jo ri-jo e-re-ta An610 24
275 ro-o-wa e-re-ta e-re-ta An1 8 te-ta-ra-ne e-re-ta e-re-ta An1 6 te-ta-ra-ne te-ta-ra-ne e-re-ta An610 31 wi-nu-ri-jo wi-nu-ri-jo e-re-ta An610 wo-qe-we wo-qe-we e-re-ta An610 523 wa-ka-ti-ja-ta ke-ki-de ke-ki-de sa-pi-da An656 wa-wo-u-de ke-ki-de ke-ki-de An654 10 me-ta-pi-jo ke-ki-de ke-ki-de An654 50 ku-pa-ri-si-jo ke-ki-de ke-ki-de An657 20 ku-pa-ri-si-jo ke-ki-de ke-ki-de An657 10 a-pu2-ka-ne ke-ki-de ke-ki-de An657 20 a-pu2-ka-ne ke-ki-de ke-ki-de po-ra-i An656 20 o-wi-ti-ni-jo o-ka-ra3 o-ka-ra3 An657 50 o-wi-to-no o-ka-ra o-ka-ra An657 30 a2-ra-tu-a o-ka-ra3 o-ka-ra3 Cn3 u-pi-ja-ki-ri-jo ku-re-we ku-re-we An654 60
O-ru-ma-to U-ru-pi-ja-jo-jo U-ru-pi-ja-jo Cn3 a2-ka-a2-ki-ri-ja-jo u-ru-pi-ja-jo-jo u-ru-pi-ja-jo-jo Cn3 a2-ka-a2-ki-ri-jo ko-ro-ku-ra-i-jo u-ru-pi-ja-jo An661 30 pi-ru-te ku-re-we ku-re-we Cn3 wo-wi-ja ko-ro-ku-ra-i-jo ko-ro-ku-ra-i-jo An656 20 ko-ro-ku-ra-i-jo ko-ro-ku-ra-i-jo ko-ro-ku-ra-i-jo Na516 ko-ro-ku-ra-i-jo ko-ro-ku-ra-i-jo ko-ro-ku-ra-i-jo Na396 ko-ro-ku-ra-i-jo ko-ro-ku-ra-i-jo ko-ro-ku-ra-i-jo Na543 ko-ro-ku-ra-i-jo ko-ro-ku-ra-i-jo ko-ro-ku-ra-i-jo Na405 Table 16. Provenance of military personnel from the o-ka tablets and the e-r-e-ta men
276
Tablet Name Origin Superior_name Superior Occupation do-e-ro, ka-ke-u Jn310 po-ro-u-te-wo ka-ke-u Jn310 pa-qo-si-jo-jo ka-ke-u Jn310 ke-we-to-jo ka-ke-u Jn310 i-wa-ka-o ka-ke-u Jn413 de-ko-to-jo ka-ke-u ? Jn431 qe-ta-ko-jo ka-ke-u ? Jn605 mi-ka-ri-jo-jo ka-ke-u Jn605 pu-ra-ta-o ka-ke-u Jn706 ka-ke-u ? Jn706 ka-ke-u ? Jn706 ka-ke-u ? Jn706 ka-ke-u ? ka-ke-u ? Jn706 ka-ke-u ? Jn750 e-u-we-to-ro ka-ke-u ? Table 17. Records of do-e-ro with contextual indication of their occupational status
277
Craft Occupation Name of group Sex Members Tablet Textiles a-ke-ti-ra2/ a-ke-ti-ri- a-ke[-ti-ra2 F Ab1099 ja a-ke-ti-ra2 F Ab564 a-ke-ti-ra2 F 38 Aa815 a-ke-ti-ri-ja F 12 Aa85 a-ke-ti-ri-ja F 32 Aa717 a-ra-ka-te-ja a-ra-ka-te-ja F 37 Aa89 a-ra-ka-te-ja F 21 Aa240 ne-we-wi-ja ne-we-wi-ja F 21 Aa695 no-ri-wo-ko no-ri-wo-ko F 8 Aa98 o-nu-ke-ja ki-si-wi-ja o-nu-ke-ja F 7 Ab194 pe-ki-ti-ra2 pe-ki-ti-[ F Aa891 pe-ki-ti-ra2 F 7 Ab578 ri-ne-ja pa-ke-te-ja ri-ne-ja F 2 Ab745 pa-ke-te-ja ri-ne-ja F 2 Ab746 Textiles and/or a-pu-ko-wo-ko a-pu-ko-wo-ko F 8 Ab210 leather craft ka-ru-ti-je-ja-o-qe M 3 Ad671 pa-ke-te-ja-o-qe
278 ra-pte-re M An207+360 ra-pte-re M An207+360 ra-pte-re M 1 An424 ra-pte-re M 10 An424 ra-pte-re M 12 An424 ra-pte-re M 20 An207+360 Possibly textiles o-ti-ri-ja o-ti-ri-ja F 21 Aa313 we-re-ka-ra-ta we-re-ka-ra-ta F 20 An298 we-we-si-je-ja we-we-si-je-ja F 16 Ab217 ki-ri-se-we ki-ri-se-we An298 Metal craft ka-ke-u ka-ke-u M 5 Jn431 po-ti-ni-ja-we-jo? ka-ke-u M 10 Jn431 ka-ke-u M 31 Jn431 ka-ke-we ka-ke-we M Na252 ka-ke-we M Na529 ka-ke-we M Na425 ka-ke-we M Na106 ka-ke-we M Na923 ka-ke-we M Na941 ka-si-ko-no ka-si-ko-no M 5 An128 Wood craft du-ru-to-mo du-ru-to-mo M Vn10 du-ru-to-mo M Vn10 te-ko-to-ne te-ko-to-ne M 254 An18 Building crafts to-ko-do-mo to-ko-do-mo M An7 to-ko-do-mo de-me-o-te M 2 An35
279 to-ko-do-mo de-me-o-te M 3 An35 to-ko-do-mo de-me-o-te M 3 An35 to-ko-do-mo de-me-o-te M 4 An35 na-u-do-mo na-u-do-mo M Na568 Pottery ke-ra-me-we ke-ra-me-we M 2 An207+360 Hunting, horse-rearing, i-po-po-qo-i-qe i-po-po-qo-i-qe M Fn79 and cattle ku-na-ke-ta-i ku-na-ke-ta-i M Na248 qo-u-ko-ro qo-u-ko-ro M 18 An830+907 qo-u-ko-ro M 60 An830+907 qo-u-ko-ro M 60 An830+907 qo-u-ko-ro M 66 An830+907 qo-u-ko-ro M 90 An18 ze-u-ke-u-si ze-u-ke-u-si M Fn79 ze-u-ke-u-si M Fn50 Food a-to-po-qo a-to-po-qo M 2 An427 preparation/agriculture a-to-po-qo M 3 An39 me-re-ti-ra2/ me-re-ti-ra2 F 6 Ab789 me-re-ti-ri-ja me-re-ti-ri-ja F 6 Aa764 me-re-ti-ri-ja F 7 Aa62 pu2-te-re pu2-te-re M Na520 si-to-ko-wo si-to-ko-wo F 24 An292 si-to-ko-wo F 21 An292 si-to-ko-wo F An292 8
280 Specialized crafts to-ko-so-wo-ko to-ko-so-wo-ko M 5 An207+360 ke-ro-si-ja ke-ro-si M 20 An261 ke-ro-si-ja M 13 An616 ke-ro-si-ja M 14 An261 ke-ro-si-ja M 17 An261 ke-ro-si-ja M 17 An616 ke-ro-si-ja M 18 An261 ke-ro-si-ja M 18 An616 ke-ro-si-ja M 20 An616 Non-specialized crafts e-ke-ro-qo-no e-ke-ro-qo-no F Aa854 e-ke-ro-qo-no F Ab1100 e-ke-ro-qo-no F Ab563 e-ke-ro-qo-no 12 An199 e-ke-ro-qo-no-qe pa-wo- M 9 Ad691 ko-qe o-pi-ro-qo ko-wo e-ke-ro-qo-no e-ke-ro-qo-no o-pi-ro-qo F 7 Aa777 o-pi-ro-qo pa-wo-ke pa-wo-ke F 4 Aa795 pa-wo-ke F 4 Ab558 pa-wo-ko pa-wo-ko M La632 ra-wi-ja-ja ra-wi-ja-ja (captives) F 26 Aa807 ra-wi-ja-ja (captives) F 28 Ab586 Servants a-pi-qo-ro a-pi-qo-ro F 32 Aa804 mi-ka-ta? mi-ka-ta M 3 An39 mi-ka-ta M 6 An39 po-ku-ta po-ku-ta M 10 An207+360 re-wo-to-ro-ko-wo re-wo-to-ro-ko-wo F 37 Ab553 re-wo-to-ro-ko-wo F 38 Aa783
281 Military e-re[-ta?] qe-ro-me-no ri-ne-ja-o ko-wo M Ad697 e-re-ta ]-ku-si-jo M 8 An610 a-ke-re-wa M 25 An610 a-po-ne-we M 37 An610 da-mi-ni-jo M 40 An610 e-ke-ra2-wo-no M 40 An610 e-re-ta M 7 An1 e-re-ta M 4 An1 e-re-ta M 5 An1 e-re-ta M 8 An1 e-re-ta M 6 An1 e-wi-ri-po M 9 An610 ki-ti-ta M 46 An610 ki-ti-ta M 36 An610 ko-ni-jo M 126 An610 ma-ra-ne-nu-we M 40 An610 me-ta[ M An610 me-ta-ki-ti-ta M An610 me-ta-ki-ti-ta M 26 An610 me-ta-ki-ti-ta M 19 An610 me-ta-ki-ti-ta M 3 An610 po-ku-ta M 10 An610 po-si-ke-te-re M An610 po-ti-ja-ke-e M 6 An610 ri-jo M 24 An610
282 te-ta-ra-ne M 31 An610 we-da-ne-wo M 20 An610 we-re-ka-ra te-qa-ta-qe M 20 An610 wi-nu-ri-jo M An610 wo-qe-we M An610 za-e-to-ro M 3 An610 i-wa-si-jo-ta i-wa-si-jo-ta M Cn3 i-wa-so i-wa-so M 10 An654 i-wa-so M 20 An519 i-wa-so M 70 An661 ke-ki-de ke-ki-de M Na103 ke-ki-de M Na514 ke-ki-de M 20 An657 ke-ki-de M 10 An657 ke-ki-de M 20 An657 ke-ki-de M 50 An654 ke-ki-de M 10 An654 ke-ki-de ne-wo M 10 An656 ke-ki-de po-ra-i M 20 An656 ke-ki-de sa-pi-da M An656 u-ru-pi-ja-jo M 10 An654 ko-ro-ku-ra-i-jo ko-ro-ku-ra-i-jo M 10 An661 ko-ro-ku-ra-i-jo M 20 An661 ko-ro-ku-ra-i-jo M 20 An661 ko-ro-ku-ra-i-jo M 30 An661
283 ko-ro-ku-ra-i-jo M 80 An656 ko-ro-ku-ra-i-jo M 20 An656 u-ru-pi-ja-jo M 30 An661 ku-re-we ku-re-we M 20 An654 ku-re-we M 50 An519 ku-re-we M Cn3 ku-re-we M 60 An654 o-ka-ra o-ka-ra M 30 An657 o-ka-ra3 o-ka-ra3 M 10 An654 o-ka-ra3 M 110 An519 o-ka-ra3 M Cn3 o-ka-ra3 M 50 An657 u-ru-pi-ja-jo u-ru-pi-ja-jo M Na928 u-ru-pi-ja-jo M 30 An519 u-ru-pi-ja-jo M Cn3 u-ru-pi-ja-jo-jo M Cn3 Chariots a-mo-si a-mo-si M 18 An1282 a-qi-ja-i a-qi-ja-i M 18 An1282 do-ka-ma-i do-ka-ma-i M 36 An1282 i-za-a-to-mo-i i-za-a-to-mo-i M Fn50 ki-u-ro-i ki-u-ro-i M 13 An1282 po-qe-wi-ja-i po-qe-wi-ja-i M 5 An1282 With possible cultic da-ko-ro da-ko-ro M 2 An424 connections da-ko-ro M 5 An427 da-ko-ro M 12 An207+0360
284 e-to-wo-ko M 4 An39 e-to-wo-ko e-to-wo-ko M 5 An39 e-to-wo-ko-i M Fn79 pu-ka-wo pu-ka-wo M 3 An427 pu-ka-wo M 6 An424 pu-ka-wo M 10 An594 pu-ka-wo M 16 An39 pu-ka-wo M 23 An39 tu-ra-te-u-si tu-ra-te-u-si M Gn428 No satisfactory ]ka-ta ]ka-ta 41 An128 interpretation ]ka-ta po-ru-qo-to 6 An128 ]we-jo ]we-jo 4 An299 a3-ki-de-ja a3-ki-de-ja F Na529 a-de-te-re a-de-te-re 2 An207+360 a-ro-po a-ro-po 3 An199 ke-ki-do ke-ki-do Na848 ki-jo-ne-u-si ki-jo-ne-u-si Gn428 ki-ri-te-wi-ja ki-ri-te-wi-ja F Eb321/327/1153 ki-ri-te-wi-ja F Ep704 ma-ra-te-we ma-ra-te-we Na245 o-pi-te-u-ke-e-we o-pi-te-u-ke-e-we M 4 An39 o-pi-te-u-ke-e-we M 5 An39 te-u-ta-ra-ko-ro te-u-ta-ra-ko-ro M An424
Table 18. Occupational status of the personnel recorded in groups
285 Tablet Group Occupation Ideogram Unit T Ab468 Granum 1 5 Ni 1 5 Ab559 Granum 1[ ? Ni 3 ? Ab575 Ab580 Granum 10 Ni 10 Ab582 Ab584 Granum 10 2 Ni 10 2 Ab978 Ab1103 Granum ]1 Ni ]1 Ab1105 Ab1112 Ad674 Ad681 Ad1450 Ab515 a-*64-ja Granum 10 Ni 10 Ab388 a-da-ra-te-ja Granum 0 4 Ni 0 4 Ab1099 a-ke[-ti-ra2 a-ke-ti-ra2 Ab564 a-ke-ti-ra2 a-ke-ti-ra2 Ad290 a-ke-ti-ra2-o ko-wo Ad666 a-ke-ti-ra2-o ko-wo Ad690 a-pi-qo-ro ko-wo Ab210 a-pu-ko-wo-ko a-pu-ko-wo-ko Granum 3 6 Ni 3 6 Ad677 a-ra-ka-te-ja-o ko-wo
286 Ad689 a-so-qi[ ] mi-ra-ti-ja-o ko-wo Ab563 e-ke-ro-qo-no e-ke-ro-qo-no Ab1100 e-ke-ro-qo-no e-ke-ro-qo-no Ad315 e-ke-ro-qo-no ko-wo Ad691 e-ke-ro-qo-no-qe pa-wo-ko-qe o-pi-ro-qo ko- e-ke-ro-qo-no wo Ad684 e-re-ta-o ko-wo, ti-nwa-ti-ja-o i-te-ja-o ko- wo Ab379 e-u-de-we-ro ri-ne-ja Granum 2 8 Ni 2 8 Ad679 ka-pa-ra-do ku-te-ra-o ko-wo Ad671 ka-ru-ti-je-ja-o-qe pa-ke-te-ja-o-qe
287 Ad380 mi-ra-ti-ja-o a-ra-te-ja-o ko-wo Ab382 mi-ra-ti-ra Granum 16 8 Ni 16 8 Ab560 ne-we-wi-ja ne-we-wi-ja Ad357 ne-we-wi-ja-o ko-wo Ab554 ne-wo-pe-o Granum 2 ? Ni 2 ? Ad669 no-ri-wo-ko-jo ko-wo Ad700 ]o ko-wo Ab899 o-pi-ro-qo o-pi-ro-qo Granum 2 2 Ni 2 2 Ab417+1050 o-ti-ra2 o-ti-ra2 Granum 6 ? Ni 6 ? Ad663 o-ti-ra2-o ko-wo Ab277 o-wi-to-no Granum 3 Ni 3 Ab745 pa-ke-te-ja ri-ne-ja ri-ne-ja Granum 0 5 Ni 0 5 Ab746 pa-ke-te-ja ri-ne-ja ri-ne-ja Granum 0 5 Ni 0 5 Ab558 pa-wo-ke pa-wo-ke Granum 1 8 Ni 1 8 Ab578 pe-ki-ti-ra2 pe-ki-ti-ra2 Granum 2 4 Ni 2 4 Ad694 pe-ki-ti-ra2-o ko-wo Ab186 ra-mi-ni-ja Granum 2 4 Ni 2 4 Ab555 ra-pi-ti-ra2 ra-pi-ti-ra2 Granum 16 ? Ni 16 ? Ab356+1049 ra-qi-ti-ra2 ra-qi-ti-ra2 Granum 2 2 Ni 2 2
288 Ad667 ra-qi-ti-ra2-o ko-wo Ab586 ra-wi-ja-ja ra-wi-ja-ja Granum 7 7 Ni 7 7 Ad686 ra-wi-ja-ja-o ko-wo Ab553 re-wo-to-ro-ko-wo re-wo-to-ro-ko-wo Granum 11 1 Ni 11 1 Ad676 re-wo-to-ro-ko-wo ko-wo Ad326 ri-ne-ja-o a-*64-ja-o ko-wo Ad295 ri-ne-ja-o ko-wo Ad670 ri-ne-ja-o ko-wo Ad672 ri-ne-ja-o ko-wo Ad678 ri-ne-ja-o ko-wo Ad687 ri-ne-ja-o ko-wo Ad697 ri-ne-ja-o ko-wo e-re[ ]qe-ro-me-no Ad921 te-pe-ja-o ko-wo Ab190 ti-nwa-si-ja Granum 3 9 Ni 3 9 Ad685 to-sa-me-ja-o ko-wo Ab217 we-we-si-je-ja we-we-si-je-ja Granum 5 1 Ni 5 1 Ad318+420 we-we-si-je-ja-o ko-wo Ad664 ze-pu2-ra-o ko-wo ri-ne-ja-o Table 19. Personnel receiving rations
289 Tablet Gr./indiv. Name ind Occup. Ind. Name group Occ. Group Ideogram Unit T V Z An7 individual pa-te-ko-to Missing 0 2 An7 individual qa-ra2-te Missing ? Oliva 6 An7 individual pa-ka An7 individual pa-te-ko-to An7 workgroup pi-ri-e-te-si pi-ri-e-te-si Oliva? 0 4 An7 workgroup to-ko-do-mo to-ko-do-mo Missing 7 Oliva? 5 Fg253 individual ]ra-so-ro Granum 192 7 Ni 192 7 Fg368 individual ke-sa-da-ra Granum 5 Ni 5 Fg374 individual ko-ka-ro a-re-po-zo-o Granum 1 Ni 1 Fg828 individual ke-sa-da-ra Granum 5 Fn324 individual e-ti-me-de-i Hordeum 0 2 3 Fn324 individual te-wa-jo Hordeum 0 2 Fn324 individual ]mo-ke-re-we-i Hordeum 0 1 Fn324 individual qo-re-po-u-ti Hordeum 0 2 Fn324 individual ]re-jo-de Hordeum 0 1 2
290 Fn324 individual a-*64-jo Hordeum 0 1 2 Fn324 individual se-we-ri-wo-wa-zo Hordeum 0 1 2 Fn324 individual a-ka-ma-jo Hordeum 0 1 2 Fn324 individual o[ ]-ke-we Hordeum 0 3 Fn324 individual o[ ]-ke-te-i Hordeum 0 1 2 Fn324 individual ]de-ra-wo Hordeum 0 1 2 Fn324 individual ne-qa-sa-ta Hordeum 0 1 2 Fn324 individual ]-me-ni-jo Hordeum 0 ? 2 Fn324 individual i-ja-me-i Hordeum 0 1 2 Fn324 individual ]ru-[ Hordeum 0 1 2 Fn324 individual o-pe-ro Hordeum 0 1 2 Fn324 individual pa-ra-ke-se-we Hordeum 0 0 3 Fn324 individual pi-ja-ma-so Hordeum 0 1 Fn324 individual ]wo-ni Hordeum Fn324 individual a-ta-o Hordeum 0 1 2 Fn324 individual re-wa-o Hordeum 0 1 2 Fn324 individual a[ Hordeum 0 0 1 Fn324 individual po-no-qa-ta Hordeum 0 0 1 Fn324 individual ]-re-[ Hordeum 0 0 2 2 Fn324 individual ke-ro-u-te Hordeum 0 0 2 Fn324 individual o-qa-wo-ni Hordeum 0 0 1
291 Fn324 individual ]-ta-ki-jo Hordeum 0 0 2 Fn324 individual pi-re-ta Hordeum 0 0 1 Fn324 individual te-pi-ja-qe Hordeum Fn324 individual to-qi-da-so Hordeum 0 0 2 Fn324 individual ko-pa-wi-jo Hordeum 0 1 Fn324 individual ke-sa-me-no Fn1427 individual pa-te-ko-to Hordeum Fn1427 individual pi-ri-e-te-re Hordeum Fn1427 individual to-ko-do-mo Hordeum Fn41 individual ta-re-wa Hordeum 0 6 4 Oliva 1 Fn41 individual o-pi-te-u-ke-e-we Hordeum 0 5 3 Fn50 individual me-za-ne Hordeum 0 0 2 Fn50 individual di-pte-ra-po-ro Hordeum 0 0 2 Fn50 individual a-to-po-qo Hordeum 0 0 2 Fn50 individual o-pi-te-u-ke-e-we Hordeum 0 0 2 Fn50 individual a3-ki-a2-ri-jo Hordeum 0 0 2 Fn50 individual mi-ka-ta Hordeum 0 0 3 Fn50 individual e-to-wo-ko Hordeum 0 0 2 Fn50 workgroup qa-si-re-wi-ja Hordeum Fn50 workgroup qa-si-re-wi-ja Hordeum
292 Fn50 workgroup qa-si-re-wi-ja Hordeum Fn50 workgroup ze-u-ke-u-si ze-u-ke-u-si Hordeum 0 0 4 Fn50 workgroup i-za-a-to-mo-i i-za-a-to-mo-i Hordeum 0 0 3 Fn79 individual a3-pu-ke-ne-ja Hordeum 0 6 4 Oliva 1 Fn79 individual a-ki-re-we Hordeum 0 5 Fn79 individual du-ni-jo ti-ni-ja-ta? Hordeum 0 0 5 Fn79 individual to-sa-no Hordeum 0 6 4 Oliva 1 Fn79 individual ne-e-ra-wo Hordeum 0 6 4 Oliva 1 Fn79 individual a-e-se-wa Hordeum 0 6 4 Oliva 1 Fn79 individual ka-ra-so-mo Hordeum 0 0 5 Oliva Fn79 individual wa-di-re-we Hordeum 0 2 3 Oliva 0 7 Fn79 individual pe-qe-we Hordeum 0 1 4 Fn79 individual te-ra-wo-ne Hordeum 0 0 5 Fn79 individual to-wa-no-re Hordeum 0 6 4 Oliva 1
293 Fn79 individual a-ki-to Hordeum 0 2 3 Oliva 1 Fn79 individual a3-ki-a2-ri-jo Hordeum 0 1 4 Fn79 workgroup ze-u-ke-u-si ze-u-ke-u-si Hordeum 1 7 3 Fn79 workgroup i-po-po-qo-i i-po-po-qo-i Hordeum 1 7 3 Fn79 workgroup e-to-wo-ko-i e-to-wo-ko-i Hordeum 0 5 1 Fn867 individual pa-na-re-jo Hordeum Fn867 workgroup qa-si-re-wi-ja Hordeum Fn867 individual do-ri-je-we Hordeum Gn428 individual ka-ra-te-mi-de Vinum 1 Gn428 individual o-ro-ke-we Vinum 0 Gn428 individual i-do-me-ni-jo Vinum 0 Gn428 workgroup tu-ra-te-u-si tu-ra-te-u-si Vinum 0 Gn428 workgroup ki-jo-ne-u-si ki-jo-ne-u-si Vinum 0 Gn720 individual pi-ke-te-i Vinum 10 Gn720 individual ru-ki-jo Vinum 9 Un1321 individual a3-te Granum Un1322 individual de-ku-tu-wo-ko Granum 2 Ni 2 Un1322 individual i-te-we Granum 12 Un443 individual te-ri-ja Granum 1 +998
294 lana 5
Table 20. Personnel receiving payment in kind
Tablet Name Occupation Action From Grain Unit T V Eb913 ]e-ko-to te-o-jo do-e-ro has onato? da-mo Granum Eb885 ]i-na te-o-jo do-e-ro has onato kekemena kotona da-mo Granum Ep613+ ]ra-so te-o-jo do-e-ro has onato kekemena kotona da-mo Granum 1131 Es644 a3-ki-wa-ro do-e-ro offer Granum 0 ? Es650 a3-ki-wa-ro do-e-ro has pemo Granum 1 En74 a3-wa-ja te-o-jo do-e-ra has onato pi-ke-re-wo Granum 0 1 Eo160 a3-wa-ja te-o-jo do-e-ra has onato pi-ke-re-wo Granum 0 1 Eb169 du-ni-jo te-o-jo do-e-ro has onato kekemena kotona da-mo Granum 0 1 Ep705 du-ni-jo te-o-jo do-e-ro has onato kekemena kotona da-mo Granum 0 1 En609 e-*65-to te-o-jo do-e-ro has onato wa-na-to-jo Granum 0 2 En74 e-*65-to te-o-jo do-e-ro has onato Granum 0 0 1 Eo211 e-*65-to te-o-jo do-e-ro has onato wa-na-ta-jo Granum 0 2 Eo276 e-*65-to te-o-jo do-e-ro has onato ru-*83-]o Granum 0 0 1 En609 e-do-me-ne-u te-o-jo do-e-ro has onato a-ma-ru-ta-o Granum 0 1 Eo224 e-do-me-ne-u te-o-jo do-e-ro has onato pa-ra-ko Granum 0 1 En74 e-ko-to te-o-jo do-e-ro has onato ru-*83-o Granum 0 0 3 En74 e-ko-to te-o-jo do-e-ro has onato a3-ti-jo-qo Granum 0 1 Eo247 e-ko-to te-o-jo do-e-ro has onato a3-ti-jo-qo Granum 0 1 Eo276 e-ko-to te-o-jo do-e-ro has onato ru-*83-]o Granum 0 0 3 Ep212 e-ko-to te-o-jo do-e-ro has onato kekemena kotona da-mo Ep705 e-ko-to te-o-jo do-e-ro has onato kekemena kotona da-mo Granum 0 2 Eb1187 e-ni-to-wo do-e-ro has onato kekemena kotona Granum 0 1 Ep539 e-ni-to-wo do-e-ro has onato kekemena kotona da-mo Granum 0 1 En74 e-pa-sa-na-ti te-o-jo do-e-ra has onato a3-ti-jo-qo Granum 0 2 Ep212 e-pa-sa-na-ti te-o-jo do-e-ra has onato kekemena kotona da-mo Granum 0 3 En609 e-ra-ta-ra do-e-ra has onato a-ma-ru-ta-o Granum 0 1 Eo224 e-ra-ta-ra do-e-ra has onato a-ma-ru-ta Granum 0 1
295 Ep212 e-ri-ko-wo te-o-jo do-e-ro has onato kekemena kotona da-mo Granum 0 0 3 Eb1440 e-ri-qi-ja te-o-jo do-e-ra has onato kekemena kotona Granum Ep539 e-ri-qi-ja te-o-jo do-e-ra has onato kekemena kotona En609 e-sa-ro te-o-jo do-e-ro has onato a-ma-ru-ta-o Granum 0 0 3 Eo224 e-sa-ro te-o-jo do-e-ro has onato a-ma-ru-ta Granum 0 0 3 Ep705 e-sa-ro te-o-jo do-e-ro has onato kekemena kotona da-mo Granum 0 0 2 Ep613+ e-u-ru-wo-ta te-o-jo do-e-ro has onato kama Granum 1 3 1131 Eb156+ e-u-ru-wo-ta te-o-jo do-e-ro ka-ma-e-u has onato pemo Granum 1 3 157 Eb498 i-do-me-ne-ja te-o-jo do-e-ra has onato kekemena kotona Granum 0 1 3 Ep539 i-na te-o-jo do-e-ro has onato kekemena kotona da-mo En609 i-ni-ja te-o-jo do-e-ra has onato wa-na-to-jo Granum 0 2 4 Eo211 i-ni-ja te-o-jo do-e-ra has onato wa-na-ta-jo Granum 0 2 4 Eb1350 i-pa-sa-na-ti te-o-jo do-e-ra has onato kekemena kotona da-mo Granum 0 3 Eo247 i-pa-sa-na-ti te-o-jo do-e-ra has onato a3-ti-jo-qo Granum 0 2 En659 i-ra-ta te-o-jo do-e-ro has onato ra-ku-ro-jo Granum 0 0 3 Eo281 i-ra-ta te-o-jo do-e-ro has onato ra-ku-ro Granum 0 0 3 En659 ka-ra-*56-so te-o-jo do-e-ro has onato a-ka-ta-jo-jo Granum 0 2 Eo269 ka-ra-*56-so te-o-jo do-e-ro has onato a-ka-ta-jo Granum 0 2 Eb838 ka-ra-u-du-ro te-o-jo do-e-ro onato kekemena kotona da-mo Granum 0 2 Ep705 ka-ra-u-du-ro te-o-jo do-e-ro has onato kekemena kotona da-mo Granum 0 2 Eb890+ ka-ta-no te-o-jo do-e-ro has onato kekemena kotona da-mo Granum 0 2 898+933 Ep705 ka-ta-no te-o-jo do-e-ro has onato kekemena kotona da-mo Granum 0 2 Eb976 ka-wa-do-ro te-o-jo do-e-ro has onato kekemena kotona da-mo Granum 0 0 3 Ep212 ka-wa-do-ro te-o-jo do-e-ro has onato kekemena kotona da-mo Granum 0 0 3 Ep613+ ko-pi-na te-o-jo do-e-ra has onato kotona kekemena da-mo Granum 0 2 1131 Eb347 ko-ri-si-ja te-o-jo do-e-ra has onato kekemena kotona da-mo Granum 1 8 En74 ko-ri-si-ja te-o-jo do-e-ra has onato a3-ti-jo-qo Granum 0 5 En74 ko-ri-si-ja te-o-jo do-e-ra has onato pi-ke-re-wo Granum 0 5 Eo160 ko-ri-si-ja te-o-jo do-e-ra has onato pi-ke-re-wo Granum 0 5 Eo247 ko-ri-si-ja te-o-jo do-e-ra has onato a3-ti-jo-qo Granum 0 5
296 Ep212 ko-ri-si-ja te-o-jo do-e-ra has onato kekemena kotona da-mo Granum 1 Eb915 ko-sa-ma-to te-o-jo do-e-ro has onato kekemena kotona da-mo Granum 0 1 Ep212 ko-sa-ma-to te-o-jo do-e-ro has onato kekemena kotona da-mo Granum 0 1 En74 ku-*63-so te-o-jo do-e-ro has onato a3-ti-jo-qo Granum 0 1 Eo247 ku-*63-so te-o-jo do-e-ro has onato a3-ti-jo-qo Granum 0 1 En74 ma-*79 te-o-jo do-e-ra has onato ru-*83-o Granum 0 0 3 Eo276 ma-*79 te-o-jo do-e-ra has onato ru-*83-]o Granum 0 0 3 Eb866 ma-ra3-wa te-o-jo do-e-ra has onato kekemena kotona da-mo Granum 0 2 Ep705 ma-ra3-wa te-o-jo do-e-ra has onato kekemena kotona da-mo Granum 0 2 Eo276 ma-re-ku-na te-o-jo do-e-ra has onato ru-*83-]o Granum 0 1 En74 ma-re-ku-na te-o-jo do-e-ro has onato ru-*83-o Granum 0 1 Ep539 me-re-u do-e-ro has onato kekemena kotona ]re-ma-ta ka- Granum 0 0 2 ma-e-we Eb905 mi-ra te-o-jo do-e-ra has onato kekemena kotona da-mo Granum 0 1 En74 mi-ra te-o-jo do-e-ra has onato ru-*83-o Granum 0 1 Eo276 mi-ra te-o-jo do-e-ra has onato ru-*83-]o Granum 0 1 Ep613+ mi-ra te-o-jo do-e-ra has onato kekemena kotona da-mo Granum 0 1 1131 Eb858 mu-ti te-o-jo do-e-ra has onato kekemena kotona da-mo Granum 0 1 Ep212 mu-ti-ri te-o-jo do-e-ra has onato kekemena kotona da-mo Granum 0 1 Ep212 o-do-me-ne-ja te-o-jo do-e-ra has onato kekemena kotona da-mo Granum 0 1 3 Ep705 o-re-a2 te-o-jo do-e-ro has onato kekemena kotona da-mo Granum 0 0 2 Ep539 pi-ro-na te-o-jo do-e-ra has onato kekemena kotona Eb173 po-so-re-ja te-o-jo do-e-ra has onato pa-ra-ko Granum 0 1 3 En609 po-so-re-ja te-o-jo do-e-ra has onato a-ma-ru-ta-o Granum 0 1 3 Eo224 po-so-re-ja te-o-jo do-e-ra has onato ta-ta-ro Granum 0 1 3 Ep539 po-so-re-ja te-o-jo do-e-ra has onato kekemena kotona Ep539 po-so-re-ja te-o-jo do-e-ra has onato kekemena kotona ka-ma-e-we Granum Ep613+ po-so-re-ja te-o-jo do-e-ra has onato pa-ra-ko Granum 0 1 3 1131 Ep539 pu-[ ]-da-ka do-e-ro has onato kekemena kotona da-mo Granum 0 3 3 Ep705 pu-ko-wo te-o-jo do-e-ro, pu-ko-wo has onato kekemena kotona da-mo Granum 0 2 Eb900 qe-ri-ta te-o-jo do-e-ra has onato kekemena kotona da-mo Granum 0 2 Ep613+ qe-ri-ta te-o-jo do-e-ra has onato kekemena kotona da-mo Granum 0 2
297 1131 Eb1174 ra-su-ro te-o-jo do-e-ro has onato kekemena kotona da-mo Granum 0 2 En659 ra-su-ro te-o-jo do-e-ro has onato qe-re-qo-ta-o Granum 0 1 Eo444 ra-su-ro te-o-jo do-e-ro has onato pa-da-je-we Granum 0 1 Ep212 ra-su-ro te-o-jo do-e-ro has onato kekemena kotona da-mo Granum 0 2 Eb1344 re-ka te-o-jo do-e-ra has onato da-mo Granum Eb886 re-ka te-o-jo do-e-ra da-mo Granum Ep212 re-ka te-o-jo do-e-ra has onato kekemena kotona da-mo Granum 0 6 En609 si-ma te-o-jo do-e-ra has onato wa-na-to-jo Granum 0 1 Eo211 si-ma te-o-jo do-e-ro has onato wa-na-ta-jo Granum 0 1 En609 so-u-ro te-o-jo do-e-ro has onato a-ma-ru-ta-o Granum 0 0 3 Eo224 so-u-ro te-o-jo do-e-ro has onato pa-ra-ko Granum 0 0 3 En659 ta-ra2-to te-o-jo do-e-ro has onato qe-re-qo-ta-o Granum 0 0 3 En659 ta-ra2-to te-o-jo do-e-ro has onato a-da-ma-o-jo Granum 0 2 4 En659 ta-ra2-to te-o-jo do-e-ro has onato a-i-qe-wo Granum 0 1 3 En74 ta-ra2-to te-o-jo do-e-ro has onato a3-ti-jo-qo Granum 0 1 Eo351 ta-ra2-to te-o-jo do-e-ro has onato a-da-ma-o Granum 0 2 4 Eo444 ta-ra2-to te-o-jo do-e-ro has onato pa-da-je-we Granum 0 0 3 Eo471+ ta-ra2-to te-o-jo do-e-ro has onato a-i-qe-we Granum 0 1 3 855 Eb464 ta-ra-mi-ka te-o-jo do-e-ra she has onato kekemena da-mo Granum 0 1 ? kotona Ep705 ta-ra-mi-ka te-o-jo do-e-ra has onato kekemena kotona da-mo Granum 0 1 Eo247 ta-ra-to te-o-jo do-e-ro has onato a3-ti-jo-qo Granum 0 1 Ep539 te-qa-ja te-o-jo do-e-ra has onato kekemena kotona da-mo Granum 0 2 En74 te-se-u te-o-jo do-e-ro has onato ru-*83-o Granum 0 4 Eo276 te-se-u te-o-jo do-e-ro has onato ru-*83-]o Granum 0 4 Eb1176 te-te-re-u do-e-ro has onato kekemena kotona da-mo Granum 0 0 3 Ep539 te-te-re-u do-e-ro has onato kekemena kotona da-mo Granum 0 0 3 Ep705 to-ro-ja te-o-jo do-e-ra has onato kekemena kotona da-mo Granum 0 1 Eb1188 to-wa-te-u do-e-ro has onato kekemena kotona da-mo Granum 0 8 Ep539 to-wa-te-u do-e-ro has onato kekemena kotona da-mo Granum 0 8 En659 tu-ri-ja-ti te-o-jo do-e-ra has onato pe-re-qo-ta-o Granum 0 9 Eo444 tu-ri-ja-ti te-o-jo do-e-ra has onato pa-da-je-we Granum 0 ?
298 Eb416 u-wa-mi-ja te-o-jo do-e-ra she has onato ijereja (gen) Granum 0 2 3 kera (gift, award) Ep704 u-wa-mi-ja te-o-jo do-e-ra has onato the kera (prize, Granum 0 1 3 gift) of the ijereja Eb1186 wi-dwo-i-jo do-e-ro has onato kekemena kotona da-mo Granum 0 2 Ep539 wi-dwo-i-jo do-e-ro has onato kekemena kotona da-mo Granum 0 2 Eb502 do-e-ra has onato kekemena kotona da-mo Granum Eb859 do-e-ra has onato Granum 0 2 Eb916 do-e-ra Granum 0 6 Eb1347 do-e-ro has onato ko-turo2-ne pa- Granum 0 2 da-je-we Eb1348 do-e-ro has onato Granum Eb835 do-e-ro Granum Eb872 do-e-ro Granum Es650 do-e-ro has pemo Granum 0 4 Eb981 te-o-jo Eb636 te-o-jo do-e-[ has kekemena kotona Granum Ep613+ te-o-jo do-e-ra has onato kekemena kotona da-mo Granum 0 0 3 1131 Eb884 te-o-jo do-e-ro has onato da-mo Granum Ep613+ te-o-jo do-e-ro has onato kekemena kotona da-mo Granum 0 0 4 1131 Ea107 ]e-ka-ra Granum 2 6 Ea109 a-pi-a2-ro holds ko-to-na su-qo-ta-o Granum 2 5 Ea132 ru-ko-ro ra-wa-ke-si-jo has o-na-to ko-tona su-qo-ta-o Granum 0 1 Ea136 wa-tu-o-ko a-ke-ro has o-na-to da-mo Granum Ea1424 ]jo has onato ru-ko-ro ra-wa- Granum ke-si-jo Ea208 ]ra-i-ka has o-na-to da-mo Granum Ea259 o-ke-u has o-na-to da-mo Granum 0 2 Ea270 a-pi-a2-ro has ko-to-na Granum 0 6 Ea28 ti-ri-da-ro ra-pte holds ka-ma Granum ? ? Ea29 e-ro2-qo ra-pte owns o-na-to i-ma-di-jo Granum 0 1 Ea304 ke-re-te-u has o-na-to sa-ke-re-we Granum
299 Ea305 ke-re-te-u has o-na-to ke-ke-me-na ko- qo-qo-ta-o Granum 0 1 to-na Ea325 e-ro2-qo ra-pte Granum Ea336 ta-ra-ma-ta has ko-to-na Granum Ea421 ]te-i-jo has o-na-to/ko-to-na ki-ti- a-mo-te-wo ra- Granum 1 4 2 me-na wa-ke-si-jo-jo Ea439 po-me? has onato mo-ro-qo-ro po- Granum 0 1 me-ne Ea460 ti-ri-da-ro ra-pte has ona[to? da-mo Granum Ea480 e-ri-qi-jo has onato kekemena kotona su-qo-ta-o Granum 0 2 Ea481 ra-pa-do has onato kotona me-ri-te-wo Granum 0 1 Ea481 ra-pa-do has onato kotona su-qo-ta-o Granum 0 1 Ea52 wi-ri-ja-no e-pi-we-ti-ri-jo owns o-na-to da-mo Granum 0 1 Ea56 ze-pu2-ro ra-pte has [onato] sa-ke-re-we Granum 0 1 Ea57 ka-ra-do-wa-ta has o-na-to granum Ea59 du-ni-jo has o-na-to da-mo Granum 1 6 Ea59 ke-re-te-u has o-na-to ke-ke-me-na ko- su-qo-ta-o Granum 1 8 to-na Ea59 ke-re-te-u has o-na-to da-mo Granum 3 Ea59 ke-re-te-u has o-na-to ra-wa-ke-si-jo Granum 2 Ea59 ke-re-te-u has on account of i-qo-jo Granum 5 Ea59 ke-re-u has o-na-to ke-ke-me ko-to- Granum 2 4 na Ea71 ko-do-jo po-me has ko-to-na ki-ti-me-na Granum 1 4 3 Ea754 ti-ri-da-ro ra-pte has onato kotona ko-do-jo Granum 0 6 Ea757 e-u-me-ne has ona[to] kekemena qo-qo-ta-o Granum 0 2 kotona Ea771 ke-re-te-u has onato kotona me-ri-te-wo Granum 0 3 Ea773 e-u-me-de has onato da-mo Granum Ea776 sa-ke-re-u has onato kotona su-qo-ta-o Granum 0 2 Ea778 ta-ra-ma-ta has onato da-mo Granum 0 9 Ea780 o-ko-me-ne-u has onato? Granum 2 Ea781 qo-u-ko-ro-jo kotona kitimena Granum 2 4 Ea782 ru-ko-ro ra-wa-ke-si-jo has onato kotona mo-ro-qo-ro-jo Granum 0 1 po-me-no
300 Ea799 ru-ko-ro has onato kotona me-ri-te-wo Granum 0 3 Ea800 ke-re-te-u has onato mo-ro-qo-ro po- Granum 2 me-ne Ea801 ku-ru-no-jo me-ri-te-wo kekemena kotona anono Granum 1 1 Ea802 ra-wo-do-ko has kekemena kotona qo-qo-ta-o Granum 0 3 Ea803 ko-do has [onato?, kekemena da-mi-jo Granum 0 6 2 kotona?] [ Ea805 o-pe-te-re-u Granum 2 Ea806 ke-re-te-u has onato kekemena kotona Granum 1 2 Ea808 ka-ra-pi e-te-do-mo has onato da-mo Granum 1 Ea809 ke-re-te-u has onato kekemena kotona ra-wa-ke-si-jo- Granum jo a-mo-te-wo Ea810 ti-nwa-si-jo Granum 3 5 Ea811 du-ni-jo has onato Granum 0 6 Ea812 e-u-me-de a-re-po-zo-o has kotona Granum 1 8 Ea813 e-ro2-qo ra-pte has onato kotona me-ri-te-wo Granum 0 1 Ea814 o-ke-u di-ra-po-ro has o-to (onato) ku-ro2 ra-wa- Granum 0 1 ke-si-jo Ea816 i-ma-di-ja has onato damo Granum 2 9 Ea817 po-me has kotona kitimena mo-ro-qo-ro-jo Granum 3 1 6 Ea820 e-u-me-de a-re-po-zo-o has onato kotona me-ri-te-wo Granum 1[ 1 Ea821 ta-ra-ma-ta-o po-me has [onato] kotona kitimena Granum 5 7 3 Ea822 e-u-me-ne ra-wa-ke-si-jo has onato su-qo-ta-o Granum 0 5 Ea823 ru-ko-ro-jo has kotona Granum 0 6 Ea824 ko-do po-me has onato da-mo Granum 0 5 Ea825 ta-ra-ma-ta has onato ko-do po-me-ne Granum 0 1 Ea827 ke-re-u has onato i[ Granum Ea922 a-pi-a2-ro has kekemena kotona Granum 0 1 nono Eb152 ka-ma-e-u has pemo Granum 1 Eb173 pa-ra-ko has kama kotonoko Granum 1 Eb177+ ]re-u a-si-to-po-qo, ka-ma-e-u has and works so much land Granum 1 2 1010 Eb294 o-pe-te-re-u has kekemena kotona Granum 2 5
301 Eb321+ they have onato kekemena da-mo Granum 1 9 0327+ kotona 1153 Eb364+ we-ra-jo po-ti-ni-ja-we-jo has onato kekemena kotona Granum 0 2 366 Eb377 pa-ra-ko has kekemena kotona Granum 0 7 Eb472 we-te-re-u o-pi-ti-ni-ja-ta has onato Granum 1 3 Eb477 we-te-re-u o-pi-ti-ni-ja-ta has onato kekemena kotona Granum 1 8 Eb496 pi-ke-re-u has kekemena kotona Granum Eb501 ke-ra-u-jo has kekemena kotona Granum 0 4 Eb566 ra-ku-ro has kekemena kotona Granum Eb747 a-da-ma-o has onato
302 En74 pe-ki-ta ka-na-pe-u wa-na-ka-te- has onato pi-ke-re-wo Granum 0 2 ro En74 pi-ke-re-wo has kotona kitimena Granum 2 6 En74 ru-*83-o has kotona kitime
303 Ep613+ pe-re-qo-ta pa-de-we-u has a kama onato alloted? Granum 1 1131 by sirijo? Ep613+ ]re-u a-si-to-po-qo he has and works kama Granum 1 2 1131 Ep613+ sa-sa-wo Granum 1 5 1131 Ep613+ we-ra-jo has onato kekemena kotona Granum 0 2 1131 Ep704 they have onato kekemena da-mo Granum 1 9 kotona Ep704 o-pe-te-re-u qe-ja-me-no has kekemena kotona Granum 2 5 Eq146 a-de-me-we Granum 1 0 3 Eq146 a-si-wi-jo re-qo-na-to-mo has onato Granum 0 7 Eq146 ]me-no i-ja-te has onato Granum 1 Eq146 po-ro-te-u Granum 1 Eq146 re-pi-ri-jo Granum 1 Es650 a-ne-o has so much seed Granum 1 5 Es650 a-re-ku-tu-ru-wo has so much seed Granum 7 Es650 ka-ra-i has so much seed Granum 0 3 Es650 ko-pe-re-u has so much seed Granum 6 Es650 ku-da-ma-ro has so much seed Granum 1 2 Es650 o-ka has so much seed Granum 1 2 Es650 o-po-ro-me-no has so much seed Granum 4 Es650 pi-ro-ta-wo has so much seed Granum 1 2 Es650 pi-ro-te-ko-to has so much seed Granum Es650 ru-ko-wo-ro has so much seed Granum 1 4 Es650 se-no has so much seed Granum 1 Es650 wo-ro-ti-ja-o has so much seed Granum 2 Table 21. Individuals who receive payment in land
304 Tablet Name Occupation Superior name Superior title Ae110 do-e[ ka-ra-wi-po-ro-jo En609 e-ra-ta-ra do-e-ra i-je-re-ja Eo224 e-ra-ta-ra do-e-ra i-je-re-ja Eb1176 te-te-re-u do-e-ro i-je-re-ja Ep539 me-re-u do-e-ro i-je-re-ja Ep539 te-te-re-u do-e-ro i-je-re-ja Ep539 pu-[ ]-da- do-e-ro ka-pa-ti-ja ka Eb1186 wi-dwo-i-jo do-e-ro a-pi-me-de-o Eb1187 e-ni-to-wo do-e-ro a-pi-me-de-o Eb1188 to-wa-te-u do-e-ro a-pi-me-de-o Ep539 e-ni-to-wo do-e-ro a-pi-me-de-o Ep539 to-wa-te-u do-e-ro a-pi-me-de-o Ep539 wi-dwo-i-jo do-e-ro a-pi-me-de-o Es650 a3-ki-wa-ro do-e-ro a-te-mi-to Cn1287 mu-ti-ri-ko do-e-ro di-u-ja goddes Fn324 do-e-ro e-u-ru-po-to-re-mo- jo Cn1287 a2-ra-ka- do-e-ro ke-re-ta-o wo Fn867 do-e-ro mi-jo-qa Es703 do-e-ro we-da-ne-wo Es644 do-e-ro we-da-ne-wo Es650 do-e-ro we-da-ne-wo Es703 do-e-ro we-da-ne-wo Es703 do-e-ro we-da-ne-wo Es703 do-e-ro we-da-ne-wo Jn413 do-e-ro, ka-ke-u de-ko-to-jo ka-ke-u Jn750 do-e-ro, ka-ke-u e-u-we-to-ro ka-ke-u pa-ra-ke-te-e- u Jn310 do-e-ro, ka-ke-u i-wa-ka-o ka-ke-u
305 Jn310 do-e-ro, ka-ke-u ke-we-to-jo ka-ke-u Jn605 do-e-ro, ka-ke-u mi-ka-ri-jo-jo ka-ke-u Jn310 do-e-ro, ka-ke-u pa-qo-si-jo-jo ka-ke-u Jn310 do-e-ro, ka-ke-u po-ro-u-te-wo ka-ke-u Jn605 do-e-ro, ka-ke-u pu-ra-ta-o ka-ke-u Jn431 do-e-ro, ka-ke-u qe-ta-ko-jo ka-ke-u Ae303 do-e-ra do-e-ra i-je-re-ja Ae26 do-e-ro do-e-ro o-pi pe-me ko-ru-da-ro-jo Jn605 do-e-ro do-e-ro, ka-ke-u pe-re-qo-no-jo ka-ke-u? Jn605 do-e-ro do-e-ro, ka-ke-u a3-ki-e-wo ka-ke-u? Fn50 do-e-ro-i do-e-ro-i au[-ke-i-]ja-te-wo Fn50 do-e-ro-i do-e-ro-i mi-jo[-qa] Fn50 do-e-ro-i do-e-ro-i a-pi-e-ra Fn50 do-e-ro-i do-e-ro-i ]-wo[ ]ne Table 22. Superiors of individual and group do-e-ro(-a)
306
Tablet Name Occupation Superior name Superior title An1281 ru-ko-ro a-pi-e-ra Ea823 ru-ko-ro-jo ra-wa-ke-si-jo-jo Ep613+1131 we-ra-jo po-ti-ni-ja An1281 ti-ta-ra-[ me-ta-ka-wa An1281 ma-ra-si-jo mi-jo-qa An1281 ]ro [ au-ke-i-ja-te-we An1281 re-si-wo po-ti-ni-ja An1281 to-ze-u a-pi-e-ra An1281 ]e-we-za-no mi-jo-qa[ An1281 po-so-ro me-ta-ka-wa An1281 ta-ni-ko au-ke-i-ja-te-we i-qe- ja An1281 o-na-se-u au-ke-i-ja-te-we i-qe- ja An1281 re-u-si-wo po-ti-ni-ja i-qe-ja An1281 a-ka po-ti-ni-ja i-qe-ja Cn254 i-sa-na-o-ti a-ke-o-jo An340 ka-wa-ti-ro a-ta-o An340 ka-u-ti-wa a-ta-o An340 a-wa-ta a-ta-o An340 a-no-ra-ta a-ta-o An340 a-re-wo a-ta-o An340 pu-ti-ja a-ta-o An340 te-pe-u a-ta-o An340 wo-ti-jo a-ta-o An340 pu-[ ]-a2-ko a-ta-o An340 ]te-u a-ta-o An340 ]-ja-do-ro a-ta-o
307 An340 ]te-u a-ta-o An340 wi-ri-wo[ a-ta-o Vn1191 pi-ro-pa-ta-ra a-ta-o-jo Na856 we-da-ne-u a2-ki-ra Vn1191 pi-ri-ta de-ki-si-wo-jo Vn1191 o[ ]-o-wa e-to-mo-jo Vn1191 a-*64-ja ka-e-sa-me-no-jo Vn1191 wo-di-je-ja me-ti-ja-no-ro Vn1191 ma-ra-me-na qa-ko-jo An129 a-ta-ro-we ti-ki-jo An129 pe-re-wa-ta ti-ki-jo Cn254 ano de-ki-si-wo we-da-ne-u Cn254 ko-ru-ta-ta we-da-ne-u Cn254 ra-ke-u we-da-ne-u Ae264 pi-ra-jo a3-ki-pa-ta du-ni-jo Ae108 qo-te-ro a3-ki-pa-ta ta-ra-ma-ta-o Ae489 a3-ki-pa-ta ta-ra-ma-ta-o Un267 tu-we-ta a-re-pa-zo-o a-ko-so-ta An129 ka-nu-ta-jo a-so-na? ti-ki-jo En609 a-tu-ko e-te-do-mo wa-na-ka-te-ro wa-na-ka Jn431 ko-za-ro ka-ke-u po-ti-ni-ja Jn431 a-ke-wa-ta ka-ke-u po-ti-ni-ja Jn431 sa-ke-re-u ka-ke-u po-ti-ni-ja Jn431 we-we-si-jo ka-ke-u po-ti-ni-ja Jn431 ko-ta-wo ka-ke-u po-ti-ni-ja Jn431 da-u-ta-ro ka-ke-u po-ti-ni-ja Jn431 ko[ ] ka-ke-u po-ti-ni-ja Jn431 e-u-wa-ko-ro ka-ke-u po-ti-ni-ja Jn431 ke-we-no ka-ke-u po-ti-ni-ja Jn431 a-ta-o ka-ke-u po-ti-ni-ja Jn431 ]wa-ti-ro ka-ke-u po-ti-ni-ja
308 Jn431 me-ri-wa[ ] ka-ke-u po-ti-ni-ja Jn431 ka-ri-se-u ka-ke-u po-ti-ni-ja Jn431 du-ko-so ka-ke-u po-ti-ni-ja An129 we-ro-ta ka-ke-u? ka-ke-u-si En74 pe-ki-ta ka-na-pe-u wa-na-ka-te-ro wa-na-ka En74 pe-ki-ta ka-na-pe-u wa-na-ka-te-ro wa-na-ka Eo160 pe-ki-ta ka-na-pe-u wa-na-ka-te-ro wa-na-ka Eo276 pe-ki-ta ka-na-pe-u wa-na-ka-te-ro wa-na-ka Eo371+1160 pi-ri-ta-wo ke-ra-me-wo wa-na-ka-te- wa-na-ka ro An261 a[ ] ke-ro-si-ja ke-ro-te An261 [ ]-ka-[ ] ke-ro-si-ja ke-ro-te An261 o-pa-[ ] ke-ro-si-ja ke-ro-te An261 ku-te-re-u ke-ro-si-ja a-pi-jo-to ke-ro-te An261 o-wo-to ke-ro-si-ja a-pi-jo-to ke-ro-te An261 a-ra-i-jo ke-ro-si-ja a-pi-jo-to ke-ro-te An261 ri-zo ke-ro-si-ja a-pi-jo-to ke-ro-te An261 a3-so-ni-jo ke-ro-si-ja a-pi-qo-ta-o ke-ro-te An261 a[ ]te ke-ro-si-ja a-pi-qo-ta-o ke-ro-te An261 a3-nu-me-no ke-ro-si-ja o-two-we-o ke-ro-te An261 qo-te-ro ke-ro-si-ja o-two-we-o ke-ro-te An261 a2-e-ta ke-ro-si-ja o-two-we-o ke-ro-te An261 o-du-*56-ro ke-ro-si-ja o-two-we-o ke-ro-te An261 wa-[ ke-ro-si-ja ta-we-si-jo-jo ke-ro-te An261 ke-ro-si-ja ta-we-si-jo-jo ke-ro-te An261 te-wa[ ke-ro-si-ja ta-we-si-jo-jo ke-ro-te An261 tu-ru-we-u ke-ro-si-ja ta-we-si-jo-jo ke-ro-te An172 ]ki-jo-qe-u pe-re-ku-ta? wo-wi-ja-ta ra-pte An172 ]mi-to-no pe-re-ku-ta? wo-wi-ja-ta ra-pte An172 mu-ko pe-re-ku-ta? wo-wi-ja-ta ra-pte An172 da-ka-sa-na-ta pe-re-ku-ta? wo-wi-ja-ta ra-pte
309 An172 di-wo pe-re-ku-ta? wo-wi-ja-ta ra-pte An172 sa-ri-qo-ro pe-re-ku-ta? wo-wi-ja-ta ra-pte An172 ma-ta-i pe-re-ku-ta? wo-wi-ja-ta ra-pte An172 ]a2-ta pe-re-ku-ta? wo-wi-ja-ta ra-pte An172 o-nu[ ] pe-re-ku-ta? wo-wi-ja-ta ra-pte Cn719 ka-do-wo po-me a-ke-o Cn599 a-ke-ra-wo po-me a-ke-o Cn599 ru-we-ta po-me a-ke-o Cn599 ke-re-no po-me a-ke-o Cn600 mi-ka-ri-jo po-me a-ke-o Cn600 wa-ra-wo-no po-me a-ke-o Cn600 o-pe-se-to po-me a-ke-o Cn702+1461 ]tu-re po-me a-ke-o Cn702+1461 po-me a-ke-o Cn643 ma-ra-ni-jo po-me a-ke-o Cn643 ku-ka-ra-so po-me a-ke-o Cn643 ]ke-u po-me a-ke-o Cn719 to-si-ta po-me a-ke-o Cn719 me-ta-no po-me a-ke-o Cn719 o-ku-ka po-me a-ke-o Cn719 ra-mi-ni-jo po-me a-ke-o Cn719 ku-pi-ri-jo po-me a-ke-o Cn655 qi-ri-ta-ko po-me a-ke-o Cn655 a-ri-wo po-me a-ke-o Cn702+1461 po-me a-ko-so-ta Cn40 e-zo-wo po-me a-ko-so-ta Cn719 a-ka-ma-wo po-me a-ko-so-ta Cn719 pa-pa-ro po-me a-ko-so-ta Cn655 pu-wi-no po-me a-pi-me-de Cn719 ku-ka-ra-so po-me a-so-ta-o Ae134 ke-ro-wo po-me ta-ra-ma-o
310 Cn45 de-mo-qe po-me we-da-ne-wo Cn600 a-[ ]u po-me we-da-ne-wo Cn643 pu-ma-ra-ko po-me we-da-ne-wo Cn655 i-wa-so po-me we-da-ne-wo Cn655 ro-ko-jo po-me we-da-ne-wo Cn655 o-pe-re-ta po-me we-da-ne-wo Cn655 po-ro-qa-ta-jo po-me we-da-ne-wo Cn655 to-ru-ko-ro po-me we-da-ne-wo Cn655 ma-ma-ro po-me we-da-ne-wo Cn655 ma-du-ro po-me we-da-ne-wo Cn655 se-no po-me we-da-ne-wo Cn655 ta-ta-ke-u po-me we-da-ne-wo Cn599 ne-ti-ja-no po-me? a-ke-o Cn40 tu-ri-ta po-me? a-ke-o Cn40 e-wi-te-we po-me? a-ke-o Cn45 pe-qe-we po-me? a-ke-o Cn45 a-ko-to-wo po-me? a-ke-o Cn45 wi-ja-te-we po-me? a-ke-o Cn45 ka-ra-wa-ni-ta po-me? a-ke-o Cn40 zo-wi-jo po-me? a-ko-so-ta Cn40 ma-ri-ti-wi-jo po-me? a-ko-so-ta Cn40 ma-u-ti-jo po-me? a-ko-so-ta Cn40 ka-ta-wa po-me? a-ko-so-ta Cn45 do-ro-jo-jo po-me? a-ko-so-ta Cn45 o-qe-qa po-me? a-ko-so-ta Cn45 e-ne-ti-jo po-me? a-ko-so-ta Cn599 ka-so po-me? a-ko-so-ta Cn40 ne-ti-ja-no-re po-me? pa-ra-jo Cn40 pa-ta po-me? pa-ra-jo Cn40 ro-ko po-me? pa-ra-jo Cn45 ko-so-ne po-me? we-da-ne-wo
311 Cn40 po-ru-qo-ta po-me? we-da-ne-wo Cn40 [ ]ma-te-we po-me? we-da-ne-wo Cn40 ka-da-ro po-me? we-da-ne-wo Cn45 e-ko-to-ri-jo po-me? we-da-ne-wo Cn40 po-so-pe-re-i po-me? wo-ne-we Qa1299 ka-e-se-u po-ti-ni-ja-wi-jo po-ti-ni-ja Ta711 pu2-ke-qi-ri pu2-ke-qi-ri wa-na-ka Ea782 ru-ko-ro ra-wa-ke-si-jo ra-wa-ke-ta Ea132 ru-ko-ro ra-wa-ke-si-jo ra-wa-ke-ta An129 to-ro-wo ri-na-ko-ro ti-ki-jo Ae8 ku-so-no tu-ra-te-u du-ni-jo-jo Ae72 ko-ro-ja-ta tu-ra-te-u, su-ra-te du-ni-jo-jo Eb903 wa-na-ka-te-ro wa-na-ka Table 23. Superiors of individuals other than do-e-ro(-a)
312 Tablet Group Occupation Superior name Superior title Pa398 qa-si-re-wi-ja a-pi-ka-ra-do-jo qa-si-re-u Pa889+1002 qa-si-re-wi-ja a-ta-[.]-wo-no qa-si-re-u Fn50 qa-si-re-wi-ja a-ki-to-jo qa-si-re-u Fn50 qa-si-re-wi-ja ke-ko-jo qa-si-re-u Fn50 qa-si-re-wi-ja a-ta-no-ro qa-si-re-u Fn867 qa-si-re-wi-ja a-ki-to-jo qa-si-re-u An661 i-wa-so i-wa-so e-ki-no-jo o-ka superior An519 i-wa-so i-wa-so ke-wo-no-jo An654 i-wa-so i-wa-so ta-ti-qo-we-wo o-ka superior at to-wa Jn431 ka-ke-u ka-ke-u po-ti-ni-ja-we-jo i-je-re-[ ] of the potinija Jn431 ka-ke-u ka-ke-u po-ti-ni-ja-we-jo to-sa-no-jo po-ti-ni-ja-we-jo? Jn431 ka-ke-u ka-ke-u po-ti-ni-ja-we-jo a-mu-ta-wo-no po-ti-ni-ja-we-jo? An654 ke-ki-de ke-ki-de ku-ru-me-no-jo o-ka superior An656 ke-ki-de sa-pi-da ke-ki-de wa-pa-ro-jo o-ka superior at ne-wo-ki-to An654 ke-ki-de ke-ki-de ta-ti-qo-we-wo o-ka superior An654 u-ru-pi-ja-jo ke-ki-de ta-ti-qo-we-wo o-ka superior at to-wa An656 ke-ki-de po-ra-i ke-ki-de du-wo-jo-jo o-ka superior at a-ke-re-wa An656 ke-ki-de ne-wo ke-ki-de du-wo-jo-jo o-ka superior at a-ke-re-wa An657 ke-ki-de ke-ki-de ne-da-wa-ta-o o-ka superior An657 ke-ki-de ke-ki-de ne-da-wa-ta-o o-ka superior An657 ke-ki-de ke-ki-de ne-da-wa-ta-o o-ka superior An261 ke-ro-si ke-ro-si ta-we-si-jo-jo ke-ro-te An616 ke-ro-si-ja ke-ro-si-ja ta-we-si-jo-jo ke-ro-te An261 ke-ro-si-ja ke-ro-si-ja a-pi-qo-ta-o ke-ro-te An261 ke-ro-si-ja ke-ro-si-ja a-pi-o-to ke-ro-te An261 ke-ro-si-ja ke-ro-si-ja o-to-wo-o ke-ro-te An616 ke-ro-si-ja ke-ro-si-ja a-pi-qo-to ke-ro-te An616 ke-ro-si-ja ke-ro-si-ja a-pi-o-to ke-ro-te An616 ke-ro-si-ja ke-ro-si-ja o-to-wo-o ke-ro-te An656 ko-ro-ku-ra-i-jo ko-ro-ku-ra-i-jo wa-pa-ro-jo o-ka superior at ne-wo-ki-to An656 ko-ro-ku-ra-i-jo ko-ro-ku-ra-i-jo du-wo-jo-jo o-ka superior at a-ke-re-wa An661 ko-ro-ku-ra-i-jo ko-ro-ku-ra-i-jo e-ki-no-jo o-ka superior An661 ko-ro-ku-ra-i-jo ko-ro-ku-ra-i-jo e-ki-no-jo o-ka superior
313 An661 ko-ro-ku-ra-i-jo ko-ro-ku-ra-i-jo e-ki-no-jo o-ka superior An661 ko-ro-ku-ra-i-jo ko-ro-ku-ra-i-jo e-ki-no-jo o-ka superior An661 u-ru-pi-ja-jo ko-ro-ku-ra-i-jo e-ki-no-jo o-ka superior An519 ku-re-we ku-re-we ro-u-ko ku-sa-me-ni-jo e-qe-ta An654 ku-re-we ku-re-we ku-ru-me-no-jo o-ka superior An654 ku-re-we ku-re-we ta-ti-qo-we-wo o-ka superior at to-wa Na245 ma-ra-te-we ma-ra-te-we ra-wa-ke-ta An657 o-ka-ra o-ka-ra ne-da-wa-ta-o o-ka superior An519 o-ka-ra3 o-ka-ra3 to-ro-o An657 o-ka-ra3 o-ka-ra3 ma-re-wo o-ka superior at o-wi-to-no An654 o-ka-ra3 o-ka-ra3 ta-ti-qo-we-wo o-ka superior at to-wa An519 u-ru-pi-ja-jo u-ru-pi-ja-jo a2-te-po
Table 24. Superiors of groups other than do-e-ro(-a)
314 APPENDIX 3
Tables of Chapter 6
Tablet Name Sex Occupation Land-holding Measure Unit Ef2 M qo-u-ko-ro has pemo Granum 6 Ef3 di-ko-na-re-ja F has kekeme[ na kotona
Table 1. Individuals and their land-holdings on the Tiryns tablets
Tablet Name Sex Members Al7+7c+7f+frr.+7b e-wo-ro-qe M Al7+7c+7f+frr.+7b ]ja-ta-[ M 18 Al7+7c+7f+frr.+7b ]me-qe M 20 Al7+7c+7f+frr.+7b [ ]ra-to-po-ro M 7 Al7+7c+7f+frr.+7b ]ro-qe M 128
Table 2. Groups of people on the Tiryns tablets
Tablet Name Occupation Toponym Ge603+frr/Ge604 a-ke-re-wi-jo a-ke-re-wa Au653/Au657 a-si-wi-jo a-si-wi-ja Au102/Au653 e-ke-ne a-to-po-qo Fo101 ko-ma-ta Oe103+105 pi-we-ri-di textile-worker? pi-we-re Au102 wa-a2-ta a-to-po-qo wa-a2-ta? Oe122 za-ku-si-jo textile-worker? za-ku-to? Fo101 pi-we-ri-si textile-workers? pi-we-re (group) Table 3. Individuals and one group of women on the Mycenae tablets with ethnic adjectives as personal name/designation
315 Tablet Name Occupation Go610/Oe115 a-ko-ro-ta a-ko-ro-ta Au609+frr e-ke-ro[ Oe117 a-to-po-qo a-to-po-qo Oe121 ka-ke-wi ka-ke-u Oe125 ke-ra-me-wi ke-ra-me-u
Table 4. Individuals at Mycenae with occupational terms as personal names
Tablet Name Sex Occupation Au102 wa-ra-pi-si-ro M a-to-po-qo Au102 i-jo M a-to-po-qo Au102/ Au660+fr/ Au657 na-su-to M a-to-po-qo Au102 /Au653/ Au657 te-ra-wo M a-to-po-qo Au102 ka-ri-se-u M a-to-po-qo Au102 e-ke-ne M a-to-po-qo Au102 e-u-po-ro M a-to-po-qo Au102 au-ja-to M a-to-po-qo Au102 ko-no-[ ]-du-ro M a-to-po-qo Au102 wa-a2-ta M a-to-po-qo Au102 de-u-ki-jo M a-to-po-qo Au102/ Au657 mo-i-da M a-to-po-qo Oe129 di-du-mo M ka-na-pe-we Oe130+133 qa-da-wa-so M pe-re-ke-we
Table 5. Individuals at Mycenae who are not designated by an occupational term alone
Tablet Name Sex Members Occupation Fo101 a-ke-ti-ri-ja-i F a-ke-ti-ri-ja-i Fo101 e-ro-pa-ke-ja F e-ro-pa-ke-ja Oi704 ka-na-pe-u-si M ka-na-pe-u-si Oi701 ka-na-pe-u-si M ka-na-pe-u-si Au102 ke-re-no M 2 a-to-po-qo Oi703 ku-wa-no-wo-ko-i M ku-wa-no-wo-ko-i Oi701 ku-wa-no-wo-ko-i M ku-wa-no-wo-ko-i Oi702 ku-wa-no-wo-ko-i M ku-wa-no-wo-ko-i Oi704 ku-wa-no-wo-ko-i M ku-wa-no-wo-ko-i Au102 o-ri-ko M 3 a-to-po-qo Oi702 po-po-i M po-[ro]-po-i Oi701 po-ro-po-i M po-ro-po-i
Table 6. Occupations of people at Mycenae who are recorded in groups
316 Tablet Name Occupation Transaction Commodity Unit T V Au653 a-si-wi-jo receipt Granum Au653 au-wi-ja-to receipt Granum Au653 e-ke-ne receipt Granum Au653 te-ra-wo a-to-po-qo receipt Granum Au653 wo-*65-[ receipt Granum Au658 qa-]ra-si-jo receipt Granum Au658 ]-ri-jo receipt Granum Eu654 ]ra-ko receipt Granum 0 2 Eu654 ]-ru-ta receipt Granum 0 1 2
Table 7. Individuals at Mycenae who receive rations
Tablet Name Occupation Transaction Commodity Unit T V Fu711 ku-ne receipt Farina 0 0 0 Fu711 ka-ra-u-ja receipt Farina 0 0 0 Ni 0 0 0 Fu711 a-re-ke-se-[ ] receipt 0 2
Table 8. Individuals at Mycenae who receive possible handouts
Tablet Name Sex Occupation Commodity Unit S V Fo101 a-ne-a2 F Oleum we 0 0 3 Fo101 pa-na-ki F Oleum we 0 0 1 Fo101 ma-no F Oleum we 0 0 1 Fo101 a-na-*82 F Oleum we 0 0 1 Fo101 to-ti-ja F Oleum we 0 0 1 Fo101 we-i-we-sa F Oleum we 0 0 1 Fo101 ke-ra-so[ ] F Oleum we 0 0 1 Fo101 Oleum we 0 1 Fo101 tu-mi-[ F Oleum we 0 0 1 Fo101 ko-ma-ta F Oleum we 0 0 1 Fo101 na-ta-ra-ma F Oleum we 0 0 1 Fo101 pe-ta-[ ] F Oleum we 0 0 1 Fo101 pu-ka-ro F Oleum we 0 0 1 Fo101 o-ta-ki F Oleum we 0 0 1 Fo101 Oleum we 2 1 1 Fo101 Oleum we 0 0 4 Oe103+105 a-pi-e-ra F Lana Oe103+105 di-we-se-ja F Lana Oe103+105 a-qi-ti-ta F Lana Oe103+105 ku-po F Lana Oe103+105 pi-we-ri-di F Lana Oe106 to-te-we-ja-se-we M Lana 1 Oe106 o-te-ra F Lana 1 Oe106 i-ta-da-wa F Lana 2 Oe110 a-ti-ke-ne-ja F Lana 10
317 Oe110 re-ka-sa F Lana 14 Oe111+136 te-wa-ro M Lana 200 Oe112+134 ro-ka F Lana 10 Oe112+134 ti-tu-so F Lana Oe112+134 ka-ti-[ F Lana 1 Oe112+134 tu-ka-ta-si Lana 8 Oe113+114 ka-sa-to M Lana 1 +135+fr Oe115 a-pi-do-ra F Lana Oe115 a-ko-ro-ta M a-ko-ro-ta Lana Oe117 a-to-po-qo M a-to-po-qo Lana? Oe121 i-te-we-ri-di F Lana 5 Oe121 ku-ka M Lana 2 Oe121 ka-ke-wi M ka-ke-wi Lana 2 Oe121 pa-se-ri-jo ko-wo M Lana 2 Oe122 za-ku-si-jo M Lana Oe124 a-pi-do-ra F Lana 2 Oe125 ke-ra-me-wi M ke-ra-me-wi[ Lana? Oe126 o-pe-ra-no-re M Lana Oe128 au-te-ra F Lana 1 Oe128 ]pi-ri-da-ke M Lana 2 Oe129 di-du-mo M ka-na-pe-we Lana 4 Oe130+133 qa-da-wa-so M pe-re-ke-we Lana 4 Oi701 po-ro-po-i po-ro-po-i *190 10 Oi701 ka-na-pe-u-si ka-na-pe-u-si *190 6 Oi701 ku-wa-no-wo-ko-i ku-wa-no-wo-ko-i *190 2 Oi701 ko-o-ke-ne M *190 5 Oi702 po-po-i po-po-i *190 5 Oi702 ku-wa-no-wo-ko-i ku-wa-no-wo-ko-i *190 2 Oi703 ku-wa-no-wo-ko-i ku-wa-no-wo-ko-i *190 2 Oi703 ko-o-ke-ne M *190 5 Oi704 ka-na-pe-u-si ka-na-pe-u-si *190 6 Oi704 ku-wa-no-wo-ko-i ku-wa-no-wo-ko-i *190 Oi704 ko-o-ke-ne M *190 Ui651 ka-ra-[ M Re? Ui651 ke-ko-jo M Re? Ui651 a3-so-ni-jo M Re Ui651 o-pe-ra-no-ro M Re 70 Ui651 ]-sa-wo M Re 100 Ui651 ]-da-jo M Re 100 Ui651 ko-ra F Re? Ui709 tu-me-ne-wo M DU 500 Ui709 ke-po M KU 300
Table 9. Individuals and groups of people at Mycenae who receive payment in kind
318 Tablet Name Occupation Father Mother V659 a-ne-a2 tu-ka-te a-ne-a2 V659 ke-ra-so ki-ra ke-ra-so V659 o-to-wo-wi-je tu-ka-te o-to-wo-wi-je V659 pi-ro-wo-na ki-ra pi-ro-wo-na Oe121 pa-se-ri-jo ko-wo pa-se-ri-jo Oe106 o-te-ra to-te-we-ja-se-we Au102 i-jo a-to-po-qo wa-ra-pi-si-ro
Table 10. Individuals who are recorded with reference to their parents
Tablet Name Occupation Nationality Av106 ]ke-re-u-so - ke-re-u-so Fq240/247/276 a-ka-de-i - a-ka-de-i Gp197/227/231 a-ra-o - a-ra-o Fq214/254+255 a-ra-o-ju - a-ra-o Ug4 au-to-te-qa-jo - au-to-te-qa-jo Of28 i-da-i-jo - i-da-i-jo Fq169 ka-ra-wi-ja - ka-ra-wi-ja Fq198/244/254+255/269/276/177 mi-ra-ti-jo - mi-ra-ti-jo Av106 o-pi-ja-ro - o-pi-ja-ro Of25 pa-pa-ra-ki - pa-pa-ra-ki? Ug12 pe-ta-o-ni-jo - pe-ta-o-ni-jo Fq253/325/339/Gp227 ra-ke-da-mi-ni-jo - ra-ke-da-mi-ni-jo Fq229/254+255/258/275/284 ra-ke-da-mi-ni-jo-ju - ra-ke-da-mi-ni-jo Av106 si-mi-te-u - si-mi-te-u Gp179 u-re-we - u-re-we?
Table 11. Individuals at Thebes who use ethnic adjectives as their personal names
Tablet Name Members Occupation Nationality Gp127 i-si-wi-jo-i - - i-si-wi-jo-i Gp178 te-qa-jo-i - - te-qa-jo-i
Table 12. Groups of people who are defined by ethnic adjectives
319 Tablet Name Sex Occupation Of34 A-ra-ka-te-ja F A-ra-ka-te-ja Fq198 I-qo-po-qo M I-qo-po-qo Fq254+255 Ka-ne-jo M Ka-ne-jo Of36 No-ri-wo-ki-de M No-ri-wo-ki-de Oh206 O-nu-ke-wi M O-nu-ke-wi Fq214/fq240/fq241/fq253/fq254+255/ To-jo M To-jo? Fq257/fq258/fq284/fq239/fq370/ Gp150/gp235 Table 13. Individuals at Thebes who use occupational terms as their personal names
Tablet Name Sex Occupation Superior Of34 ko-tu-ro2 M a-pi-qo-ro Of35 F te-pe-ja ko-ma-we-te-ja Oh208 pe-re[ M pe-re-ke-we Of27 F pu2-ke-qi-ri-ne-ja a-ka-i-je-u Of36 F a-ke-ti-ra2 wa-na-ka[ -te-ra wa-na-ka Of36 F a-ke-ti-ra2 po-ti-ni-ja
Table 14. Individuals at Thebes who are not designated by an occupational term alone
Tablet Name Members Occupation Sex Av135 ]-ma-ka 2 M Of25 ma-ri-ne-wa-i-ja-i F Of26 ko-de-wa-o do-de M Of26 di-u-ja-wo do-de M Of33 o-*34-ta-o do-de M Of35 ma-ri-ne-we-ja-i F Fq169 a-ke-ne-u[-si a-ke-ne-u[-si M Fq305 a-ke-ne-u-si a-ke-ne-u-si M Fq125Fq136+Fq137 a-ke-ne-u-si a-ke-ne-u-si M Fq130 a-ke-ne-u-si a-ke-ne-u-si M Fq214 a-ke-ne-u-si a-ke-ne-u-si M Fq239 a-ke-ne-u-si a-ke-ne-u-si M Fq240 a-ke-ne-u-si a-ke-ne-u-si M Fq241 a-ke-ne-u-si a-ke-ne-u-si M Fq254+255 a-ke-ne-u-si a-ke-ne-u-si M Fq284 a-ke-ne-u-si a-ke-ne-u-si M Fq214 e-pi-qo-i e-pi-qo-i M Fq229 e-pi-qo-i e-pi-qo-i M Fq252 e-pi-qo-i e-pi-qo-i M Fq247 i-qo-po-qo i-qo-po-qo M Fq252 i-qo-po-qo i-qo-po-qo M Fq254+255 i-qo-po-qo-i i-qo-po-qo--i M Gp199 i-qo-po-qo-i i-qo-po-qo-i M Fq272 i-qo-po-qo-i i-qo-po-qo-i M
320 Fq367 i-qo-po-qo-i i-qo-po-qo-i M Fq214 i-qo-po-qo-i i-qo-po-qo-i M Fq276 i-qo-po-qo-i i-qo-po-qo-i M Fq305 i-qo-po-qo-i i-qo-po-qo-i M Av106 ka-na-pe-we 6 ka-na-pe-we M Fq301 ke-re[ ke-re[ F Fq169 ke-re-na-[i ke-re-na-[i F Gp176 ke-re-na-i ke-re-na-i Fq200 ku-na-ki-si ku-na-ki-si? F Av100 ku-na-ki-si ku-na-ki-si? F Fq247 o-ti-ri-ja-[i o-ti-ri-ja-i F Fq249+339+352+353? o-ti-ri-ja-i o-ti-ri-ja-i F Fq306 o-ti-ri-ja-i o-ti-ri-ja-i F Fq229 o-ti-ri-ja-i o-ti-ri-ja-i F Fq276 o-ti-ri-ja-i o-ti-ri-ja-i F Fq275 o-ti-ri-ja-i o-ti-ri-ja-i F Av101 po-me-ne 2 po-me-ne M Av106 ru-ra-ta-e 2 ru-ra-ta-e M Av104+191 si-to-ko-wo si-to-ko-wo M Av104+191 si-to-ko-wo 20 si-to-ko-wo M Av104+191 si-to-ko-wo si-to-ko-wo M Av104+191 si-to-ko-wo 10 si-to-ko-wo M Av104+191 si-to-ko-wo 10 si-to-ko-wo M Av104+191 si-to-ko-wo si-to-ko-wo M Av104+191 si-to-ko-wo 6 si-to-ko-wo M Gp175 ]ta-si te-ka-]ta-si M Gp147 ]-si-qe te-ka-ta-]si M Gp112 te-ka-ta-si te-ka-ta-si M Gp114 te-ka-ta-si te-ka-ta-si M Fq247 te-ka-ta-si te-ka-ta-si M Fq341 to-pa-po-ro-[i to-pa-po-ro-i M Gp184 to-pa-po-ro-i to-pa-po-ro-i M
Table 15. Occupations of people at Thebes recorded in groups
321
Tablet Name Sex Occupation Commodity Unit T V S Fq205 *56-ru-we M Hordeum? Fq240 *63-u-ro M Hordeum Fq241 *63-u-ro M Hordeum? Fq281 *63-u-ro M Hordeum? 0 0 0 ? Fq239 a-]me-ro M Hordeum? Fq247 a-ka[-de-i M Hordeum? Fq240 a-ka-de-i M Hordeum Fq276 a-ka-de-i M Hordeum 0 2 Fq241 a-ko-da-mo M Hordeum? Fq253 a-ko-da-mo M Hordeum? Fq258 a-ko-da-mo M Hordeum Fq343 a-ko-da-mo M Hordeum? Fq240 a-ko-da-mo M Hordeum Fq275 a-ko-da-mo M Hordeum? 0 0 0 2 Fq117 a-ko-da-mo M Hordeum? 0 0 1 Fq307 a-ko-da-mo M Hordeum? 0 0 2 Fq309 a-ko-da-mo M Hordeum? 0 0 2 Fq254+255 a-ko-da-mo M Hordeum 0 0 2 Fq257 a-ko-da-mo M Hordeum? 0 0 4 Fq352 a-me-ro M Hordeum? Fq379 a-me-ro M Hordeum? Fq198 a-me-ro[ M Hordeum? Fq214 a-me-ro M Hordeum Fq229 a-me-ro M Hordeum Fq247 a-me-ro M Hordeum? Fq276 a-me-ro M Hordeum Fq281 a-me-ro M Hordeum? 0 0 ? Fq125+136+ ]a-me-ro M Hordeum? 0 0 ? 137 Fq339 a-me-ro M Hordeum? 0 0 ? Fq254+255 a-me-ro M Hordeum 0 0 1 Fq272 a-me-ro M Hordeum? 0 0 1 Fq236 a-mo-ta-ro-ko M Hordeum? Fq244 a-nu-to M Hordeum? Fq198 a-nu-to M Hordeum? Fq236 a-nu-to M Hordeum? Fq240 a-nu-to M Hordeum Fq241 a-nu-to M Hordeum? Fq276 a-nu-to M Hordeum 0 0 0 ? Fq132 a-nu-to M Hordeum? 0 0 0 1 Fq254+255 a-nu-to M Hordeum 0 0 0 1 Fq214 a-ra-o-ju M Hordeum 0 0 Fq254+255 a-ra-o-ju M Hordeum 0 0 1 Fq276 a-ta-o[ M Hordeum Fq269 da-u-ti-jo M Hordeum 0 1
322 Fq241 de-u[ M Hordeum? Fq214 de-u-ke-we M Hordeum Fq229 de-u-ke-we M Hordeum Fq252 de-u-ke-we M Hordeum? Fq347 de-u-ke-we M Hordeum? 0 0 0 ? Fq254+255 de-u-ke-we M Hordeum 0 0 0 1 Fq308 de-u-ke-we M Hordeum? 0 0 0 1 Fq269 de-u-ke-we M Hordeum 0 0 0 1 Fq278 do-ra-a2-ja F Hordeum? Fq403 do-ra-a2-ja F Hordeum? Fq229 do-ra-a2-ja F Hordeum Fq277 do-ra-a2-ja F Hordeum? 0 0 0 ? Fq294 do-ra-a2-ja F Hordeum? 0 0 0 ? Fq254+255 do-ra-a2-ja F Hordeum 0 0 0 1 Fq276 do-ra-a2-ja F Hordeum 0 0 0 1 Fq311 do-ra-a2-ja F Hordeum? 0 0 0 1 Fq187 do-re-ja F Hordeum? Fq265 do-re-ja F Hordeum? Fq132 do-re-ja F Hordeum? Fq241 do-re-ja F Hordeum? Fq169 do-re-ja F Hordeum? 0 0 0 1 Fq214 do-ro-jo M Hordeum Fq229 do-ro-jo M Hordeum Fq247 do-ro-jo M Hordeum? Fq258 do-ro-jo M Hordeum 0 0 0 ? Fq292 do-ro-jo M Hordeum? 0 0 0 2 Fq205 e-pi-do[-ro-mo M Hordeum? Fq378 e-pi-do-ro- mo M Hordeum? Fq347 e-pi-do-ro-mo M Hordeum? 0 0 0 ? Fq138 e-pi-do-ro-mo M Hordeum? 0 0 0 1 Fq254+255 e-pi-do-ro-mo M Hordeum 0 0 0 1 Fq276 e-pi-do-ro-mo M Hordeum 0 0 0 2 Fq229 e-pi-ni-ja F Hordeum Fq171 epi-]do-ro-mo M Hordeum? Fq198 i-qo-po-qo M i-qo-po-qo Hordeum? Fq198 ja-]so-ro M Hordeum? Fq171 ]ja-so-ro M Hordeum? Fq214 ]ja-so-ro[ M Hordeum Fq276 ja-so-ro M Hordeum 0 0 0 1 Fq292 ka[ M Hordeum? Fq254+255 ka-ne-jo M ka-ne-jo Hordeum 0 0 3 Fq169 ka-ra-wi-ja F Hordeum? Fq275 ]ka-si[ M Hordeum? 0 0 2 2 Fq356 ]ka-ti-jo[ M Hordeum? Fq276 ka-ti-jo M Hordeum 0 0 0 ? Fq132 ]ka-ti-jo M Hordeum? 0 0 0 1 Fq120 ka-wi-jo M Hordeum?
323 Fq261 ka-wi-jo M Hordeum? Fq229 ka-wi-jo M Hordeum Fq247 ka-wi-jo M Hordeum? Fq342 ka-wi-jo-ju M Hordeum? ? Fq130 ka-wi-jo-ju M Hordeum 1 Fq123 ka-wi-jo-ju M Hordeum? 0 0 Fq254+255 ka-wi-jo-ju M Hordeum 0 0 1 Fq258 ka-wi-jo-ju M Hordeum 0 0 1 Fq401 ]ke-se[ M Hordeum? Fq169 ko]-ru-we M Hordeum? 0 0 0 2 Fq177 ko-du-*22[-je M Hordeum? Fq214 ko-du-*22-je M Hordeum Fq252 ko-du-*22-je M Hordeum? Fq263 ko-du-*22-je M Hordeum Fq128 ko-du-*22-je M Hordeum? 0 0 0 ? Fq254+255 ko-du-*22-je M Hordeum 0 0 0 1 Fq276 ko-du-*22-je M Hordeum 0 0 0 1 Fq261 ko-du-*22-je M Hordeum? 0 0 0 1 Fq275 ko-du-*22-je M Hordeum? 0 0 1 Fq254+255 ko-ru (theo?) M Hordeum 0 0 0 2 Fq331 ko-ru-we (theo?) M Hordeum? Fq214 ko-ru-we (theo?) M Hordeum Fq241 ko-ru-we (theo?) M Hordeum? Fq309 ko-ru-we (theo?) M Hordeum? 0 0 0 1 Fq117 ko-ru-we (theo?) M Hordeum? 0 0 0 2 Fq284 ko-ru-we (theo?) M Hordeum? 0 0 1 Fq236 ku-no-ju M Hordeum? Fq205 ku-ro2 [ M Hordeum? Fq120 ku-ro2 M Hordeum? 0 0 ? Fq138 ]ku-ro2 M Hordeum? 0 0 0 1 Fq214 ]ma-di-je[ M Hordeum Fq285+307? ma-di-je M Hordeum Fq339 ma-di-je M Hordeum? Fq357 ma-di-je M Hordeum? Fq241 ma-di-je M Hordeum? Fq263 ma-di-je M Hordeum 0 0 1 Fq254+255 ma-di-je M Hordeum 0 0 1 Fq309 ma-di-je M Hordeum? 0 0 2 1 Fq258 ma-di-je M Hordeum 0 0 3 2 Fq132 me-to-re-[i M Hordeum? Fq229 me-to-re[-i M Hordeum Fq252 me-to-re-i M Hordeum? Fq292 me-to-re-i M Hordeum? Fq254+255 me-to-re-i M Hordeum 0 0 0 2 Fq276 me-to-re-i M Hordeum 0 0 0 2 Fq214 mi-ra-[ti-jo M Hordeum Fq177 mi-ra-ti-jo[ M Hordeum?
324 Fq198 mi-ra-ti-jo M Hordeum? Fq244 mi-ra-ti-jo M Hordeum? Fq254+255 mi-ra-ti-jo M Hordeum Fq276 mi-ra-ti-jo M Hordeum 0 0 0 1 Fq269 mi-ra-ti-jo M Hordeum 0 0 1 Fq277 mo-ne-we M Hordeum? 0 0 1 1 Fq278 mo-ne-we M Hordeum? 0 0 2 Fq254+255 mo-ne-we M Hordeum 0 0 3 Fq247 o]-u-ko-we-i M Hordeum? Fq258 o-]u-ko-we-i M Hordeum 0 0 1 Fq284 o-ko-[we-i M Hordeum? Fq125Fq136+ o-ko-we-i M Hordeum? Fq137 Fq214 o-ko-we-i M Hordeum Fq269 o-ro-wa-ta M Hordeum 0 0 2 Fq214 o-to-ro-no M Hordeum 0 0 2 Fq371 o-u-ko-we-i M Hordeum? Fq229 o-u-ko-we-i M Hordeum Fq379 o-u-ko-we-i M Hordeum? Fq276 o-u-to-we-i M Hordeum 0 2 Fq214 o-u-wa-ja-wo-ni M Hordeum Fq254+255 o-u-wa-ja-wo-ni M Hordeum 0 0 0 2 Fq257 pe-ra-ko M Hordeum? 0 0 0 ? Fq194 pi-ra-ko-ro[ M Hordeum? Fq214 pi-ra-ko-ro M Hordeum Fq229 pi-ra-ko-ro M Hordeum Fq236 pi-ra-ko-ro M Hordeum? Fq128 pi-ra-ko-ro M Hordeum? 0 0 0 1 Fq294 pi-ra-ko-ro M Hordeum? 0 0 0 1 Fq254+255 pi-ra-ko-ro M Hordeum 0 0 0 1 Fq311 pi-ra-ko-ro M Hordeum? 0 0 0 1 Fq198 pi-ra-me-no M Hordeum? Fq125+136+ qe-re-ma-o M Hordeum? 137 Fq276 qe-re-ma-o M Hordeum Fq324 qe-re-ma-o M Hordeum? Fq229 qe-re-ma-o M Hordeum Fq236 qe-re-ma-o M Hordeum? Fq275 qe-re-ma-o M Hordeum? 0 0 1 1 Fq254+255 qe-re-ma-o M Hordeum 0 0 1 2 Fq284 qe-re-ma-o M Hordeum? 0 0 1 2 Fq258 qe-re-ma-o M Hordeum 0 0 1 2 Fq325 ra-ke-da-mi-ni-jo M Hordeum? Fq253 ra-ke-da-mi-ni-jo M Hordeum? Fq339 ra-ke-da-mi-ni-jo M Hordeum? Fq229 ra-ke-da-mi-ni-jo-ju M Hordeum Fq258 ra-ke-da-mi-ni-jo-ju M Hordeum 0 0 Fq284 ra-ke-da-mi-ni-jo-ju M Hordeum? 0 0 2
325 Fq275 ra-ke-da-mi-ni-jo-ju M Hordeum? 0 0 2 Fq254+255 ra-ke-mi-ni-jo-ju M Hordeum 0 0 2 Fq252 ra-qe-te M Hordeum? Fq194 ra-wi-to M Hordeum? Fq169 re]-wa-ko M Hordeum? 0 0 1 Fq198 re-wa-ko M Hordeum? Fq130 re-wa-ko a-me[-ro M Hordeum Fq171 ]ri-te-re M Hordeum? Fq221 ]ro-za M Hordeum? Fq138 ]-te-a2 M Hordeum? 0 0 0 1 Fq228 ]te-to M Hordeum? Fq214 to-jo M to-jo? Hordeum Fq239 ]to-jo M to-jo? Hordeum? Fq240 to-jo M to-jo? Hordeum Fq241 to-jo M to-jo? Hordeum? Fq253 to-jo M to-jo? Hordeum? Fq370 ]to-jo[ M to-jo? Hordeum? Fq257 to-jo M to-jo? Hordeum? 0 0 ? Fq284 to-jo M to-jo? Hordeum? 0 0 0 ? Fq254+255 to-jo M to-jo? Hordeum 0 0 0 1 Fq258 to-jo M to-jo? Hordeum 0 0 3 Fq238 to-po-wo[ M Hordeum? Fq132 ]-to-qo-ju M Hordeum? 1 Fq198 to-tu-no M Hordeum? Fq214 to-tu-no M Hordeum Fq229 to-tu-no M Hordeum Fq236 to-tu-no M Hordeum? Fq301 to-tu-no M Hordeum? Fq311 to-tu-no M Hordeum? 0 0 0 2 Fq269 to-tu-no M Hordeum 1 Fq236 wa-do-ta M Hordeum? Fq301 wa-do-ta M Hordeum? Fq214 wa-do-ta M Hordeum Fq229 wa-do-ta M Hordeum Fq269 wa-do-ta M Hordeum 0 0 0 1 Fq125Fq136+Fq1 wa-do-ta M Hordeum? 0 0 0 1 37 Fq240 we-re-na-ko M Hordeum Fq241 we-re-na-ko M Hordeum? Fq258 we-re-na-ko M Hordeum Fq169 we-ro-te[ M Hordeum? Fq240 zo-wa M Hordeum Fq241 zo-wa M Hordeum? Fq276 zo-wa M Hordeum 1 Fq305 zo-wa M Hordeum? 0 0 ? Fq254+255 zo-wa M Hordeum 0 0 1 Fq257 zo-wa M Hordeum? 0 0 1
326 Fq258 zo-wa M Hordeum 0 0 1 Fq275 zo-wa M Hordeum? 0 0 1
Table 16. Individuals at Thebes who receive barley (HORDEUM)
Tablet Name Occupation Commodity Unit T V Z S V Z Gp157 *56-ru-we Vinum? Gp170 *56-ru-we Vinum? 0 0 2 Gp176 *56-ru-we Vinum 0 0 3 Gp184 *56-ru-we Vinum 0 0 1 Gp345 *56-ru-we Vinum? 0 0 0 2 Gp110 *56-ru-we Vinum Gp112 *56-ru-we Vinum? 0 0 6 Gp114 *56-ru-we Vinum? 0 0 3 Gp119 *56-ru-we Vinum Gp158 *56-ru-we Vinum 0 0 4 Gp186 *56-ru-we Vinum Gp215 a]-ko-ro-da-mo Farina 0 0 1 Gp122 a-ki-to Vinum? Ft141 a-ko-da-mo Oliva 0 0 4 Gp144 a-ko-da-mo Vinum? 0 0 4 Ft148 a-ko-da-mo Oliva Ft193 a-ko-da-mo Oliva? 0 0 4 Ft217 a-ko-da-mo Oliva 0 0 4 Ft220+248 a-ko-da-mo Oliva 0 0 4 Ft234 a-ko-da-mo Oliva 0 0 Ft246 a-ko-da-mo Oliva? 0 0 4 Ft268 a-ko-da-mo Oliva Av101 a-ko-da-mo Granum 0 6 Gp158 a-ko-ro-da-mo Vinum Gp215 ]a-me-ro Farina Gp179 a-ra-ki-to Vinum 0 1 Gp197 a-ra-o Vinum 0 0 ? Gp227 a-ra-o Vinum? 0 0 1 Gp231 a-ra-o Vinum Gp167 a3-ni-jo Vinum 0 1 Av101 ]da-ro Granum Gp303 i-je-re-wi-jo Farina 0 1 2 Gp153 ke-wa-to Farina? Gp124 ]ko-ju Vinum 0 0 2 Av101 ko-ru-we Granum 0 2 Gp210 ko-ta Vinum 0 0 ? Av101 ma-di-je Granum 0 6 4 Gp110 mo-ne-we Vinum 0 1 Gp110 na-ne-mo Vinum 0 0 2 Gp199 pe-ta[ Vinum?
327 Gp179 pi-ri-[ Vinum Gp119 pu2-ke-qi-ri-ne Vinum Gp150 qe-da-do-ro Vinum? Gp215 qe-da-do-ro Farina 0 0 3 Gp270 qe-re-ma-o Vinum? Gp227 ra-ke-da-mi-ni- Vinum? 0 0 1 jo Gp179 ro-[ Vinum Gp157 te-ri-a2 Vinum? Gp235 ]to-jo to-jo? Vinum? 0 0 1 Gp150 to-jo to-jo? Vinum? Gp158 to-ro-wo Vinum 0 1 Gp179 u-re-we Vinum 0 1 Gp129 we-ka-sa[ Vinum?
Table 17. Individuals at Thebes who receive commodities other than barley (HORDEUM)
328
Tablet Name Members Occupation Commodity Unit T V Z S V Z Fq169 a-ke-ne-u[-si a-ke-ne-u[-si Hordeum? Fq305 a-ke-ne-u-si a-ke-ne-u-si Hordeum? Fq125+ a-ke-ne-u-si a-ke-ne-u-si Hordeum? Fq136+Fq137 Fq130 a-ke-ne-u-si a-ke-ne-u-si Hordeum 0 0 2 Fq214 a-ke-ne-u-si a-ke-ne-u-si Hordeum Fq239 a-ke-ne-u-si a-ke-ne-u-si Hordeum? Fq240 a-ke-ne-u-si a-ke-ne-u-si Hordeum Fq241 a-ke-ne-u-si a-ke-ne-u-si Hordeum? Fq254+255 a-ke-ne-u-si a-ke-ne-u-si Hordeum 0 0 2 Fq284 a-ke-ne-u-si a-ke-ne-u-si Hordeum? Fq214 e-pi-qo-i e-pi-qo-i Hordeum Fq229 e-pi-qo-i e-pi-qo-i Hordeum Fq252 e-pi-qo-i e-pi-qo-i Hordeum? Fq247 i-qo-po-qo i-qo-po-qo Hordeum? Fq252 i-qo-po-qo i-qo-po-qo Hordeum? Gp199 i-qo-po-qo-i i-qo-po-qo-i Vinum? Fq272 i-qo-po-qo-i i-qo-po-qo-i Hordeum? 0 0 0 3 Fq367 i-qo-po-qo-i i-qo-po-qo-i Hordeum? Fq214 i-qo-po-qo-i i-qo-po-qo-i Hordeum Fq254+255 i-qo-po-qo-i i-qo-po-qo--i Hordeum 0 0 1 1 Fq276 i-qo-po-qo-i i-qo-po-qo-i Hordeum 0 0 2 1 Fq305 i-qo-po-qo-i i-qo-po-qo-i Hordeum? 0 0 2 ? Gp127 i-si-wi-jo-i Vinum 0 0 2 Av106 ka-na-pe-we 6 ka-na-pe-we Fq301 ke-re[ ke-re[ Hordeum? Fq169 ke-re-na-[i ke-re-na-[i Hordeum? Gp176 ke-re-na-i ke-re-na-i Vinum Fq200 ku-na-ki-si ku-na-ki-si? Hordeum? Av100 ku-na-ki-si ku-na-ki-si? Granum 2 0 2 2 Av135 ]-ma-ka 2 Fq247 o-ti-ri-ja-[i o-ti-ri-ja-i Hordeum? Fq249+339 o-ti-ri-ja-i o-ti-ri-ja-i Hordeum? +352+353? Fq306 o-ti-ri-ja-i o-ti-ri-ja-i Hordeum? Fq229 o-ti-ri-ja-i o-ti-ri-ja-i Hordeum Fq276 o-ti-ri-ja-i o-ti-ri-ja-i Hordeum 0 0 3 Fq275 o-ti-ri-ja-i o-ti-ri-ja-i Hordeum? 0 0 1 Av101 po-me-ne 2 po-me-ne Granum Av106 ru-ra-ta-e 2 ru-ra-ta-e Gp147 ]-si-qe te-ka-ta-]si Vinum 4 Av104+191 si-to-ko-wo si-to-ko-wo Av104+191 si-to-ko-wo 20 si-to-ko-wo Av104+191 si-to-ko-wo si-to-ko-wo Av104+191 si-to-ko-wo 10 si-to-ko-wo
329 Av104+191 si-to-ko-wo 10 si-to-ko-wo Av104+191 si-to-ko-wo si-to-ko-wo Av104+191 si-to-ko-wo 6 si-to-ko-wo Gp175 ]ta-si te-ka-]ta-si Vinum 0 0 3 1 Gp112 te-ka-ta-si te-ka-ta-si Vinum 0 0 6 Gp114 te-ka-ta-si te-ka-ta-si Vinum? 0 0 2 Fq247 te-ka-ta-si te-ka-ta-si Hordeum? Gp178 te-qa-jo-i Vinum? Fq341 to-pa-po-ro-[i to-pa-po-ro-i Hordeum? Gp184 to-pa-po-ro-i to-pa-po-ro-i Vinum 0 1
Table 18. Groups of people at Thebes and the commodities that they receive
330