15 The Painted Plaster Reliefs from Pseira Maria C. Shaw Some ninety years have passed since the 1907 within the limitations of working with material that discovery of the painted plaster reliefs from Pseira. has deteriorated over time and which is mostly Since then, they have been the subject of numerous embedded in a gypsum plaster backing). The early studies and, in their restored form as two separate restorations have been taken for granted for too panels (henceforth referred to as Panels A and B) , long, both in overall composition and in details. It is they have been objects of admiration for generations hoped that new photographs and drawings will of visitors to the Archaeological Museum in Hera- provide a more accurate record of extant pieces and kleion where they have been displayed for almost provoke new insights. Renewed study also holds the nine decades (Color Pls. A-B). Seager’s 1910 pub- proniise of providing a firmer date for the reliefs. lication of these exceptional products of Minoan art This is now possible because of the enhanced under- unfortunately leaves much to be desired, both in the standing of the chronology of the Pseira site result- reporting of their context and in terms of a proper ing from current excavations, and through the avail- pictorial record. Information on the stratigraphic ability of a greater body of comparanda owing to ftir- context is unfortunately lost forever, as are other ther excavations of Aegean sites, especially Akrotiri details of find spots from his excavations. There are on Thera with its well-preserved frescoes. Last, but several good reasons for a reconsideration of the not least, one can profit from a recapitulation of the reliefs. opinions of scholars expressed over the years, for no Foremost, perhaps, is the need to sort out fact exclusive study of the reliefs has been undertaken from restoration and to convey a fairer impression of since their summary publication by Seager. the degree of preservation for these paintings (albeit History of Discovery, Restoration, and Study Thanks to a letter by Richard Seager addressed to in connection with that short visit. Official Edith Hall from Pseira on June 28, 190’7,we can now publication followed three years later, in the small narrow down the period when the reliefs were volume that sums up the results of the excavations at discovered to between the date of this letter and the Pseira (Seager 1910). The plaster reliefs were preceding month, May, when the excavation season commented on sporadically (Seager 1910:11, 15, 32- began. There had been only minor testing of the site 34), and they were described as coming from “a small in the previous year, and no frescoes were mentioned but well built house” (now called Building AC) . They 56 PSEIRA I1 were illustrated in a drawing restoring them as the termin us post quem for the watercolors. For the sake of arms and body of a seated woman whose head and convenience, and because there is little doubt about other parts were missing (here P1. 20A). the attribution, the watercolor reproductions of the The artist that Seager employed is not acknowl- loose fragments will henceforth be referred to as edged in the publication, but in the letter ofJune 28 “Bagge’s watercolors.” the intention is expressed “to have Bagge in July for Seager was not insensitive to the quality and the the drawings,” that is, just after the excavation season social and historical implications of the reliefs. He was over. Halvor Bagge had previously worked for wrote that “the work is very delicate and the smallest Harriet Boyd Hawes when she excavated Gournia, details are drawn with a care that even now must and his fine watercolors of pottery adorn the publica- excite admiration” (Seager 1910:32). The presence tion of her book Gournia, Vasiliki and Other Prehistoric of such an ambitious form of mural decoration Sites on the Isthmus of Hierapetra, Crete (Hawes et al. suggested a general prosperity, apparent elsewhere in 1908). the LM I settlement at Pseira. It also suggested It is likely that Bagge is also the painter of some evidence for close associations with Knossos. The unpublished watercolors of fragments of painted date he proposed for them was late LM IB, a date he reliefs from Pseira, illustrated here for the first time regarded as contemporary with what some scholars (Color P1. C). These paintings were all on one sheet were then calling LM 11. The presence of examples of paper that was found in a copy of the Gournia of what he described as “Palace Style” pottery in LM I volume belonging to Arthur Richter, a book dealer. contexts at Pseira suggested to him that the LM I Professor J. W. Graham, of the University of Toronto, style continued longer there than at Knossos (Seager purchased the color “plate” separately sometime in 1910:ll). the 1960s. According to Richter, the volume itself A final note on Seager’s role in the history of the had been purchased in Europe. The watercolors study of the plasters is an intriguing remark he made remained in Graham’s possession until his retire- in the earlier (June 28, 1907) of the two letters to ment, whereupon, wishing to have them deposited in Hall. In it, he stated that, in addition to the discovery Philadelphia, the city that had sponsored Seager’s of the “queen”or “goddess” in plaster relief (here P1. excavation, he contacted archaeologists first at the 20A), there was “part of another from another University of Pennsylvania, and then at Temple house.” This writer is inclined to think that the University. After the former institution declined the additional painting is not among the illustrations he offer, the watercolors went to the latter, where they published. Perhaps the reference was to some poorly are now stored in the Rare Book Room of Paley preserved fragment(s), possibly among those ulti- Library. mately relegated to the storeroom of the museum, or The watercolors depict parts of two feet, arms, and since lost. patterns from dresses, some of which are recog- The next major step in restoration and interpreta- nizable as fragments incorporated in the restored tion was played by one of the Gillikrons, pire et fils, panels in the Herakleion Museum. That Bagge was artists who had worked for a long time for Sir Arthur the artist is suggested by the repetition of a mistake Evans. There is some ambiguity as to which of the in one of the dress patterns that also occurs in the two was mainly responsible. In an article published in restored drawing published by Seager (Pl. 20A). One 1923-1924, G. Rodenwaldt referred to Emile Gillik- also notices an affinity in the painting style with that ron pkre working in 1914 on a new restoration of the of Bagge’s watercolors in the Gournia publication. reliefs from Pseira. Apparently the artist undertook The handwritten notation “wohl von Giirtel,” prob- this task on his own initiative, executing it in his free ably penned by the artist, suggests that he spoke time while working under Evans’ direction on German. restorations of frescoes At hiossos (Rodenwaldt 1923- Another letter of Seager’s mentioning plasters Iq21:268). Rodenwaldt wrote the article as a token of from Pseira, also addressed to Hall, almost cci taiiily appreciation for Gillikron’s work, but also as an ana- confirms that Bagge was the ai tist responsible for the lytical commentary on the restoration. The two pho- watercolors ot the fragments (Seager 1907b). The tographs which Rodenwaldt published and for which letter makes reference to “the gesso duro relief” with he thanked Gillikron fils illustrate the new schcme. “a very elaborately patterned” dress and to the plan In it, two ladies were shown seated on rocks, an idea for Bagge “to make two color plates of her showing supported by the inclusion of fragments omitted in the detail but not attempting 1:) restore.” Quite pos- Bagge’s earlier drawing (Rodenwaldt 1923-1924:268, sibly, the two plates referred to are the watercolors, 271-272, figs. 1 and 2, here reproduced as P1. 20B-C). which for whatever reason were never included in These reconstructions are very similar, though not Seager’s publication, plus the plate Seager actually identical, to Panels A and B exhibited in the museum published (here P1. 20A), presumably executed in today. color but reproduced only in black and white. The The published photos in Rodenwaldt’s article show date of the letter, September 8, 1907, gives the that the reconstruction incorporated most of the THE WAIL PAINTINGS 57 preserved relief fragments and that an attempt was * the north (Platon 1955:128; 1962:135-136). In other made by the restorer, although inconsistently, to words, they were where the Procession Fresco from distinguish between preserved and restored areas. the Palace of Knossos and the Griffin Fresco from The distinction is clearer in Panel B, in which re- the Throne Room at Knossos are displayed today stored parts are painted on a flat surface. In Panel A, (1992). They were moved to their present position in the entire figure is restored in relief. In both panels, the smaller Gallery XVI, when the addition of a new the rocks are rendered in relief, ai!tiough there was wing to the museum led to a rearrangement of many no indication of such a setting on any of the pre- of the exhibits (Alexiou 1968:106). served pieces. Neither panel displays a background. It should be noted that sometime between their Although it appears from Rodenwaldt’s article that installation in the new museum and the present day, Gillieron pkre was the actual restorer, a reference the panels underwent changes once again.