Mycenaean Art: A Psychological Approach 9781407300757, 9781407331058

Citation preview

BAR S1636 2007  MUSKETT  MYCENAEAN ART: A PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH

9 781407 300757

B A R

Mycenaean Art: A Psychological Approach Georgina Muskett

BAR International Series 1636 2007

Mycenaean Art: A Psychological Approach

Georgina Muskett

BAR International Series 1636 2007

Published in 2016 by BAR Publishing, Oxford BAR International Series 1636 Mycenaean Art: A Psychological Approach © G Muskett and the Publisher 2007 The author's moral rights under the 1988 UK Copyright, Designs and Patents Act are hereby expressly asserted. All rights reserved. No part of this work may be copied, reproduced, stored, sold, distributed, scanned, saved in any form of digital format or transmitted in any form digitally, without the written permission of the Publisher. ISBN 9781407300757 paperback ISBN 9781407331058 e-format DOI https://doi.org/10.30861/9781407300757 A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library BAR Publishing is the trading name of British Archaeological Reports (Oxford) Ltd. British Archaeological Reports was first incorporated in 1974 to publish the BAR Series, International and British. In 1992 Hadrian Books Ltd became part of the BAR group. This volume was originally published by Archaeopress in conjunction with British Archaeological Reports (Oxford) Ltd / Hadrian Books Ltd, the Series principal publisher, in 2007. This present volume is published by BAR Publishing, 2016.

BAR PUBLISHING BAR titles are available from: BAR Publishing 122 Banbury Rd, Oxford, OX2 7BP, UK E MAIL [email protected] P HONE +44 (0)1865 310431 F AX +44 (0)1865 316916 www.barpublishing.com

MYCENAEAN ART: A PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH

Contents Preface ................................................................................................................................................................................ 3 List of Abbreviations ......................................................................................................................................................... 4 List of Figures..................................................................................................................................................................... 5 Glossary.............................................................................................................................................................................. 6 Introduction The Mycenaean World ....................................................................................................................................................... 9 Chapter 1 How Humans See: an introduction to the visual system................................................................................................... 12 Chapter 2 Methods of Representation of the Human Form............................................................................................................... 18 Chapter 3 The Recognition of the Individual .................................................................................................................................... 25 Chapter 4 Composition in Mycenaean Art........................................................................................................................................ 34 Chapter 5 Colour and Form in Mycenaean Art ................................................................................................................................. 43 Chapter 6 Warfare and Aggression: their effects on Mycenaean art................................................................................................. 50 Epilogue............................................................................................................................................................................ 60 Bibliography ..................................................................................................................................................................... 63

1

MYCENAEAN ART: A PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH

Preface The science of psychology - the science of mind and behaviour - is wide-ranging in its scope. It encompasses aspects of biology, social sciences, anthropology and sociology, and deals not only with all aspects of human behaviour but also animal behaviour. Psychology is concerned with both the physiology of the brain which causes certain types of behaviour, as well as the processes which have evolved to deal with the basic needs of life - thirst, hunger, fear, anger, sleep and waking - together with the learning necessary to sustain life. Psychology also deals with processes which can be roughly grouped under the heading of “cognition” - perception, memory, thought, knowledge and language - as well as social behaviour which includes the biological bases for love and aggression, and social relations. Although psychologists deal with the investigation of general principles which affect and concern all human beings, their main objective is to apply such general findings to the individual. The aim of this book to demonstrate the value of psychology in the study of ancient art, enabling emphasis on the individual, in the sense of a human being or person in a general way, in addition to denoting a discrete human being possessing an individual identity. Not all aspects of psychology lend themselves to application to the set of data which has been preserved in the archaeological record in Late Bronze Age Greece. This book primarily explores the knowledge of visual perception acquired via psychological research, which has provided valuable information on the production of images by artists. In addition, the nature of aggression, that is, conflict between members of the same species, is discussed. The case studies focus on art from the periods described as ‘Early Mycenaean’ and ‘Mycenaean’, roughly the fifteenth to the thirteenth centuries BC. As this book is not intended to be a general introduction to Mycenaean art, I have kept illustrations to a minimum, and have included them only to add emphasis to the text. This book is partly based on my PhD thesis entitled ‘The Representation of the Individual in Mycenaean Art’ written at the University of Liverpool under the supervision of Christopher Mee. I particularly thank Chris for his constructive criticism which provided the impetus to make my methodology and arguments convincing., and for reading and commenting on the Introduction to this book. At an early stage of my research, I benefited from financial assistance provided by a postgraduate studentship awarded by the then Arts and Humanities Research Board (now the Arts and HumanIties Research Council), the British School at Athens, who awarded me a grant from the Hector and Elizabeth Catling Bursary in the session 2000-2001, and the Humanities Graduate School of the University of Liverpool, which awarded me grants in the sessions 1998-99, 19992000 and 2000-1. I am also grateful to the School of Archaeology, Classics and Egyptology at the University of Liverpool, which awarded me an Honorary Research Fellowship from 2004-7, providing me with the facilities to complete my research. The help and support of the many friends and colleagues during my time as a research student is acknowledged in my PhD thesis. In addition, thanks are due to Roy Forshaw for his help with the illustrations for this book. I am also grateful to the National Museum, Athens for providing photographs and for giving permission to publish the items shown in Figures 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 14 and 15.

3

GEORGINA MUSKETT

List of Abbreviations And Technical Terms (for bibliographic abbreviations, see Bibliography) ArchMus BM CM cm CT D EC EH EM H HM km LB LC LH LM m m2 MB MC MH MM mm NMA Th W

Archaeological Museum British Museum, London Chora Tryphilia Museum, Messenia centimetre Chamber tomb diameter Early Cycladic Early Helladic Early Minoan height Herakleion Museum, Crete kilometre Late Bronze Age Late Cycladic Late Helladic Late Minoan metre square metre Middle Bronze Age Middle Cycladic Middle Helladic Middle Minoan millimetre National Museum, Athens thickness width

4

MYCENAEAN ART: A PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH

List of Figures Detail of spiral frieze in the Hall of the Double Axes, Knossos; after Evans 1930, fig.229.................................................Cover Figure 1: The human visual system; after Goldstein 1996, fig. 2.4.............................................................................................12 Figure 2: Ambiguous figure; after Boring 1930 .............................................................................................................. 16 Figure 3: Aeginetan barrel jar fragment, Kolonna Museum 2375; after Siedentopf 1991, pl. 14.75............................... 21 Figure 4: Reconstructed ship from reconstructed Aeginetan barrel jar, after Siedentopf 1991, fig. 4............................. 22 Figure 5: Electrum mask from Grave Γ, Grave Circle B, Mycenae. NMA 8709. Image reproduced with permission of the National Archaeological Museum, Athens ................................................................................................ 27 Figure 6: Gold mask from Grave V, Grave Circle A, Mycenae. NMA 624. Image reproduced with permission of the National Archaeological Museum, Athens ...................................................................................................... 27 Figure 7: Ivory “warrior head”, Chamber Tomb 27, Mycenae. NMA 2468. Image reproduced with permission of the National Archaeological Museum, Athens ...................................................................................................... 29 Figure 8: Faience juglet, Grave III, Grave Circle A, Mycenae. NMA 123-4. Image reproduced with permission of the National Archaeological Museum, Athens ...................................................................................................... 30 Figure 9: Seal made from amethyst, from Grave Gamma, Grave Circle B, Mycenae. NMA 8708. Image reproduced with permission of the National Archaeological Museum, Athens................................................................. 31 Figure 10: Gold seal, from Grave III, Grave Circle A, Mycenae. NMA 35. After CMS I,11......................................... 34 Figure 11: Gold seal, from Grave III, Grave Circle A, Mycenae. NMA 33. After Demakopoulou 1990, no.219.......... 35 Figure 12: Fragment of wall painting showing three females seated in a “loggia”. Found below the Ramp House, Mycenae. NMA 1015. After Rodenwaldt 1911, pl. IX.2............................................................................... 39 Figure 13: Reconstructed figure from the ‘Tiryns Procession Fresco’. After Rodenwaldt 1912a, pl. VIII. .................... 40 Figure 14: Fragments of wall painting from the ‘Tiryns Boar Hunt’, reconstructed to show two females driving a chariot. NMA 5878. Image reproduced with permission of the National Archaeological Museum, Athens . 45 Figure 15: Fragments of wall painting from the ‘Tiryns Boar Hunt’, reconstructed to show a male dog handler. NMA 5880. Image reproduced with permission of the National Archaeological Museum, Athens......................... 46 Figure 16: Detail of gold ring from Tiryns; after CMS I, 179.......................................................................................... 47 Figure 17: Fragment of wall painting from the ‘Tiryns Boar Hunt’, showing hair and the back of a female neck. After Rodenwaldt 1912a, 121, no.158, fig.52 .......................................................................................................... 48 Figure 18: Stucco plaque, painted. Found in “Tsountas’ House”, the Cult Centre, Mycenae. NMA 2666. After Rodenwaldt 1912b, pl. VIII................................................................................................................... 52

5

GEORGINA MUSKETT

Glossary Chamber tomb A tomb cut from the natural rock. Consists of a dromos, stomion and burial chamber, perhaps with one or more side chambers, roughly circular or rectangular in shape. Generally used for more than one burial, placed either on the floor, in pits or cists, or on a bench. Cist grave A subterranean built grave, roughly rectangular in shape, used for single burials. Corbel vault A type of roofing, where each layer of stone projects slightly further than the last. Dromos (pl. dromoi) The passageway to a tholos tomb or chamber tomb. Ekphora The carrying out of a corpse to burial. Epichosis Filling material. Faience A ceramic material made mainly of crushed quartz or sand with small amounts of lime and either natron or plant ash. This core is coated with a glaze which, in the case of Egyptian faience, is normally bright blue or blue-green in colour. The glaze of Aegean faience tends to be described as “whitish”, that is, various shades of light grey or light brown. Genii Supernatural figures with the heads of lions or donkeys. Griffin Supernatural creature, with the head and wings of a bird and the body of a lion. Kourotrophos One who cares for children. Krater A large wide-mouthed vessel, used for mixing wine and water. Kylix (pl. kylikes) A stemmed drinking vessel. Larnax A bathtub or coffin made of terracotta. Linear B A syllabic script used in Minoan Crete and Mycenaean Greece during LM/LHIII. The use of the script was effectively restricted to the major palace sites. The majority of Linear B inscriptions are found on clay tablets, but it is also found painted on pottery vessels. Linear B, an early form of Greek, was deciphered by Michael Ventris in 1952. Megaron A building with a rectangular plan of porch, anteroom and main room with central hearth, the latter often surrounded by four columns. Oberburg Upper citadel at Tiryns. Peribolos Surrounding wall. 6

Pit grave Grave, roughly oval or rectangular in plan, dug into the ground surface, used for single burials. Prothesis Formal display of the body of the deceased. Rhyton A vessel with a hole at the lower end, plausibly used for libations. Made in various forms: funnel-shaped, conical or theriomorphic. Seal or sealstone Small object with a design cut in intaglio on one or more surfaces, and capable of making an impression in a soft substance such as clay. Sealing The impression of a sealstone, preserved in clay, accidentally hardened by fire. Sphinx Supernatural creature, with the head of a human, body of a lion and wings of a bird. Stela An upright stone slab, often inscribed or carved in relief, and sometimes painted. Stirrup jar A closed vessel, designed for the storage of oil. A false spout rising at the top of the vessel supports two handles forming the shape of a stirrup, with a functional spout slightly further down the vessel. Stomion Short passage at the door of a tholos tomb or chamber tomb. Tholos Tomb Stone-built tomb consisting of a dromos, stomion and roughly circular chamber with corbelled roof, occasionally with a side chamber. Burials were placed either on the chamber floor, or in pit or cist graves. Used for multiple burials. Tumulus Above-ground burial mound made of heaped earth, stones, or both. Burials were inserted into the tumulus, in either pit or cist graves. Unterburg Lower citadel at Tiryns.

7

MYCENAEAN ART: A PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH

Introduction The Mycenaean World impression of “stasis if not stagnation”5 seems reasonable, when compared to Crete, where the first palaces were emerging, and the Cyclades, where there were some major sites. There were, however, a few settlements on the Greek mainland, such as Thebes,6 which the archaeological record suggests were centres of wealth and probably also power-bases for a local elite.

This chapter gives a brief historical survey of the Mycenaean world in its broadest sense, from the first evidence of recognisably Mycenaean material culture late in the Middle Bronze Age (known in mainland Greece as the Middle Helladic period), through the time of the Mycenaean palaces, until the post-palatial phase.1 This is followed by an introduction to the main media employed in Mycenaean art and which provide the evidence for this study:2 wall paintings, pottery, larnakes, sealstones and sealings, and items made of ivory, metal, faience and stone.3

In contrast to the simplicity in terms of burial customs and technology, which was widespread in the earlier phases of the Middle Helladic period, there are marked changes in MHIII, which continue into LHI, and the first evidence of recognisably Mycenaean material culture is apparent.7 In this period and throughout the entire Early Mycenaean period, there is a bias of archaeological data, with an emphasis on tombs and their offerings as opposed to domestic architecture,8 as later occupation levels at sites which developed into palatial centres have removed earlier settlement evidence. Particularly noticeable is the tendency for the emerging elites, predominantly in the Argolid but also elsewhere on the Greek mainland, to develop their own form of grave assemblage; jewellery, weaponry and containers of various types are more generally found as funerary offerings from MHIII onwards, items which provide valuable evidence for this study. It is important to observe that the characteristic features of material culture which can be identified as Mycenaean did not arrive at a single mainland site, or at a group of sites simultaneously, but apparently were adopted at various sites in the Peloponnese at slightly different times, fusing with the existing traditions.9

During the Early Helladic period, mainland Greece was certainly the equal of the other areas of the Aegean, and rivaled the Cyclades and Crete in terms of economic and social complexity, encouraged by the increased use of metals and the development of technology. There is evidence of a general reduction in the numbers of sites on the Greek mainland towards the end of the Early Helladic period; this trend initially continues during Middle Helladic, suggesting a radical change in the pattern of settlement. The theory of an external invasion as the cause of this change no longer finds favour, and perhaps a general systems collapse is a more plausible explanation. Whatever the cause or causes of the change in settlement pattern, Dickinson’s memorable description of Middle Helladic Greece as “poor, backward and unorganised compared with the societies of the Aegean”,4 with an 1

Following the normal conventions of Aegean archaeology, relative rather than absolute chronology will be used throughout the study, with the abbreviations used for the chronological phases included in the list preceding this chapter. Reviews of research in Rutter (2001: 124-47) in respect of the Early Mycenaean period (usually considered to encompass the phases of Middle Helladic III, Late Helladic I, Late Helladic IIA and Late Helladic IIB; that is, until the construction of the first Mycenaean palace, apparently at Tiryns in LHIIIA1 [Shelmerdine 2001:350]) and Shelmerdine (2001: 329-81) in respect of the Mycenaean palatial period (LHIIIA-B). As a general guide, the Early Mycenaean period can be considered to be c.1600-1375 BC, and the Mycenaean period c.1375/50-1200 BC; Late Bronze Age chronologies are conveniently summarised by Shelmerdine 2001: 332, Table 1. 2 The bibliography cited for these artifacts is not intended to be exhaustive, but refers to the main discussions and good illustrations. 3 Terracotta figurines will not be included in this study. Although the archaeological record indicates a strong tradition of the production of terracotta figurines throughout the Mycenaean period, a review of specialist studies of this class of artifact (French 1971; 1981). suggests that the vast majority are standard in terms of their form and, accordingly, their contribution to this study would be minimal. 4 Dickinson 1977: 107.

The most stunning manifestation of the changes in grave assemblages is found at Mycenae, where two main phases of excavation, undertaken in 1876 by Heinrich Schliemann,10 and between 1952 and 1954 by the Greek Archaeological Society, revealed the shaft graves in the burial facilities known as Grave Circle A and Grave Circle B respectively.11 The ceramic offerings suggest that Grave Circle B was established at Mycenae in the late Middle Helladic period, apparently for the burials of 5

Dickinson 1989: 133. Which had an estimated area of about 21 hectares in the Middle Helladic period (Dickinson 1989: 131, n.1; KilianDirlmeier 1997: 112). 7 For discussion of the political organization of Early Mycenaean society see, inter alia, Kilian 1988b; Wright 1984; Cavanagh 1995; Deger-Jalkotzy 1995, Laffineur 1995; Voutsaki 1995, 1997 and 1999; Rutter 2001. 8 Summarized in Cavanagh and Mee 1998 and Gallou 2005. 9 Dickinson 1984: 115. 10 Fitton 1995: 71-95. 11 Fitton 1995: 182. 6

9

GEORGINA MUSKETT the elite emerging at this centre.12 Grave Circle A came into use while burials were still taking place in Grave Circle B, although the period of use of Circle B ended earlier than Circle A;13 it is likely that burials were taking place in the Shaft Graves for a period of little more than a hundred years.14 The graves in Circle B which are largest in size and which have the most lavish offerings are similar to those in Circle A with the poorest offerings.15

east as Miletos on the south-west coast of modern Turkey. Major building programmes were undertaken at sites in the Argolid, Messenia, Boeotia and Attika. Conventionally known as ‘palaces’, these sites were the economic power bases of the Mycenaean world, the centres of autonomous states. Palatial control is also apparent from the extant examples of Linear B script inscribed on clay tablets or nodules, or painted on clay stirrup jars. 24 However, it should be noted that direct palatial control is not apparent throughout the Mycenaean world. Mycenaean Greece had now reached its floruit; as well as importing various types of raw materials for the production of lavish luxury items, Mycenaean influence in terms of exchange of commodities can be found in both the eastern25 and western Mediterranean.26

The assemblages of offerings in the Shaft Graves continue the trends which were apparent in a few elite burials in earlier phases of the Middle Helladic period; emphasis on the deceased’s wealth,16 warlike qualities,17 and ability to forge contacts outside the immediate community, predominantly with Crete,18 either by the inclusion of artifacts which may have been direct imports, or were made by non-local craftsmen, or incorporated imported material in their manufacture.19 Although the assemblages of offerings apparently show marked differences according to gender, the iconography of a small number of the offerings associated with female burials also feature scenes of conflict, and will be discussed further in Chapter 6. Lavish funerary display was not confined to the Argolid, and was also apparent at Peristeria20 and Pylos21 in Messenia and at Vapheio in Lakonia.22

This period also produced a major new source of evidence of particular use in this study: a large corpus of wall paintings incorporated into the decorative systems of Mycenaean palaces and other domestic contexts. In addition, portable items found in domestic contexts may also be a valuable source of information, especially Pictorial Style pottery, a new class of decorated ceramics, which emerged in this period. In addition, the period LHIIIA1 to IIIB2 provides the first substantial evidence of cult activities on the Greek mainland during the Late Bronze Age, contexts which provide useful material for this study.27 Artifacts from funerary contexts are also considered; the number and size of cemeteries increased throughout the Greek mainland in LHIIIA-B although the surviving evidence suggests there was no corresponding rise in the accompanying offerings, either in terms of quantity or richness.28

The period Late Helladic IIIA1 to IIIB2 is also referred to as the Mycenaean palace period.23 At this time the Mycenaean world extended from Thessaly in the north to Crete in the south, and Pylos to the south-west, and as far 12 See Alden 2001 for discussion of other burials from the prehistoric cemetery at Mycenae. 13 Dickinson 1977: 39. The latest pottery in Circle A is from Grave I, which was probably established at the end of LHI and continued to be used into LHIIA (Mountjoy 1999: 62). 14 Dickinson 1984: 115. 15 Dickinson 1977: 40; Graziadio 1991. 16 For example, Grave IV contained over 40 vessels made of precious metal (Karo 1930-3: nos.273, 313, 351, 384, 388, 3901, 412, 427, 440-2, 469, 471-6, 478, 481, 504, 509-10, 518-20, 605, 608 pls.CVII-XXII, CXXVII-XXXIV). 17 For example, in Grave V, at least fifteen swords in direct association with the southern burial, as well as some sixty weapons found between the feet of this individual and the central burial (Graziadio 1991: 436). 18 Note that there was some form of Mycenaean presence at Knossos in LMII-IIIA1/2. The rich repertoire of contemporary material from Crete or other areas outside Mycenaean sphere of domination is not included in this book, as it is likely that some iconographic motifs could have been used to symbolize different ides and concepts in different regions. 19 In many cases, Minoan influence is visible in terms of motifs and themes only rather than exact parallels (Dickinson 1984: 116). 20 Hägg 1982: 32; Hood 1978: 198; Lolos 1987: 212a, figs. 4468; Mountjoy 1999: 303. 21 Finds catalogued in Blegen et al. 1973: 110-34 (Tholos IV) and 156-69 (Tholos V). 22 Finds conveniently summarised by Vermeule 1972: 127-30. 23 For discussion of the political organization of Mycenaean society see, inter alia, Wright 1995; Shelmerdine 2001.

The palace economies collapsed at the end of LHIIIB2, accompanied by a widespread horizon of destruction on the Greek mainland. This series of events resulted in changes in settlement pattern in LHIIIC;29 many major sites were abandoned, or continued to exist on a lesser

24 A concise summary is provided in Chadwick 1976, although this does not take account of the more recent material from Thebes (Aravantinos 1999, Aravantinos et al.2001; 2002; 2005). 25 For example, up to the 1990s, approximately 2,300 Mycenaean and Minoan vessels had been found in the Levant (Leonard and Cline 1998: 3). Note, however, Morgan’s (1988: 172) interesting observation that the only iconographic evidence of interrelations in the Eastern Mediterranean are in Egyptian tombs, where foreigners are shown bringing goods to Egypt; for discussion and illustration of these representations, see Wachsmann 1987. 26 Several papers in Laffineur and Greco (eds.) 2005. 27 Renfrew’s (1985: 14) list of methods of identifying places of ritual activity is, I believe, still useful in this respect. 28 Cavanagh and Mee 1998: 61. 29 Dickinson 1994: 86. The settlement pattern in LHIIIC is shown in Dickinson 1994: 87, fig. 4.28. Evidence from field survey is summarised by Rutter (2001: 98), confirming there was a decline in the number of settlements on the Greek mainland in LHIIIC.

10

MYCENAEAN ART: A PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH scale, although others flourished for a time.30 In terms of artistic production, the loss of palace-based patrons is most keenly apparent in wall painting and so-called “minor arts’ such as representations in ivory and faience, and on vessels made from precious metal. However, ceramics decorated in the Pictorial Style continued to be produced,31 and those with human subjects have particular relevance to this study. The focus of the remaining chapters is the testing of certain psychological concepts against the artifacts which appear in the appendix to this volume. The first chapter provides an introduction to the human visual system, and how the effects produced by neural mechanisms in the human brain can help to explain the appearance of works of art.

30 For example, Tiryns increased in size to approximately 25 ha., an increase interpreted by Kilian (1980; 1988a: 135) as the result of the movement of inhabitants from the surrounding area to a centre that was capable of providing better physical protection, including more certain access to food 31 It should be remembered that, as was the case in previous phases, such elaborately decorated pottery remained a small percentage of decorated ceramics, cf. remarks by Crouwel (1991: 32), Dickinson (1994: 126) and Steel (1999: 804), although this does not, of course, diminish its value to this study.

11

GEORGINA MUSKETT

Chapter 1 How Humans See: An Introduction to the Visual System When the viewer looks at an object, light energy, structured by the shape of the object, is reflected into the eyes of the viewer. An image of the object forms on the retina, a network of cells known as neurons, located on the back of the eye. Two types of neurons in the retina, known as receptor cells, called rods and cones because of their different shapes, convert the light energy into electrical signals. A network of neurons, which include bipolar cells, horizontal cells, amacrine cells, and ganglion cells, start the process of analysing and recording the visual information and transmitting it out of the eye via the optic nerve.32 Most of the electrical signals which travel along the optic nerve reach the lateral geniculate nucleus, situated near the centre of the brain. From there, the signals are transmitted into the primary visual cortex, situated at the back of the brain (Figure 1).33

means that the eye responds to images in the same physical way in virtually all people.35 This chapter considers the effects produced by neural mechanisms at the various stages in the human visual system, and how they can help to explain the appearance of works of art. LATERAL INHIBITION: EXAGGERATING THE VISUAL MESSAGE The first stage of visual processing takes place in the retina, and involves the neural mechanism known as lateral inhibition.36 Lateral inhibition exaggerates differences in contrast; dark areas appear darker and light areas appear lighter.37 The visual effects created by lateral inhibition have been exploited by artists, particularly the Op Artists of the 1950s and 1960s.38 Another phenomenon, known as “Mach Bands”, have been used by artists. “Mach Bands” can be created by a series of vertical stripes, ascending in brightness from right to left. To the immediate left of the boundary between two stripes, there appears to be a narrow band which is lighter than the rest of the stripe, and to the immediate right of the same boundary there appears to be a band which is dimmer than the rest of the stripe. These bright and dim bands are the “Mach Bands”. The slight shift in perceived brightness at the start of each band is a result of lateral inhibition.39 The “Mach Band” effect known as irradiation, which sharpens edges by imitating the natural mechanisms of the human visual system, has been used by artists from Leonardo da Vinci onwards, most notably by Georges Seurat.40 CENTRAL PROCESSING: MOVING THROUGH THE BRAIN

Figure 1: The human visual system; after Goldstein 1996, fig. 2.4.

The next major stage in the human visual processing system takes place in the lateral geniculate nucleus, situated near the centre of the brain between the retina and the visual cortex (Figure 1).Research using primates demonstrates that the lateral geniculate nucleus plays an

Discrete parts of the primary visual cortex analyse the image in terms of different attributes - colour, form, movement – a process known as modularity. The subdivision and specialisation within the visual cortex is, however, not normally apparent, and the viewer acquires a unified image of the world.34 The manner in which the properties of objects in the environment are processed

35 Goldstein 1996: 4; Marmor and Ravin 1997: 148; Solso 2003: 22-3. 36 Hartline et al. 1956. 37 Gleitman et al 2004: 187-190; Latto 1995: 72; Goldstein 1996: 71-3; Bruce and Young 1998: 51. 38 Lynton 1989: 301. 39 Gleitman et al 2004: 188-9, fig.5.17; Goldstein 1996: 74-5; Bruce and Young 1998: 51-3. 40 Riley 1991; Bruce and Young 1998: 53.

32

Gleitman et al 2004: fig.5.10; Solso 2003: 87-9, figs. 3.5-6. Gleitman et al 2004: 185; Goldstein 1996: 42-44. 34 Zeki 1978; Livingstone 1988, 1990; Livingstone and Hubel 1988. 33

12

MYCENAEAN ART: A PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH Most of the research in modularity has been carried out on monkeys, given the similarity between the visual systems of monkeys and humans.46 One must also accept that all primates possess the comparable ability to both see and discriminate between faces. Experimental evidence using both simian and human subjects does, however, suggest this is the case.47

important role in the perception of movement, pattern, shape, colour and depth.41 From the lateral geniculate nucleus, nerve fibres run to the primary visual cortex, or striate cortex, and the other areas of the brain which are associated with vision. The section of the brain surrounding the primary visual cortex can be divided into at least twenty different areas, each of which has a discrete function and is associated with the analysis of different properties or dimensions of the human visual system,42 a process known as modularity. The implications of this are not apparent in terms of phenomenology but have been exploited, either consciously or unconsciously, by artists.

Research by various teams has demonstrated that small groups of cells in the inferotemporal cortex of macaque monkeys responded to various body postures and movement,48 as well as forms such as images of paws,49 and, of particular relevance to this study, heads and faces.50 In the case of the latter, it was found that neurons responded best to an image of a full face, both human and simian; removing the eyes or, indeed, presenting a schematic representation of a face lessened the response. The neurons did not fire when presented with a random grouping of short lines.51

ORIENTATION DETECTORS IN THE VISUAL CORTEX: THE IMPORTANCE OF LINES AND EDGES Although the visual cortex is the central processor of the human visual system, there is little spontaneous activity, and several stimulus features are needed to drive the cells. The most important of such features has been found to be orientation; that is, cells in this part of the brain responded best to lines or edges in a particular orientation.

In the case of humans, one’s own experience suggests a positive response to the human face; indeed, humans even appear willing to attempt to identify facial characteristics in abstract images.52 This is supported by the results of several studies which located the fusiform gyrus, an area of the brain which responds to human faces.53

This phenomenon was first discovered in the course of research conducted by Hubel and Wiesel from the late 1950s,43 working on the visual system of the cat. They found that the cells from which the visual cortex is composed are organised into location columns, with neurons within each of these columns having receptive fields in the same location on the retina. In practical terms, this means that line drawings are processed at the point where the image received by the retina is broken down into the lines and edges from which it is formed, and a drawing composed entirely of lines, without any narrative content, can be a strong, aesthetically satisfying image,44 a concept which will be explored below.

Investigations regarding the recognition of individual faces includes the possibility that humans recognise caricatures more quickly than realistic line drawings.54 Research into this topic is considered in greater detail in Chapter 3, which discusses the manner in which the human face was portrayed by Early Mycenaean and Mycenaean artists via the application of research into the perception and recognition of faces. A related topic, the concept of “aesthetic primitives”, a term suggested by Latto55 to describe a stimulus or property of a stimulus which excites particular groups of cells within all levels of the human visual system,56 and

VISUAL PROCESSING PAST THE PRIMARY VISUAL CORTEX: THE PERCEPTION AND RECOGNITION OF FACES

46 The general idea of modularity is confirmed in humans using brain imaging techniques. The use of PET and MRI technology makes it possible to see which part of the brain is activated by a stimulus (Solso 2003: 125; Zeki 1999: 177, fig. 17.8). 47 Perrett et al. 1995: 96. 48 Perrett et al. 1990. 49 Gross et al. 1972. 50 Bruce at al. 1981; Perrett et al. 1982 and 1991; Rolls 1992; Young and Yamane 1992. 51 Goldstein 1996: fig.3.24. 52 Gombrich 1972; 1984: 264. 53 Haxby et al. 1994; Kanwisher et al. 1997; Tong et al. 2000. 54 Benson and Perrett 1991, 1994; Rhodes et al. 1987. 55 Latto 1995: 75-7, cf. Solso’s term “visual primitives (Solso 2003: 130). 56 Note Solso’s observation that it is relatively straightforward to identify the location or locations in the brain responsible for the processing of visual primitives such as shapes or colours, although what he terms as the “higher order associates” are plausibly distributed in several different areas (Solso 2003: 130).

As mentioned above, it has been demonstrated that the section of the brain surrounding the primary visual cortex can be sub-divided into about twenty different areas, each of which has a distinct function in analysing visual information - colour, form, movement and spatial organisation; that is, the neurons respond best to stimuli which are increasingly specialised.45 41

Schiller et al. 1990; Goldstein 1996: 92-3. Ungerleider and Mishkin 1982; Livingstone 1988 and 1990; Livingstone and Hubel 1988 and 1995. 43 Hubel and Wiesel 1959. 44 Latto 1995: 75-7. 45 Ungerleider and Mishkin 1982; Livingstone 1988 and 1990; Livingstone and Hubel 1988 and 1995; Solso 2003: 99. 42

13

GEORGINA MUSKETT type of cell has a R+G- response (that is, inhibited by short wavelengths and excited by long wavelengths), whereas the surround has a R-G+ response (that is, excited by short wavelengths and inhibited by long wavelengths). These types of double colour-opponent cells are the most common types of colour cells in monkeys.63 It has been suggested that these cells would assist the monkey in its natural habitat by creating a high degree of colour contrast; that is, red fruit would stimulate the R+ centre of one of the cells and green leaves would stimulate the G+ surround.64 Therefore, the perception of colour occurs via a sequence of activity in the retina, in the lateral geniculate nucleus and in the primary visual cortex.65 The interpretation of colour in accordance with the cognitive approach to perception is discussed later in this chapter.

provides aesthetic satisfaction, will be discussed in Chapter 2, with reference to the rendering of the human body in a highly schematic way and the occurrence of artistic parallels. THE PROCESS OF COLOUR VISION Colour vision begins in the retina, with physiological mechanisms in the receptor cells, when rod vision shifts to cone vision. The receptor cells have different properties; the rods are more sensitive to shorter wavelengths of light than the cones. That is, the rods are responsible for vision in dim light, and as light increases, the cones become more active.57 This is apparent in a change in colour perception known as the “Purkinje Shift”,58 which is caused by the movement from cone to rod sensitivity, which occurs when eyes become used to viewing objects in the dark. When blue and red objects are viewed with eyes accustomed to daylight, the objects appear approximately equal in brightness. When the same objects are viewed with eyes accustomed to the darkness, they appear grey, rather than red and blue; this occurs because we are seeing with the rods. However, when viewed with dark-adapted eyes, blue objects appear brighter than red ones. The visible spectrum indicates that the colour of light changes with its wavelength, which means that short-wavelength light appears blue, mediumwavelength light appears green or yellow, and longwavelength light appears orange or red. Less light is needed to see wavelengths in the middle of the spectrum than to see wavelengths at either the short or long wavelength ends of the spectrum. If the eye is adapted to the dark, with vision shifting from cones to rods, it becomes more sensitive to light towards the blue end of the spectrum.59

ASYMMETRY IN THE BRAIN: ITS EFFECTS ON ARTISTIC COMPOSITION The brain is divided into two hemispheres, linked by a group of nerve fibres known as the corpus callosum, which transmits information from one hemisphere to another. Although the two hemispheres are anatomically similar, they have different functions, ascertained by research on subjects with split brains, that is, the corpus callosum has been surgically cut, an operation sometimes carried out to attempt to control severe epilepsy.66 The findings of some studies suggest that the asymmetry in the human brain may be able to influence aesthetic preference, not merely in terms of lack of symmetry in the content of an image, but also in irregularity in other aspects of composition. One area of research involved both a lack of symmetry in content and asymmetric motion; that is, left-to-right and right-to-left.67 The conclusion of this research was that right-handed subjects preferred scenes with right-based content and right-to-left movement. Results obtained using left-handed subjects, who, unlike right-handers, do not show a consistent pattern of cerebral dominance, showed their aesthetic preferences were not influenced by asymmetries in the composition of images, which indicated that the organisation of the brain is responsible for aesthetic judgements. The team’s findings were broadly consistent with research using right-handed subjects, with the exception of the preference for movement from right to left. It should be noted that although all subjects were students at universities in the USA, the results appeared unaffected by the western reading method of scanning from left to right. This is in contrast to a study undertaken using both French subjects, who were left-toright readers, and Israeli subjects, who were right-to-left

The electrical signals generated by the rods and cones in response to light are then transmitted via a network of neurons, leaving the eye via the optic nerve.60 The next stage of colour vision takes place as a result of physiological mechanisms in “opponent cells”. Cells have been found in the lateral geniculate nucleus of the rhesus monkey which, when exposed to light from various parts of the spectrum, responded in opposite ways to blue and yellow, and to red and green. In addition, several types of opponent cells have been found in the primary visual cortex of the monkey, the majority of which increase their firing (that is, are “excited”) by wavelengths at one end of the spectrum, and decrease their firing (that is, are “inhibited”) by wavelengths at the other.61 Also present in the monkey cortex are double colouropponent cells.62 The centre of the receptive field of this 57

Solso 2003: 92-7. Named after the person who first described it in AD 1825 (Goldstein 1996: 61). 59 Goldstein 1996: 54-61; Solso 2003: 93. 60 Goldstein 1996: 42. 61 Goldstein 1996: fig.4.19. 62 Goldstein 1996: fig.4.20. 58

63

Goldstein 1996: 145-6. Livingstone and Hubel 1988. 65 Goldstein 1996: 150. 66 Gleitman et al 2004: 61-2; fig.2.17. 67 Banich et al. 1989. 64

14

MYCENAEAN ART: A PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH of single figures in profile will be discussed further in Chapter 4.

readers. In this case, the team used pairs of mirrorimages, and found that reading methods had a significant effect on aesthetic preference, as left-to-right readers preferred images with left-to-right movement, whereas right-to-left readers preferred images with right-to-left movement.68 It is questionable, however, whether this research would be relevant in its application to images from Mycenaean Greece, where, although Linear B evidence suggests a considerable bureaucracy at Pylos,69 plausibly reflected across all palatial sites, evidence for more general literacy is difficult to establish. I believe that it may be more relevant to this study, therefore, to limit consideration to experiments with a focus on artistic compositions and whether they possess symmetry of content. For example, a further group of researchers70 found a preference for scenes with movement from left to right, with images lacking a significant asymmetry in their content. The conclusion appears, therefore, that right to left movement is preferred only in images with a significant lack of symmetry in content.71 This research will be applied to Mycenaean art in Chapter 4, which includes an analysis of representations of processions in terms of lateral movement.

CULTURALLY DEPENDENT TECHNIQUES: THE COGNITIVE APPROACH The discussion of visual perception has so far concentrated on physiological aspects; that is, the workings of groups of cells within the human brain. At the same time, however, the visual perception of the viewer is influenced by his or her prior experiences, knowledge, peer pressure, interest, current thoughts and expectations, thus creating terms of reference. The sources of information are not limited to vision, but may also include the other senses - touch, taste, smell and hearing.76 It is apparent that over and above the physiological mechanisms which form the basis of visual perception, the processing of information also depends on learning, that is, knowledge gained via experience.77 The approach to perception referred to as the cognitive approach, can, therefore, be defined as the way in which the meaning of the stimulus and the expectation of the viewer influence perception. It should be stressed, however, that this approach does not seek to separate the processes of seeing and of understanding (that is, making sense of the impressions received in the brain and forming them into objects), the approach taken by neurologists in the late nineteenth century; the processes of seeing the image and understanding it occur at the same time.78

It is also possible that asymmetries in the mechanism of face perception may be responsible for the tendency for modern portraits to show the subject in left profile.72 The simplest explanation for representations of the human face being more likely to show the left profile is because right-handed artists find it easier to draw left profiles in this way. However, faces drawn with the left hand show a similar number of right and left profiles, suggesting that there are other factors which result in the preference for a left profile.73 It is possible, though by no means certain, that the viewer favours a left profile, because of the functioning of the right hemisphere of the brain, the area which deals with the perception of facial features. Because information regarding the left profile is transmitted to the right hemisphere of the brain, the area which deals with facial perception is able to access, and thus process, more information.74 In the case of modern portraits, created in a studio, the right-handed artist would hold the palette in the left hand, in line with the subject, to ease colour selection. The subject would be lit from the left to avoid the painting hand casting a shadow. This would result in the head of the subject being turned to his or her left, which would not only present the side which is easier for a right-handed artist to draw, but also ensure that the subject was well-lit.75 In order to assess whether a preference for the depiction of right or left profiles can be detected in Mycenaean art, an analysis of representations

A frequently-used expression in this connection is “topdown processing”, which some theorists believe occurs when the viewer’s perception is based the viewer’s prior knowledge, or by reference to context. By contrast, bottom-up processing is based on data feeding into the brain.79 The interpretation of colour: the cognitive approach This subsection explores the concept that, due to his or her prior knowledge, the viewer expects certain objects to be of a particular colour, and his or her prior knowledge of the colour of such objects affects their identification. Experiments conducted by Treisman80 which illustrates conjunctions of colour and form are relevant to this discussion. As previously mentioned, different areas of the brain deal with different parts of visual perception. For example, one area deals predominantly with the orientation of lines and edges, another area with colour, and another with directions of movement. In testing, subjects often see illusory conjunctions of properties which are extracted from the different areas of the field of

68

Chokron and de Agostini 2000. For Linear B tablets from Pylos, see Ventris and Chadwick 1973. 70 Freimuth and Wapner 1979. 71 Banich et al 1989: 194. 72 That is, with the left cheek facing the viewer. Latto 1996: 89. 73 Latto 1996: 91. 74 Rizzolatti et al. 1971. 75 Latto 1996: 92. 69

76

Goldstein 1996: 4-5, 24; Marmor and Ravin 1997: 148. Gleitman et al 2004: 124; Goldstein 1996: 4; Solso 2003: 67. 78 Zeki 1992: 43. 79 Kowalski and Westen 2005: 149-50. 80 Treisman 1986. 77

15

GEORGINA MUSKETT Subjects were first shown one of two essentially unambiguous versions of the figure, showing the young woman and the old woman respectively, followed by the ambiguous figure. When the subjects were shown the ambiguous figure, they interpreted it in accordance with the unambiguous version they had previously seen.85

vision. This was found in Treisman’s experiment in which she and her team exposed her subjects to a series of coloured letters – a red X, a blue S and a green T – for a period of a fifth of a second, followed by a random pattern, shown in the same location as the letters, the purpose of which was to remove any images which might remain from the first display before the subjects were questioned.81 The subjects were asked to report the name and colour of the letters. Treisman found that in about a third of cases, the subjects reported an incorrect combination of colour or letter, such as a green X, a red S or a blue T. Treisman noted that these type of errors were made much more frequently than reporting colours or shapes which were not present at all, which she suggests indicate a change in properties. Similar results were reported when shapes such as coloured triangles or circles were used.82 Treisman observed that in a more natural, everyday scene, some conjunctions of features would not occur due to prior knowledge. To investigate the contribution of previous experience to the conjoining of properties, Treisman, together with her colleague Butler, showed subjects a set of three coloured shapes, flanked on each side by a single number.83 As in the experiment discussed previously, one fifth of a second later, the subjects were shown a display of a random design. The subjects were also shown a pointer, to indicate the prior location of the shape they were asked to report. The researchers either called the stimuli names that were associated with the shape-colour combination, such as lake (blue), carrot (orange) or tyre (black), or non-commital names, such as ellipse, triangle or ring. Treisman and her team found that the associative of names eliminated conjunction mistakes when the objects were presented in the colours which would be expected,84 suggesting that that the viewer’s prior knowledge and expectations assist in the conjoining of properties of form and colour.

Figure 2: ambiguous figure; after Boring 1930.

A similar experiment was conducted in the early 1960s by Bugelski and Alampay86, who used an ambiguous figure, the “rat-man”, which can be identified as either a rat or as an old man. A response from either category can be gained by showing the viewer pictures of animals other than rats or different types of people. That is, to induce the response of “rat”, the testers showed the viewer pictures of animals such as dogs, cats and rabbits, and to induce the response of “elderly man”, the testers showed the viewer pictures of men, women and children of all ages. In fact, the results of the testing showed that with only one prior experience (that is, a picture of a cat or of a woman), about 75% of the members of the subject groups described the figure as a rat or a man respectively. Bugelski and Alampay concluded that the majority of people - albeit in an artificial classroom setting - can be induced to perceive whichever interpretation the tester wishes the group to perceive. A more recent example of a set of figures demonstrating the effects of context on perception is shown by Kowalski and Westen.87

The possible application of the cognitive approach towards perception to the use of colour in Mycenaean Greece will be discussed in Chapter 5, with regard to the representation of costumes in Mycenaean wall painting. The interpretation of form: the cognitive approach The cognitive approach to perception can also be of value in the interpretation of form. The effects of top-down processing in visual perception can be shown by attempting to demonstrate how past experiences affect the manner in which the viewer perceives a situation or responds to it. Such effects were demonstrated as long ago as the 1930s using the ambiguous figure which can be perceived as either an old woman in profile or a young woman with her head turned slightly away (Figure 2).

The effects of context were tested by Palmer, who suggested that the viewer expects to find certain objects in certain places and that his or her knowledge of the

81

Goldstein 1996: fig.5.46. Treisman 1986: 106-9. 83 Treisman 1986: 114, top. 84 Treisman 1986: 111-4; 1988: 215. 82

85

Boring 1930. Bugelski and Alampay 1961. 87 Kowalski and Westen 2005: fig.4.43. 86

16

MYCENAEAN ART: A PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH location of such objects affects their identification.88 The context for an object was established by showing the viewer a setting where certain categories of objects are usually found, e.g. a kitchen with three “target objects”, in this case a loaf of bread, a US-style mailbox and a drum. The objects were paired to simulate three situations: appropriate context, inappropriate context and no context. Palmer’s findings were that the probability of the subject being correct was highest in the appropriate context and lowest in the inappropriate context. Similarly, the assistance of prior knowledge in visual perception can be shown when subjects are asked to locate a familiar objects in photographs of a scene which is either unexceptional, or cut into sections, and reassembled in a random manner. Subjects reported that it took longer to locate the object in the latter photograph than in the former, indicating that knowledge of the world in which we live aids recognition.89 In another experiment conducted by Biederman,90 subjects were shown a drawing of a US street scene. The subjects were asked to identify an object which was located at a particular location in the scene, having been told where to look immediately prior to seeing the picture. When the subjects were asked to identify a fire hydrant, they made more errors when the hydrant was drawn on top of a mailbox than when it was situated in its normal place, on the pavement. The findings of all these experiments indicate that the subjects’ knowledge of the usual location of an object influenced their ability to recognise it.

more realistic, as opposed to abstract forms. Zeki and Marini found that the area of the brain known as “Human V4” (an area associated with colour perception) was involved, as well as other areas lying just in front of this part of the brain, extending into the temporal lobe and the hippocampus, the latter associated with the consolidation of memory.93 Accordingly, it has been suggested that realistic scenes would have stimulated areas of the brain associated with memory.94 Given the similar social experiences of the Mycenaean elite, which would have contributed to “communal consciousness”,95 the application of research in cognitive psychology, incorporating the effects of the viewer’s acculturation, is potentially valuable in assisting the interpretation of images from Late Bronze Age Greece, and will be discussed in Chapter 5. The remaining chapters examine the manner in which certain aspects of psychological research may assist in interpreting the meaning of Mycenaean art. The first of these chapters considers methods of representation of the human form, with a focus on schematic images from the Middle Bronze Age on the Greek mainland, also referred to as the Middle Helladic period.

Segall’s91 approach was to consider any work of art to be a form of culturally-conditioned behaviour. Segall’s view was that an artist needs to present his or her work to be viewed by people who are likely to be from his or her own society, adding that the continuous change to which all societies are subject would be reflected in the visual arts. Although this approach recognises the role of learning in the interpretation of images, it fails to take account of the neural mechanisms which are responsible for many of the effects visible in works of art. The research outlined above demonstrates that visual perception is heavily dependent on both the viewer’s past memories and experience and his or her future expectations. However, the general conclusion of research in the area of cultural differences in visual perception is that all the subjects which were studied, even those who were considered as pictorially naive, were probably capable of perceiving perspective and other depth clues.92 Other experiments with possible application to ancient art were those conducted to show how the brain copes with 88

Palmer 1975. Biederman et al 1973. 90 Biederman 1981. 91 Segall 1976. 92 Pick and Pick 1978; Jones and Hagen 1980; Deregowski 1989. 89

93

Zeki and Marini 1998. Solso 2003: 128. 95 Solso 2003: 33. 94

17

GEORGINA MUSKETT

Chapter 2 Methods of Representation of the Human Form Chapter 2 considers the manner in which human figures were represented during the earlier phases of the Middle Bronze Age on the Greek mainland, also referred to as the Middle Helladic period, a time when such images were rare.96 This chapter reviews the archaeological background to the period and the simple form of human images in this period, together with psychological reasons for the use of a simple artistic style.

characteristically simple in terms of technology, the most complex find being a bone inlay with spiral decoration.101 A small number of graves from this period can be considered exceptional in terms of either their construction or offerings,102 or both,103 including those designated as “warrior burials” due to the type of offerings accompanying the deceased. The site of Kolonna on the island of Aegina has provided remarkable evidence of the presentation of the deceased as a warrior in Middle Helladic II,104 although this burial is, at present, unique for this period in terms of its construction and lavish offerings. The burial is of a single male, interred in a large built cist grave,105 of a type which may have originated in the Cyclades,106 sometimes described as a “shaft grave”, although there is no surviving shaft above the tomb.107

GREECE IN THE MIDDLE BRONZE AGE: THE NATURE OF THE EVIDENCE The surviving evidence from the earlier phases of the Middle Helladic period suggests that artefacts were produced using simple technology and were functional in nature. Virtually all Middle Helladic artefacts were aniconic, even in the northeastern Peloponnese, where the most sophisticated items were found.97 This trend is reflected in the ceramics which characterise this period, the so-called Minyan pottery, which is monochrome, and Matt-Painted pottery, with abstract, geometric decoration.98

The location of the burial, immediately in front of the outer façade of the fortification wall of Settlement IX at Kolonna,108 only a few metres north of the main entrance to the settlement, with no other tombs in the vicinity, clearly marks the deceased as an individual of exceptional status. However, the isolated nature of this burial appears to suggest that the deceased was not part of a dynasty. The importance of the individual buried in this tomb is further attested by the fact that the subsequent remodelling of this area of the settlement did not destroy the grave, which was still accessible, and subsequently lay behind the fortifications.109

It is apparent that during the Middle Helladic period, a few settlements on the Greek mainland, which the archaeological record suggests were centres of wealth, were probably also power-bases for a local elite. However, these were not the impressive settlements found elsewhere in the Aegean; the only sizeable settlement may have been at Thebes, which had an estimated area of about 21 hectares in the Middle Helladic period,99 and it is likely that most sites on mainland Greece were similar in character to Asine, on the gulf of Argos. As was the case in the remainder of the Argolid, Asine was not fortified. In addition, there was no evidence of any central authority, or any areas with a communal function. Although there were no especially wealthy houses, it has been suggested that social ranking may have been expressed via the size of dwellings,100 although this appears difficult to state with any degree of certainty. Indeed, finds from the settlement at Asine provide scant evidence of social differentiation, being

101

Frödin and Persson 1938: 254, fig.181; Nordquist 1987: 39, no.B41. 102 Although, in general, burial offerings are comparatively rare on mainland Greece in the Middle Bronze Age (Cavanagh and Mee 1998: 31). 103 A map showing the distribution of these graves is given by Kilian-Dirlmeier 1997: fig.68. 104 During the Middle Bronze Age, Aegina was essentially Helladic in terms of general material culture, although there is extensive evidence of contacts with Crete and the Cyclades (Graziadio 1998: 45). 105 Size of chamber - 2.60m long x 1.40m high (KilianDirlmeier 1995: 50); the grave as excavated is illustrated by Kilian-Dirlmeier 1997: fig.3.1 and col. pl.1. 106 cf. Graves 8 and 24 at Ayia Irini on Keos (Overbeck 1989: 204). 107 Hiller 1989: 137-44. 108 A series of maps and aerial photographs of the site in Walter and Felten 1981: pls.1-5. 109 Walter 1981: 179-84; AR 1983-4: 14; Kilian-Dirlmeier 1995: 49-53; Cavanagh and Mee 1998: 32.

96

This discussion does not include human representations of any type from the latest phase of Middle Helladic, from the Shaft Graves at Mycenae, considereded in Chapter 3. 97 Dickinson 1977: 34-6; 107. 98 Both classes illustrated in Demakopoulou and Konsola 1981: pl.8. 99 Dickinson 1989: 131, n.1; Kilian-Dirlmeier 1997: 112. 100 Nordquist 1987: 23-9, 76-86, 108.

18

MYCENAEAN ART: A PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH constructing tumuli, the sacrifice of horses and the relative scarcity of tumuli at Dendra surely indicates that those buried in the tumuli had considerable status,124 and the fact that this type of burial facility continued to be used in the Mycenaean period might suggest appropriation by emerging leaders attempting to legitimise their position by association with the elite who first constructed the monuments.125

The offerings from the tomb, intact at the time of discovery, were apparently carefully selected to emphasise the individual’s wealth, warlike qualities and ability to forge contacts outside the island. The deceased’s wealth and status is indicated by the presence of a gold headband,110 with pointillé decoration consisting of rows of vertical lines linked by intersecting diagonal lines,111 a rare offering in Middle Helladic Greece.112 The deceased’s warlike qualities were indicated by a bronze sword with an ivory pommel and gold disc,113 four bronze weapons, one of which had gold hilt fittings,114 a bronze shoe-socketed spearhead,115 six obsidian arrowheads,116 and worked boar’s tusk, the latter seemingly from a helmet.117 The ability of the deceased to forge contacts with communities outside Aegina is shown by fine quality decorated pottery of mainland, Minoan118 and Cycladic manufacture, the latter possibly from Ayia Irini on Keos.119

The cemeteries serving the settlement at Asine, where, as noted above, social ranking was possibly reflected in the size of dwellings, may have provided similar opportunities for display, albeit in a very limited way. The vast majority of intramural burials at Asine were simple pits, containing no surviving grave offerings. There were more elaborate forms of burial in the extramural cemeteries, where the majority of burials were in cist graves. In general, the latter were more lavish in terms of the number and quality of grave offerings, with just over half of the burials being without offerings. 126

Another type of burial in the Middle Helladic period was within a tumulus, although, in general, the majority of burial tumuli have been poorly published and, therefore, are difficult to date with any certainty.120 The evidence from some of the sites at which burial tumuli were in use is reviewed briefly below. To date, three tumuli with Middle Helladic burials have been located at Dendra,121 although the exact period of use is uncertain.122 A pair of horses were found in a pit in Tumulus C, apparently sacrificed in honour of someone buried in the tumulus no later than Middle Helladic II/III, although the associated burial has not yet been located.123 The effort required in

The offerings accompanying the burial in Grave 197012,127 a MHII cist grave in the East Cemetery at Asine, suggest an outstanding individual. The deceased was a male, aged 25. The only definite offering was a gold band with repoussé decoration,128 which had been broken and repaired,129 possibly an indication of inherited status, with property being passed down a family line.130 As mentioned above, the offering of a headband was extremely rare in Middle Helladic Greece, and the inclusion of such an item appears to identify the exceptional status of the deceased.

110

Identified by its position in the tomb (Kilian-Dirlmeier 1997: 54). 111 Found broken and twisted into five pieces. Length as restored c. 45cm, maximum width 1.6 cm. Walter 1981: pl.7a; Higgins 1987: 182, pl.Va; Kilian-Dirlmeier 1997: 54-7, figs.6.9, 8.9 and col.pl. 3. 112 Although there are several examples from the early Shaft Grave period, listed by Kilian-Dirlmeier (1997: 56). There are only two possible headbands made from precious metal dating from the previous phase found on the Greek Mainland. 1. From Asine, Grave 1970-12 (Dietz 1980: 30, figs.20-1; Nordquist 1987: no.Au1; Kilian-Dirlmeier 1997: 56). 2. From Lerna, Grave DE21 (213)(Kilian-Dirlmeier 1997: 56). 113 Walter 1981: fig.7B; Kilian-Dirlmeier 1997: 13-23, figs.5.1a-e, 7.1, 8.1b.c.e and col.pl. 3. 114 Walter 1981: fig.7Γ; Kilian-Dirlmeier 1997: 27-8, 50-4, figs.5.3, 6.6, 6.7, 6.8, 7.8, 8.3, 8.6, 9.7 and col.pl.3. 115 Kilian-Dirlmeier 1997: 23-7, figs.5.2, 8.2 and col.pl.3. 116 Kilian-Dirlmeier 1997: 28-35, figs.6.4, 9.4 and col.pl.3. 117 Kilian-Dirlmeier 1997: 35-50, figs.9.5, 15, 16, 17 and col.pl.3. It is likely that the ivory disc found in the grave was part of the helmet, a speculated reconstruction of which is shown by Kilian-Dirlmeier 1997: figs.18, 19 and 20. 118 Minoan and Minoanising pottery discussed by Hiller 1993. 119 Kilian-Dirlmeier 1997: 57-66, figs.27-33. 120 Cavanagh and Mee 1998: 44. 121 Pronotariou-Deilaki 1990: 85, 94 122 Cavanagh and Mee 1998: 41-2. 123 Also note that another pair of horses was buried in a pit at the eastern edge of Tumulus B, possibly an extension of Tumulus A. The context indicates that the skeletons cannot be

The impression from Asine is that status may have been expressed in death by some burials in the extramural cemeteries receiving different types and amounts of offerings, although such variations may be the result of gender or, more probably, age;131 for example, because the extramural cemeteries contained more adult burials.132 In addition, bronze jewellery was found as offerings in less than 10% of burials, present in burials of both sexes, and of varying ages, suggesting that it is a significant indicator of a society in which social standing passes older than LHI, suggesting that the person for whose burial they were killed may have been given the honour of burial in an older tumulus (Pronotariou-Deilaki 1990: 94-5) 124 Mee and Cavanagh 1984: 47 125 Cavanagh and Mee 1998: 41-2. 126 Dietz 1980; Nordquist 1987: 91,101-3; 1990: 39; Cavanagh and Mee 1998: 31. 127 Dietz 1980: 30. 128 Dietz 1980: 30, figs.20-1; Nordquist 1987: no.Au1; KilianDirlmeier 1997: 56. Only 24.3 cm long, and thus too short to have totally encircled an adult head. The hook and ring at each end of the band may indicate it could have been worn around the head, tied by a cord. 129 Dietz 1980: no.F70-12; 30, 70, figs.19-21; Nordquist 1987: 47. 130 Nordquist 1987: 109-10. 131 Rutter 2001: 130. 132 Nordquist 1987: 101-103.

19

GEORGINA MUSKETT through a family line.133 This status is likely to have had its basis both in terms of wealth, and an association with a particular family or social group, and this group’s standing in a community.134 For example, the individual buried in cist grave B15 in MHIII was a boy aged about thirteen, whose offerings included bronze jewellery.135

if not stagnation”.144 This apparent lack of sophistication does not mean, however, that the mainland was without external contacts. Archaeological evidence indicates that several areas of the Greek mainland, together with the Saronic islands, were not isolated during the Middle Bronze Age, and had contact with other parts of the Aegean,145 although the vast majority of evidence is from sites either on the coast or near the coast.146 Indeed, the pottery from Late MH Tsoungiza shows no evidence of contact with either Crete or the Cyclades, and only tenuous links, probably indirect, with Aegina.147 Furthermore, it is important to note that the presence of a particular type of ceramic does not necessarily mean direct contact between the site where the vessel was produced and its find-spot.148 The presence of imported materials (whether ceramics from outside the community or metal artefacts) indicates, however, that the individual’s family or group had access to exchange mechanisms.

The situation is slightly different at Lerna, where under 20% of the Middle Helladic and Late Helladic I burials had ceramic offerings.136 The most lavish burial of a child was Grave D17, where the deceased was buried within a large Matt-Painted Aeginetan barrel jar.137 Tantalising evidence of a burial of a high status individual is from Grave DE21 (213), where small fragments of sheet silver were found under the skull of the deceased, possibly the remains of a headband,138 as already observed, an extremely rare offering on the Greek mainland in this period. The impression from funerary evidence during the Middle Helladic period is of a tendency towards a high degree of uniformity in terms of tomb types throughout the Greek mainland, with overwhelmingly single burials.139 However, the location of tombs within cemeteries, with richer and poorer burials placed adjacent to each other, suggests not only social differentiation, but also the emphasis on collective groups, probably family groups, with status transmitted via the family line.140 In the small communities with relatively low population density which were characteristic of mainland Greece in the Middle Bronze Age, all the inhabitants knew each other and, accordingly, even a single death affected the entire community.141 Therefore, a death was an opportunity to assert one’s family or community associations, together with the social rank of the family or group. In particular, the death of an individual of high status in a community would pose a possible threat to the security of the community, and so it is likely that their funeral would demand greater attention in terms of ritual and offerings.142

SCHEMATIC RENDERINGS OF THE HUMAN FORM: AESTHETIC PRIMITIVES? As previously observed, representations of the human form during the earlier phases of the Middle Helladic period are extremely rare. Further, the extant examples indicate that the human form was represented by means of the main axes of the body and limbs, a characteristic of ancient art in many societies. In contrast to the mainland, human images were much more common on Crete, particularly in glyptic art. Although there are very few examples in the hoard of several thousand clay sealings from the first palace at Phaistos, which date to MMII,149 more examples of human figures appear on sealstones from the “Mallia Workshop group”, which also date to MMII.150 In addition, there are rare depictions of human figures on two MMII ceramic vessels, both found in association with cult objects in a room off the West Court of the first

Dickinson memorably described Middle Helladic Greece as “poor, backward and unorganised compared with the societies of the Aegean”,143 with an impression of “stasis

144

Dickinson 1989: 133. Kilian-Dirlmeier 1997 includes a series of useful distribution maps relevant to this discussion: fig.63. distribution of Cycladic pottery (MCI-II) outside the Cyclades; fig.64. distribution of Grey Minyan pottery in the Aegean islands; fig.65. distribution of Minoan artefacts from the Protopalatial period outside Crete; fig.66. distribution of MBA pottery from Melos, Keos, Thera and Aegina; fig.67. MBA settlements in the Cyclades and Aegina. 146 Rutter 1990: 454. Furthermore, there were certainly contacts between the various parts of the Greek mainland and Saronic islands, most notably between Aegina and the coastal sites of the Argolid, but also connections being made via overland routes, such as between western Greece and the northeast Peloponnese (Nordquist 1987: 67). 147 Rutter 1990: 454. 148 Nordquist 1987: 65. 149 Immerwahr 1990: 29. Human figures appear on CMS II, 5: nos.323-326. 150 Seals from this context catalogued in CMS II,2: nos.86-198. The designs of numerous examples include human figures. 145

133

Nordquist 1987: 45. Nordquist 1987: 109; 1990: 38. 135 Two bronze rings, a bronze wire necklace with beads made from bronze, carnelian and bone, as well as two strings of shells, and two ceramic vessels (Nordquist 1987: 44). 136 Zerner 1990: 24. 137 Closed with an intact Matt-Painted jug of local manufacture (Zerner 1990: no.8, figs.10 and 11). 138 Kilian-Dirlmeier 1997: 56. 139 Cavanagh and Mee 1998: 23. 140 Mee and Cavanagh 1984: 48; Nordquist 1987: 103; Cavanagh and Mee 1998: 34. 141 Brown 1981: 28. 142 Nordquist 1987: 103-4. 143 Dickinson 1977: 107. 134

20

MYCENAEAN ART: A PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH show ships.158 It seems appropriate, therefore, for large ceramic vessels to be a suitable medium to advertise Kolonna’s seafaring prowess.

palace at Phaistos. The first vessel is a shallow bowl with loop handles, whose interior decoration shows three figures, all apparently female. A small central figure, its body outlined with loops, possibly snakes, is flanked by two figures, both with one arm upraised.151 The second example is the vessel shape known as a “fruit stand”, whose decoration is similar in style and content to the previous vase. In the central “tondo” are three figures, a larger central figure, holding a flower in each hand, flanked by two smaller figures, each with one upraised arm. The rim shows a series of three female figures, with lowered heads, whilst on the foot of the vessel is a series of four female figures, with hands on hips.152 These representations, although few in number, are far in advance, both in terms of quantity and sophistication of composition, of anything found on the Greek mainland in this period. When considering the scarcity of representational art on the Greek mainland, therefore, evidence for contact between Crete and the mainland is clearly an important element.

The face and body of the individual shown on Kolonna Museum 2375 are rendered using very simple forms (Figure 3).159

The first group of images to be considered appear on three fragments, or groups of fragments of Matt-Painted pottery from Kolonna on Aegina.153 It should be emphasised that these figured examples are a very small percentage of the corpus of Matt-Painted material discovered to date.154 These fragments all date from MHII, when Settlement IX was at its height, with impressive fortifications (despite reasonable natural defences), monumental architecture and indications that the settlement was a member of a trade network.155 It is surely significant that human representations in the Middle Helladic period are linked to representations of ships,156 and that the type of vessels on which the human and ship representations appear - two barrel jars and an amphora - are the type of vessels used to store and transport goods. As discussed above, Kolonna had attested links with the Greek mainland and the Cyclades during this period, including the presence of offerings in the “warrior grave” of fine decorated Cycladic and Minoan pottery. Millstones made from andesite were imported to the Argolid from Aegina,157 and there is also ample evidence of Aeginetan pottery at sites in the Argolid, particularly at Lerna and Asine, including two sherds of Aeginetan Matt-Painted pottery which may

Figure 3: Aeginetan barrel jar fragment, Kolonna Museum 2375; after Siedentopf 1991, pl. 14.75.

On Kolonna Museum 2458 (Figure 4) and Kolonna Museum 2462,160 the human figures are depicted in an even simpler manner, with a single brushstroke for the body, and a large dot to represent the head. The fourth example is on a fragmentary Matt-Painted jar,161 dated to MHIII-LHI, from the small settlement162 of Tsoungiza, in the Argolid, which had been abandoned during most of the Middle Helladic phase and reoccupied at the end of the period.163 In this case, the representation of the form is highly schematic, with merely the major axes of the body and limbs being sketched in. In the case of the sherd shown in Figure 3, however, there may be a case for arguing that the manner of representing the human form was influenced by exposure to ceramics 158

Nordquist 1987: 67, fig.66. I believe the person is standing on a ship rather than a fish (contra Hiller 1972). Although it is perhaps tempting to see this as an early representation of the frequently occurring theme of a person assisted by a dolphin, there is a complete absence of parallels in any medium throughout the Bronze Age, and a person’s association with a ship would be more in keeping with the other evidence discussed in this chapter. 160 Rutter 2001: fig. 14b 161 Nemea Valley Archaeological Project 1336-2-15 and 14102-23, Rutter 2001: 141-2, fig. 17. 162 Described by Wright (1990: 353, n.13) as a “hamlet”, which he defines as a “social unit without a political or economic organisation”. 163 Wright 1990: 347; Wright et al. 1990: 629.

151

159

Immerwahr 1990: 33, col.pl.II; Schiering 1999: pl.CLXVb. 152 Immerwahr 1990: 34, col.pl.III; Schiering 1999: pls.CLXVac. 153 Sherd 1: Kolonna Museum 2375, Welter 1938: fig. 22, Hiller 1972, Siedentopf 1991: 18, no. 75, pl. 14, Rutter 2001: 128-9, fig. 14a. Sherd 2: Kolonna Museum 2458, Siedentopf 1991: 245, no. 158, pls. 35-7, fig. 4, frontispiece (col. pl), Rutter 2001: 128-9, figs. 13, 14c. Sherd 3: Kolonna Museum 2462, Siedentopf 1991: 25, no. 162, pl. 38, Rutter 2001: 128-9: 778-9, fig. 14b. 154 Catalogued by Siedentopf 1991. 155 Walter and Felten 1981: 72-82, figs. 56-66, pls. 60-9. 156 For full discussion, see Muskett 2002. 157 Nordquist 1987: 63.

21

GEORGINA MUSKETT

Figure 4: Reconstructed ship from reconstructed Aeginetan barrel jar shown by Siedentopf 1991, frontispiece (colour plate); after Siedentopf 1991, fig. 4.

According to Gombrich, schemata are never invented but are merely modified from existing forms. However, as Whitley observes, the logical conclusion of this would be “infinite regression.” Furthermore, such representations do not require high levels of artistic skill, and would not appear to require great reliance on external influences.169

produced in the Cyclades and on Crete. The method of rendering the torso by means of an inverted triangle is seen on a representation of a man on a fragment of an EMIII bowl from Palaikastro on Crete164 and on late EC/early MC sherds from Phylakopi on Melos.165 In addition, the “helmet” could plausibly be hair; the method of depicting hair by means of a series of thick, curved lines is also seen on the two MMII ceramic vessels from Phaistos, discussed above.166 The style of representation is so similar on both vessels that the method of showing the hair may merely be an idiosyncrasy of the artist but, equally, the lack of parallels from other contexts means that it is impossible to say whether this was the customary manner of depicting hair at this period. The fact that the person shown in Figure 3 has merely two “curls” on his head may be simply due to his gender, although one should not ignore the possibility that the artist intended to show him wearing an elaborate helmet, similar in style to that shown on a small faience jug found in Shaft Grave III at Mycenae,167 discussed in Chapter 3.

An associated issue is whether there is a physiological explanation for the independent occurrence at different times in different geographical areas of similar decorative motifs and simplified representations of the human form. The explanation given by Koehler earlier this century was the “Gestalt Theory”; that is, the brain is not a tabula rasa, but has certain inbuilt properties, hence the human preference for simple shapes, such as straight lines and circles.170 Loewy’s suggestion was that the vast majority of decorative motifs had an apotropaic function,171 and, indeed, there is much evidence in support of this hypothesis in ancient art, although Gombrich is certainly correct that Loewy over-simplified the argument in suggesting only one explanation for the use of certain motifs.172 Another view was taken by Lévi-Strauss, who believed diffusion is inevitably the cause for the appearance of artistic parallels. However, he suggested that where there is no evidence of contact, one should explore whether there are psychological reasons for the appearance of forms which cannot be the result of mere coincidence.173

The argument for representations of the human form in Middle Helladic Greece to be influenced by Cycladic or Minoan antecedents is reflected in Gombrich’s view168 that every representation needs a schema, that is, a model. 164

Immerwahr 1990: 32, fig.11d. Immerwahr 1990: 32, fig.11e. Also note that Rutter (2001: 142) favours Cycladic antecedents for the figure from Toungiza, cf. Immerwahr (1990: 26), who believes that the appearance of figural art found towards the end of MH is “probably as a result of influence from the Cyclades”. 166 Ns. 56 and 57. Note, however that the manner of rendering the face as a bird’s beak is also found on a sherd from a LMIIIC cup, coincidentally from Phaistos (Phaistos Stratigraphical Museum F.1027; Wedde 1999: no.B5, pl.LXXXIX), showing a ship crewed by two individuals, their faces rendered as though with bird-like beaks. 167 NMA123-4; Karo 1930-3: 60-1, nos. 123-4, pls.23-4, fig. 16; Pendlebury 1930: 53, 56, no. 90, pl. IV; Vermeule 1975: 28, fig. 29; Foster 1979: 125-6, pl. 33, fig. 86; Foster 1981: 9-16; Cline 1995: 102-3, no. 53. 168 Gombrich 1977: 263. 165

Another explanation is that the recurrence of these shapes, forms and patterns, which have no overt or narrative meaning, is due to the fact that they are aesthetically pleasing to the viewer. The idea that the survival of motifs may be due to the aesthetic satisfaction they engender is by no means a new idea, and was suggested by Hogarth in the mid-18th century174 and by Jones in the mid-19th 169

Whitley 1991: 48. Discussed inter alia by Gombrich 1984: 4. 171 Loewy 1930. 172 Gombrich 1984: 259. 173 Lévi-Strauss 1958, Chapter XIII. 174 Hogarth 1753. 170

22

MYCENAEAN ART: A PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH century.175 Gombrich echoes the belief of both Hogarth and Jones that certain motifs “are found to fit certain psychological dispositions which had not been satisfied before”, at the same time conceding that it may not be possible to be specific about the cause of the attraction of particular motifs.176

representation of the person shown in Figure 3, I believe that the argument is much weaker in the case of the other fragments from Kolonna and, in particular, the jug from Tzoungiza, where the effect of external connections is unproven. If such images developed independently, the reason for this could be because this form of depiction is motivated by particular groups of cells within the human brain which respond to certain types of images, of which schematic representations of the human form are but one example.184

This suggestion does to some degree anticipate the more scientific approach of Latto, who has suggested the term “aesthetic primitive”177 - a stimulus or property of a stimulus which has the property of exciting particular groups of cells within all levels of the human visual system, and provides aesthetic satisfaction.

This chapter was concerned with assembling evidence which may help in seeking answers to the questions of why there are so few representations of the human form on the Greek mainland during this period and reasons for their method of representation. If schematic ‘stick figures’ are an ‘aesthetic primitive’, it would be a normal assumption for human images to appear in Middle Helladic art. Another factor to explain the use of human figures could be the exposure of mainland artists and craftsmen, together with their patrons, to artefacts produced on Crete decorated with representations of the human form.185 In my view, the crucial element is the necessity for an appropriate context for the use of human representations. For example, the group of sherds from Kolonna, all of which appear on large ceramic vessels, seem to be part of a deliberate attempt of the ruling elite of Kolonna to advertise not only their ability to exchange with other communities in the Aegean, but also their ability to control manpower, not merely to crew the large ships depicted on the vessels, but also to defend the settlement.186 By contrast, as noted above, a major vehicle for Minoan representational art was engraved sealstones, which were part of a literate administration on Crete of a type unknown on the Greek mainland in this period.187 Such contexts were not present on the mainland in this period; there was simply no appropriate vehicle for the use of such images in a medium which has survived in the archeological record.

Low-level aesthetic primitives, so-called because they stimulate neural activity low in the cortical visual pathways in the primary visual cortex of the human brain,178 include geometric shapes, blocks of monochrome colours, stylised organic forms and patterns of lines.179 The research by Hubel and Wiesel,180 discussed in Chapter 1, regarding orientation detectors in the visual cortex, may be the reason why an image consisting solely of a pattern of lines can be aesthetically pleasing.181 This tendency can be seen in the prehistoric Aegean, where the use of lines is found as an element of the earliest designs applied to pottery on both Crete and the Greek mainland.182 In addition, as previously observed, other research indicates cells within the temporal cortex of the brain which respond to the human body, and some of its component parts. The human body, face and hands are considered by Latto to be high-level aesthetic primitives, so-called because they trigger neural activity higher along the cortical visual pathways in the human brain which have developed specifically to process the human face and body, and which are probably located in the temporal lobes of the brain.183 Accordingly, it is plausible that the reappearance of representations of humans in Middle Helladic Greece was not necessarily dependent on any outside influences. Although it is possible that Kolonna’s links with outside communities may have been the catalyst for the style of

When discussing iconographic transfer, it appears insufficient to speak merely of “influences”; a society must be predisposed to receive such influences into its artistic repertoire, whether on the grounds of aesthetic preferences or because of the perception of a motif or form possessing an intrinsic meaning, such as the Egyptian form of male, wingless sphinx, which was not readily accepted into the Aegean repertoire. In addition, there seems a flaw in the argument for the theory of “influence”; that is, Gombrich’s view that schemata are

175

Jones 1856. Gombrich 1984: 191. 177 Latto 1995: 67-8, cf. Solso’s term “visual primitives (Solso 2003: 130).. 178 Latto 1995: 86. 179 Latto 1995: 68. 180 Hubel and Wiesel 1959. 181 Latto 1995: 75-7. 182 e.g. ENII bowl from Knossos (Hood 1978: fig.1), Neolithic pottery from various sites in Thessaly, e.g. MN bowl from Tsangli (Hood 1978: fig.2A), LN jar from Dhimini (Hood 1978: fig.3). This trend continued in the EM period, most notably on Ayios Onoufrios ware (e.g. Higgins 1997, fig.10; Hood 1978: fig.4). 183 Latto 1995: 86. Latto’s suggestion that there may be certain facial expressions and body postures which are especially effective in eliciting neural responses, with particular neural mechanisms which respond to such forms, will be discussed in Chapter 3. 176

184

Latto 1995: 89. Cf. Immerwahr (1990: 26), contact with Crete “introduced to the mainland a real interest in representational art, as well as the technical means to produce it, in some cases through migrating artists.” 186 Muskett 2002. 187 The artefacts discussed in Younger 1991 should, as he correctly states, be classified as stamps, used to imprint designs for decorative rather than bureaucratic reasons. 185

23

GEORGINA MUSKETT never invented but are merely modified from existing forms,188 with the counter-argument by Whitley that the logical conclusion of this would be “infinite regression”.189 Therefore, the argument that representational art on the Greek mainland was the result of artistic influence from Crete, which in turn is usually explained as being the result of Syrian and Egyptian influences,190 whilst clearly having some substance, does not take account of the problem of “infinite regression”. In addition, such arguments fail to accept that some of the earliest forms of representational art in any society are extremely simple in form, and may have arisen independently, and also fail to take account of the cultural factors involved in the decision by the artists and craftsmen, plus their patrons, of any society whether to accept or reject any form of artistic representation. The lack of familiarity by the artisan or artisans responsible for the decoration of the figured sherds from Kolonna is certainly a factor for the rendering of the human figure in a schematic way. Indeed, the small number of vessels involved may suggest a quirk of artistic style by a single artisan. As previously noted, the schematic renderings of the human figure does not detract from its emotional impact, and adds weight to the suggestion that such figures are ‘aesthetic primitives’. Chapter 3 investigates the recognition of the individual in Mycenaean art, with specific reference to the issue of portraiture.

188

Gombrich 1977: 263. Whitley 1991: 48. 190 Immerwahr 1990: 26-7. 189

24

MYCENAEAN ART: A PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH

Chapter 3 The Recognition of the Individual The identification of the image of an individual, in the sense of a discrete human being in possession of a specific identity, in any era of prehistory appears to be a difficult, if not impossible, task. Indeed, during the Early Mycenaean and Mycenaean period on the Greek mainland (that is, from Middle Helladic III to Late Helladic IIIB), the possibility of identifying images of individuals would appear slight. At this time, there were few written records on the Greek mainland, and those which have survived possess significant limitations.191 Accordingly, the concept of a portrait at this time may appear anachronistic. However, if a portrait is defined as an attempt to depict a named, or nameable, person, even though an actual name may be lost, the use of the term appears justified.

faces. Experimental evidence using both simian and human subjects does, however, suggest this is the case.194 In the case of humans, this seeming predisposition to respond to faces appears to have a sound scientific foundation, supported by the results of several studies which located an area of the brain known as the fusiform gyrus, which reacted when viewers looked at human faces.195 Another strand of this argument is the manner in which the viewer recognises faces. The face evolved due to its important biological rôle, the features being placed in particular ways to serve specific functions. For example, eyes and ears are separated to allow distance to be perceived, the nose and mouth are placed to avoid choking, and the mouth and jaws not only have the function of chewing and swallowing food, but also have a rôle in the important social functions of speaking and smiling. Therefore, all human faces are very similar in terms of form, although very slight differences make each face unique and accordingly enable us to identify individuals.196

The methodology used to identify portraits within the archaeological record from this period will be twofold. The first element is the application of experimental research by psychologists in the area of visual perception to the artefacts, to provide a scientific basis for their interpretation. The second element is consideration of the nature and meaning of the artefacts in terms of how they functioned, suggested by their archaeological context.

Studies with new-born infants has shown that the human brain appears to respond to faces from birth, and that humans, therefore, possess an innate knowledge of faces which cannot be explained by cultural factors.197 Johnson and his colleagues used a series of four patterned boards, each of which was moved in an arc in front of the baby’s head. They found that the baby’s eyes followed the most face-like pattern longer than the un-face-like patterns. Moreover, the research of Bushnell and his colleagues198 showed that the process of recognition of individual faces begins within two days of birth; an infant recognises its own mother very quickly.

Phenomenology suggests a positive response to the human face; indeed, humans even appear willing to attempt to identify facial characteristics in abstract images.192 This seeming predisposition to respond to faces appears to have a sound scientific foundation, supported by research which has attempted to clarify whether there are specific neural mechanisms which respond to faces. As noted in Chapter 1, research in the area of modularity has focused on simian rather than human studies, although modularity in the human brain is indicated via brain imaging techniques, which indicate the area of the brain activated by a particular stimulus.193 The acceptance of the validity of such experiments using monkeys is dependent on the belief not only that the neural mechanisms which are responsible for visual processing in the brains of both monkeys and humans are the same, but also that all primates possess the comparable ability to both see and discriminate between

However, the question remains as to the manner in which the faces of individuals are identified. Experiments have shown that when asked to select a likeness of well-known faces, the majority of subjects chose line-drawn caricatures in preference to more realistic, unaccentuated line drawings.199 The way in which an artist produces a caricature is to exaggerate the differences between the subject and an average face; that is, by exploiting distinctive facial traits, the artist makes the subject’s face less average

191

Dickinson (1994: 194-7), provides a convenient summary of the main characteristics of documents written in Linear B, the script used on the Greek mainland in the period under discussion. 192 Gombrich 1972; 1984: 264. 193 The general idea of modularity is confirmed in humans using brain imaging techniques. The use of PET and MRI technology makes it possible to see which part of the brain is activated by a stimulus (Solso 2003: 125; Zeki 1999: 177, fig. 17.8).

194

Perrett et al. 1995: 96. Haxby et al. 1994; Kanwisher et al. 1997; Tong et al. 2000. 196 Bruce and Young 1998: 4. 197 Johnson et al. 1991. 198 Bushnell et al. 1989. 199 Benson and Perrett 1994. 195

25

GEORGINA MUSKETT and more distinctive.200 Indeed, experiments have shown that people are able to recognise caricatures of well-known people201 more quickly than more realistic line drawings.202

artefacts may well have been owned by the deceased in life, albeit worn only on ceremonial occasions,207 suggested in particular by the evidence of repaired items.208 The form or technique of manufacture of other offerings, however, suggests that they were made specifically for the funeral of the deceased, to be worn at the prothesis and accompany the deceased to the grave. Obvious examples of this type of item are the masks of precious metal, discussed further below, and gold ornaments, seemingly designed to decorate the body or clothing.209 A feature of Circle A210 were sets of flat, round gold discs with incised designs.211 The effect of the body seemingly clothed in gold, wearing a gold headdress and jewellery must have been truly spectacular, and is echoed by the series of thin gold sheets from Grave III, shaped to cover the face and body of a child apparently buried in this grave, although the skeleton had seemingly disintegrated, and no remains of any children were observed.212

A possible reason for this it that it is believed that images of faces stored in the human memory are not realistic but are “selectively exaggerated”203 in the manner of a caricature. Another explanation is that an accurate depiction is remembered, but a caricature is preferable because individual features are not very distinctive and require exaggeration to remain memorable and recognisable.204 These results hold true even when subjects are tested with a photograph rather than a line drawing; in this case 50% of subjects recognised the caricature rather than the photograph.205 However, it is clear that despite quicker recognition time, the subjects were aware that the caricatures were not true images, suggesting that although the correct dimensions of a particular face must be accurately stored in memory, the dimensions of the face must be coded in a relative way. Benson and Perrett argue that the reason why caricatures are recognised in a more efficient way is because they are presented in a manner which is comparable to the way images are accurately stored in the human brain.206 The research undertaken on the perception and recognition of faces may help explain the manner in which the human face was portrayed by Early Mycenaean and Mycenaean artists, which is the topic of the case study considered in this chapter.

207

Such as the head-dresses described as “crowns”, e.g. from Grave IV (Karo 1930-3: nos.229 and 230, pl.XLI) and “diadems”, e.g. from Grave E (Mylonas 1973: E-363, pl.85a:2), Grave Γ (Mylonas 1973: Γ-359, pl.59α:1) and Grave IV (Karo 1930-3: nos.232-5, pls.XXXVI and XXVII; 231, 236-9, pl.XXXIX; no.286, pl.XXXVIII), and jewellery such as armbands, e.g. From Grave IV, 3 gold armbands (Karo 1930-3: nos.255, 257 and 263, pls.XLII and XLIII). 208 Dickinson 1977: 75; Graziadio 1991: 423. 209 Such as “half-diadems”, pieces of precious metal in the shape of an elongated triangle, strengthened with wire along their long sides (e.g. Grave E, Mylonas 1973: pls.75-6; Grave III, Karo 1930-3: pl.XIV.5) and gold ornaments, with small holes to facilitate their attachment (Grave Iota [in the case of this grave, I am spelling the Greek letter phonetically to avoid confusion with Grave I in Circle A], Dickinson 1977: 43; Mylonas 1973: pl.102:α; the original position of the ornaments can be seen on Mylonas 1973: pl.94. Graves III and I, illustrated by Karo 1930-3: pls.XXVI, XXVII). Possibly some were joined together to form the heads of pins (Dickinson 1977: 76). Hood (1978: 203) suggests the holes indicate the plaques were from necklaces. In addition, one of the deceased buried in Grave N seemingly wore a garment with sheet gold at the neck (Mylonas 1973: 158-76, pls.138-54, inserted fig. B΄). 210 This type of funerary ornament is completely absent from Grave Circle B (Laffineur 1989: 238). 211 Over 700 in Grave III, with smaller groups from Graves IV and V, and a few from Grave I (Hood 1978: 204-5; illustrated by Karo 1930-3: pls.XXXVIII-XXIX). 212 Karo 1930-3: no. 146, pl. LIII. In response to the conventional view, originally suggested by Schliemann, that there were two child burials in Grave III (and frequently cited, e.g. Tsountas and Manatt 1897: 87), Dickinson observes that the ‘suit’ contains enough pieces for only one complete burial, the only extra equipment being two right foot covers, and suggests that Schliemann connected the child burial with the legendary twin children of Cassandra (Dickinson 1977: 48, n.1). Indeed, no grave offerings supporting two child burials in Grave III were included in Karo’s 1930-3 publication.

Images of the human face from the Shaft Graves at Mycenae: a psychological interpretation Many of the images of the human face from Mycenaean Greece which most plausibly may be interpreted as portraits appear on items which are distinctive either in terms of medium, form or both. This is exemplified by six masks in the shape of a male face, made from precious metal, which were found in Grave Circles A and B at Mycenae (Figures 5 and 6). Probably the most striking aspect of the offerings found in both Grave Circles at Mycenae was the ability of those using these burial facilities to advertise the wealth of the deceased by including lavish offerings, in some cases extremely ostentatious, and in excessive quantities; indeed, the redundancy of many of the items in Circle A is striking. Metal was certainly a precious resource, and its disposal in tombs would have had major significance. Many of the 200

Bruce and Young 1998: 168. See Bruce and Young 1998: fig. 5.18 for a selection of caricatures and anticaricatures of the comedian, Rowan Atkinson. 202 Benson and Perrett 1994; Rhodes et al. 1987. 203 Perrett et al. 1995: 108. 204 Perrett et al. 1995: 108; cf. Hochberg 1972: 90. 205 Benson and Perrett 1994; cf. Ryan and Swartz 1956. 206 Benson and Perrett 1991. It should be noted that changes in the strength and position of lighting can affect the recognition of a face (Perrett et al. 1995: 114). 201

26

MYCENAEAN ART: A PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH

Figure 6: Gold mask from Grave V, Grave Circle A, Mycenae. NMA624. Height: 26 cm. Image reproduced with permission of the National Archaeological Museum, Athens.

Figure 5: Electrum mask from Grave Γ, Grave Circle B, Mycenae. NMA8709. Height (maximum): 21.5 cm. Image reproduced with permission of the National Archaeological Museum, Athens.

appears straight in profile, is distorted at the bridge, possibly due to post-depositional damage. The mouth is thin, and upturned, although this effect is accentuated by what appears to be a moustache. The ears are set high on the head, particularly noticeable when seen in profile. Two gold face masks were found in Grave V. The first216 is similar in form to the round mask from Grave IV, being three-dimensional with a flat strip of gold surrounding the face. The face is broad, with very rounded cheeks. The ears are shown in the correct position relative to the rest of the face. The eyebrows are thin, rendered by an unbroken line. The eyes are realistically shaped, although no eyelashes are shown. The nose is straight, although broadened at the tip, possibly due to post-depositional damage. The mouth is straight. No beard is indicated, although lines on the upper lip, extending below the outer corners of the mouth, may suggest a moustache. The second mask from Grave V217 (Figure 6) is flatter in appearance. The features are rendered with a much greater degree of detail than the other masks. The eyebrows are shown separately, and although the eyelids meet in the centre of the eye, the eyelashes are rendered separately. The nose is slim, and straight in profile, although it appears to bend to the left when viewed from the front, possibly the result of post-depositional damage. The mouth is thin, straight and

The series of masks are an example made of electrum from Grave Γ in Grave Circle B (Figure 5),213 and five gold masks from Graves IV and V in Grave Circle A (Figure 6). The mask from Grave Γ (Figure 5) and two of the masks from Grave IV214 are very similar in character. All three are flat, with the eyebrows rendered as a single line of wide, angular incisions. None of the men are shown as bearded. In all cases, the eyes are indicated as closed, with both upper and lower lashes shown. The noses are very straight and thick, and the mouth in all instances is wide and slightly down-turned. The other three masks are more individual in nature. The third mask from Grave IV215 is three-dimensional, with a flat band of gold surrounding the face. The face is broad, with arched eyebrows rendered by an unbroken line, dipping down in the centre. The eyes are round, and no eyelashes are shown. The nose is fairly well modelled, and although it 213

NMA 8709. Height (max.): 21.5cm. Width (max.): 17.8cm. Blegen 1962: 245-6, pl. 62, fig. 3; Mylonas 1973, no. Γ-362, pl. 60α and colour pl. ιβ΄;1992: pl.1; Musgrave et al. 1995. 214 NMA 253 and 254. Heights: 20.5cm and 21.5cm respectively. Widths: 27.5cm and 29cm respectively. Karo 1930-3: no. 253, pl. XLVII, no. 254, pl. XLVIII; Blegen 1962: pl. 61, figs. 1 and 2. 215 NMA 259. Height: 30.3cm. Width: 29cm. Depth: 8.5cm. Karo 1930-3: no. 259, pls. XLIX and L; Blegen 1962: pl. 62, fig. 4.

216

NMA 623. Height (overall): 31.5cm. Height of face: 23cm. Width (overall): 31cm. Width of face: 28.5cm. Karo 1930-3: no. 623, pl. LI; Blegen 1962: pl. 62, fig. 5; Mylonas 1969: 125-42. 217 NMA 624. Height: 26cm. Width: 26.5cm. Karo 1930-3: no. 624, pl. LII; Blegen 1962: pl. 62, fig. 6.

27

GEORGINA MUSKETT Even if the masks were not intended to be “death masks”, it is worth considering whether any were intended to be a portrait. As previously noted, the three flat masks from Grave Γ (Figure 5) and Grave IV, which are from the earliest “mask burials”, have been given similar facial characteristics. Furthermore, although the round masks from Graves IV and V are fairly similar in form, the details of their features are somewhat different, and in the case of the mask from Grave IV, the mouth is shown as though smiling. The flat mask from Grave V (Figure 6) is in a different category altogether in terms of realism, especially in the rendering of the beard and moustache.225 Even in this latter case, however, it is apparent that in no sense are the faces shown realistic likenesses; indeed, the exaggeration of features is such that they could even be perceived as caricatures.226

unsmiling, with the lips shown separately. The artist has attempted to indicate individual hairs of the beard and moustache. The shape of the ears, cut out from the rest of the mask, is rendered by a volute. All the masks depict adult males,218 with the exception of a mask which is part of the ‘gold suit’ found in Grave III.219 Unlike the adult masks, there was no attempt whatsoever to render facial features, perhaps because the child was considered too young to possess its own individual identity. The masks from Grave Circles A and B are the only examples from the Greek mainland in the Late Bronze Age,220 hindering comparisons with similar finds. As all the masks were deposited in graves, it may be reasonable to suppose they were intended to be death masks, an explanation apparently supported by the fact that the masks from Grave Circle A were found placed over the faces of the deceased. However, the masks do not appear to have been made to fit over the face, which is particularly marked in the case of the flat masks from Grave Γ and Grave IV, an impression which is reinforced by the fairly small size of these masks. The presence of holes near the ears of most of the masks seem to indicate they could have been tied round the head,221 although they may have been attached to shrouds.222 In the case of the mask from Grave Γ (Figure 5), it was not found over the face of the individual whose burial it accompanied, but was behind the head of the deceased, above his right shoulder.223 Its position was so far from the head that it clearly never rested on the face, a fact which suggests that the original function of the masks was not to serve as a death mask; that is, a representation of the deceased.224

As noted above, experiments have shown that when asked to select a likeness of well-known faces, the majority of people chose line-drawn caricatures, which exploit distinctive facial characteristics, in preference to more realistic line drawings.227 It is unclear whether the artists who served the people buried in the Grave Circles at Mycenae recognised the fact, whether consciously or unconsciously, that by creating faces which were other than average by selectively highlighting distinguishing features - possibly emphasising family resemblances they were creating what we recognise today as a caricature. Blegen suggested that the artist or artists who created the masks may have been trying to convey elements of the individuals’ personalities via the masks, such as his comments regarding the flat mask from Grave V (Figure 6), “his tight lips lead me to think that he could be imperious and impatient”,228 which sounds subjective and unscientific to the modern reader. However, his comments could be interpreted as echoing the more recent observations of Bruce and Young regarding caricatures; that is, the caricaturist is seeking to emphasise those features which set an individual apart from the average and, as we know from research conducted by psychologists, are the idiosyncrasies which enable individuals to be recognised by others.229

218

Note Mylonas’ reservations regarding the round mask from Grave V (Mylonas 1969: 125-42). 219 n.212 above. Width of face mask: 10.7cm. Height of face mask: 6.7cm. Heights of two pieces with ears: 5cm and 5.5cm. 220 Although note the rectangular sheet of gold, 15cm x 10.8cm, with a socket for the nose, found on the face of the deceased buried in Tholos Tomb B at Mouliana on Crete, dated to the end of the Late Bronze Age, and thus more recent than the examples from Mycenae (Davaras 1975: 113). I am inclined to discount the gold mask, apparently from Anatolia, although its exact provenance is unknown, which is reported by Mellaart (1968: 195) as being very similar to those from Mycenae. 221 Musgrave et. al. 1995: 120; Prag and Neave 1997: 113. 222 Dickinson 1977: 72; Graziadio 1991: 423. 223 Dietz 1991: 108. 224 A funerary link is suggested by Morgan, who observes that the masks, even the round masks from Graves IV and V, although more three-dimensional in character, were designed to be seen from the front rather than in profile, and frontal faces are occasionally depicted in the case of those who are about to die (Morgan 1995: 138-9.) van Leuven has made the suggestion that the masks were cult equipment, used to represent traditional gods, either by being worn in life by the individuals whose burials they accompanied, or used by them to mask cult figures (1989: 196). I would observe, however, that the suggested similarities to the very small gold face from Phylakopi, which was not only from a figure much less than life size (discussed by Renfrew 1985: 302-3), implies that religious practices at

Although it is perhaps tempting, therefore, to consider such masks as providing some form of likeness of the elite individuals who incorporated these masks into their grave offerings, the available evidence suggests that this is unlikely to have been the case for the earliest group of masks. Not only does the find-spot of the mask from Grave Γ, the earliest mask, suggest that such masks were Phylakopi in LHIIIB were related to those at Mycenae in LHI, which is not supported by other finds from the religious area at Phylakopi (listed by Renfrew 1985: 302-3). 225 Musgrave et al. 1995: 109; Prag and Neave 1997: 113-4. 226 Muskett 20001. 227 Benson and Perrett 1994: 75-93. 228 Blegen 1962: 246. 229 Bruce and Young 1998: 168; cf. Morgan’s comments that “in caricature … we recognise the individual” (Morgan 2000: 925).

28

MYCENAEAN ART: A PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH indicated by an altar in Grave Circle A and pottery from a partly artificial hollow in the same area.237

not originally conceived as “death masks”, that is, lying over the face of the corpse, but the general similarities between the three earliest masks are too close to represent different individuals, even accounting for family likenesses.230

When seeking examples of portraiture in Mycenaean Greece, it is also important to distinguish between a portrait and the representation of a face on items such as ivory “warrior heads”, even though the latter were plausibly individual commissions (Figure 7).

In addition, forensic reconstruction of the skull of the individual buried with the mask from Grave Γ has been undertaken.231 Despite the fact that such reconstruction does not produce an accurate portrait, the methodology produces a recognisable face. Although both the reconstructed face and the mask from Grave Γ were roughly triangular with a high forehead, the details of mouth and nose do not correspond. In this case, it is clear that the mask from Grave Γ is not a portrait of the man whose burial it accompanied.232 In the case of the three latest masks, however, there is a possibility that the artist or artists who made the masks attempted to convey some of the individual facial characteristics of those whose burials they accompanied; this was the view of both Karo233 and Blegen.234 It is conceivable that the exaggeration of features, which is a characteristic of the later masks, was an attempt by the artist to ensure recognition of the subject, and is a technique which modern psychological research has shown significantly improves the chances of identification by others. This is in accordance with the opinion of Tsountas and Manatt,235 and of Vermeule,236 that the masks were made to preserve the memory of the individuals concerned. I would suggest that it is also plausible that the attempt to produce a recognizable image of the deceased could have been an element in ancestor cult; as Gallou observes, a cult of the dead could have been established at Mycenae in late MH/LHI,

230

Musgrave et al. 1995: 120. Musgrave et al. 1995. 232 Musgrave et al. 1995: 120-9. 233 Karo 1930-3: 328-30. 234 Blegen 1962: 246, contra Breckenridge 1968: 81, who believed that the value of the masks as likenesses is ‘negligible’ and the artist/s responsible for the masks had no desire to produce a realistic resemblance. 235 Tsountas and Manatt 1897: 99. 236 Vermeule 1979:45, cf. Parker Pearson in his observations regarding funerary dress, ‘It is in those final moments that the living’s memories of the dead person are congealed’ (Parker Pearson 1999: 9), that is, when the body was displayed prior to the funeral, as of course, the masks would not have been visible following deposition of the body. It is even possible that the masks may be associated with the change in physical state from the living to the dead, either preserving his appearance in life, or even depicting the deceased in his new physical appearance, cf. the suggestion made by Osborne that the terracotta masks from the sanctuary of Artemis Orthia may have been associated with ceremonies involved in the transfer from one age group to another, emphasising a change in physical appearance (Osborne 1996: 182). In the case of the masks from Mycenae, however, it appears extremely hazardous to speculate on possible beliefs regarding the after-life in the absence of other evidence. 231

Figure 7: Ivory “warrior head”, Chamber Tomb 27, Mycenae. NMA 2468.Height: 8.2 cm. Image reproduced with permission of the National Archaeological Museum, Athens.

“Warrior head” is the name given to small heads, carved in relief, overwhelmingly in profile, made of hippopotamus ivory, in the form of a warrior wearing a boar’s tusk helmet, probably used for the decoration of furniture.238 Examples have been found on the Greek mainland, Crete and Cyprus.239 Although the facial features of the “warriors” exhibit great variation, the basic form of the heads is alike; only the head is shown, the hair is rendered in the same way, and the man is 237

Gallou 2005: 21-4. Krzyskowska 1991: 109. Despite the conventional name for these pieces, such representations need not necessarily represent warriors, and the individuals shown could equally be interpreted as hunters (Morris 1990: 151). 239 Krzyskowska 1991: 118-9. 238

29

GEORGINA MUSKETT

Figure 8: Faience juglet, Grave III, Grave Circle A, Mycenae. NMA 123-4. Height (total): 3.3cm. Image reproduced with permission of the National Archaeological Museum, Athens.

always shown wearing a boar’s tusk helmet without a plume.240

two separate people are shown, although differences in the type of helmet worn, clearly visible despite the small size of the vessel, may favour the latter view. The features of the better preserved head are fairly distinctive in nature, with a heavy brow, and prominent nose, possibly indicating the emphasis or exaggeration which, as discussed above, may signify the identification of an individual. Representations of profile faces on the mainland are few in number at this time, and without suitable comparisons, it would be hazardous to speculate whether these facial characteristics were typical of images from this period, or were to indicate that a particular individual was depicted. This vessel is so unusual that it is possibly an individual commission, and, if so, the conclusion that it was intended to be a portrait, in some sense, of either one or two individuals seems plausible. An alternative reason for the commissioning of the faience jug or, indeed, the ivory “warrior heads”, may not have been to memorialise the features of the owner, but rather to provide a more generic representation of a warrior, with the usual attribute of an elaborate helmet. The association of a warrior representation on the item may, indeed, have served to indicate the warlike qualities of the owner of the artefact, or the deceased whose burial the artefact accompanied.

Even if specially made for a particular individual,241 it would be difficult to perceive the heads as being portraits of the patron concerned242 and their decorative function of is emphasised by their use as furniture inlays.243 Human heads appear on the spout of a small, fragmentary jug from Grave III in Grave Circle A at Mycenae, made from brown-green faience. It has relief decoration on each side of the spout in the form of the head of a man, carrying a body shield and wearing a helmet with a crest in the form of four horns (Figure 8).244 Due to the nature of the subject, Foster suggested that this piece was especially commissioned by a Mycenaean patron, a ‘specific Shaft Grave prince, possibly a relative of one of the women buried in Grave III’,245 with the faces being portraits of one or two individuals. Unfortunately, the features of one of the warriors are so damaged that it is impossible to determine whether one or 240

Krzyskowska 1991: 117. Krzyskowska 1991: 109, 117. 242 Although note the 14 small heads made from ivory from Vergina, two of which are interpreted by the excavator as identified with historical figures, namely Alexander the Great, and his father, Phillip (Andronikos 1984: 76-86). 243 e.g. decorating a footstool from Archanes in Crete. The original arrangements of the ivories is shown in Poursat (1977a: pl. VII, 3) and Sakellarakis and Sapouna-Sakellaraki (1997: 721-9). 244 Karo 1930-3: 60-1, nos. 123-4, pls. 23-4, fig. 16. 245 Foster 1981: 10. 241

A further example of a depiction of a human face from the Grave Circles at Mycenae is on a seal made of amethyst from Grave Γ (Figure 9),246 which shows a man in profile with an upwardly tilted nose, full lips and long, thick hair and beard. Although the method of rendering the features may, on a superficial level, appear to be selective exaggerations akin to caricature, these characteristics are also seen, either together or singly, on 246

30

CMS I, 5.

MYCENAEAN ART: A PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH if in death, and there is a definite sense of an individual in the long face, pointed chin, high, rounded cheeks and straight nose. The small size of the item makes it highly unlikely, however, that such details would have been visible to mourners at the prothesis, and thus associated with the deceased. Nevertheless, these facial characteristics appear emphasised, and it is tempting to speculate that by producing an image of a face which was distinctive by stressing particular features, the engraver was creating an image which would facilitate recognition of the face, using the principles of caricature. The unique nature of the seal suggests a particular commission, which could indicate that it was a representation of a specific individual, although not necessarily the deceased.

a series of seals and sealings from Crete, usefully summarised by Betts.247

Images of the human face in Late Bronze Age Greece were not, of course, restricted to funerary contexts. In particular, representations of processions of human figures are found in both domestic, cult and funerary contexts in Late Bronze Age Greece, and appear on a variety of media – glyptic, ceramics and, most characteristically, in wall painting.250 The most typical form of depiction of processions, conventionally referred to as “procession frescos”251 involved solely female participants, whose characteristic mode of dress is a short-sleeved bodice, able to be worn displaying the breasts, and ankle-length flounced skirt. This form of dress is characteristic of earlier representations of women from Crete, and thus is conventionally referred to as “Minoan-style”. The costumes are essentially similar in design, albeit differing in terms of decorative detail and colour. Equally, the participants in processions are depicted as being so similar that there is a strong possibility that it was not considered necessary for individuals to be identified. Moreover, in representations of other types of procession, even when someone possessed physical characteristics which differentiated him from his companions, such as a black-skinned man in a procession from the palace at Pylos,252 his features are rendered in a remarkably similar way to those of his companions. However, the surviving fragments of wall paintings occasionally hint at the depiction of an individual, such the woman conventionally known as the “Mykenaia”, on a large fresco fragment from Mycenae,253 who is shown with almond eyes and a double chin. Although it is tempting, perhaps, to see a suggestion of caricature, and thus an aid to recognition, in this depiction, the female known as the “White Goddess”, from Pylos,254 is also shown with a double chin. Furthermore, consideration of other wall painting fragments indicate that the “Mykenaia” was herself walking in procession, making the offering of a

Figure 9: Seal made from amethyst, from Grave Gamma, Grave Circle B, Mycenae. NMA8708. Diameter: 9.4 - 9.8mm. Image reproduced with permission of the National Archaeological Museum, Athens.

Furthermore, it is by no means certain that the seal should be associated with the male burial whose offerings included the electrum mask discussed above, and it may have accompanied the female burial in the grave; as Dickinson observed,248 seals are more frequently associated with female burials. Therefore, rather than being a portrait, as may have been the case if the man depicted on the seal and buried with the mask were the same person, the representation on the seal would appear to be a genre work; that is, the artist’s intention was not to show a specific individual. A most unusual image is the depiction of the frontal face of a man on a sealstone made of carnelian, from the MME tholos at Nichoria, dating to LHIIIA2-LHIIIB2.249 The interpretation of this item as an image of the deceased appears less likely than the possibility that it was incorporated into the assemblage of burial offerings as a personal possession of the deceased, coveted because of the skill involved in its execution. Considering the small size of the sealstone, which has a diameter of 1.7 centimetres, the face is very distinctive. Furthermore, the method of rendering the features may indicate that it was intended to be viewed in the original rather than in terms of the sealing it would have made. The eyes are closed, as

250

The directional movement apparent in processions in Mycenaean art is discussed in Chapter 4. 251 Immerwahr 1990: 114-8. 252 Lang 1969: nos. 54-9 H nws, pls.41-7, 117, 129-30, D. 253 Kritseli-Providi 1982: pp. 37-40, no.B-1, colour pl. Γ, pls.4, 5. 254 Lang 1969: no.49 H nws, pls.33, 116, 127, D.

247

Betts 1981: 2-8. Dickinson 1977: 45. 249 CMS V, 431. 248

31

GEORGINA MUSKETT necklace,255 and thus unlikely to have been intended as an individual portrait. It is perhaps more reasonable to conclude that the double chin is to be interpreted as a stylistic trait.256

Identifiable depictions of any wanax are, however, even more elusive. I agree with Blegen and Rawson262 and Kilian263 that a plausible candidate is the figure on one of the fresco fragments from Room 5 at Pylos,264 restored leading a procession of figures,265 and shown on a larger scale to his companions, possibly indicating his greater status. In addition, the form of his costume is distinctive, and his arm positions suggest he is not carrying an offering. The nature and preservation of the face of this figure does not, however, suggest a portrait.

The general absence of images from this period which depict a potentially nameable individual, found in both funerary and settlement contexts, is consistent with the nature of Mycenaean art as generic rather than commemorative or narrative. This is exemplified by the fact that the evidence from the Greek mainland from the start of Late Bronze Age onwards has not suggested the ready visual identification of a single individual as ruler, a marked contrast to the situation in the Egyptian and Hittite empires, and in the kingdoms of the Levant during this period. The issue is also complicated by the uncertainty regarding the social structure on the Greek mainland in the Late Bronze Age. The information regarding the divisions in society obtained from Linear B evidence,257 is inevitably limited in nature, and biased both chronologically and geographically. It is extremely hazardous to assume that the social structure evident at Pylos, where the majority of Linear B documents with references to social structure were found, was the same throughout the Greek mainland. Furthermore, as the documents were seemingly not intended as a permanent archive, and were preserved as a result of the fire which destroyed the Mycenaean palace at the site, they apply only to the period immediately prior to the destruction, and the information they provide cannot be applied to the Early Mycenaean period. However, Linear B evidence suggests that, at least towards the end of the Mycenaean period, the individual of highest rank was the wanax, a term usually interpreted as “king” or “ruler”,258 although there is emphasis on ceremonial and administrative matters in the Linear B documents, and there are no surviving references to involvement in legal or diplomatic matters,259 with minimal suggestions of military interests.260 Documentary evidence of the wanax as an individual is slight, although it is generally believed that one wanax is referred to by name, e-ke-ra2-wo.261

Although I believe it is justified to attempt to identify representations of the wanax at Pylos, it may be safer to look merely for images of leaders, or even exceptional individuals, at other sites, and in other periods. Candidates for identification as individuals in this category must, in my opinion, be portrayed in a manner which singles them out from the norm. It would be insufficient for a leader to be presented merely as a warrior and/or hunter; from the end of the Middle Bronze Age onwards, the presentation of all elite males laid emphasis on their prowess as warriors or hunters, in both life and death, although it should be noted that, in LHIIIA-B at least, some men achieved their status via holding senior positions in cult activity. A leader would have to be marked out by special attributes in some aspect of their presentation in death. Good candidates in this respect are, inter alia, the individuals buried in the “warrior grave” at Kolonna on Aegina,266 in the tholos tombs at Dendra,267 Tholos 2 at Routsi268 and Vapheio,269 and those buried in the Grave Circles at Mycenae, whose grave assemblages included a mask made of precious metal, discussed above. However, with the possible exceptions of these masks, there is an absence of images in the grave assemblages which could be plausibly associated with portraits of any of these individuals. Although a leader is plausibly shown on large pottery vessels known as the ‘Mycenae Parasol Krater’270and the more complete ‘Tiryns Parasol Krater’,271 the artistic style of rendering the human figures on these vessels272 means that the facial features are rendered in a stylised manner, and it is inappropriate to attempt to identify portraits. However, irrespective of the ability of the modern viewer to identify a specific ruler, the presence of individual rulers can be detected, albeit indirectly. The changes in the decorative schemes at the Mycenaean palace sites, manifest in the fragments of wall paintings

255

Jones 2003; my thanks to Dr. Jones for drawing my attention to her paper. Cf. the observations of Immerwahr (1990: 166) that the ‘Mykenaia’ may be the best preserved of a series of women in procession, carrying offerings, in her case a necklace. 256 Cf. Morgan (2000: 938), who observes that the double chin occurs on young women as well as older women depicted in the “House of the Ladies” and Xeste 3 at Akrotiri on Thera. 257 Simply and conveniently summarised by Chadwick 1958: 112-7. 258 Note the comments of Darcque (1987: 187-9) regarding the question of whether it is appropriate to use the term “king” in the Mycenaean period. 259 Shelmerdine 1999: 20. 260 Pylos tablets An 724.5-6 and An610-13 refer to fairly large numbers of rowers, and Pylos sealing Wr 1480 refers to javelins or spears. 261 On Pylos tablets Er 880, Un 718.2, An 610.13, An 724.5 and probably also on Un 219.5 (conveniently listed by DegerJalkotzy 1999: 128). Contra the identification of e-ke-ra2-wo as the wanax (Carlier 1998).

262

Blegen and Rawson 1966: 75. Kilian 1988b: 300, n.1. 264 Lang 1969: no. 13 H 5. 265 Although there is no actual evidence which places this places this fragment separate from the majority of his companions, contra the restoration of McCallum (1987: pl. VIIIb). 266 Kilian-Dirlmeier 1997. 267 Persson 1931. 268 Lolos 1987: 208-10. 269 Finds conveniently summarised by Vermeule 1972: 127-30. 270 Crouwel 1991: 13, A5. 271 Sakellarakis 1992: 27, no. 12, with full references. 272 Plausibly by the same hand (Crouwel 1991: 13). 263

32

MYCENAEAN ART: A PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH from earlier decorative schemes, removed from their original position and deposited outside the buildings, and the use of scenes removed from walls incorporated as fill under floors and within walls, could be not merely the result of redecoration for aesthetic reasons, but could be due to changes in the priorities of the ruling elite, or even actual changes in ruler, possibly with traces of predecessors deliberately removed. Consideration of the surviving evidence from Late Bronze Age Greece suggests that although the majority of depictions of the human face at this time do not appear to have been representations of individuals and may be genre works rather than portraits, this is not to say that portraiture was totally absent from Late Bronze Age Greece. Indeed, the masks from the later burials in the Grave Circles at Mycenae and faces on a faience jug from the same site may have been portraits, an opinion supported by psychological experiments which indicate that recognition of an individual is aided when facial features are exaggerated. The rarity of images from Late Bronze Age Greece which can be considered as portraits is reflected in the overall nature of Mycenaean art, reinforcing the view that it was essentially generic rather than commemorative or narrative. Chapter 4 discusses the possible influence of psychological factors in the composition of Mycenaean art by the consideration of partiality for the depiction of particular postures on sealstones and preferences for directional movement in the scenes of procession found in art of this period.

33

GEORGINA MUSKETT

Chapter 4 Composition in Mycenaean Art This chapter considers psychological factors which may have influenced the composition of scenes in Mycenaean art, in particular, the preferences for postures and for directional movement. Two case studies are included; discussion of whether images on sealstones showing armed combat may be partly motivated by psychological reasons or whether any compositional factors are predominant, and consideration of whether the preference for lateral movement observed in humans is reflected in the scenes of procession found during this period.

of signals, some of which are communicated unconsciously.275 The ability to understand the various movements, however slight, of the human body and face was essential to human survival in the past, in relation to warfare and hunting, and continues to be important today in respect of social behaviour. Accordingly, Latto speculates that the evolution of the human brain has resulted in a category of cells which have developed not only specifically to analyse the human body, but also suggests there may be certain facial expressions and body postures which are especially effective in eliciting neural responses, and, indeed, there are particular neural mechanisms which respond to such forms. These specialized neural mechanisms have evolved by monitoring the hand movements and body postures of others because they were important in fighting and hunting. Artists are, therefore, portraying types of scenes which are important to the viewer, and elicit responses, whilst at the same time, due to evolution, the viewer has the appropriate neural mechanisms which react to such responses. One example of this type of pose would be the “aggressor or the vanquished”,276 seen in the depictions of agonistic conflict involving two warriors in single combat.

Images of agonistic conflict – a psychological explanation? The first case study considers preferences for the depiction of particular postures in Mycenaean art, with a focus on sealstones dating from the Early Mycenaean period showing single armed combat. Although the limited size of the sealstones, only a couple of centimetres in diameter or length, would make them ostensibly unsuitable media for the depiction of very complex compositions, their preservation due to their inclusion as an element of grave assemblages has ensured a generally good state of preservation. A study of these scenes suggests an emphasis on the presentation of the victor in a heroic light, with the climax of single combat one warrior killing his opponent – although it is unclear whether the images of single combat were intended to be interpreted as individual depictions of duels or as elements of more general battle scenes. There is no evidence for the use of sealstones in an administrative sense on the mainland in the Early Mycenaean period (late MH – LHIIB) and the use of seals and rings may, therefore, be considered as part of the presentation of the deceased, and his or her kinship group, their iconography singling out their owners as being members of a society which valued individual bravery and fighting skills.273 It should be noted that the designs should not be interpreted as showing the death of the owner of the seal; rather, the owner, or his or her family, would have wished to be associated with the victor.

Figure 10: Gold seal, from Grave III, Grave Circle A, Mycenae. NMA35. H:1.2cm. W.1.8. After CMS I,11

There may be a case that scenes of single combat could have a psychological basis, if one accepts the hypothesis that this type of composition is an example of the type of image described by Latto as an “aesthetic primitive”,274 discussed in Chapter 2, although in this case dependent on the cultural experiences of the viewer. The way humans understand other humans depends on the analysis

A sealstone found in Shaft Grave III at Mycenae is engraved with the motif of two warriors engaged in single combat ,277 and a gold ring, from Shaft Grave IV, whose bezel is engraved with a scene popularly known as the “Battle in the Glen”, shows four warriors, two central 275

Barnett 1975: 132. Latto 1995: 86. 277 CMS I, 12.

273

276

Dickinson 1977: 78; Crowley 1995: 488. 274 Latto 1995: 67-8.

34

MYCENAEAN ART: A PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH from Athens, dated to LHII-III on the grounds of style.283 The latter shows a duel, where, although both combatants remain standing, one of the warriors is pushing the head of his opponent, suggesting the former will be victorious.

figures engaged in single combat, with a third striking the helmet of the first warrior with his spear, and a fourth sitting on the ground, apparently defeated.278 Another scene of agonistic combat appears on a gold seal279 from Shaft Grave III.280

The composition appears somewhat dissimilar, however, in the case of the surviving man-animal combats from LHII-III. For example, in the case of a sealstone from Tholos Tomb IV at Pylos showing a man-lion combat,284 the dynamics of the composition are different. In this case, the engraver has shown the dominant hunter, who has already succeeded in stabbing the lion several times, and is about to administer the coup de grâce, with bent knees, seizing the animal’s jaw. The head of the severely wounded lion is, accordingly, at a slightly higher level than the man. In this instance, however, the “aggressor” and “vanquished” are clearly defined. By contrast, the composition of a sealstone from Tholos V at Pylos285 seems dictated primarily by the lentoid shape of the seal. The body of the prey – in this case, a boar – is contorted above the hunter and his dog. This accordingly suggests that although the “aggressor or the vanquished” pose may be partly motivated by psychological reasons, this pose is not universal in Early Mycenaean Greece. It seems apparent, therefore, that, on occasion, other compositional factors are predominant.

Figure 11: Gold seal, from Grave III, Grave Circle A, Mycenae. NMA33.H.1.5cm. W.2.5cm. After Demakopoulou (ed.) 1990, no.219

Although in all instances, the engraver has chosen to show the moment at which one warrior is seemingly killing his opponent, by piercing his throat with his weapon, the gruesome details of the killing, including mutilation of the opponent, were apparently not routinely commissioned. Despite the fact that small sealstones do not appear particularly suitable media to show the horrific details of the blood which would certainly have gushed from such fatal wounds, this would not have been beyond the expertise of the engravers, who skilfully rendered even small details of the weaponry, in particular the elaborate helmet and shield of the vanquished warrior on this latter sealstone. Accordingly, in addition to extolling the fighting prowess of the victor, the defeated opponent is also accorded respect281. This visual message is also implicit in the designs on sealstones engraved with scenes of agonistic conflict dating from slightly later in the Early Mycenaean period, such as a sealstone from Tholos Tomb 1 at Gouvalari in Messenia,282 and a seal said to be

Representations of processions in Mycenaean Greece: their form and function The second case study considers the effects on artistic composition which psychological research suggests are the effect of the asymmetry present in the physiological structure of the human brain, and which were briefly reviewed in Chapter 1. This case study discusses whether this phenomenon is apparent in Mycenaean artistic compositions, with particular emphasis on one of the most characteristic forms of Mycenaean images, the procession. For the purposes of this discussion, I shall use an amended version of the definition used by Peterson;286 that is, the term “procession” is interpreted as signifying a representation of two or more figures who move towards an unspecified goal, frequently carrying an object or objects. This does not suggest that such activities invariably involved a single file of participants. The lack of the use of perspective in Mycenaean art made it difficult to render a group of participants, and it may be the case that the easiest method of showing a group of people making offerings was to show them in a continuous line. In addition, as Cavanagh and Mee observe, the “processions” shown on the larnakes from Tanagra may not necessarily be such; the artistic conventions of depicting human figures in full or partial

278

CMS I, 16; Cain, 1997: 135-7. Also note Morgan’s observation that the fall of the physically defeated to the ground was a motif used in art throughout the ancient world as signalling dominance over the enemy (Morgan 2000: 935). 279 The gold cushion-shaped seals from Shaft Grave III at Mycenae are called “spacers” by Kilian-Dirlmeier (1990: 158), in view of their original use as the focal point of a necklace (Dickinson 1977: 49, 78). However, the “talismanic” sealstones found among the offerings in Shaft Graves Graves M and O (CMS I, 6 and 7 respectively) were apparently also part of necklaces, and I shall use the term “seal” when discussing the cushion-shaped seals from Grave III. 280 CMS I, 11. 281 This topic is explored further in Muskett forthcoming (a). 282 CMS, V, 643.

283

Berlin FG6. Zwierlein-Diehl 1969: 31, No. 25, Tafel 7, 25. CMS I, 290. 285 CMS I, 294. 286 Peterson 1981: 1. 284

35

GEORGINA MUSKETT processions including male participants.292 Processions were also frequently shown in glyptic art,293 although rarely on pottery.294.

profile may suggest motion when, in fact, motion is not intended.287 Furthermore, as German observes, there are close similarities between images of processions and dancing, and the contemporary viewer possibly distinguished no visual differences. 288

The act of procession clearly played a major part in ritual in Mycenaean Greece, both cultic and funerary, suggested primarily by representations in a variety of media.295 The ritual behaviour shown by this type of representation can also be recognised via the formality of the images, the repetition of the figures, and the determined manner in which the figures appear to be shown, which are all in accordance with Renfrew’s methods of recognising ritual behaviour.296 Cameron’s interpretation, based on the evidence from Knossos, was that representations of processions served as visual markers, directing the viewer from less important to the more significant rooms of the palace. At this point there was a change of scale from smaller to larger figures.297 This was not necessarily the case on the mainland, where evidence from Pylos suggests that the small scale of the male figures in procession in Room 5 (the “Vestibule”)298 was continued in the area south-west of the doorway of Room 6, (the “Throne Room”), where the figures of two men, processing right,299 were shown on the same scale as the larger figures in Room 5.

The most typical form of procession was depicted on the so-called ‘procession frescos’ incorporated into the decorative systems of Mycenaean palaces and other contexts.289 Although the poor state of preservation and fragmentary nature of the wall paintings means that entire works can rarely be reconstructed, in many cases there are sufficient remains to ascertain the general nature of the composition. The procession frescos, which are found throughout the LHIIIA-B period, show female participants, whose characteristic mode of dress is Minoan-style costume.290 Surviving wall paintings suggest that a range of offerings were carried, although the recipient of the offerings is not at all apparent. Wall paintings showing male processional figures have been found only at the palace at Pylos, the most complete example being the procession of male offering bearers in Room 5 (the “Vestibule”),291 which also apparently included at least one female wearing a flounced skirt. In addition, the fresco dump on the northwest slope at Pylos also produced evidence suggesting two further

Hägg’s opinion is slightly different, suggesting that the procession frescoes may have served two functions; that is, directing the participants involved in the actual procession, as well as perpetuating the ritual of the procession when it was not actually taking place.300 For example, he would interpret the procession in Room 5 at Pylos301 as both maintaining a ritual as well as possibly acting as a visual marker for the participants, directing them to Room 6.302

287

Cavanagh and Mee 1995: 50. German 2005: 57-8. 289 Thebes (Immerwahr 1990: Th No.1, with earlier bibliography pl.XXI.; Kontorli-Papadopoulou 1996: 71-2, no. 106, pl. 129; Dakouri-Hild 2001; Later procession: ADelt 37 B1 (1982): 165; AR 1990-91: 34). Mycenae: the “Ramp House deposit” (Immerwahr 1990: My.No.1c, with earlier bibliography. Note that Immerwahr’s reference to Reusch 1953: fig.6 is incorrect. My inspection of these fragments confirm that the pieces illustrated by Reusch in this instance clearly correspond to Lamb 1921-3: pl. XXVIII, b, h, i and k, which are fragments found by Tsountas in the so-called “Pithos Area” outside the West Portal, and should not be included in Immerwahr’s catalogue entry for the “Ramp House Deposit”), the “Pithos Area, Mycenae (Lamb 1921-3: 166-8, pl. XXVIII; Reusch 1953: fig. 6); three examples from the ‘South-West building’ of the Cult Centre: 1. Immerwahr 1990: My.No.4, with previous bibliography; 2. Immerwahr 1990: My.No.3, with previous bibliography , pl.XX; Kontorli-Papadopoulou 1996: 61, no.70, pl.92; Jones 2003; 3. Immerwahr 1990: no. My.No.5, with previous bibliography; Kontorli-Papadopoulou 1996, 62: no.72. Also note a small quantity of fragments from a procession fresco found in the fill of Rooms XI and 18 of the Temple Complex, although it is plausible that they may have originated higher up the citadel rather than their findspot (Moore and Taylour 1999: 10, 23; Mycenae Archive x129). Pylos (Lang 1969: nos. 51 H nws, pls.34-8, E, O). Tiryns (From the west slope epichosis [Rodenwaldt 1912a: nos. 71-111, figs. 27-34, 37, pls. VIII-X; Boulotis 1979]; from the “Inner Forecourt” [Rodenwaldt 1912a: 18, no.23, pl.II,10]). Possibly at Argos (BCH 1977: 664; AR 1978-9: 13) and Gla (AR 1984-5: 3; Iakovidis 1998: 292, fig.10). 290 The question of whether this type of dress was actually worn on the Greek mainland, or was purely an iconographic convention, is discussed in Chapter 5. 291 Lang 1969: 5-15 H 5; Immerwahr 1990: Py. No. 8. 288

MOVEMENT IN PROCESSION FRESCOS This section will consider two aspects of movement in procession frescoes. First, the possible unifying role of the coordinated rhythmic movement of processions, and second, whether the preferences for lateral movement 292

Lang 1969: 60 H nws (procession associated with the “Cupbearer”) and 54-59 H nws. 293 E.g. CMS I, 17, 42, 86, 108, 132, 162, 170, 179, 191, 285, 313, 361. 294 Exceptions include examples from Tiryns (Vermeule and Karageorghis 1982: no. IX.15; Güntner 2000: Motiv Mensch 18, 33-4, pl. 12,7). 295 Although not a comprehensive catalogue of processions in Mycenaean art, German’s discussion of images depicting dancing and procession (German 2005: 63-8) is a useful summary. 296 Renfrew 1985: 14. 297 Cameron 1970: 165. 298 Lang 1969: 5-15 H 5; Immerwahr 1990: Py. No. 8. 299 Lang 1969: 45 H 6. 300 Hägg 1985: 211. 301 Lang 1969: 5-15 H 5; Immerwahr 1990: Py. No. 8. 302 Hägg 1985: 216.

36

MYCENAEAN ART: A PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH observed in humans is reflected in the scenes of procession found during this period.

shortcomings concerned with lack of control of exposure time and inadequate definition of the stimulus.306

McNeill has suggested that a factor in the bonding of human groups has been coordinated rhythmic movement. Not only more energetic forms of rhythmic movement, such as dancing and dance-like behaviour, but also more stately movement, such as walking in procession, may be sufficient to gain an emotional response in humans. Indeed, it is possible that the act of walking in procession served as a method of maintaining social bonds in the community, additionally serving to confirm authority; this would be the case not merely in cult, but also in funerary contexts.303

A more recent project involved both asymmetric content and asymmetric motion; that is, left-to-right and right-toleft. Although all the subjects were students at universities in the USA, the researchers noted that the results appeared unaffected by the western reading method of scanning from left to right. The conclusion of this research was that right-handed subjects preferred scenes with right-based content and right-to-left movement. Results obtained using left-handed subjects, who, unlike right-handed individuals do not have a consistent pattern of dominance of one hemisphere of the brain, showed their aesthetic preferences were not influenced by asymmetries in the composition of images, which indicated that the organisation of the brain is responsible for aesthetic judgements. The team’s findings were broadly consistent with earlier research, with the exception of the preference for movement from right to left. Accordingly, it can be concluded that right to left movement is preferred only in images with a significant asymmetry in content.307

In addition, repetition seems to be a valuable part of the ritual associated with cult activity,304 and it seems that the repeated representation of figures which are very similar in terms of size, pose, costume and hairstyle emphasises the role of such processions in Mycenaean cult. Asymmetry in the brain: its effects on artistic composition As noted in Chapter 1, the brain is divided into two hemispheres which are anatomically similar but they have different functions. The asymmetry in the human brain appears to influence aesthetic preference, not merely in terms of asymmetry in the content of an image, but also by asymmetry in other aspects of composition.

Possibly more relevant to the study of procession frescoes was a project conducted by Freimuth and Wapner, whose findings, however, differed from those of Banich and her team. They found that, when exposed to an image for five seconds, the subjects selected original and reversed views with a left-to-right sequence of figures significantly more often than views with a right-to-left sequence. When an exposure time of twenty seconds was used, original views were selected more frequently than reversed views, and views with a left-to-right sequence were selected more often than views with a right-to-left sequence. In addition, only paintings showing a left-to-right sequence in the original view were selected as presenting a balanced view. When asked to select which view of the paintings was more dynamic and full of life, only reversed views with a left-to-right sequence were selected to any significant degree. The researchers observed that the consistency of the selection of paintings with left-toright rather than right-to-left sequence fits in with other findings and adds weight to a belief in perceptual asymmetry. If it is assumed that this behaviour is a result of neural mechanisms, it is possible that preferences for artistic composition may be linked to patterns of eye movement. Freimuth and Wapner’s study found that lateral directional properties influence aesthetic preferences. Asymmetrical factors are predominant in perception and aesthetic preferences made after short exposure to the composition, although such asymmetrical factors appear to influence preferences only for compositions with dominant directional factors, that is left-to-right or right-to-left movement, measured by lateral organisation. However, when viewers are exposed to the image for longer periods, cognitive factors such as

It is clear that the objective of the organisation of the elements in an artistic composition is to stimulate the viewer, and one of these elements is lateral organisation. Lateral organisation is both the location and situation of the main figure in an artistic composition to the right or the left, and the sequence of figures from either left-toright or right-to-left, in accordance with the suggested movement or action.305 However, one should question whether the preference for a stimulus with a left-to-right sequence is biologically based, or a culturally determined reflection of reading patterns. If the asymmetry were based on lateralization of hemispheric functions in the human brain, whether the viewer is right- or left-handed would plausibly be linked to preferences in sequences. Studies undertaken in the 1940s and 1950s concluded that when viewers were presented with paintings shown in the way created by the artist, followed by the same paintings in a mirror image, the viewers preferred the original views. It was further noted that the original, artist-created work tended to have its elements presented in a left-toright direction. However, there were methodological

303

McNeill 1995: 57-67; cf. comments by Cavanagh and Mee (1998: 107) regarding funerary processions and rituals. 304 Dissanayake 1988: 87; Goodison and Morris 1998: 123. 305 Freimuth and Wapner 1979: 211.

306 307

37

Reported by Freimuth and Wapner 1979: 211-2 Banich et al 1989: 194.

GEORGINA MUSKETT In addition, Woodford and Loudon have considered the significance of movement to the right or left in respect of representations in black figure vase painting of Ajax carrying the body of Achilles and of Aeneas carrying Anchises,314 as well as reviewing previous scholarship in this area. They note that movement to the right appears to be the customary direction for movement in black figure vase painting, and add that this characteristic is shared not only by representations of processions, but also single figures and groups. However, representations of the theme of Ajax carrying the body of Achilles appear to reverse this trend, which they explain as a consequence of the introduction of a new motif of a warrior carrying another armed warrior, which was placed by the artists to show the shield of Ajax, decorated with the image of Athena Promachos, to its best advantage.315

conceptual and symbolic analyses became increasingly important.308 The two studies appear to have different conclusions; that is, Banich, Heller and Levy’s results suggested a preference for right-to-left motion whereas Freimuth and Wapner found that preferred slides had relative motion from left-to-right. However, Banich, Heller and Levy observed that the slides used by Freimuth and Wapner lacked significant asymmetry of content,309 and it is possible, therefore, that right-to-left motion is preferred only when there is substantial asymmetry in a composition. As noted in Chapter 1, in a society such as Mycenaean Greece, concepts such as reading habits are not truly relevant, although it may be worthwhile noting a further study, which used both French subjects, who were left-toright readers, and Israeli subjects, who were right-to-left readers. In this case, the team used pairs of mirrorimages, and found that reading methods had a significant effect on aesthetic preference, and left-to-right readers preferred images with left-to-right movement, whereas right-to-left readers preferred images with right-to-left movement.310 Although it worth observing that Linear B is read left to right, in accordance with modern Western reading habits I will concentrate on experiments with a focus on the symmetry of the content of artistic compositions.

This case study considers artefacts which show not only a row of figures, but also seemingly indicate movement. A row of figures which is clearly static, such as the women in a “loggia”316 (Figure 12) or a larnax from Tomb 6 at Tanagra, showing three figures framed in windows,317 were not included. The findings are presented in terms of media. Although such an exercise cannot be truly comprehensive, given the incomplete nature of the evidence, I believe the data to be representative. Wall painting The existing fragments of the “Thebes procession fresco”318 suggest that the original composition, on a wall space which would allow up to twelve figures,319 included at least eight women moving left to right,320 but only one surviving figure moving right to left.321 The latter wears a more elaborate necklace and distinctive bodice, which suggests she may have been the object of the procession, although it may be the case that the figures may have been moving in both directions.322 The “White Goddess” from Pylos323 is plausibly the object of a left to right procession, possibly including the “Priestess” 324 and the male figure, conventionally known as the “Cup Bearer”,325 although neither association is

Although I am not aware of these principles having previously been applied to Aegean Bronze Age art, the findings of the research projects discussed above have been applied to European medieval art, in a project which appears to confirm the preferences noted by Freimuth and Wapner for left to right movement. Trevarthen has studied the composition of the thirty-four paintings by Giotto which decorate the Capella di Santa Maria della Carità, also known as the Arena Chapel, in Padova, produced between 1303 and 1305.311 He observed that in thirty-two of the thirty-four paintings,312 the main protagonist is looking forward and/or moving to the right of the picture, with the figures attendant to the main protagonist on the left side of the scene, facing right. In addition, in many of the paintings, characters who are perceived as passive, or receiving, are situated on the right, facing left. However, aggressive or violent actions, which are seen in five of the paintings, are enacted from right to left, with only one exception. Preferences can also be seen in lesser details; all significant gestures are made with the right hand, irrespective of the way a person is facing.313

314

Woodford and Loudon 1980: Appendix II (39-40) includes a review of previous scholarship. 315 Woodford and Loudon 1980: 40. 316 Rodenwaldt 1911, pl.IX.2; Lamb 1919-21: 191-2, pl. VII, 13; Immerwahr 1990: no. My. No. 1. 317 Cavanagh and Mee 1995: no. 32. 318 Reusch 1956. 319 Peterson 1981: 46. 320 (1. Reusch’s Fragment 5; 2. R.’s Frags. 6-8; 3. R’s Frag. 11; 4. R’s Frags. 12-14; 5. R’s Frags. 15-17; 6. R’s Frags. 19-22; 7. R’s Frag. 23; 8. R’s Frag. 26). 321 Reusch’s Frags. 9-10. 322 Peterson 1981: 132-3. 323 Lang 1969:49 H nws. 324 Lang 1969:50 H nws. 325 Lang 1969:60 H nws.

308

Freimuth and Wapner 1979: 215-8. Banich et al. 1989: 193-4. 310 Chokron and de Agostini 2000. 311 Colour views of the interior of the chapel in Guillaud and Guillaud 1987: 10-12. 312 Illustrated in Gnudi n.d. and Guillaud and Guillaud 1987. 313 Trevarthen 1995: 183-6. 309

38

MYCENAEAN ART: A PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH

Figure 12: Fragment of wall painting showing three females seated in what is popularly referred to as a “loggia”. Found below the Ramp House, Mycenae. NMA1015. After Rodenwaldt 1911: pl. IX.2.

certain.326 There are also examples of left to right processions from Mycenae,327 Tiryns328 and, possibly, Gla.329

possibly outside the citadel at Mycenae, the latter an unusual image from the House of the Oil Merchant showing a man, possibly carrying a litter or palanquin,333 although his relationship to any of the other fragments found in this context334 is unknown. Other right to left processions are found at Thebes335 and, possibly, at Argos.336

There are several examples of right to left processions from Pylos,330 although other examples are less certain.331 Right to left processions are found both inside332 and

It is possible that architectural considerations could also have been a major consideration in the disposition of figures. Although the exact context of the wall painting is unknown, the surviving fragments of the procession of life-size females from Tiryns337 indicate that the figures face both right and left, suggesting movement in both directions, possibly with the same goal. Similar in nature is the “procession fresco” from the northwest plaster

326

Other fragments which may have formed elements of left to right processions from Pylos are Lang 1969: 35 H 2 (male figures), L9, Lang 1969: 45 H 6 (male figures, southwest of doorway of Room 6) and Lang 1969: 46 H 1 (male head, lifesize). 327 Procession associated with the “Lady with the Lily” (Kritseli-Providi 1982: Γ-1, 73-6, fig. 8, pls. B and 24; Immerwahr 1990: no. My. No. 5) and a procession of genii (Immerwahr 1990: My. No. 8). 328 Procession of smaller sized females, Inner Forecourt (Rodenwaldt 1912a: 18, no. 23, pl. II, 10). 329 Two female heads, both right profile, Building H (AR 19845: 31, fig. 41). 330 From Room 5 (Lang 1969: 5-15 H 5; Immerwahr 1990: Py. No. 8), male processional figure, Corridor 13, Pylos (Lang 1969: 47 H 13), procession of male figures, (Lang 1969: 54-59 H nws). 331 Female with flowers (Lang 1969: 41 H sw), figure interpreted by Lang as a woman, but I believe it is a “genius” (Lang 1969: 40 H ne), female head (Lang 1969: 52 H nws). 332 Procession associated with figurine offering (Kritseli-Providi 1982: B-2 and 3, 41-4, pl. 6; Immerwahr 1990: no. My No. 4); procession associated with the ‘Mykenaia’ (Kritseli-Providi 1982: B-1: 37-40, pls. Γ.4-5; Immerwahr 1990: no. My. No. 3),

now considered as a participant in a procession (Jones 2003); small scale procession (Lamb 1921-3: 168-9, no. 9, pl. XXVIII, p). 333 Wace 1953: pl. 9a, Crouwel 1981: 53; Immerwahr 1990: 5, 106, 165, My.No.12. Cf. a similar fragment from Tiryns (Rodenwaldt 1912a: no.152, pl. XI: 6). 334 On the same scale: parts of female garments, part of a charging bull, the legs of a man wearing white greaves or gaiters, and decorative fragments (Wace in Bennett 1958: 9; these fragments are, however, not illustrated). 335 Females in funerary procession, Tomb I, Megalo Kastelli, Thebes (ADelt. 27B (1972): 309-312, Pls. 253:b-c, 254, 255). 336 AR 1978-9:13-4, fig. 14. 337 Rodenwaldt 1912a: nos. 71-111, figs. 27-34, 37, pls. VIII-X.

39

GEORGINA MUSKETT girdle and skirt, found in the same context, suggests left to right movement.342 Although it could be argued that representations of movement in wall paintings could be dictated by architectural demands, often impossible to ascertain due to the removal of the paintings from their original location, the same cannot be true in respect of representations of processions on other media. Pottery I do not intend to discuss the procession scenes on chariot kraters, which appear rather formulaic and suggest a stock repertoire rather than being specially commissioned,343 as well as creating a static effect. However, the examples illustrated by Vermeule and Karageorghis344 indicate no single preference for direction of movement. Both of the “parasol kraters” from Mycenae345 and Tiryns,346 which are clearly more individual in terms of composition and execution, show left to right movement, as do the files of warriors shown on the “Warrior Vase” from Mycenae347 and male figures in procession on a rhyton from Tiryns,348 and in hunting scenes, the direction of movement is usually from left to right.349 Left to right movement is not universal on Pictorial Style pottery, however, as can be seen on two examples from Tiryns350 on which the participants clearly move from right to left. Larnakes When processions are shown on the long sides of larnakes from Tanagra, the participants are usually shown moving to the right on one side, and to the left on the other,351 plausibly suggesting the processions should be interpreted as approaching a common goal.352 It is worth noting, however, that the poorly-preserved procession associated with a ship depicted on a larnax from Tomb 46 shows movement from right to left,353 although left to right movement is indicated on an unusual scene on a Figure 13. Reconstructed figure from the ‘Tiryns Procession Fresco’, fragments of which were found in the west slope epichosis at Tiryns. After Rodenwaldt 1912a, plate VIII.

342

Reusch 1956: fig.5. In addition, note fragments from Mycenae of one or more processions (Lamb 1921-3: 166, nos. 6-8, pl. XXVVIII, a-b), suggesting movement in both directions. 343 Crouwel 1981: 139. 344 Vermeule and Karageorghis 1982. 345 Crouwel 1991: A5. 346 Sakellarakis 1992: no.12. 347 Vermeule and Karageorghis 1982: 132-4, 222, no. XI.43; Immerwahr 1990: My. No. 21, pl. 84. 348 Vermeule and Karageorghis 1982: no. IX.15. 349 Vermeule and Karageorghis 1982: 138. 350 Collar necked jar showing a chariot race (Vermeule and Karageorghis 1982: no. XI.19.1) and a krater showing male figures in procession (Güntner 2000: Motiv Mensch 18, 33-4, pl. 12,7). 351 E.g. Cavanagh and Mee 1995: no. 9, Vermeule 1965: 129, no. 3, pls. XXVb, XXVIIa, b. 352 Cf. Vermeule 1965: 129. 353 Clear drawing in Gallou 2005: fig.35.

dump at Pylos.338 The fragments suggest that the original composition consisted of at least six females, including one certain example of a left-facing figure.339 In addition, the slight curvature on a fragment of skirt from the “Ramp House deposit” at Mycenae suggests a seated figure, possibly the object of a right to left procession,340 supported by other fragments indicating female figures moving right to left,341 although another fragment of a

338

Lang 1969: 51-53 H nws. Peterson 1981: 77. 340 Lamb 1919-21: no.9, pl.VIII. 341 Fragments arranged by Reusch 1956: fig.4. 339

40

MYCENAEAN ART: A PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH Hunt Dagger364 has a different scene on each side of the dagger, both with left to right movement.365 However, another example366 shows birds in flight moving left to right towards the point of the dagger and birds flying right to left towards the handle of the dagger on the other side367.

larnax which shows two male figures apparently pursued by a bird354 and the winged figure from the “Ludwig Larnax” and Tomb 3.355 Sealstones Sealstones have been considered in terms of the impression they would have made as this was, presumably, the artist’s original intention. For example, a cylinder seal from Tholos 2, Routsi356 would produce the repeated motif of a male figure and a griffin, proceeding from left to right. Indeed, the majority of the images of processions found in glyptic art show movement from left to right, including examples from Mycenae,357 Tiryns,358 Dendra,359 Pylos360 and elsewhere.361 Right to left movement is seemingly much more unusual.362

Sculpted stelai Although a small sample, the extant examples appear to indicate a preference for left to right movement. Two stelai found above Grave V, Grave Circle A at Mycenae, indicate movement from left to right. Both depict chariots, one attacking a bull,368 the other also showing a lion, possibly in pursuit of a deer.369 Although not indisputably Mycenaean in date, the six ships engraved on two stone blocks from the ‘tholos’ at Dramesi in Boeotia move from left to right.370

Inlaid daggers In the case of inlaid daggers, the extant examples suggest that directional preferences may be dictated by the shape of the artifact. Where movement is implied, the direction is usually towards the point of the dagger. Although two of the daggers have the same design on both sides, accordingly producing left to right and right to left movement on alternative sides of the dagger,363 the ‘Lion

Other media Processions are depicted on the stela found among building material at the entrance of Chamber Tomb 70 at Mycenae.371 The stela, painted in LHIIIC1 was originally unpainted; where the paint has flaked away on the upper register, the original design of circles with spokes, linked by lines can clearly be seen. Two of the processions proceed from left to right: armed soldiers on the middle registers and deer shown on the bottom register. The upper register, which is very fragmentary and in a poor state of preservation, may show a seated woman receiving a procession of one or more men,372 moving from right to left.

354

Presumably from Tanagra (Vermeule 1965: 130-1, no. 5, pl. XXVIII). 355 Vermeule 1979: fig. 23. 356 CMS I, 285. 357 Gold ring from the “Acropolis Treasure”, females processing towards a “seated goddess” (CMS I, 17); gold ring from CT55, females in procession towards a “shrine”(CMS I, 86); gold ring from CT71, females in procession towards a “shrine” (CMS I, 108); sealstone from CT 103, females in procession, possibly including a male figure (CMS I, 132); sealing from House of the Oil Merchant, females in procession (CMS I, 162); sealings from slope above House of the Wine Merchant, males in procession (CMS I, 170; two examples from the same context, made by the same ring). 358 Gold ring from “Tiryns Treasure”; procession of supernatural “demons” towards a “seated goddess” (CMS I, 179). 359 Gold ring from CT10, Dendra; females in procession towards a “shrine” (CMS I, 191). 360 Sealing, Room 105, females in procession towards a “seated goddess” (CMS I, 361). 361 Gold ring, Grave Γ, Mega Monastiraki, females in procession towards an altar (CMS V2, 728). Gold rings from a small shaft parallel to the south wall of Chamber Tomb 7, Aidonia. One showing two females in procession towards a built structure (CMS V, Supp.1B, 113), the other three females in procession towards a built structure (CMS V, Supp.1B, 114). 362 Sealstone from acropolis, Mycenae, schematic males in procession (CMS I, 42); sealing, Room 98, Pylos, females in procession (CMS I, 313); steatite mould, Eleusis, females in procession towards a built structure (CMS V2, 422); sealstone, tholos tomb, Vapheio, females in procession (CMS I, 220). 363 NMA 395 from Grave IV at Mycenae, showing three lions in flying gallop (Xenaki-Sakellariou and Chatziliou 1989: no.2, pl. III) and Patras Musum 52 from Tholos 2 at Pharai, showing dolphins (Xenaki-Sakellariou and Chatziliou 1989: no. 11, pl. VII,2).

Other miscellaneous fragments are equally equivocal. A fragment of a vase from Epidavros, which is made of mottled dark grey and white stone,373 shows eight figures, possibly a file of marching warriors,374 proceeding from left to right. A fragment of a gold vessel from Peristeria

364

NMA 394 from Grave IV at Mycenae (Xenaki-Sakellariou and Chatziliou 1989: no.1, pls.I-II). 365 Xenaki-Sakellariou and Chatziliou 1989: pls.I (Side A) and II (Side B). 366 NMA 6416 from Tomb 3 at Prosymna (Xenaki-Sakellariou and Chatziliou 1989: no.7). 367 The latter side illustrated by Xenaki-Sakellariou and Chatziliou 1989: no.7: pl. IX, 2. 368 Younger 1997: 229-30, No. V, pl. XCIa, with previous bibliography. 369 Younger 1997: 229-30, No. 1, pl. XCa, with previous bibliography. 370 Blegen 1949. 371 Tsountas 1896; Kritseli-Providi 1982: 18-9, 73-7, 111; Vermeule and Karageorghis 1982: 132-4, 222, no. XI.43; Immerwahr 1990: 149-51, My.No.21, pl.84. 372 Vermeule and Karageorghis 1982: 222; Immerwahr 1990: 151. 373 Sakellariou 1971; Vermeule 1972: 103, fig. 20b; Hood 1978: 147; Morgan 1988: 151-2, pls. 193-4; Lang 1999. 374 Crouwel and Morris 1996: 209.

41

GEORGINA MUSKETT shows a procession of three young men and boys, moving from right to left.375

a jug from Tomb 3 at Alyke387 hold a drinking vessel or flower388 in their left hand.

The findings of Trevarthen’s study, together with the observations noted by Woodford and Loudon, outlined above, not only appear to confirm the preferences noted by Freimuth and Wapner for left to right movement, but, when applied to Mycenaean art, would appear to support a preference for a procession to be composed with the figures moving from left to right when not constrained by architectural limitations. It is also worthwhile observing that the evidence of Mycenaean belief systems does not indicate significance of direction of movement in respect of both the journey of the dead to the underworld and the flying movement of figures identified as souls.376 The perceived preference of making gestures with the right hand, noted by Trevarthen,377 is more difficult to discern in Mycenaean art. As Immerwahr observes,378 some Mycenaean wall painters had problems in differentiating right and left hands, especially when rendering figures on a large scale. Even if the detail of thumb position is ignored, the participants in procession frescos are shown carrying either a larger object, such as a box, with both hands or carrying smaller items, such as a jug or flower, in each hand; this could also be true in the case of the fragmentary wall painting showing a woman holding a lily,379 plausibly a participant in a procession, where only one hand is preserved. However, the “Mykenaia”,380 who is depicted with two right hands,381 uses the hand attached to her right arm to carry the offering of a necklace, and a right hand, possibly touching an object, may be associated with the “White Goddess”.382 In addition, figurines are offered using the right hand on wall painting fragments from the Cult Centre at Mycenae383 and from the west slope epichosis at Tiryns.384 By contrast, a left hand from the Thebes Procession fresco holds a flask385and the single figures depicted on a larnax from Tomb 36 at Tanagra386 and on

The focus of Chapter 5 is the interpretation of depictions of male and female clothing in terms of their form and colour.

375

AR 1965-6; Hägg 1982: 32, fig. 11; Hood 1978: 164, 166. Gallou 2005: 61-2. Although the floating figures, identified as souls by Gallou (2005: 38), are moving from right to left, I would suggest that their placement is dictated by the placement of the more important female figure to the left of the composition rather than by a preference for directional movement. 377 Trevarthen 1995: 183-6. 378 Immerwahr 2005: 174. 379 Kritseli-Providi 1982: Γ-1, 73-6, fig. 8, pls. B and 24; Immerwahr 1990: no. My. No. 5. 380 Kritseli-Providi 1982: B-1: 37-40, pls. Γ.4-5; Immerwahr 1990: no. My. No. 3; Jones 2003. 381 Immerwahr 2005: 174. She also observes that hands are sometimes presented from the viewpoint of the painter, not the viewer (Immerwahr 2005: 173). 382 Lang 1969:49 H nws. 383 Kritseli-Providi 1982: B-2 and 3, 41-4, pl. 6; Immerwahr 1990: no. My No. 4. 384 Boulotis 1979: pl.2. 385 Immerwahr 2005: fig.11.15. 386 Immerwahr 1995: fig. 7.5. 376

387

Vermeule and Karageorghis 1982: IX.13. Vermeule and Karageorghis 1982: 92, although note that Gallou (2005: 89) favours the former interpretation, Demakopoulou (1971: 97) the latter. 388

42

MYCENAEAN ART: A PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH

Chapter 5 Colour and Form in Mycenaean Art tones of human flesh, nor subtle gradations of colour.394 If the Mycenaean viewer accepted this clear example of colour coding, surely it is plausible that similar colour coding was employed in other circumstances.

In contrast to the physiological aspects of visual perception which have formed the basis for the case studies in Chapters 2, 3 and 4, this chapter considers the ways in which cognitive psychology may assist in the interpretation of Mycenaean art.

Although it was fairly easy to vary the colours employed in wall painting, either by mixing or overpainting, the surviving examples suggest that Mycenaean artists preferred to use a relatively basic palette.395 The very simple system of colour coding for gender demonstrates this. It did not matter to the viewer whether the skin of the individual depicted was actually red-brown or white: the use of these colours ensured that the viewer would be able to interpret the image.

As observed in Chapter 1, in addition to the activity of groups of brain cells, a viewer’s visual perception is influenced by his or her prior experiences. The use of studies in this area, usually called the cognitive approach, is particularly suited to the interpretation of colour and form in Mycenaean art.389 The findings of the experiments suggest that the recognition of an object is assisted when the viewer’s prior knowledge associates its colour and form. Further, the viewer expects to find particular objects in specific places, and his or her knowledge of the location of such objects and, indeed, of the world in which they live, affects their identification.390

This appears to be confirmed by Treisman’s research, discussed fully in Chapter 1, suggesting that not only does the viewer’s prior knowledge of the colour of certain objects affect their recognition, but that when the colour and form of the item are closely linked, fewer mistakes are made in their identification.396 Consequently, a representation of a figure wearing a garment in a particular colour may well have been interpreted by the viewer as a person associated with a specific activity. This would be the case whether the actual garments were made of vividly-coloured fabric (which may have been difficult to achieve using vegetable dyes) or whether the colours were more subtle. The use of particular colours in wall painting may have been a deliberate attempt to assist the viewer in interpreting the images depicted by the artist.

The case studies in this chapter focus on the depiction of dress in Mycenaean Greece, and whether the colour and form of dress shown in art was an aid to the viewer in identifying the rôle of the person represented. Colour in Mycenaean art The surviving corpus of Late Bronze Age wall paintings from the Greek mainland suggests that Mycenaean artists had access to a relatively wide range of pigments.391 This section392 investigates whether the use of particular colours in Mycenaean wall paintings of male and female dress was part of a system of coding, facilitating the viewer’s understanding of the images.

Even costumes with distinctive forms may still have been colour coded. In the ‘procession frescoes’397 all the participants are depicted wearing a distinctive robe, consisting of a short-sleeved bodice, open to display the breasts, and ankle-length flounced skirt (such as in Figure 11). The costumes are essentially similar in design, differing in terms of decorative detail and in terms of colour. It is particularly noticeable that only two colours, red and blue, are used in the depiction of bodices. It is

The most obvious use of colour in Mycenaean wall painting was to indicate gender, with white or dark redbrown being used to distinguish between females and males.393 The surviving examples suggest that neither were there attempts to render the reality of the actual 389

The physiological process of colour vision was outlined in Chapter 1. 390 Full references in Chapter 1, ns.75-94. 391 For the composition of pigments used in Mycenaean wall painting, see Dandreau 1999; Filippakis et al. 1976; Perdikatsis 1998; Profi et al. 1974; Jones 2005, as well as Heaton 1912 in respect of Tiryns, and Young 1969 in respect of Pylos. 392 This section is based on Muskett 2004. 393 Immerwahr 1990: 53-4; Eaverly 1999, c.f. Damiani Indelicato 1988, Marinatos 1989, and Hitchcock 2000, who urge caution in automatically assuming that white skin in Aegean art consistently indicates a female.

394

In contrast to Egyptian art, where light tan, paler brown or reddish, colours might indicate females, Säflund 1986: 187; Eaverly 2004. 395 Brysbaert 2004. 396 Treisman 1986; 1988. 397 Discussed in Chapter 4. The best preserved examples at Thebes (Reusch 1956, passim), Pylos (Lang 1969: nos. 51 H nws, pls.34-8, E, O), Tiryns (Rodenwaldt 1912a: nos. 71-111, figs. 27-34, 37, pls. VIII-X), and Mycenae (Lamb 1919-21: 1945, nos. 8-10, pl. VIII, 8-10; Reusch 1953: 34-8, figs. 4-5).

43

GEORGINA MUSKETT border.407 The bodice is worn exposing the breasts, in line with the costume worn in procession frescoes. The rest of her costume has not been preserved, and the location and lack of associations of this fragment mean that it would be hazardous to make the assumption that this individual held high status purely from the evidence of the colour of her bodice. However, an association with cult cannot be discounted.

unclear whether variation in the saturation of colours was deliberate, or a result of accidents of preservation. Neither green nor yellow bodices are depicted.398 The absence of depictions of green clothing may reflect the supposition that, during the Late Bronze Age, green was a difficult colour to produce in textiles, achieved by double dyeing.399 By contrast, natural sources of yellow dye would have been plentiful.400 Representational evidence suggests that yellow was a popular colour for the skirts of Minoan-style costumes.401

A further example of a female interpreted as holding high status, possibly even one of a “triad of divinities”408 wears Minoan-style dress in the wall painting from the ‘Room with the Fresco’ at Mycenae.409 Several aspects of her appearance, primarily her attribute of a staff or sceptre and her “commanding gesture” pose410 but also costume and jewellery, suggest that she should be interpreted as a figure of significance. The bodice of her garment is red, however, rather than the yellow which I have suggested indicated the wearer’s special status. It may be the case that the main visual clue to the interpretation of this figure was the attribute of a sceptre or staff rather than the colour of her costume.

The ‘Mykenaia’402 is a notable exception. Associated with a procession,403 she is depicted wearing a yellow bodice and, plausibly, a “flounced kilt over a flounced dress”.404 The wearing of a yellow bodice may be intended to mark her out as an individual of special status. However, the surviving fragments of the Mykenaia’s bodice appear different in form to the type of dress normally represented in the procession frescos, while the less saturated tone of the yellow – possibly the result of post-depositional factors - creates the impression of a more delicate fabric.405

In addition to Minoan-style costume, iconographic evidence suggests that women in Mycenaean Greece also wore a plainer type of garment, resembling a shortsleeved tunic. Representations of this costume are less common, including females apparently driving chariots from Tiryns (Figure 14),411 Mycenae,412 and Orchomenos.413 The costumes from Tiryns are light blue and light red,414 with another in yellow, patterned with small groups of black dots.415 Another female figure, possibly holding a spear416 wears a violet tunic.417 This type of costume in yellow appears on fragments of wall painting from Mycenae, depicting a seated female figure418 holding a figurine.419 In this case, the material is patterned with small groups of red dots and the seams of the garment are rendered in red. It appears, therefore, that tunic-style garments were made in more than one colour. It cannot be determined, however, whether the viewer would have interpreted the wearers of yellow garments as possessing special status, or as members of a particular social group, or whether the choice of colour was for purely aesthetic reasons, to produce a more varied effect.

This example is not unique; both of the ‘Women in a Loggia,’ from Mycenae (Figure 12) wear yellow bodices. As they appear to be watching bull leaping,406 it could be argued that they are associated with cult activities. A fragment from the northwest dump at Pylos also depicts a female wearing a yellow bodice, with an elaborate 398

Several of the female figures depicted in Theran wallpainting are shown wearing garments with yellow bodices (notably a younger woman from the painting on the north wall of Room 3, First Floor, Xeste 3 [Doumas 1992, pls. 122, 123, 124], an older woman from Room 3b, First Floor, Xeste 3 [Doumas 1992, pls. 170-1] and the woman depicted on the east section of the south wall, Room 1, ‘House of the Ladies’ [Doumas 1992, pls. 6, 9, 11] but, it would be unwise to attempt to relate these earlier images from a different region of the Aegean to the later wall paintings found on the Greek mainland. Green was not favoured in Mycenaean wall painting. Only a few examples have survived, mostly notably the ‘Shield Frieze’ at Tiryns (Rodenwaldt 1912a: no.44, pl.V), where details of the band of running spirals are rendered in green, in this instance made by grinding malachite, which resulted in a bright green (Heaton 1912: 216). 399 Barber 1991: 330. 400 Barber 1991: 233. 401 Evident in procession frescoes from Tiryns (Rodenwaldt 1912a: nos.85, 86) and Mycenae (Reusch 1953: fig.5). 402 Kritseli-Providi 1982: 37-40, no.B-1, colour pl. Γ, pls.4, 5. 403 Recent consideration of fragments of wall paintings from the Southwest Building at Mycenae, leads to a new interpretation of the ‘Mykenaia’ as walking in procession and offering a necklace (Jones 2003). 404 Jones 2003. 405 A possible comparison may be the diaphanous shawl worn by one of the females depicted on the north wall of the ‘lustral basin’ in Xeste 3 at Akrotiri (Doumas 1992: pls. 100, 107-8). My thanks to Dr. Eleanor Loughlin for suggesting this association. 406 Shaw 1996: 176-7, 1980, col.pl. B.3.

407

Lang 1969: no. 4Hnw, pls. 2, 121, B. Rehak 1992a: 58. 409 Taylour 1969: 91-7, fig. 2 and pl.Xa. 410 Rehak 1992a: 49. 411 Rodenwaldt 1912a: nos. 113-39. 412 Reusch 1953: fig.1, left. 413 Spyropoulos 1973: fig. 4β. 414 Rodenwaldt 1912a: no.134. 415 Rodenwaldt 1912a: no.135. 416 Rodenwaldt 1912a: no. 157, pl.XIV, 1. 417 Rodenwaldt 1912a: no. 156, pl.XVII. Although they could be from separate figures, the two fragments were associated by Rodenwaldt (1912a: 120). 418 Jones 2003. 419 Kritseli-Providi 1982: 41-3, nos. B-2 and B-3, pl. 6α-β. 408

44

MYCENAEAN ART: A PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH colours would be speculative: it is possible that particular colours were used to indicate the participation of different grades of hunters. The surviving evidence makes it very difficult to reconstruct any system of colour coding used by Mycenaean artists, although it seems plausible that such a system existed. Even though some types of dress are suited to interpretation on the basis of their form,425 as will be discussed further below, this does not discount the possibility that colours could have provided additional information regarding the identity of the wearers. The use of colour appears to conform to the conventional and generic nature of Mycenaean art: seen not only in details,426 but also, possibly, in larger compositions. Although hunting and warfare certainly took place, the activities may have been depicted in a generalised manner: if the hides of animals were rendered in a conventional manner, is it not possible that the costumes and weaponry were depicted in the same way?427 Form in Mycenaean art In the case of male dress,428 surviving representations suggest that form, as much as colour, provided the visual clues to interpreting the image. This can be seen in the contrasting garments worn by the combatants in the battle scene from Room 64 at Pylos.429 The men wearing long robes, in procession in Room 5 at Pylos430 are distinguished not in terms of the basic colour of the robes, which are uniformly white, but according to the decoration, since the cloth is decorated with simple motifs, including crocus,431 rosettes432 and dots.433

Figure 14: Fragments of wall painting from the ‘Tiryns Hunt’, reconstructed to show two females driving a chariot. Found in the west slope epichosis at Tiryns. NMA5878. Image reproduced with permission of the National Archaeological Museum, Athens.

425

The rather uncertain artistic rendering of some of the figures on the larnakes from Tanagra hinders identification of gender on the basis of dress (cf. Cavanagh and Mee 1995: 46). 426 The texture of the coats of animals, rendered by crosses; ‘Deer Frieze’ at Tiryns (Rodenwaldt 1912a: pl. XV) and the conventional manner of representing cut stone; two fragments of a painted dado from Tiryns (Rodenwaldt 1912a, no.32; Demakopoulou 1988: 186, no.158). Furthermore, formulaic characteristics could suggest that certain motifs had a symbolic significance that would have assisted in interpreting scenes. 427 Lang 1969: 226-7. Some of the interpretations are straightforward in nature: on the wall painting in Room 6 at Pylos (Lang 1969: pl.125) the representation of a bull indicates a sacrifice, the lyre-player and banqueters the accompanying rituals, while the large bird may signify a deity (J.B. Carter 1995: 294-6). 428 See Rehak 1996 for discussion of the various types of male dress. 429 Lang 1969: no. 22H64, pls. 16, 117, A, M and no. 25H64, pls. 19, N. 430 Lang 1969: 7-10H5, pls. 7-9, 119, 120. 431 Lang 1969: 7H5. Described as “psi or arrow” decoration by Lang (1969: 66), although the motif most closely resembles examples of crocus on wall paintings from Akrotiri on Thera, especially those on the north and east walls of Room 3a (first floor) of Xeste 3. Detail shown in Doumas 1992: 127. Perhaps the figure was carrying an offering of saffron. 432 Lang 1969: 8H5. 433 Lang 1969: 9-10H5.

Some male figures are shown wearing coloured clothing. The hunting scenes from Tiryns, where fragments of wall paintings from the ‘Old Palace’ include representations of men, carrying spears, wearing short tunic-style garments. In the best-preserved example,420 one of the tunics is coloured greyish-blue and the other is yellow, with an elaborate band of decoration extending across the chest and down the arm. In the ‘Tiryns Boar Hunt’ wall painting, some of the men are depicted wearing short garments,421 the length suggesting they were worn only by men,422 easily recognisable by their form. There are examples in light greyish-blue,423 and yellow.424 As with the tunic-style costumes worn by females, any observations regarding the possible meaning of the 420

Rodenwaldt 1912a: pl.I, 6. Cf similar garments won by male hunters at Pylos (Lang 1969: 16-17H43, 19-20H43). 422 The lower parts of similar garments worn by female charioteers at Tiryns (Rodenwaldt 1912a: nos. 113-39), and Mycenae (Reusch 1953: fig.1, left) are concealed by the chariots making it impossible to ascertain the length of the tunics. 423 Rodenwaldt 1912a: no.151, pl.XI,5; no.153, fig.50. 424 Rodenwaldt 1912a: no.140, pl.XI, 4. 421

45

GEORGINA MUSKETT

Figure 15: Fragments of wall painting from the ‘Tiryns Hunt’, reconstructed to show a male dog handler. Found in the west slope epichosis at Tiryns. NMA5880. Image reproduced with permission of the National Archaeological Museum, Athens.

A lack of parallels, either from this site or elsewhere on the Greek mainland, makes it impossible to draw suitable analogies. However, Linear B tablets Kn Ld571 and Ld871 from Knossos refer to “cloth for e-qe-ta”, or “cloth of e-qe-ta type”; in addition, Kn Ld571 refers to “25 cloaks with white o-nu-ke of cloth for e-qe-ta (or “cloth of e-qe-ta type”)” - the o-nu-ke appears to refer to a type of decoration.434 The cloth of e-qe-ta type with onu-ke may have been similar to the type of clothing represented here, although there is no supporting documentary evidence from Pylos, possibly due to the fragmentary nature of the Linear B tablets referring to textiles.435 The significant factor may be that the cloth is decorated rather than the detail of the design, an argument which could also be applied to the examples of female tunic-style clothing mentioned earlier. It is, indeed, also possible that this could be another instance of the form of garment being more significant than the colour.

The same may be true for the person shown on the procession from Room 5 at Pylos436 who some have identified as a wanax.437 Apart from a slightly more elaborate neckline, rendered in dark brown, this individual’s garment is plain white, with dark brown seams, although distinguished by a distinctive collar. Equally distinctive in terms of form are the long robes with diagonal brown stripes, worn by several individuals depicted in Room 6 at Pylos – the person holding the large lyre,438 the two men seated at a table,439 and by two of the figures from the poorly-preserved procession.440 Similarly, long robes with a diagonal stripe appear on several larnakes from Tanagra441 assisting in the identification of the individuals as males.

436

Lang 1969: no. 13H5. Blegen and Rawson 1966: 75; Kilian 1988b: 300, n.1. 438 Lang 1969: 43H6. The instrument is technically a phorminx; a lyre without a sound box (Younger 1998: 23). 439 Lang 1969: 44H6. 440 Lang 1969: 45H6; the stripes are “lavender and brown” (Lang 1969: 81). 441 e.g. from Tombs 6, 60 and 51 (Cavanagh and Mee 1995: figs. 5, 6 and 8 respectively). 437

434

Nosch 2004. Ventris and Chadwick 1973: 228, 318, nos.214 and 216. References to textile specialists concerned with o-nu-ke in texts from Thebes (Aravantinos 1999: 72). 435

46

MYCENAEAN ART: A PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH length flounced skirt. The findings of experiments regarding the recognition and interpretation of images of objects assists in answering the question of whether it was purely an iconographic convention, or whether it was actually worn, albeit on certain ceremonial occasions.445

The long robe interpreted as indicating that the wearer is an Aegean ‘priest’,442 easily recognised, even on a small scale, exemplifies that certain types of male costume could be easily identified by form alone. In addition, some styles of female clothing can be identified primarily by their form. The form of the heavy robe, worn by women interpreted as possessing high status, is so distinctive that it could certainly be recognised without the use of colour. This can be seen not only in the example from the ‘Room with the Fresco’ at Mycenae,443 where it is painted grey with red, blue and white detail, but equally when it is rendered in a purely linear fashion, on a small object such as a gold ring from Tiryns.444

It appears plausible that knowledge of this form of dress was introduced to the Greek mainland at the start of the Early Mycenaean period. Interaction between mainland Greece and Crete in the Early Mycenaean period is particularly apparent in the arts for the elite where, in general, there was massive Cretan influence shown by the incorporation into burial assemblages of artefacts which may have been direct imports446 or made by non-local craftsmen, or incorporated imported material in their manufacture. However, in many cases, Minoan influence is visible in terms of motifs and themes only rather than exact parallels.447 These artefacts incorporate motifs known from Minoan religious contexts, such as gold plaques in the shape of a built shrine, topped with birds and horns of consecration,448 a female wearing Minoan court costume,449 double axes,450 and “sacral knots”,451 as well as a silver rhyton in the form of a bull’s head.452 The use of such items in burial offerings does not necessarily mean they possessed religious significance on the 445

Various views are expressed by Lee (2000: 21), Peterson (1981: 100), Rehak (1999: 194), Reusch (1956: 58). Jones , “the evidence suggests that besides wearing clothes of indigenous Mycenaean design, women on the Greek mainland also wore costumes of Minoan design for the ceremonial purposes depicted in art” (Dr. B. R. Jones, pers. comm.). 446 As Dickinson comments (1977: 54; 1984: 116), such as the stone vases, some of the large vases made of copper or bronze, especially a cauldron with a Linear A sign (Karo 1930-3: no.604a), and the artefacts made from faience and ostrich egg (Sakellarakis 1990) 447 Dickinson 1984: 116. For example, the two gold plaques in the form of a naked human figure accompanied by birds from Grave III (Karo 1930-3: nos.27 and 28, pl.XXVII); although the birds are a common element in Minoan religious iconography (Rutkowski 1986: 147), the representation of a nude figure is extremely unusual. 448 One in Grave III (Karo 1930-3: no.26, pl.XXVII) and three in Grave IV (Karo 1930-3: nos.242-4, pl.XVIII). 449 Grave III (Karo 1930-3: no.36, pl.XXVII). 450 Grave IV (Karo 1930-3, nos.353-4, 378, pl.XLIV). This motif is also found on ceramics (Grave I; Karo 1930-3: nos.1902 and 195, pl.CLXVII) 451 Grave IV (Karo 1930-3, nos.355 and 357, pl.XLIV). This motif is also represented in faience (Grave IV; Karo 1930-3: nos.553 and 554, pl.CLI; nos.557-9, pl.CLII; nos.569-71, pl.CLI, fig.42). The small number of faience artefacts in the Shaft Graves (summarised in Foster 1981: 9-10) were possibly imported direct from Crete (Dickinson 1977: 54; 1984: 116), contra Foster (1981: 9-11), whose opinion is that despite a lack of archaeological evidence of faience workshops, some of the faience artefacts, such as the rectangular spacer beads found in Graves Ξ and Y (Mylonas 1973: Ξ-241, pl.159α; Y243-5, pl.209β; Y467-8, pl.210α) could have been made on the mainland, contra Graziadio (1991: 424), who suggests the rectangular spacers are from the Near East. 452 Grave IV (Karo 1930-3: no.384, pls.CXIX-CXXI).

Figure 16: Detail of gold ring from Tiryns; after CMS I, 179

The case study in this section discusses another type of high-status dress, the Minoan-style costume depicted as worn by, amongst others, participants in the ‘procession frescoes’ whose composition was considered in Chapter Four. Minoan-style dress in Mycenaean Greece: artistic convention or reality? As previously noted, a typical mode of dress depicted in art is the type of ceremonial costume which originated on Crete rather than the Greek mainland, comprising a shortsleeved bodice, worn to display the breasts, and ankle442

Rehak 1994; Younger 1992, see sealstones from Vapheio, CMS I,223, and Routsi, CMS V, Suppl.1, A.345. 443 Taylour 1969: 91-7, fig. 2 and pl.Xa. 444 Karo 1930: pls.II.1, III.2, beil. XXX.2; CMS I, 179.

47

GEORGINA MUSKETT mainland,453 and it is likely that some of these items were valued on the mainland because of their intrinsic value or rarity.454

particular type of cult practice would wear this type of costume.

However, unlike the majority of Minoan religious symbols, which fell out of the iconographic repertoire, the Minoan-style of dress was depicted in the earliest surviving wall paintings from Mycenaean palatial contexts. Early examples of wall paintings showing women wearing this type of dress have been found in early ‘procession frescoes’ at Thebes,455 in the “Ramp House deposit” at Mycenae,456 and at Argos,457 as well as on the fresco known as the “Women in a Loggia” from Mycenae458 (Figure 12). Some of the earliest examples include Minoan elements not found in later examples, most notably a fragment from Mycenae, which clearly shows a “sacral knot”.459 Similar representations of Minoan-style costume are found throughout the Mycenaean period, with examples found in the “Pithos Area” fresco dump at Mycenae,460 at Pylos,461 Tiryns,462 Thebes463 and Gla,464 including some of the latest Mycenaean wall paintings, such as in Room 5 at Pylos,465 which also apparently included at least one female wearing a flounced skirt, and in the “Room with the Fresco” in the Cult Centre at Mycenae, where one of the women is depicted wearing a flounced skirt in bluegrey, with a red and yellow trim, and a red bodice.466

Figure 17: Fragment of wall painting from the ‘Tiryns Boar Hunt’, showing hair and the back of a female neck. Found in the west slope epichosis at Tiryns. After Rodenwaldt 1912a, 121, no.158, fig.52.

Furthermore, if the Mycenaean viewer would have interpreted a figure shown on a slightly larger scale to have been of greater importance, such as the female figure wearing Minoan-style costume from the Boar Hunt fresco at Tiryns (one fragment shown as Figure 17),467 or the male figure frequently interpreted as a wanax,468 from the wall painting from Room 5 at Pylos, even though the figures were unlikely to have been so tall in life. I would accordingly suggest that it is plausible that other artistic conventions would have been employed in the latter composition. Therefore, the female figure, or figures, wearing Minoan-style costume, from the same wallpainting, may have been an example of another artistic convention; that is, the representation of a female wearing this particular style of dress would have signalled the presence of an individual associated with cult, irrespective of whether this exact style of costume was actually worn.

The view that Minoan-style dress was not actually worn on the mainland, but was purely an archaistic iconographic convention, derived from Minoan prototypes is, to some extent, in accord, with the findings of cognitive psychologists that the viewer more readily recognises an image to which he or she is accustomed, based on his or her prior knowledge. In the context of Mycenaean Greece, and in accordance with the conventional nature of Mycenaean art, the viewer would be immediately aware that women associated with a

453

cf. Rutter 2001: 143-4. Although van Leuven (1989: 195) may be correct in his opinion that the models of shrines had religious significance on the Greek mainland, his suggestion that the women buried in Grave Circle A held religious roles in life is difficult to prove. 454 Cavanagh and Mee 1998: 51. 455 Reusch 1956. 456 Lamb 1919-21: 194-5, nos. 8-10, pl. VIII. 457 AR 1978-9:13-4, fig. 14. 458 Rodenwaldt 1911: 222-30, pl.IX, 2. 459 NMA 2783; Rodenwaldt 1921: 50, fig.26; Reusch 1953: 54, fig.11; Smith 1965: fig.117b. 460 Lamb 1921-3: 166, nos. 6-8, pl. XXVVIII, a-b. 461 Lang 1969: 51-53 H nws. 462 Inner Forecourt (Rodenwaldt 1912a: 18, no. 23, pl. II, 10); Tiryns “procession fresco” (Rodenwaldt 1912a: nos. 71-111, figs. 27-34, 37, pls. VIII-X). 463 ADelt 37 B1 [1982]: 165); AR 1990-91: 34. 464 AR 1984-5: 31, fig. 41 465 Lang 1969: 5-15 H 5; Immerwahr 1990: Py. No. 8. 466 Taylour 1969: 91-7, fig. 2 and pl.Xa.

The view that Minoan-style costume was actually worn on the Greek mainland is, however, supported to an even greater extent by the principles of cognitive psychology. As already mentioned, the experiments of Palmer and Biederman indicated that the viewer expects to find certain objects in certain places, and his or her knowledge of the location of such objects and, indeed, of the world in which they live, affects their identification. The application of these ideas to representations of Mycenaean female figures would accordingly indicate 467

A fragment showing hair and the back of a woman’s neck (Rodenwaldt 1912a: 121, no.158, fig.52) and a fragment of a flounced skirt (Rodenwaldt 1912a: 121, no.159, fig.53). 468 Lang 1969: included in 13 H 5.

48

MYCENAEAN ART: A PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH that the viewer would have more readily recognised the representation of a form of dress which was actually worn, albeit on occasions on which the depicted cult activities actually took place, rather than in everyday life. This argument may be supported by the wall-painting from the “Room with the Fresco”, in the Cult Centre at Mycenae.469 In this case, the three female figures are shown wearing three completely different forms of dress, which were plausibly deliberately chosen. As previously observed, that the female on the upper right of the scene is wearing a Minoan-style costume, with flounced skirt. In this case, there is no reason why this wall-painting does not represent either a real enactment of a ceremony, or the manner in which the deities were perceived. I suggest that the representation Minoan-style costume for females indicates connection with cult activity, irrespective of whether such a costume was actually worn. Minoan-style costumes in the hunting scene at Tiryns470 or the procession in Room 5 at Pylos471 may be instances of this. Figures clad in such a costume need not be individualised; the viewer would have sufficient knowledge interpret the meaning of the image as symbolising the identity of the wearer. Equally, it seems that the less frequent occurrence of representations of women wearing other forms of dress in cult contexts emphasises their exceptional nature. Accordingly, the argument regarding whether Minoan-style costume was worn or whether it was an archaising artistic convention would have less relevance. The possibility that this type of costume was actually worn on the mainland should not, however, be discounted and would agree that since the images must have been capable of being understood by the viewer, the styles of costume must have been based on reality. In both case studies, cognitive psychology suggests that both colour and form provide valuable assistance to both the contemporary and modern viewer in interpreting images of Mycenaean male and female dress. The principles of cognitive psychology support the hypothesis that the palette of colours available to the Mycenaean artists, although deceptively simple, could have served as a powerful tool to identify members of particular social groups, supplementing other methods used by the viewer to interpret images. Further, it seems likely that that there was a complex system of coding in terms of form, and, in particular, closely associated the form of female dress in Mycenaean Greece with the identity of the wearer. Chapter 6 considers the nature of aggression, that is, conflict between members of the same species, with relation to images of warfare from Early Mycenaean and Mycenaean Greece.

469

Taylour 1969: 91-7, fig. 2 and pl.Xa. Rodenwaldt 1912a: 121, nos. 158-9, figs. 52-3. 471 Lang 1969: pl.119. 470

49

GEORGINA MUSKETT

Chapter 6 Warfare and Aggression: Their Effects on Mycenaean Art Perhaps the most characteristic image of Late Bronze Age Greece is that of the warrior engaged in combat. Detailed evidence of Late Bronze Age warfare472 in terms of battles is difficult to detect, although some of the skeletons found buried in Grave Circle B at Mycenae had suffered serious injury,473 plausibly in battle. The effects of warfare on Mycenaean art is difficult to assess. Art in “official” contexts in Mycenaean Greece, such as the decoration of the palatial megaron complexes, is an ideological statement,474 although it is difficult to state with certainty that it is not a representation of actual events, whether specific or generic. Indeed, modern anecdotal evidence suggests that representations of warriors and fighting would, to some extent, reflect the contemporary political situation.

Although the head-dresses conventionally called “diadems” are usually considered an indicator of a female burial, one example from Grave IV, of unique style, with pendants hanging from chains at its lower edge, is possibly associated with a male burial.478 The small group of seals in Grave III,479 a rare offering in the Shaft Graves, may be significant in terms of their iconography. One example shows a female deer and its young,480 the design of which could be significant in view of the women and children buried in this grave, although the animals could be the prey of a hunt. The designs on the other seals, however, are violent themes - a combat between an armed man and a lion,481 men in armed combat,482 and a single wounded lion.483 Although it is possible that the iconography was of secondary importance, and the seals may have been present merely as a component of a necklace,484 it seems more plausible that the gold seals, so distinctive in terms of their material, form and iconography, were special commissions. If this were the case, it would be appropriate that their iconography was chosen to reflect the prowess in warfare which may have contributed to the elevation of their families to high status in their own community.

This chapter briefly reviews evidence for the use of martial iconography, together with the characterisation of individuals as a warrior in death. The case study considers whether psychological research may provide reasons for the apparent preference for elite males in Mycenaean Greece to be presented as warriors and, in particular, whether research into certain aspects of the behaviour of birds and animals, as well as humans, can provide a useful contribution.

The characterisation of elite male individuals as warriors is apparent in both Grave Circles at Mycenae, where weapons accompanied the majority of male burials. This trend is most striking in Graves Z,485 Iota,486 and N,487 and the single burial in Grave II488 as well as the multiple

In general, the female burials which can be identified in the Shaft Graves475 lack the over-provision of weaponry which is a feature of the male burials, although the burial offerings share some similarities. In female burials, the majority of, if not all, the items made of precious metal were solely for personal adornment, a tendency which can be detected, for example, in Graves Y476 and III.477

477

Conventionally considered to contain the remains of three women, plus at least one child. Grave offerings catalogued by Karo 1930-3: nos.1-183. 478 Karo 1930-3: nos.236-9; Hood 1978: 198. 479 Three gold cushion seals (CMS I, 9, CMS I, 11 and CMS I,10), an amygdaloid sealstone made of carnelian (CMS I, 12.), an amethyst lentoid sealstone (CMS I, 13) and an onyx lentoid sealstone (CMS I, 14). 480 CMS I, 13. 481 CMS I, 9. 482 CMS I, 11, CMS I, 12. 483 CMS I, 10. 484 Cf. n.279. 485 Single male, with offerings including a bronze Type A sword with ivory pommel (Mylonas 1973: 102-5, pls.88-90). 486 A bronze sword with ivory pommel and a dagger were associated with the male burial in this grave (Mylonas 1973: 110-21, pls. 95-102). 487 Two individuals presented as warriors. The grave was marked with a fragmentary stela. Offerings attributed to the later burial included a sword and long dagger (Mylonas 1973: 158-76, pls.138-54, inserted fig. B΄). 488 Male, with offerings including a bronze sword (Karo 1930-3: no.214, pl.LXXII), spearhead, (Karo 1930-3: no.215,

472

This study does not attempt a detailed discussion of Mycenaean warfare; the reader is referred to, for example, the papers in Laffineur (ed). 1999. 473 Skeleton nos.51Myc (Tomb Γ) and 59Myc (Tomb Z) apparently suffered head injuries (Angel 1973: 380-2). 474 Cf. Gates’ (1999: 281) observation that there is no correlation between warfare in society and the representation of warfare, as representational art is not necessarily a reflection of reality, but rather a statement of ideology. 475 Dickinson (1977: 48) urges caution in the conventional view of the assignation of gender to the burials in Grave Circle A, as these judgements were made on the basis of grave offerings rather than skeletal remains, although the findings from Circle B appear to support Schliemann’s view that important male burials include offerings of weapons and important female burials include large quantities of jewellery and sheet gold ornaments. 476 Including a gold head-band with leaf-shaped attachments, long pins, one example with an oval head, made of rock-crystal, fluted in the manner of a helix (Mylonas 1973: no.Y-320, pls.208α and γ; Demakopoulou 1988: no.10).

50

MYCENAEAN ART: A PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH seals and metal vases,501 including the gold “Vapheio Cups”,502 an axe-adze embossed with a figure-ofeight,503an inlaid dagger decorated with men who appear to be swimming,504 and other inlays, possibly from other daggers, were found above the floor of the tomb.505 The designs engraved on the large group of sealstones included a images of warfare and hunting: a depiction of a boar’s tusk helmet506 and a man fighting a wild boar.507 The eclectic nature of the offerings suggest that the deceased was not only exhibiting his wealth and status, shown by his ability to amass a group of offerings from outside the Greek mainland, but also prided himself in the nature of his collection. Indeed, the view of Tsountas, who excavated the tomb, was that the deceased was “one of markedly Minoan, and possibly effete, tastes.”508

burials in Graves IV and V, characterised by the inclusion of large numbers of weapons, greatly in excess of what might be expected to have been included as the personal property of the deceased.489 Outside Mycenae, Type A swords were also found in the “Peribolos Tomb” at Peristeria,490 Tholos V at Pylos,491 and in the burial in the Tamviskou plot at Thebes, normally dated MHIII, although the grave could be earlier,492 where the assemblage also contained a range of other weapons.493 In addition, although only one bronze dagger was found at Asine,494 its rarity at this site emphasised the standing of the deceased. Rare finds of unplundered male burials from the later phases of the Early Mycenaean period suggest the emergence of individuals characterised in death as a leader, if not primarily as a warrior. One of the two tholos tombs at Routsi in Messenia, designated Routsi 2, was almost intact on discovery. The tomb, built in LHI,495 contained two pit burials, as well as burials on the floor of the tholos. There was a substantial range of offerings – weapons, including long swords and two inlaid daggers,496 jewellery including a gold head-band, an important group of seals, items made of gold, bronze, stone and ivory, and polychrome glass beads, as well as high-quality pottery from LHI until LHIIIA1.497 Several of these vases used to be considered Minoan imports of LMIB,498 although more recent research indicates that they are either pseudo-Minoan, or are not necessarily imports.499

One of the unusual features of the cemetery at Dendra is the high number of elite male burials,509 several of which have offerings suggesting the characterisation of the deceased as a warrior. Although the tholos tomb is one of the smallest in the Argolid, and of poor construction, the exceptional status of the individual buried in Pit 1 is clear from the offerings,510 which were found intact. They include an ostrich egg rhyton,511 a gold cup with a marine design512 containing six sealstones,513a silver bowl, bronze vessels, a bronze sword with an ivory pommel, covered with gold, gold jewellery, and glass plaques.514 In addition, sixteen chamber tombs have been located at Dendra, the earliest of which apparently dates to LHIIA, although the most spectacular finds are from the end of LHIIB and LHIIIA1, in particular from tombs

An undisturbed pit burial, dated to LHIIA,500 in the tholos tomb at Vapheio, near Sparta, contained extremely lavish offerings, amongst which were a substantial number of

501

The finds are conveniently summarised in Vermeule 1972: 127-30. 502 NMA1758 and 1759. Vermeule 1972: 127-30; E. Davis 1974: 472-87: figs. 1-10, 12, 14, 17, 20, 21; E. Davis 1977: 150, 256-7, figs. 1-10, 12, 14, 17, 20, 21; Younger 1985: 54-5; Xenaki-Sakellariou 1996; Cain 1997: 137-40. 503 Also note the lunate fenestrated axe-head, made of bronze, possibly imported from Syro-Palestine, via Crete (Touchais 1999: 207, fig.12). Lavish versions of this type of axe were found in the royal tombs at Byblos, made of gold and with granulation decoration, dating from the Middle Bronze Age. The axe from Vapheio is the only actual example found in the Aegean (E.Davis 1995: 15). 504 NMA 1819. Xenaki-Sakellariou and Chatziliou 1989: no.16, pl.VIII,4. Laffineur (1990: 117, n.3) reports an exact parallel which appeared on the art market in 1990. 505 NMA 1808, 1824. Xenaki-Sakellariou and Chatziliou 1989: nos.17a and b, pls.VIII,3 and XIII,3. 506 CMS I, 260. 507 CMS I, 227 508 Cited in Vermeule 1972: 127; cf. similar argument by Vermeule 1972: 130, who described the deceased buried in the tholos tomb at Vapheio as a “collector and a connoisseur”. 509 Persson 1942: 35 and passim. 510 Probably LHIIIA1 (Pelon 1976: 180). 511 With added silver spout and applied bands of gold-plated bronze (Persson 1931: 37, pl. III). 512 Hurwit 1979, with previous bibliography. 513 CMS I, 182-3, 185-8. 514 Persson 1931: 27-42, pls. VIII-XXVIII.

pl.LXXII), dagger (Karo 1930-3: no.217, pl.LXXII) and, possibly, four knives (Karo 1930-3: nos.216, 218 and 227, pl.LXXII). 489 In Grave V, at least fifteen swords in direct association with the southern burial, as well as some sixty weapons found between the feet of this individual and the central burial (Graziadio 1991: 436). 490 AR 1978-79: fig.27; Lolos 1987: fig.457. 491 Pit 1: CM 2186, Blegen et al. 1973: fig.229:13. Pit 3: CM 218, 2189, 2196 and 2198, Blegen et al. 1973: figs.229:1-4. cf. Karo 1930-3: nos.399, 414, 417 and 434, pl.LXXIII. The ivory pommel from Pit 3 (CM 2050, Blegen et al. 1973: fig.231:4) is similar to an example from Shaft Grave IV (Karo 1930-3: no.485, pl.LXXVI). 492 Cavanagh and Mee 1998: 32, n.123. 493 Kasimi-Soutou 1980[1986]: 88-101; AR 1982-3: 31; AR 1986-7: 24; Kilian-Dirlmeier 1995: 49; 1997: 24-50; Cavanagh and Mee 1998: 32. 494 Dietz 1980: figs.51-4; Nordquist 1987: no.AE3 and no.S113. 495 Bennet 1999: 15; Mountjoy 1999: 304. 496 NMA 8340. Xenaki-Sakellariou and Chatziliou 1989: no.10, pl.V,2; NMA 8339. Xenaki-Sakellariou and Chatziliou 1989: no.9, pl.VI. 497 Hood 1978: 181; Lolos 1987: 208-9. 498 Lolos 1987: 209-10, figs. 394-8. 499 Mountjoy 1999: 317-21. 500 Younger 1973: 340.

51

GEORGINA MUSKETT

Figure 18: Stucco plaque, painted, showing a female figure virtually concealed by a figure-of-eight shield, flanked by two standing females. Found in “Tsountas’ House”, the Cult Centre, Mycenae. h.11.9cm. w.19cm. NMA 2666. After Rodenwaldt 1912b, pl. VIII.

2, 10 and 12.515 The offerings in Tomb 12 included a complete set of bronze body armour,516 together with other military equipment, including a boars’ tusk helmet.517

plausibly been associated with the cult suggested by this type of shield’s use in Crete, and, furthermore, it is unlikely that the family of the deceased were aware of the cult significance on Crete of the figure-of-eight shield when associated with females.520 I believe that, in this instance, the figure-of-eight shield could have been used in an apotropaic manner, literally to shield an individual from harm and, therefore, a necklace incorporating this device could have been an amulet.521

The inclusion of martial iconography was not confined to adult males. An exceptional burial of a child was Grave 4 on the Giannaki plot, in the northern part of Argos. This cist grave was so large,518 it could have been used by an adult, although the bone fragments suggest the deceased was a young child aged 2½ to 3½ years of age. The deceased was accompanied by rich offerings, which included 13 ceramic vessels and a large quantity of jewellery, consisting of three necklaces of glass paste, one of faience and one of amethyst, the latter including beads in the shape of a figure-of-eight.519 Apart from being an attempt to demonstrate the disposable wealth and status of the family, both the large size of the grave and the offerings seem inappropriate for such a young child, especially the jewellery, which would hardly have been worn in life. In addition, the iconography of the amethyst necklace appears at odds with the age of the deceased; the inclusion of an item in the form of figureof-eight shields is hardly a reference to the individual’s warlike qualities, nor would a child so young have

The discovery in cult contexts at Mycenae of several representations of women with weapons, a form of characterization normally associated with men, appears to suggest a “warrior goddess”,522 an interpretation emphasized by the inclusion of supernatural or cult aspects. As well as the two females depicted on the upper register in the ‘Room with the Fresco’,523 plausible candidates include the central figure on the stucco plaque found in “Tsountas’ House”,524 virtually concealed by a 520

Rehak 1992b: 116. Also note a sealstone engraved with a woman carrying a sword, found in an LMIA context at Knossos (CMS II.3, 16), which plausibly has a religious meaning. 521 cf. a small gold pendant from Tholos IV, Pylos, in the form of a figure-of-eight shield, with surface decoration of groups of granular beads. Two suspension holes in the pendant suggest it could have been the centrepiece of a necklace (NMA 7987: Blegen et al. 1973: fig.190:20). 522 Rehak 1984; 1999. 523 Reconstruction in French 2002: pl.12. 524 Tsountas 1887: 155-172, pls. 10: 2, 2α; Rodenwaldt 1912b: 129-140, pl. VIII; Rehak 1984: 535-8, figs. 1-2; Immerwahr

515

Åström et al. 1977: 7-65; Darcque 1987: 190-204. Detailed description in Åström et al. 1977: 28-34. 517 Åström et al. 1977: 7-65. 518 1.50m x 1.33m, with a depth of 1.22m. 519 Kaza-Papageorgiou 1985. 516

52

MYCENAEAN ART: A PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH individuals shown could equally be interpreted as hunters. Indeed, hunting may have served as a means of military training; the same type of weapons, both offensive and defensive, were used in both activities.534

figure-of-eight shield, holding a yellow object in her right hand, receiving the homage of the two women flanking the shield, and a fragment of wall painting showing a woman wearing a boar’s tusk helmet, carrying a griffin.525 However, the attribute of a boars’ tusk helmet does not necessarily mean that the woman should be considered a warrior goddess, but could equally be a reference to hunting,526 and by extension to the protection of the ruling elite and their territory.527 Another interpretation is suggested by Immerwahr, who proposes that the woman is a representation of a figurine carried by a participant in one of the processions,528 an opinion which seems to be supported by a reference to te-o-po-rija (“the carrying of the goddess in procession”) in Linear B texts Ga 1058 and Od 696 from Knossos, although there is no reference to this in the surviving tablets from the Greek mainland. Whilst acknowledging that the small scale of this representation, and its realistic style of execution, similar to the figurine on offered on fragments on wall painting from the South-West Building of the Cult Centre at Mycenae529 may support this identification, I believe it is unlikely. In addition, the argument that the woman is not a representation of an offering is supported by the fact that a scene depicting a procession of Mycenaean genii, also from the Cult Centre at Mycenae,530 is shown on a similar small scale.

The period LHIIIC is notable not merely for depictions of individual warriors, but also for representations which appear to show battle scenes. However, as previously mentioned, the range of media on which such images appear is extremely limited, and almost exclusively confined to pottery. In addition, there is some evidence that the preferred style of presentation in death of high status males was as a warrior535. Even though there was no longer a ruling elite associated with the palace economies, it would surely have been the case that settlements would have had some form of formal leadership.536 The evidence from Mycenae suggests that association with warfare continued to be a major preoccupation of the individuals of highest status during LHIIIC. Representations of warriors retain a role as important elements in funerary display, suggested by the file of armed soldiers painted on one of the registers of the stela found among building material at the entrance of Chamber Tomb 70 at Mycenae.537 It is tempting to interpret the scenes on the stela as representing the various aspects of the life of the patron.538 If the deceased was male, the file of soldiers could represent an allusion to his military prowess,539 and the deer shown on the bottom register would refer to his involvement in hunting. The upper register, which is very fragmentary and in a poor state of preservation, may show a seated woman receiving a procession of one or more men,540 possibly a reference to a funerary ritual,541 whose exact character is unknown. However, there is no reason why

A feature of the offerings from chamber tombs in LHIIIA-B is the characterisation of the deceased as a warrior. Particularly striking offerings are the “warrior heads” discussed in the Introduction; that is, small heads made of hippopotamus ivory, carved in the form of a warrior wearing a boar’s tusk helmet. Three “warrior heads” were found in Chamber Tomb 27 at Mycenae531 and one at the “House of Shields” at the same site,532 as well as an example from Spata in Attica.533 Despite the conventional name for these pieces, such representations need not necessarily represent warriors, and the

534

C.Morris 1990: 151. The “warrior graves” in Achaea are conveniently listed by Papadopoulos (1999: 267) and outside Achaea by Cavanagh and Mee (1998: 95). 536 For example, Tiryns increased in size to approximately 25 ha., an increase is interpreted by Kilian (1980; 1988a: 135) as the result of the movement of inhabitants from the surrounding area to a centre that was capable of providing better physical protection, including more certain access to food. If Kilian’s estimate were correct, a settlement the size of Tiryns would surely have required some form of central administration. 537 Tsountas 1896: 1-22, pls. 1 (colour) and 2/2; Kritseli-Providi 1982: 18-9, 73-7, 111; Vermeule and Karageorghis 1982: 1324, 222, no. XI.43; Immerwahr 1990: 149-51, My.No.21, pl.84. 538 Contra Tsountas’ (1896) suggestion that the three registers showed the elite in times of peace, the middle class engaged in warfare, and the animals of the natural world. 539 Vermeule’s (1965: 143) interpretation is that the spears may be related to funerary games. 540 Vermeule and Karageorghis 1982: 222; Immerwahr 1990: 151. 541 cf. the scene on a vase from Tiryns (Crouwel 1981: V51, pl. 66; Vermeule and Karageorghis 1982: 230, no. XI.19.1; Immerwahr 1990: 154, fig. 40; Rutter 1992: 71-2, fig. 9.1; Wright 1995: 304-5; Mountjoy 1999: 161). 535

1990: 121, 140, My.No.7, pls.62-3; Rehak 1999: 227, pl. XLVIa. 525 Kritseli-Providi 1982: 28-33, no. A-6, pls. Bα, 2α; Immerwahr 1990: 121, 192, My.No.9; Rehak 1999: 228, pl. XLVIc. 526 Muskett forthcoming( b) assesses the evidence for a Mycenaean goddess of the hunt. 527 cf. similar comments by C.Morris 1990: 155. 528 Immerwahr 1990: 121. 529 Kritseli-Providi 1982: 41-3, nos. B-2 and B-3, pl. 6α-β; Demakopoulou 1988: 183, nos. 152-3; Immerwahr 1990: 119, 166, My.No.4, fig.33a. 530 Immerwahr 1990: My. No. 8. 531 NMA 2468 (Figure 7); Tsountas 1888: 146, 165, pl. VIII, 12; Poursat 1977b: no. 288, 88, pl. 27; Hood 1978: 128, fig.118; Demakopoulou 1988: 236; Krzyskowska 1991: fig. 3b), NMA 2469 (set onto a plaque decorated with running spirals; Poursat 1977b: no.289; Krzyskowska 1991: no.2) and 2470 (front facing; Poursat 1977b: no.290; Krzyskowska 1991: no.3). 532 NMA 7397. Wace 1954: pl.35b, c; Poursat 1977b: no.63, pl.VII; Krzyskowska 1991: no.4. 533 NMA 2055. Poursat 1977b: no.466, pl.L; Krzyskowska 1991: no.5.

53

GEORGINA MUSKETT be parts of two moving chariot teams, one on the upper part of the sherd, the other on the lower part, the latter being driven by an unarmed charioteer, depicted with an oddly elongated head. Despite the lack of weaponry, Åkerström believes that the fragment is part of a battle scene, rather than a race.551 The lack of parallels, however, makes such a scene difficult to interpret with any certainty. Among the pictorial style pottery from Lefkandi, on the island of Euboea, are several sherds which may depict scenes of battle. The most informative shows part of what appears to be a light chariot,552 although the decoration of other sherds can plausibly be interpreted as having military content.553 Sherds from one or more large kraters, with warrior iconography,554 were found in a deposit of ceramics at Kalapodi whose context suggests it may have been an open court and, therefore, no additional information can be gleaned as to the original use of the vessel. The site of Pyrgos Livanaton is notable for the finds of LHIIIC Pictorial Style pottery, particularly images of ships plausibly interpreted as warships.555 Warriors were also part of the repertoire of

the deceased could not have been female; the file of soldiers could equally have been part of funerary ritual; a “guard of honour” for the deceased. Warriors are shown on several fragmentary vessels of this period from Mycenae, the best preserved of which is the large krater conventionally known as the “Warrior Vase”.542 One interpretation of the scenes is a simple narrative depiction of two of the phases of warfare – the departure of the troops, with a woman waving farewell, and the actual battle. Despite the different helmets worn by the soldiers on either side of the vessel, they are not necessarily opponents; indeed Immerwahr543 suggests they are allies rather than enemies due to the similarities in armour. Another interpretation is that the scene is wholly funerary in nature, with the woman making a mourning gesture, and the marching men being either those who have fallen in battle or comrades of the deceased, parading in his honour.544 In this case, the warriors with raised spears on the other side of the vessel would possibly be participants in funerary games.545 I believe that not only do the warriors with raised spears bear a remarkable resemblance to the warriors shown on the painted stela noted above, but the gesture made by the woman – a very unusual representation of a woman from this period – must surely have special significance, most likely to have been funerary, perhaps even a grave marker.546

551

Åkerström 1986. Whilst agreeing that there is nothing to discount Åkerström’s interpretation of the scene as showing a battle, I would, however, query his reading of the oddly shaped head as an attempt to render either an Egyptian or Near Eastern crown, possibly even inspired by the Kadesh reliefs found at various sites in Egypt and seen by Mycenaean visitors (Åkerström 1986: 147). 552 Catling 1968: 41, pl.21, fig. 1; Vermeule and Karageorghis 1982: 128, 221, no. XI.37. 553 Vermeule and Karageorghis 1982: nos. XI.38, XI.39XI.59, XI.60, XI.61 and XI.61 (Lefkandi) and XI.56 (Amarynthos), plus more recent material from Lefkandi (AR 2004-5: 51). 554 Felsch 1981: 86, fig.7; Jacob-Felsch 1987a: 37-9, fig.5 ((contra Jacob-Felsch 1987a: 39, this is not the sherd illustrated in BCH 104 (1980): fig.88); Jacob-Felsch 1987b: figs. 50, 51 (contra Jacob-Felsch 1987a: 39, this is not the sherd illustrated in BCH 104 (1980): fig.88); Güntner 2000: 203, Liste Mensch 127. Felsch (1981: 86) suggests that the theme may be the departure of warriors. 555 Dakoronia 1990; Dakoronia 1995; Dakoronia 1996a; Dakoronia 1996b: 1171, pl. 4; Dakoronia 1999; Crouwel 1999: pls. LXXXd-f; Hiller 1999: pl. LXXIII, 20b; Wedde 1999: 473, pls. LXXXVIII, A4-6, XC, C9. Also note an LMIIIC cup sherd from Phaistos, which shows two men, seemingly wearing “hedgehog” helmets, standing on the deck of a masted sailing vessel (Phaistos, Stratigraphical Museum F.1027; Wedde 1999: pl. LXXXIX, B5). In addition, the island of Kos, in the Dodecanese, has produced suggestions of warfare at sea in LHIIIC. The sherds (Annuario 50-1 [1972-3]: 360, figs. 357-9) were found in the area known as the Seraglio, a settlement site in the modern town of Kos (Vermeule and Karageorghis 1982: 159). The most complete rower wears unusual rounded headgear, described as a “baggy turban” by Vermeule and Karageorghis (1982: 160-1) and as a “boars’ tusk helmet” by Basch (1987: 147). If Basch is correct, this may suggest that the individual depicted may have been actively involved in fighting as well as being engaged in propelling the vessel (cf. Basch 1987: 147). These scenes can be usefully compared to krater fragments from Tiryns decorated with a representation of a ship with three rowers (Podzuweit 1978: 489, fig. 37, 2; Güntner 2000: Motiv Mensch 17, 33, pl. 12,6). Although found in an

The number of representations of human activities on ceramic vessels from the Unterburg at Tiryns during this period is noteworthy. A particularly frequent find spot has been the so-called North and South Syrinxes, water channels previously serving the site, which had fallen out of use to become rubbish dumps in this period,547 although painted ceramics have been found elsewhere at Tiryns. Several images of military activities are seen on vessels from the Unterburg, the majority showing armed men travelling in chariots,548 the general impression being of slow, measured progression rather than an incident during a battle.549 Different in nature is the unusual representation on a fragment from a fairly small bowl, found in the Oberburg.550 It shows what appears to 542

Vermeule and Karageorghis 1982: 130-2, no. XI.42; Younger 1987: 64, 69; Immerwahr 1990: 149-50, pls. 85-7; Sakellerakis 1992: 36-7, no. 32; Mountjoy 1993: 100, fig. 266; Güntner 2000: 204, Liste Mensch 144; French 2002: 140, col. pl. 20. 543 Immerwahr 1985: 91. 544 The latter interpretation is supported by N. Marinatos (1997: 284). 545 Vermeule 1965: 143. 546 French 2002: 140. Vermeule (1965: 134) observes that the gesture resembles that found on several of the larnakes from Tanagra. 547 Dickinson 1994: 164. 548 Examples in Güntner 2000: 22-7, Motiv Mensch 18A-29. 549 cf. Crouwel (1981: 140), who believes these vessels show men being transported to battle. 550 Vermeule and Karageorghis 1982: 126, no. XI.19; Åkerström 1986.

54

MYCENAEAN ART: A PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH human aggression are difficult to trace, lost under subsequent cultural factors. Some psychologists believe that to discover the origins of aggression in humans, one has to look at other members of the animal kingdom, of which virtually all species show aggression.565 It appears worth investigating, therefore, whether research into certain aspects of the behaviour of birds and animals can make a useful contribution to the reasons for the depiction of warriors, warfare and hunting in Mycenaean Greece. This psychological research in this chapter considers the rôle of aggression with regard to the social behaviour of three species, the rat,566 the great tit,567 and the macaque monkey.568 In addition, agonistic encounters between children will be discussed in an attempt to investigate whether such encounters tend to be male-dominated,569 and whether the bias towards aggression in males continues into adulthood.570

vase painters even in the northern part of the Greek mainland, indicated by material from settlement contexts at the Kastro at Volos, where fire destroyed the large building which was possibly the residence of the leading figure in the settlement.556 The sherds show not only the processions of warriors familiar from other sites,557 but also actual fighting558 including a rare representation of an archer. Hunting is a less popular subject for representations in LHIIIC than in previous phases of the Late Bronze Age on the Greek mainland. However, its retention as a subject indicates that prowess in hunting remained a desirable quality for elite males, although the focus tends to be on the prey rather than the hunters.559 In addition, the prey depicted is, to some degree, different from earlier periods, with a move away from images of boar hunting, a change which further confirms the vital role of such hunts to the palace-based elite. Furthermore, representations of hunters are very scarce,560 a seemingly unique exception being a krater from a chamber tomb at Englianos,561 Messenia, which is decorated with a deer hunt, including a hunter wearing an elaborate horned helmet.562

Aggression in animals is generally a response to lack of resources - food, water, even a sexual partner. The gain of these resources may lead to the acquisition of a specific area - a territory - subsequently to be defended to ensure its exclusive occupation. Case studies undertaken by Barnett571 and by Krebs572 suggest that, as a general rule, birds and animals both display a form of dispersive behaviour which can be described as “aggression” when they are defending their territory, although actual conflict is uncommon.573 Such limitation on aggression avoids danger; therefore, threat displays may avert actual fighting and, consequently, must be a factor in the survival of the species.574

War games: the aggressive male? Conflict and aggression563 are found to some degree in all human societies, although they are not manifested in the same way everywhere.564 The biological origins of LHIIIC early context, their style suggests LHIIIB end (Güntner 2000:33). 556 Immerwahr 1985: 85. 557 Vermeule and Karageorghis 1982: no. XI.57; Immerwahr 1985: 88-92, figs. 2b-c; Güntner 2000: 204, Liste Mensch 157. 558 On Volos K2773B, another fragment from the same vessel noted in n.557 (above) and Volos K2773Γ (BCH 85 [1961]: 769-70, fig. 21;Vermeule and Karageorghis 1982: 135-6, 223, no.XI.58; Immerwahr 1985: 92-3, fig. 3; Güntner 2000: 203, Liste Mensch 129). 559 Vermeule and Karageorghis 1982: 137. 560 With the exception of the example from Englianos, noted below, human figures are absent on LHIIIC pottery decorated with hunt scenes, e.g. Vermeule and Karageorghis 1982: nos. XI.72, XI.78; Güntner 2000: Motiv Jagd 2-5, Motiv Hund 1, pl. 14, 2-6, although this could, of course, be an accident of preservation. 561 Several sherds of the vessel were found in the dromos of the tomb, possibly discarded by looters (Blegen et al. 1973: 226). 562 Blegen et al. 1973: 229, pls. 289, a-e; Vermeule and Karageorghis 1982: no. XI.80, 140-1, 224; Mountjoy 1999: 355, fig. 122, no. 128. 563 There are problems in establishing a terminology for any discussion of “aggression” and “violence” (considered by, inter alia, Silverberg and Gray 1992: 2-3) and throughout this study, the term “aggression” is used to refer to a form of dispersive behaviour, rather than in the sense of unprovoked violence. 564 Ross 1992: 286. Although this would appear to contradict the “Seville Statement on Violence”, drafted by an international committee of twenty scholars at the 6th International Colloquium on Brain and Aggression, held at the University of Seville, Spain, in May 1986, some basic differences can be

Barnett’s study considered the social behaviour of wild rats, observing that if there were no social controls, colonies of rats would reach untenable proportions. However, stereotyped aggressive behaviour, designed to provoke the withdrawal of a rival, without actual conflict between group members, limits the size of such colonies. Indeed, actual physical attacks only take place in response to direct provocation, when a strange male adult rat is introduced to a group.575 Similarly, Krebs’576 research, regarding the territorial behaviour of the Great Tit, concluded that the maintenance of territory rarely explained in terms of terminology, and the Statement acknowledges the fact that fighting does occur between animal species. I would not in any way disagree with the committee’s assertion that war is a phenomenon which is found only in man and does not occur in other animals. 565 Gleitman et al 2004: 432. 566 Barnett 1975. 567 Krebs 1971. 568 Harlow 1962. 569 Geary and Bjorklund 2000; Lauer 1992. 570 Anderson and Bushman 2002. 571 Barnett 1975. 572 Krebs 1971. 573 Other examples given in Krebs and Davies 1993: 102-19. 574 Barnett 1975: 122. 575 Barnett 1975: 125, 132-3. 576 Krebs 1971.

55

GEORGINA MUSKETT The ample evidence of weaponry from the Shaft Graves at Mycenae and from other funerary contexts in Early Mycenaean Greece, reinforces the impression that, although the elaborate nature of many weapons suggests ceremonial rather than practical use, military expertise was apparently an essential element of the funerary presentation of a male member of the elite.

involved direct conflict between the birds, but rather used song presentation. To attempt to ascertain whether gender is an issue, Harlow’s577 study, using male and female infant macaque monkeys, concluded that the two sexes showed differences in behaviour. Contact play behaviour was not only almost invariably initiated by males, but was much more frequent among the males, although some females participated.

A type of defensive weapon frequently found as a burial offering at this period were pieces of worked boars’ tusk, apparently from helmets. This practice was not confined to the Shaft Graves at Mycenae, where worked tusks were found in Graves A,583 N584 and IV,585 but also in a few tombs elsewhere on the Greek mainland.586 It is apparent that such helmets were a manner of expressing an individual’s bravery and expertise in hunting wild boar,587 as it has been suggested that the manufacture of a boar’s tusk helmet requires the tusks of at least 30-40 animals.588 However, the attribution of heroic or warlike qualities by association with grave offerings made from the bodies of fierce animals is not confined to the Bronze Age Aegean and can be found in many societies throughout the world, in all chronological periods. For example, Linares589 undertook a study of decorated vessels which were offerings in high status cemeteries from sites in central Panama, dating from AD 500 to 1500. Many of the vessels were painted with representations of animals, their placement suggesting that the motifs were intended to be seen by those attending the funeral. Other grave offerings included weapons of various types. Linares’ hypothesis is that the attributes of certain dangerous animals were used to suggest the bravery of the deceased, such as crocodiles, jaguars, sharks, stingrays, snakes, and poisonous toads and frogs. Some of the other creatures depicted on the vessels, such as turtles, armadillos and squid, possess the capacity to defend themselves. It is notable that prey species and animals which were eaten were not shown on the pots. In addition, body parts of many of the animals on the vessels, such as shark teeth and stingray spines, were included as grave offerings. Therefore, in this society, the animals shown on grave offerings were carefully chosen from the many species living in the area to show the qualities admired in the warriors. Similar tendencies are apparent in Bronze Age Greece, indicated by the inclusion of plaques made of boar’s tusks and the use of lion iconography on some of the seals, such as CMS I, 9. In addition, it has been suggested that rather than being a purely decorative motif, depictions of the

Various studies have shown that, throughout the world, human boys and more physically aggressive than girls. A bias towards aggression in males apparently continues into adult life; records of murder convictions in the USA between 1951 and 1999 suggests that male murderers outnumber females by 10:1.578 The engagement in aggressive behaviour may, however, be dependent on the society in which an individual is raised.579 Lauer580 has studied the behaviour of young children, observing “agonistic encounters”, that is, situations where a child threatened or attacked another, or elicited a gesture of submission from another child. The subjects used by Lauer were four groups of children from day-care centres in the United States and eight groups of children from Israeli kibbutzim, ranging in age from eighteen months to four years. Lauer’s findings were that, on average, males took part in more agonistic encounters than females, although in some groups, girls were more frequent participants. In the case of those who initiated such encounters, it was found that, on average, males initiated more encounters than females, although in some cases, the differences were not significant. Therefore, the research showed that there was great variability between the subject groups, which is attributed to cultural differences which affect behaviour within the different groups. Lauer’s findings tally with the conclusions of Ross,581 that the overall level of conflict within a society stems from early learning experiences within one’s own environment. Indeed, engagement in aggressive behaviour is often dependent on the society in which an individual is raised.582 Overkill? The nature of weaponry in Early Mycenaean Greece This case study considers reasons for the inclusion of weapons in burial assemblages, and the extent to which this type of offering, or items incorporating martial iconography, contributed to the characterisation of male burials, with particular reference to psychological research into aggressive behaviour in males and females.

583

Mylonas 1973: A-508, pl.22γ. Mylonas 1973: nos.N-488 and N-489, pls.154β and γ. 585 Pieces of tusk: Karo 1930-3: nos.521-531 (pls.LXIX and LXX). Helmet fittings: Karo 1930-3: nos.532-5, 541-9. 586 Kasimi-Soutou 1980 [1986]: 98-9 lists other examples of boar’s tusk helmets from the period of transition from Middle to Late Bronze Age. 587 Morgan 1988: 112. 588 Morris 1990: 155; Papadopoulos 1999: 269, n.11. 589 Linares 1977. 584

577

Harlow 1962. Data given in Anderson and Bushman 2002. 579 Gleitman et al 2004: 435. 580 Lauer 1992. 581 Ross 1992: 271. 582 Gleitman et al. 2004: 435. 578

56

MYCENAEAN ART: A PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH It is plausible that it is not merely the excess provision of weapons in the Shaft Graves at Mycenae which is significant, but also the technique of manufacture. This is evident in the elaboration of swords,601 such as pommels made from ivory, the addition of silver caps to the rivets, or by decoration,602 such as sword blades from Grave Iota, with two butterflies603 and Grave V, with four griffins in “flying gallop” pose.604 Grave Δ produced a particularly lavishly decorated sword, with an ivory pommel, decorated gold-plated hilt and grip,605 and blade engraved with griffins in “flying gallop”.606 Possibly of particular relevance is a sword from Grave IV,607 whose blade is decorated with a row of figure-of-eight shields,608 a motif used in Minoan as well as LHIII iconography, although its significance on the mainland in this period is less certain.

nautilus, a sea creature with a predatory nature, was symbolic of sea power.590 It is clear, therefore, that one reason for the inclusion of weapons as burial offerings was to identify the individual as a warrior and hunter whose individual prowess,591 or that of their kinship group, ensured their prominence in society. It is also apparent that weaponry may have been included to indicate the deceased’s wealth and status,592 and, accordingly, may be considered an element of funerary display. An analogy may be found on the “Ship Procession” wall-painting from Thera, which shows some men not wearing their helmets, but merely displaying them above their heads;593 that is, they are deliberately associating themselves with prestige weaponry, in this case defensive, even when not actively engaged in warfare or hunting.594

The daggers found in the Shaft Graves were even more elaborately decorated than the swords. One of the daggers from Grave IV had its hilt and grip encased in gold plate, inlaid with lapis lazuli and rock crystal.609 The method of decoration of the group of elaborate daggers, from Graves IV and V, with inlaid decoration in gold, silver and electrum, of which the most lavish example is probably the “Lion Hunt Dagger”,610 also suggest a ceremonial

Despite the often excessive provision of weapons in male burials, there is a comparative scarcity in both Grave Circles at Mycenae of spearheads and arrowheads. This may be explained due to the perception of spears and bows as lower status weapons and, therefore, spears and arrows were included as offerings usually as part of a set of weapons,595 as was apparently the case at Thebes.596 The consideration of the bow as a lower-status weapon is emphasised by the fact that the depiction of hunting with a bow from a chariot, on a gold ring from Grave IV at Mycenae,597 a rare motif in Aegean art.598 The omission of spearheads and arrowheads, therefore, reinforces the impression that swords were items possessed only by the elite,599 possibly of both sexes,600 and the function of weapons as a burial offering was to reflect the high status of the deceased, as much as his prowess as a warrior.

601

The size and shape of spearheads and arrowheads offers less scope for elaborate decoration, a fact which may be related to their omission from the majority of elite grave assemblages. 602 Graziadio 1991: 421; Rutter 2001: 140 603 Mylonas 1973: pl.99α. The butterfly motif is also found on Crete, where Evans (1930: 149-51, 154) believed it had religious significance. It is also found on Thera, where it is use an emblem on ships, suggesting swift movement, on the “Ship Procession” wall painting at Akrotiri, seems particularly appropriate (Morgan 1988: pl.171; ships shown in Colour Plate C). 604 Karo 1930-3: no.747, pl.XCI-XCII, figs.49-50; Demakopoulou 1988: no.15. 605 Repoussé decoration in the form of a network of spirals ending with the confronted heads of large cats, with smaller animal heads on the horned shoulders of the hilt. 606 Mylonas 1973: Δ-277, pls.67-8, figs.7-8, col. pl.ι΄β; Hood 1978: 176. This is the sword which Rehak (1999: 230, n.31) suggested may be associated with a female burial, although see the comments in n.600 above regarding a more recent study of the skeleton, which suggests it may, in fact, be male. Other decorated swords from Circle B are Mylonas 1973: A-251 (pl.17β), Γ-264 (pl.54β) and Λ-259 (pl.121). 607 Karo 1930-3: 99, no.404, fig.30, pl.LXXXV; Hood 1978: 76. 608 The shields are flanked by rows of running spirals, both originally gilded. Other decorated swords from Circle A are Karo 1930-3: nos.402 (“sacral ivy” with spirals), 417 (griffins in flying gallop pose), 727 (spirals), 736 (spirals), 748 (horses in flying gallop pose) and 751 (spirals). 609 Karo 1930-3: nos.294 and 405, pls.LXXXVII and LXXXVIII; Hood 1978: 177, fig.175D. 610 From Shaft Grave IV, Mycenae (Karo 1930-3: 95-7, no. 394, pls.XCIII and XCIV; E. Davis 1976: 3-6; Hood 1978: 178-181, figs. 177, 178; Xenaki-Sakellariou and Chatziliou 1989: no.1, pls.I-II; Demakopoulou et al 1995: 137-50).

590

Davis and Bennet 1999: 111, n.24. Graziadio’s (1991: 440) view is that the large quantities of weapons in Graves IV and V suggests the “high military rank of the men”, although my view is this may be the way in which the men were intended to be perceived in death, and were presented as such by their relatives. 592 Graziadio 1991: 440; Cavanagh and Mee 1998: 50. 593 From the south wall of the West House at Akrotiri (Morgan 1988: Colour Plate C, pl.10 [Ship 2]). 594 Morgan 1988: 114-5. Also cf. a fragment of wall painting from the same site, which shows a detailed image of a boar’s tusk helmet (AR 2000-1:121, fig. 174). 595 Graziadio 1991: 421-2. 596 Also note that a set of arrowheads was found in the “Peribolos Tomb” at Peristeria (Lolos 1987: 212a). 597 CMS I, 15. 598 Crouwel (1981: 122) suggests it may be an example of borrowing an eastern motif rather than showing actual practice at the time of the Shaft Graves. 599 Driessen and MacDonald 1984: 56. 600 Also note the association of a sword (Δ-277; Rehak 1999: 230, n.31) and a silver cup decorated with a lion hunt (Δ-326; Dickinson 1977: 45) with the last burial in Grave Δ, originally considered as possibly a woman (Angel 1973: no.61 Myc), although Little’s study of the skeletal remains suggests that it was male (Brown et al 2000: 118). 591

57

GEORGINA MUSKETT rather than practical use.611 The lavish hilts and pommels of many of the swords and daggers, as well as the perceived weak point at the junction of the hilt and the blade in the case of swords, especially Type A swords, have led to the theory that some Mycenaean swords were not designed to be used for fighting,612 although, as Dickinson observes,613 it is unlikely that this form of sword would have retained its popularity if it was unusable.

offerings in the Shaft Graves possessed an additional symbolic significance on account of their technique of manufacture, both in terms of the amount of time involved, and the skill required. A good death in Mycenaean Greece? Despite the seeming preference for the inclusion of weapons and the use of violent iconography, a close study of scenes of agonistic conflict discussed in Chapter 4 suggests an emphasis on the presentation of the victor in a heroic light rather than on explicitly gruesome scenes of death and mutilation.617 The climax of agonistic conflict is, however, seen on several examples of Mycenaean glyptic art. Both CMS I, 11 and CMS I, 12 show two warriors engaged in single combat, and CMS I, 16 is engraved with four warriors, consisting of two central figures engaged in single combat, with a third striking the helmet of the first warrior with his spear, and a fourth sitting on the ground, apparently defeated. In all instances, the engraver has chosen to show the moment at which one warrior is seemingly killing his opponent, by piercing his throat with his weapon. However, although the medium chosen - small seals618 - may not be particularly suitable to show the gruesome details of the blood which would certainly have gushed from such fatal wounds, the engravers of all seals have skilfully rendered the details of the weaponry, in particular the elaborate helmet and shield of the vanquished warrior on CMS I, 11. It should be noted, however, although such scenes of violent death are in the majority on the seals from the Shaft Graves at Mycenae, such examples are rare in the remainder of the Early Mycenaean period when compared to the large numbers which show animals in peaceful settings.

It must be questioned, however, whether there was an actual need for such a degree of ornamentation. The ability to commission highly skilled artisans to make such items would certainly have increased the prestige of the owner. Further, the technique of manufacture of these items was so demanding that one must also question whether there would be a high risk of failure. It seems plausible that an analogy to this would be the creation of stone vases614 or stone tools which had been crafted in a highly elaborate manner. Sinclair’s investigations regarding the manner in which worked stone tools were made during the Upper Palaeolithic period in France and the Iberian peninsular, consider the tools not merely as utilitarian objects, but also in terms of their manufacture. In particular, he draws attention to larger bifacial leaf points, observing that the degree of retouching on such tools appears in excess of the amount needed for the tool to be effective. Experiments in creating replicas suggest that not only do leaf-shaped points require a considerable amount of time to make, but the process of manufacture makes the blank thinner, and, therefore, more difficult to work. It has been estimated that the larger leaf-shaped pieces, which range between 10 to 15 cm long, may take three to four hours to retouch, and the largest pieces, which are up to 30cm long, may take up to eleven hours to retouch. It is certainly significant that tools with less retouching can be made in less then five minutes. It should, therefore, be considered whether both elaborately made tools and the activities for which they were made, share a symbolic meaning.615 Similarly, Carter616 considered the significance of the worked obsidian blades found in tholos tombs in the Mesara on Crete. The blades are almost entirely pressure-flaked, a technique requiring a great deal of skill. In addition, the vast majority of the blades were unused, suggesting they were made especially for funerary purposes. The acquisition of this type of tool would have been an advertisement of the ability of the deceased to have access to an exotic material, crafted by an expert. I would suggest, therefore, that, in addition to having the more utilitarian function of indicating the martial prowess or aspirations of the deceased, the more elaborate weapons included in the

At first sight, it may appear that the animal and bird behaviour observed by Barnett and Krebs is, to a certain extent, reflected in some of the activities depicted in Late Bronze Age Greece. For example, it is possible that bull leaping619 and hunting may have represented a method of providing a symbolic outlet for aggression,620 which avoided, or at least reduced, the incidence of actual warfare.621 Associated with this are architectural displays, manifest in the construction of fortification 617

This topic is expanded in Muskett forthcoming (a). Which measure 1.8cm x 1.2cm, 2.3 cm x 1.7 cm and 3.5cm x 2.1cm respectively. 619 cf. Pinsent’s (1983: 265) observation that in cases where a human appears to be grasping the bull’s horns, the artist may be symbolising human control over the bull rather than representing a real event. Also note Younger’s (1976: 1363) observation that this activity may never have taken place on the mainland, and was possibly discontinued towards the end of LBIIIA. 620 Driessen 1999: 18; cf. Nikolaidou and Kokkinidou 1997: 179, 185. 621 The important topic of the psychological reasons for the incidence of ritualised aggression, especially amongst males, is too extensive to be considered in detail in this study. 618

611

cf. Xenaki-Sakellariou’s comment (in Xenaki-Sakellariou and Chatziliou 1989: 13) that inlaid daggers were insignia dignitatis of those holding high rank. 612 Kilian-Dirlmeier 1990: 157. 613 Dickinson 1977: 56. 614 Devetzi 2000: 123, n.5. 615 Sinclair 1995. 616 T.Carter 1998: 61-6, 72.

58

MYCENAEAN ART: A PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH walls, which are generally interpreted as symbols of power rather than practical systems of defence.622 There are, however, major flaws in attempting to draw conclusions regarding human behaviour based on studies of the behaviour of birds and animals. For example, there is a strong element of learned behaviour involved in human territoriality and, in addition, human aggression can be the result not merely of threats to physical welfare, but also via symbolic acts, such as responses to insults to one’s beliefs.623 Consequently, it is unwise to base conclusions regarding manifestations of human aggression on research using animals, such as the study conducted by Harlow;624 by contrast, the research of Lauer625 and Ross,626 using human subjects, suggests that participation in fighting is not overwhelmingly the preserve of males. Further, some studies have not found a strong relationship between the production of testosterone, a male sex hormone, and physical aggression in humans.627 The overall impression gained from consideration of psychological research into the manifestation of aggression is that, in the case of humans, dominance within groups of people is not merely the exercise of greater physical power, but also involves social functions,628 tendencies reflected in the surviving evidence from the Mycenaean world. Elite grave assemblages from the Middle Helladic period indicate that the desire for display was apparent at this time, at least in the case of a few select individuals. However, both the resources at their disposal and their political and social power were much less significant than in the Early Mycenaean period. The emergence of elite individuals in Early Mycenaean Greece, manifest in the later burials in Grave Circle B and in Grave Circle A at Mycenae, together with the single individuals buried in the tholos tombs at Dendra, Tholos 2 at Routsi and Vapheio, may have been fostered by warfare and perpetuated by association with warlike attributes. The continued emphasis on this type of behaviour in LHIIIA-C demonstrates the importance of warfare, and associated activities, such as hunting, within Mycenaean society, even after the fall of the palaces.

622

Demakopoulou and Divari-Valakou 1999: 212; Iakovidis 1999: 203; cf. the observation of Branigan (1999: 92), Broodbank (1989) and Muskett (2002) regarding the use of fortifications and depictions of longboats in the Southern Aegean in the EBA and at Kolonna in the MBA respectively. For a comprehensive study of the construction of fortifications on mainland Greece, see Loader 1998. 623 Gleitman et al. 2004: 434-5. 624 Harlow 1962. 625 Lauer 1992. 626 Ross 1992. 627 Book et al 2001. 628 Seville Statement on Violence (see n.564).

59

GEORGINA MUSKETT

Epilogue The methodology used in this study, stated in the Preface, included an exploration of the knowledge of visual perception, acquired by experiments undertaken by psychologists. The case studies suggest that this knowledge, which has the ability to provide valuable information regarding the production of images by artists, both ancient and modern, can also, I believe, be usefully applied to representations from Late Bronze Age Greece. A further objective was to investigate the nature of aggression, that is, conflict between members of the same species, and explore its effects, if any, on representations from the Greek mainland in the Late Bronze Age.

this type of approach being applied to Late Bronze Age Aegean art, by Kopcke,630 who explains the appearance of two-dimensional male standing figures from Minoan Crete in terms of visual perception. The phenomenon of the viewer being able to envisage the complete image of the body, although not all body parts are actually visible is described as “Minoan illusionism”.631 The adoption of a more scientific approach to this area by drawing on previous psychological research can produce even more valuable results. The research of several scholars is particularly relevant in this instance. For example, Latto has suggested that some types of “aesthetic primitive” may be effective depending on one’s cultural experiences,632 such as the postures of “the aggressor or the vanquished”.633 Research projects conducted by Treisman,634 Boring,635 Bugelski and Alampay,636 Palmer637 and Biederman638have suggested that the recognition of objects is dependent on the viewer’s previous experiences. In addition, Treisman639 demonstrated that the viewer expects certain objects to be of a particular colour, and his or her prior knowledge of the colour of such objects affects their identification, a phenomenon which I believe could play a role in the interpretation of the social standing of individuals in terms of their costume (Chapter 5).

The application of this methodology has produced variable results. In particular, the application of the research by psychologists into the nature of aggression has been limited in success, due overwhelmingly to the lack of appropriate research projects involving human subjects. Indeed, the effects of warfare and aggression on representations of the individual appear extremely difficult to isolate, and the characterisation of an individual as a warrior, or associated with warlike attributes and martial iconography, is more plausibly an aspect of elite display. However, the case studies suggest the value of the application of research into the effects on artistic production caused by the physiological mechanisms involved in visual perception.629 When applied to images from Late Bronze Age Greece, this approach has not only produced extremely constructive results which support the psychologists’ findings, but also has assisted in answering the important question of why the elite living on the Greek mainland were depicted in a particular manner. Especially valuable case studies have been the application of the principles of caricature to the rendering of the facial features of the Shaft Grave masks (Chapter 3), and findings regarding preferences for directional movement applied to representations of processions found on the Greek mainland (Chapter 4).

Studies by Boring640 and by Bugelski and Alampay,641 using ambiguous figures, demonstrate how past experiences affect the manner in which the viewer perceives a situation or responds to it. The research of Palmer642 into the concept of “context effects”,643 that is, the manner in which prior knowledge affects the identification of various objects with relation to their context, demonstrated that the probability of the subject being correct was highest in the appropriate context and lowest in the inappropriate context. Similar in nature are Biederman’s644 experiments, which also suggest that subjects made more errors in locating objects in a scene when the items were placed in unusual positions rather than in their normal place. The findings of all these

In addition, over and above the mechanisms in the human brain responsible for visual perception, which affect everyone possessing normal vision, other aspects are dependent on previous experience. The application of research in cognitive psychology, incorporating the effects of the viewer’s acculturation has the potential to be of equal, if not greater, importance in the interpretation of images. I am aware of only one previous instance of

630

Kopcke 1977. Kopcke 1977: 34. 632 Latto 1995: 68. 633 Latto 1995: 86. 634 Treisman 1986 and 1988. 635 Boring 1930. 636 Bugelski and Alampay 1961. 637 Palmer 1975. 638 Biederman 1981. 639 Treisman 1986. 640 Boring 1930. 641 Bugelski and Alampay 1961. 642 Palmer 1975. 643 Gleitmann 1995: 219. 644 Biederman 1981. 631

629

My research suggests, however, that the surviving examples of art from Late Bronze Age Greece do not betray any evidence of the exploitation of the visual effects caused by lateral inhibition, due to the limitations both in the palette used by Mycenaean artists, and the fresco technique, which would certainly have restricted experimentation.

60

MYCENAEAN ART: A PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH boar’s tusk helmet may have been the means of identifying a Mycenaean outside mainland Greece.

experiments suggest that the viewer expects to find certain objects in certain places, and his or her knowledge of the location of such objects and, indeed, of the world in which they live, affects their identification.

The study demonstrates that the application of certain aspects of psychology to Mycenaean art can provided useful results. In particular, this approach highlights the value of the use of research into the effects on artistic production caused by the physiological mechanisms involved in visual perception. In addition, the application of the principles of cognitive psychology, incorporating the effects of learned behaviour in addition to neural mechanisms which respond to the arrangement of form and colour, successfully produces a new manner of considering images from this period.

Accordingly, I believe that the viewer’s recognition and interpretation of images is aided by the conventional nature of Mycenaean art. This is seen not only in details, such as the texture of the coats of animals which are rendered by crosses,645 and the conventional manner of representing cut stone,646 noted in Chapter 5, but also, possibly, in larger compositions. Lang believes that although hunting and warfare certainly took place, the activities were depicted in a generalised manner. As Lang notes, if the hides of animals were rendered in a conventional manner, is it not possible that the costumes and weaponry were depicted in the same way?647 Furthermore, these formulaic characteristics could suggest that certain motifs had a symbolic significance which would have been of assistance in interpreting the scene. Some of the interpretations are straightforward in nature. For example, on the wall painting in Room 6 at Pylos, the representation of a bull would indicate a sacrifice, the lyre-player and banqueters would indicate the rituals accompanying the sacrifice, and the large bird may signify a deity.648 Accordingly, I would hazard the suggestion that the representation of a female wearing Minoan-style costume would be a symbol of a woman connected with cult activity, irrespective of whether such a costume was actually worn. The representation of a female wearing Minoan-style court costume on the representation of a hunting scene at Tiryns,649 or on the procession in Room 5 at Pylos,650 may be an instance of this. The viewer had no need to have the figures clad in such a costume to be individualised; he or she would have sufficient knowledge to be able to interpret the meaning of the image as a symbol of the identity of the wearer. Equally, I believe that the less frequent occurrence of representations of women in cult contexts wearing other forms of dress emphasises the exceptional nature of the latter individuals. If this was the case, the argument regarding whether Minoan-style costume was worn or whether it was an archaising artistic convention (Chapter 4) would have less relevance. I do not discount the possibility that this type of costume was actually worn on the mainland, and would agree that since the images must have been capable of being understood by the viewer, the styles of costume must have been based on reality.651 This does not preclude the possibility of a form of dress acquiring a symbolic value; for example, a 645

e.g., deer in the “Deer Frieze” at Tiryns (Rodenwaldt 1912a: pl. XV). 646 e.g. two fragments of a painted dado from Tiryns (Rodenwaldt 1912a: no.32. Colour reproduction in Demakopoulou 1988: 186: no.158). 647 Lang 1969: 226-7. 648 Suggested by J.Carter 1995: 294-6. 649 Rodenwaldt 1912a: 121, nos. 158-9, figs. 52-3. 650 Lang 1969: pl.119. 651 Lee 2000: 122, n.4.

61

MYCENAEAN ART: A PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH

Bibliography BIBLIOGRAPHICAL ABBREVIATIONS AA

Archäologischer Anzeiger (supplement to JdI)

AAA

Άρχαιολογικά Άνάλεκτα έξ Άθηνών (Athens Annals of Archaeology)

ADelt

Άρχαιολογικόν Δελτίον

AE

Αρχαιολογική Εφημερίς

Aegaeum

Aegaeum: Annales d’archéologie égéenne de l’Université de Liège et UT-PASP

AJA

American Journal of Archaeology. The Journal of the Archaeological Institute of America

AM

Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts: Athenische Abteilung

AnatSt

Anatolian Studies

Annuario

Annuario della Scuola Archaeologica di Atene.

Antiquity

Antiquity. A Quarterly Review of Archaeology

AR

Archaeological Reports (supplement to JHS)

ArchKorrBlatt

Archäologisches Korrespondenzblatt

BAR-IS

British Archaeological Reports, International Series

BASOR

Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research

BCH

Bulletin de Correspondance Hellénique

BICS

Bulletin of the Institute of Classical Studies

BSA

The Annual of the British School at Athens

CMS

Corpus der Minoischen und Mykenischen Siegel

Hesperia

Hesperia. The Journal of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens

JdI

Jahrbuch des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts

JEA

The Journal of European Archaeology

JHS

Journal of Hellenic Studies

JRGZM

Jahrbuch des Römisch-Germanisch Zentralmuseums Mainz

Kadmos

Kadmos. Zeitschrift für vor- un frühgriechische Epigraphik

OpAth

Opuscula Atheniensia

Pantheon

Pantheon. Internationale Zeitschrift für Kunst.

RA

Revue archéologique

SIMA

Studies in Mediterranean Archaeology

SIMA-PB

Studies in Mediterranean Archaeology and Literature.

Pocketbook TAPS

Transactions of the American Philosophical Society

TUAS

Temple University Aegean Symposium

63

GEORGINA MUSKETT Bennett, E. L. (ed.), 1958. ‘The Mycenae Tablets II”, TAPS 48, Part 1.

Åkerström, Å., 1986. ‘A Mycenaean Pictorial vase fragment from Tiryns’. Φίλια έπη εις Γ.Ε. Μυλωνάν I (Athens): 144-7.

Benson, P.J. and D.I. Perrett, 1991. ‘Perception and recognition of photographic quality caricatures: implications for the recognition of natural images. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology 3: 105-35.

Alden, M., 2001. Well Built Mycenae: The HellenoBritish Excavations within the Citadel at Mycenae 19591969. Fascicule 27: The Prehistoric Cemetery: PreMycenaean and Early Mycenaean Graves. W. D. Taylour, E. B. French and K. A. Wardle (eds.). (Oxford).

Benson, P.J. and D.I. Perrett, 1994. ‘Visual processing of facial distinctiveness’, Perception 23: 75-93. Betts, J.H., 1981. ‘The Seal from Shaft Grave Gamma - A “Mycenaean Chieftain”?’, TUAS 6: 2-8.

Anderson, C.A. and Bushman, B.J., 2002. ‘Human aggression’, Annual Review of Psychology 53: 27-51.

Biederman, I., 1981. ‘On the semantics of a glance at a scene’, in M. Kubovy and J. Pomerantz (eds.), Perceptual organization (Hillsdale, NJ): 213-53.

Andronikos, M., 1984. Vergina: the Royal Tombs and the Ancient City (Athens). Angel, J.L., 1973. ‘Human skeletons from Grave Circles at Mycenae’ in G.E. Mylonas, Ο ταφικóς Κúκλος Β’ των Μυκήνων (Athens): 379-97.

Biederman, I., Glass, A.L. and Stacy, E.W.Jr, 1973. ‘Searching for objects in real-world scenes’, Journal of Experimental Psychology 97: 22-7.

Aravantinos, V. L., 1999. ‘Mycenaean texts and contexts at Thebes: the discovery of new Linear B archives on the Kadmeia’ in S. Deger-Jalkotzy, S. Hiller and O. Panagl (eds) Floreant Studia Mycenaea, I (Wien,): 45-78.

Blegen, C.W., 1949. ‘Hyria’, Hesperia Supplement 8: 3942. Blegen, C.W., 1962. ‘Early Greek Portraits’, AJA 66: 2457.

Aravantinos, V. L., M. del Freo, L. Godart, A. Sacconi, 2005. Thèbes. Fouilles de la Cadmée, IV. Les texts de Thèbes (1-433). Translitération et tableaux des scribes (Pisa and Rome).

Blegen, C.W. and M. Rawson, 1966. The Palace of Nestor at Pylos in Western Messenia I (Princeton). Blegen, C.W., M. Rawson, W. Taylour and W.P. Donovan, 1973. The Palace of Nestor in Western Messenia, III. Acropolis and Lower Town: Tholoi, Grave Circle and Chamber Tombs. Discoveries outside the Citadel (Princeton).

Aravantinos, V. L., L. Godart and A. Sacconi., 2001. Thèbes. Fouilles de la Cadmée, I. Les tablettes de la Odos Pelopidou. Edition et commentaire (Pisa and Rome). Aravantinos, V. L., L. Godart and A. Sacconi., 2002. Thèbes. Fouilles de la Cadmée, III. Corpus des documents dárchives en linéaire B de Thèbes (Pisa and Rome).

Book, A.S., Starzyk, K.B. and Quinsey, V.L., 2001. ‘The relationship between testosterone and aggression: A metaanalysis’, Aggression and Violent Behavior 6: 579-99.

Åström, P. N.M. Verdelis, N-G. Gevjall and H. Hjelmqvist, 1977. The Cuirass Tomb and other finds at Dendra. Part I: the Chamber Tombs (SIMA 4; Göteborg).

Boring, E.G., 1930. ‘A new ambiguous figure’, American Journal of Psychology 42: 444-5.

Banich, M.T., W. Heller and J. Levy, 1989. ‘Aesthetic preference and picture asymmetries’, Cortex 25 (2): 187-95.

Boulotis, C., 1979. ‘Zur Deutung des Freskofragmentes Nr. 103 aus der Tirynther Frauenprozession’, ArchKorrBlatt 9: 59-67.

Barber, E.J.W., 1991. Prehistoric Textiles: the Development of Cloth in the Neolithic and Bronze Ages with Special References to the Aegean (Princeton, NJ). Barnett, S. P., 1975. The rat: a study in behaviour (London and Chicago).

Branigan, K., 1999. ‘The nature of warfare in the southern Aegean’ in R. Laffineur (ed.), Polemos: Le contexte guerrier en Égée à l’Âge du Bronze (Aegaeum 19; Liège): 87-94.

Basch, L., 1987. antique (Athens).

Le musée imaginaire de la marine

Breckenridge, J.D., 1968. Likeness. A conceptual history of ancient portraiture (Evanston, Ill.)

Bennet, J., 1999. ‘Pylos, the expansion of a Mycenaean palatial center’ in M.L. Galaty and W.A. Parkinson (eds.), Rethinking Mycenaean Palaces: New Interpretations of an Old Idea (Los Angeles, Ca.): 9-18.

Broodbank, C., 1989. ‘The Longboat and Society in the Cyclades in the Keros-Syros Culture’, AJA 93: 313-37.

64

MYCENAEAN ART: A PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH Brown, J.A., 1981. ‘The search for rank in prehistoric burials’ in R. Chapman, I. Kinnes and K. Randsborg (eds.), The Archaeology of Death (Cambridge): 25-38.

Cavanagh, W.G. and C. B. Mee, 1995. ‘Mourning before and after the Dark Age’, in C. Morris (ed.), Klados: Essays in Honour of J.N. Coldstream: 45-61 (London).

Brown, T.A., K.A. Brown, C.E. Flaherty, L.M. Little and A.J.N.W. Prag, 2000. ‘DNA analysis of bones from Grave Circle B at Mycenae’, BSA 95: 115-9.

Cavanagh, W.G. and C. B. Mee, 1998. A private place: Death in prehistoric Greece (SIMA 125 Jonsered). Chadwick, J., 1958. (Harmondsworth).

Bruce, C.J., R. Desimone and C.G. Gross, 1981. ‘Visual properties of neurons in a polysensory area in superior temporal sulcus of the macaque’, Journal of Neurophysiology 46: 369-84.

The Decipherment of Linear B

Chadwick, J., 1976. The Mycenaean World (Cambridge).

Bruce, V. and A. Young, 1998, In the Eye of the Beholder: the Science of Face Perception (Oxford).

Chokron, S and M. de Agostini, 2000. ‘Reading habits influence aesthetic preference’, Cognitive Brain Research 10: 45-9.

Brysbaert, A., 2004. ‘Take It or Leave It? Towards more non-destructive approaches in Aegean and Eastern Mediterranean Bronze Age painted plaster studies’ in L. Cleland and K. Stears (eds.), Colour in the Ancient Mediterranean World (BAR-IS 1267; Oxford): 9-15.

Cline, E.H., 1995. ‘Egyptian and Near Eastern Imports in Late Bronze Age Mycenae’ in W.V. Davies and L. Schofield (eds.), Egypt, the Aegean and the Levant: Interconnections in the Second Millennium BC (London): 91-115.

Bugelski, B.R. and D.A. Alampay, 1961. ‘The role of frequency in developing perceptual sets’, Canadian Journal of Psychology 15: 205-11.

Crouwel, J.H., 1981. Chariots and other means of land transport in Bronze Age Greece (Allard Pierson Series No.3, Amsterdam).

Bushnell, I.W.R., F. Sai and J.T. Mullin, 1989. ‘Neonatal recognition of the mother’s face’, British Journal of Developmental Psychology 7: 3-15.

Crouwel, J.H., 1991. Well Built Mycenae: The HellenoBritish Excavations within the Citadel at Mycenae 19591969. Fascicule 21: The Mycenaean Pictorial Pottery. W. D. Taylour, E. B. French and K. A. Wardle (eds.). (Oxford).

Cain, C. D., 1997. Narrative in Bronze Age Aegean Art (PhD dissertation, University of Toronto).

Crouwel, J.H., 1999. ‘Fighting on land and sea in Late Mycenaean times’ in R. Laffineur (ed.), Polemos: Le contexte guerrier en Égée à l’Âge du Bronze (Aegaeum 19; Liège): 455-63.

Cameron, M.A.S., 1970. ‘New restorations of Minoan frescoes from Knossos’, BICS 17: 163-6. Carlier, P., 1998. ‘Wa-na-ka derechef. Nouvelles reflexions sur les royautés mycénniennes’, BCH 122: 411-5.

Crouwel, J.H. and C. Morris, 1996. ‘The beginnings of Mycenaean Pictorial vase painting’, AA: 197-219.

Carter, J.B.,1995. ‘Ancestor cult and the occasion of Homeric performance’ in J.B. Carter and S.P. Morris (eds.), The Ages of Homer: a tribute to Emily Townsend Vermeule (Austin, TX): 285-312.

Crowley, J.L., 1995. ‘Images of power in the Bronze Age Aegean’ in R. Laffineur and W-D Niemeier (eds.), Politeia: Society and state in the Aegean Bronze Age (Aegaeum 12: Liège): 475-92.

Carter, T., 1998. ‘Reverberations of the “International Spirit”; thoughts upon “Cycladica” in the Mesara’ in K. Branigan (ed.), Cemetery and Society in the Aegean Bronze Age (Sheffield Studies in Aegean Archaeology 1; Sheffield): 59-77.

Dakoronia, F., 1990. ‘War-ships on sherds of LHIIIC kraters from Kynos?’ in H. Tzalas (ed.), Tropis II: 2nd international symposium on ship construction in antiquity (Athens): 117-22.

Catling, H.W., 1968. ‘A Mycenaean puzzle from Lefkandi in Euboea’, AJA 72: 41-9.

Dakoronia, F, 1995. ‘War-ships on sherds of LHIIIC kraters from Kynos? Editor’s note’ in H. Tzalas (ed.), Tropis III: 3rd international symposium on ship construction in antiquity (Athens): 147-8.

Cavanagh, W.G., 1995. ‘Development of the Mycenaean state in Lakonia: evidence from the Lakonia survey’ in R. Laffineur and W-D Niemeier (eds.), Politeia: Society and state in the Aegean Bronze Age (Aegaeum 12: Liège): 817.

Dakoronia, F., 1996a. ‘Kynos … fleet’ in H. E. Tzalas (ed.), Tropis IV: 4th international symposium on ship construction in antiquity (Athens): 159-71

65

GEORGINA MUSKETT Demakopoulou, K., 1971. ‘A Mycenaean pictorial vase of the 15th century BC from Lakonia’, BSA 66: 95-100.

Dakoronia, F., 1996b. ‘Mycenaean East Lokris’ in E. de Miro, L. Godart and A. Sacconi (eds.), Atti e Memorie del Secondo Congresso Internazionale de Micenologia (Rome): 1167-73.

Demakopoulou, K. (ed.), 1988. The Mycenaean World: Five Centuries of Early Greek Culture, 1600-1100 BC (Athens).

Dakoronia, F., 1999. ‘Representations of sea-battles on Mycenaean sherds from Kynos’ in H. Tzalas (ed.), Tropis V: 5th international symposium on ship construction in antiquity (Athens): 119-28.

Demakopoulou, K. (ed.), 1990. Troy, Mycenae, Tiryns, Orchomenos. Heinrich Schliemann: the 100th Anniversary of his Death (Athens).

Dakouri-Hild. A., 2001. ‘The House of Kadmos in Mycenaean Thebes reconsidered: architecture, chronology and context’, BSA 96: 81-122.

Demakopoulou, K. and N. Divari-Valakou, 1999. ‘The Fortifications of the Mycenaean Acropolis of Midea’ in R. Laffineur (ed.), Polemos: Le contexte guerrier en Égée à l’Âge du Bronze (Aegaeum 19; Liège and Austin TX): 205-15.

Damiani Indelicato, S., 1988. ‘Were Cretan girls playing at bull leaping?’, Cretan Studies I: 39-47. Dandreau, A., 1999. ‘La peinture murale minoenne, I. La palette du peintre égéen et égyptien à l’Âge du Bronze. Nouvelles données analytiques’, BCH 123, 1: 1-41.

Demakopoulou K. and D. Konsola, 1981. Archaeological Museum of Thebes (Athens). Demakopoulou, K., E. Mangou, R.E. Jones, and E. Photos-Jones, 1995. ‘Mycenaean Black Inlaid Metalware in the National Archaeological Museum, Athens: a technical examination’, BSA 90: 137-50.

Darcque, P., 1987. ‘Les tholoi et l’organisation sociopolitique du monde mycénien’ in R. Laffineur (ed.), Thanatos: les coutumes funéraires en Égée à l’Age du Bronze (Aegaeum 1; Liège): 185-205. Davaras, C., 1975. ‘Early Minoan jewellery from Mochlos’, BSA 70: 101-14.

Deregowski, J.B., 1989. Real space and represented space: cross-cultural perspectives. Behavioural and Brain Sciences 12: 51-119.

Davis, E.N., 1974. ‘The Vapheio Cups: One Minoan and One Mycenaean’, Art Bulletin 56: 472-87.

Devetzi, A., 2000. ‘The “imported” stone vases at Akrotiri, Thera’, BSA 95: 121-39.

Davis, E.N., 1976. ‘Metal Inlaying in Minoan and Mycenaean Art’, TUAS 1: 3-6.

Dickinson, O.T.P.K., 1977. The Origins of Mycenaean Civilisation (SIMA 49: Göteborg).

Davis, E.N., 1977, The Vapheio Cups and Aegean Gold and Silver Ware (New York).

Dickinson, O.T.P.K., 1984. ‘Cretan Contacts with the Mainland during the Period of the Shaft Graves’ in R. Hägg and N. Marinatos (eds.), The Minoan Thalassocracy: Myth and Reality (Stockholm): 115-8.

Davis, E.N., 1995. ‘Art and Politics in the Aegean: the missing ruler’ in P. Rehak (ed.), The Role of the Ruler in the Prehistoric Aegean (Aegaeum 11, Liège and Austin TX): 11-20.

Dickinson, O.T.P.K., 1989. ‘“The Origins of Mycenaean Civilisation” revisited’ in R. Laffineur (ed.), Transition: Le Monde Egéen du Bronze Moyen au Bronze Récent (Aegaeum 3; Liège): 131-6.

Davis, J.L. and J. Bennet, 1999. ‘Making Mycenaeans: warfare, territorial expansion and representations of the other in the Pylian kingdom” in R. Laffineur (ed.), Polemos: Le contexte guerrier en Égée à l’Âge du Bronze (Aegaeum 19; Liège): 105-20.

Dickinson, O.T.P.K., 1994. The Aegean Bronze Age (Cambridge). Dietz, S., 1980. The Middle Helladic Cemetery. The Middle Helladic and Early Mycenaean Deposits. Asine II, 2. Results of the Excavations East of the Acropolis 19701974. (Stockholm).

Deger-Jalkotzy, S., 1995. ‘Mykenische Herrschaftsformen ohne Paläste und die grieschische Polis’ in R. Laffineur and W-D Niemeier (eds.), Politeia: Society and state in the Aegean Bronze Age (Aegaeum 12: Liège): 367-77.

Dietz, S., 1991. The Argolid at the Transition to the Mycenaean Age (Copenhagen).

Deger-Jalkotzy, S., 1999. ‘Military prowess and social status in Mycenaean Greece’ in R. Laffineur (ed.), Polemos: Le contexte guerrier en Égée à l’Âge du Bronze (Aegaeum 19; Liège and Austin TX): 121-31.

Dissanayake, E., 1988. What is Art for? (Seattle and London).

66

MYCENAEAN ART: A PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH The Wall Paintings of Thera

French, E.B., 2002. Mycenae. Agamemnon’s Capital (Stroud).

Driessen, J., 1999. ‘The archaeology of Aegean warfare’ in R. Laffineur (ed.), Polemos: Le contexte guerrier en Égée à l’Âge du Bronze (Aegaeum 19; Liège): 11-20.

Frödin, O and A.W. Persson, 1938. Asine. The Results of the Swedish Excavations, 1922-1930 (Stockholm)

Doumas, C., 1992. (Athens).

Gallou, C., 2005. The Mycenaean Cult of the Dead (BARIS 1372; Oxford).

Driessen, J. and C. MacDonald, 1984. ‘Some military aspects of the Aegean’, BSA 79 (49-74).

Gates, C., 1999. ‘Why are there no scenes of warfare in Minoan art?’ in R. Laffineur (ed.), Polemos: Le contexte guerrier en Égée à l’Âge du Bronze (Aegaeum 19; Liège and Austin TX): 277-83.

Eaverly, M.A., 1999. ‘Color and gender in ancient painting: a pan-Mediterranean approach’ in N.L. Wicker and B. Arnold, From the Ground Up: Beyond Gender Theory in Archaeology (BAR- IS 812; Oxford): 5-10.

Geary, D.C. and Bjorklund, D.F., 2000. ‘Evolutionary development psychology’, Child Development 71: 57-65. Eaverly, M.A., 2004. ‘Colours of Power: Brown Men and Brown Women in the Art of Akhenaten’ in L. Cleland and K. Stears (eds.), Colour in the Ancient Mediterranean World (BAR-IS 1267; Oxford): 53-5.

German, S.C., 2005. Performance, Power and the Art of the Aegean Bronze Age (BAR-IS 1347; Oxford). Gleitman, H.F., Fridlund, A.J. and Reisberg, D., 2004. Psychology (New York and London).

Evans, A.J., 1921-1935. The Palace of Minos at Knossos (Vol. I 1921; Vol. II 1928; Vol. III 1930; Vol. IV, part 1 1935, Vol. IV, part 2 1937, London).

Goldstein, E. B., 1996. (Pacific Grove, Ca.).

Felsch, R.C.S., 1981. ‘Mykenischer Kult im Heiligtum bei Kalapodi?’ in R. Hägg and N. Marinatos (eds.), Sanctuaries and Cults in the Aegean Bronze Age: Proceedings of the 1st International Symposium of the Swedish Institute in Athens (Stockholm): 81-9.

Sensation and Perception

Gombrich, E.H., 1972. ‘The Mask and the Face: Perception of physiognomic likeness in life and in art’ in E.H. Gombrich, J. Hochberg and M. Black (eds.), Art, Peception and Reality (Baltimore): 1-46. Gombrich, E. H. 1977. Art and Illusion: A Study in the Psychology of Pictorial Representation (London).

Filippakis, S.E., B. Perdikatsis and T. Paradellis, 1976. ‘An analysis of blue pigment from the Greek Bronze Age’, Studies in Conservation 21: 143-53.

Gombrich, E.H., 1984. The Sense of Order: A Study in the Psychology of Decorative Art (Oxford).

Fitton, J.L., 1995. The Discovery of the Greek Bronze Age (Cambridge, Mass.)

Goodison, L. and C. Morris, 1998. ‘Beyond the “Great Mother”: the sacred world of the Minoans’ in L. Goodison and C. Morris (eds.), Ancient Goddesses: The myths and the evidence (London): 113-32.

Foster, K.P., 1979, Aegean Faience of the Bronze Age (New Haven and London). Foster, K.P., 1981. ‘Faience from the Shaft Graves’, TUAS 6: 9-16.

Gnudi C. (tr. R. H. Boothroyd), n.d. Giotto, London.

Freimuth, M. and S. Wapner, 1979. ‘The influence of lateral organization in the evaluation of paintings’, British Journal of Psychology 70: 211-8.

Graziadio, G., 1991. ‘The Process of Social Stratification at Mycenae in the Shaft Grave Period’, AJA 95 (3): 40340.

French, E. B., 1961. ‘A Chariot Larnax from Mycenae’, BSA 56: 88-9.

Graziadio, G., 1998. ‘Trade Circuits and Trade Routes in the Shaft Grave Period’ SMEA Fasc. XL/1: 29-76.

French, E. B., 1971. ‘The development of Mycenaean terracotta figurines’, BSA 66: 101-87.

Gross, C.G., C.E. Rocha-Miranda and D.B. Bender, 1972. ‘Visual properties of neurons in inferotemporal cortex of the macaque’, Journal of Neurophysiology 35: 96-111

French, E. B., 1981. ‘Mycenaean figures and figurines, their typology and function’ in R. Hägg and N. Marinatos (eds.), Sanctuaries and Cults in the Aegean Bronze Age: Proceedings of the 1st International Symposium of the Swedish Institute in Athens (Stockholm): 173-8.

Guillaud J. and Guillaud M. 1987. Giotto: Architect of color and form. Paris.

67

GEORGINA MUSKETT Güntner, W., 2000. Figürlich bemalte Mykenische Keramik aus Tiryns (Tiryns XII: Mainz am Rhein).

Prehistory to the Present (Basingstoke and London): 6986.

Hägg, R., 1982. ‘On the nature of the Minoan influence in Early Mycenaean Messenia’, OpAth 14: 27-37.

Hochberg, J., 1972. ‘The representation of things and people’ in E.H. Gombrich, J. Hochberg and M. Black (eds.), Art, Peception and Reality (Baltimore): 47-94.

Hägg, R., 1985. ‘Pictorial programmes in Minoan palaces and villas’ in P. Darcque and J-C. Poursat (eds.), L’Iconographie Minoenne (BCH Supplément XI; Athens): 209-17.

Hogarth, W., 1753. The Analysis of Beauty (London). Hood, M.S.F., 1978. The Arts in Prehistoric Greece (London).

Harlow, H. F., 1962. ‘The heterosexual affectional system in monkeys’, American Psychologist 17: 1-9.

Hubel, D.H. and T.N. Wiesel, 1959. ‘Receptive fields of single neurons in the cat’s striate cortex”, Journal of Physiology 148: 574-91.

Hartline, H.K., H.G. Wagner and F. Ratliff, 1956. ‘Inhibition in the Eye of the Limulus’, Journal of General Physiology 39: 651-73.

Hurwit, J., 1979. ‘The Dendra Octopus Cup and the problem of style in the fifteenth century Aegean”, AJA 83: 413-26.

Haxby, J.V., B. Horwitz, L.G. Ungerleider, J.M. Maisog, P. Pietrini and C.L. Grady, 1994. ‘The functional organisation of human extrastriate cortex: A PET-r CBF study of selective attention to faces and locations’, Journal of Neuroscience 14: 6336-53.

Iakovidis, S.E., 1998. ‘Gla, Orchomène et l’assechement mycénien du Kopais’, Atti della Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, Classe di Scienze Morali, Storiche e Filologiche, Rendiconti, Serie 9, Vol. 9: 281-308.

Heaton, N., 1912. ‘On the nature and method of execution of specimens of painted plaster from the palace of Tiryns’ in G. Rodenwaldt, Tiryns II. Die Fresken des Palastes. (Athens): 211-16. Higgins, R.A., 1987. (London).

Iakovidis, S., 1999. ‘Late Helladic Fortifications’ in R. Laffineur (ed.), Polemos: Le contexte guerrier en Égée à l’Âge du Bronze (Aegaeum 19; Liège): 199-204.

Greek and Roman Jewellery

Immerwahr, S.A., 1985. ‘Some Pictorial Fragments from Iolkos in the Volos Museum’, AE: 85-94.

Higgins, R.A., 1987. ‘A gold diadem from Aegina’, JHS 107: 182.

Immerwahr, S.A., 1990. Aegean Painting in the Bronze Age (University Park and London).

Higgins, R.A., 1997. Minoan and Mycenaean Art (London).

Immerwahr, S.A., 2005. ‘Left or right? A study of hands and feet’ in L. Morgan (ed.), Aegean Wall Painting: a tribute to Mark Cameron (BSA Studies 13; London): 17383.

Hiller, S., 1972. ‘Fisch oder Schiff. Zu einem bemalten mittelbronzezeitlichen Gefässfragment aus Ägina’, Pantheon XXX (6): 439-46.

Jacob-Felsch, M., 1987a. ‘Die Entwicklung der Keramik der Phase SHIIIC fortgeschritten und spat Anhand der Schichtenfolge von Kalapodi und ihre Relation zu vergleichbaren Fundkomplexen’ in E. Thomas (ed.), Forschungen sur Ägäischen Vorgeschichte. Das Ende der mykenischen Welt (Köln): 37-52.

Hiller, S., 1989. ‘On the origins of the Shaft Graves’ in R. Laffineur (ed.), Transition: le Monde Égéen du Bronze Moyen au Bronze Récent (Aegaeum 3, Liège): 137-44. Hiller, S., 1993. ‘Minoan and Minoanizing Pottery on Aegina’ in C. Zerner (ed.), Wace and Blegen: Pottery as Evidence for Trade in the Aegean Bronze Age 1939-1987 (Amsterdam): 197-9.

Jacob-Felsch, M., 1987b. ‘Kalapodi. Bericht zur spätmykenischen and submykenischen Keramik’, AA: 2735.

Hiller, S., 1999. ‘Scenes of warfare and combat in the arts of Aegean Late Bronze Age. Reflections on typology and development’ in R. Laffineur (ed.), Polemos: Le contexte guerrier en Égée à l’Âge du Bronze (Aegaeum 19; Liège): 319-330.

Johnson, M.H., S. Dziurawiec, H. Ellis and J. Morton, 1991. ‘Newborns’ preferential tracing of face-like stimuli and its subsequent decline’, Cognition 40: 1-19. Jones, B. R., 2003. ‘A New Interpretation and Reconstruction of the ‘Mykenaia’ Fresco from Mycenae’.

Hitchcock, L.A., 2000. ‘Engendering Ambiguity in Minoan Crete: It’s a Drag to be a King’ in M. Donald and L. Hurcombe (eds.), Representations of Gender from 68

MYCENAEAN ART: A PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH Abstracts, Archaeological Institute of America Annual Meeting 2003.

Kowalski, R. and Westen, D., 2005. Psychology (Hoboken, NJ).

Jones, O., 1856. The Grammar of Ornament (London).

Krebs, J.R., 1971. ‘Territorial defence in the great tit, Parus Major L.’, Ecology 52: 2-22.

Jones, R.E., 2005. ‘Technical studies of Aegean Bronze Age wall painting: methods, results and future prospects’ in L. Morgan (ed.), Aegean Wall Painting: a tribute to Mark Cameron (BSA Studies 13; London): 199-228.

Krebs, J.R. and N.B. Davies, 1993. An introduction to behavioural ecology (Oxford). Kritseli-Providi, I., 1982. Τοιχογραφίες Θρησκευτικού Κέντρου τών Μυκηνών (Athens).

Jones, R.K. and M.A. Hagen, 1980. ‘A perspective on cross-cultural picture perspective’ in M.A. Hagen (ed.), The Perception of Pictures, Vol.II (New York): 193-226.

τού

Krzyskowska, O., 1991. ‘The Enkomi warrior head reconsidered’. BSA 86: 107-20.

Kanwisher, N., J. McDermott and M.M. Chun, 1997. ‘The fusiform face area: a module in human extrastriate cortex specialized for face perception’, Journal of Neuroscience 17: 4302-11.

Laffineur, R., 1989. ‘Hiérarchie Sociale aux Cercles des Tombes de Mycènes’ in R. Laffineur (ed.), Transition: le Monde Égéen du Bronze Moyen au Bronze Récent (Aegaeum 3, Liège): 227-38.

Karo, G., 1930. ‘Schatz von Tiryns’, AM 55: 119-40. Karo, G., 1930-33. (Munich).

Laffineur, R., 1990. ‘The iconography of Mycenaean seals and the status of their owners’ (Aegaeum 6; Liège): 117-60.

Die Schachtgräber von Mykenai

Kasimi-Soutou, M. 1980 [1986]. ‘Μεσοελλαδικóς τáφος πολεμιστή απó τη Θήβα’, ADelt 35: Mel. 88-101.

Laffineur, R., 1995. ‘Aspects of rulership at Mycenae in the Shaft Grave Period’ in P. Rehak (ed.), The Role of the Ruler in the Prehistoric Aegean (Aegaeum 11, Liège and Austin TX): 81-94.

Kaza-Papageorgiou, D., 1985. ‘An Early Mycenaean cist grave from Argos’, AM 100: 1-21. Kilian, K., 1980. ‘Zum Ende der mykenischen Epoche in der Argolis’, JRGZM 27: 166-95.

Laffineur, R. (ed.), 1999. Polemos: Le contexte guerrier en Égée à l’Âge du Bronze (Aegaeum 19; Liège and Austin TX).

Kilian, K., 1988a. ‘Mycenaeans up to date’ in E. B. French and K. A. Wardle (eds.), Problems in Greek Prehistory (Bristol): 115-151.

Laffineur, R. and E. Greco (eds.), 2005. Emporia: Aegeans in the Central and Eastern Mediterranean (Aegaeum 25, Liège and Austin TX).

Kilian, K., 1988b. ‘The emergence of wanax ideology in the Mycenaean palaces’, OJA 7: 291-302.

Lamb, W., 1919-21. ‘Frescoes from the Ramp House’, BSA 24: 189-99.

Kilian-Dirlmeier, I., 1990. ‘Remarks on the non-military functions of swords in the Mycenaean Argolid’ in R. Hägg and G. C. Nordquist (eds.), Celebrations of Death and Divinity in the Bronze Age Argolid (Stockholm): 157-63.

Lamb, W., 1921-3. ‘Excavations at Mycenae: Palace Frescoes’. BSA 25: 249-255. Lang, F., 1999. ‘Delphin oder Heckfigur auf einem mykenischen Steinvasenfragment’, ArchKorrBlatt: 3358.

Kilian-Dirlmeier, I., 1995. ‘Reiche Gräber der Mittelhelladischenzeit’ in R. Laffineur and W-D Niemeier (eds.), Politeia: Society and State in the Aegean Bronze Age (Aegaeum 12; Liège and Austin, TX): 49-53.

Lang, M.L., 1969. The Palace of Nestor at Pylos in Western Messenia, Vol. II: The Frescoes (Princeton). Latto, R., 1995. ‘The brain of the beholder’ in R. Gregory et al. (eds.), The Artful Eye: 66-94 (Oxford).

Kilian-Dirlmeier, I., 1997. Das Mittelbronzezeitliche Schachtgrab von Ägina (Alt-Ägina IV, 3; Mainz).

Latto, R., 1996. ‘Turning the other cheek; profile direction in self-portraiture’, Empirical Studies of the Arts 14(1): 89-98.

Kontorli-Papadopoulou, L., 1996. Aegean Frescoes of Religious Character (SIMA 117; Göteborg). Kopcke, G., 1977. ‘Figures in pot-painting before, during and after the Dark Age’ in E.N. Davis (ed.), Symposium on the Dark Ages in Greece (New York): 32-50.

Lauer, C., 1992. ‘Variability in the Patterns of Agonistic Behavior of Preschool Children’ in J. Silverberg and J. P.

69

GEORGINA MUSKETT Gray (eds.), Aggression and Peacefulness in Humans and Other Primates: 172-88 (New York and Oxford).

Crète Mycénienne (BCH Supplément 30; Athens): 28192.

Lee, M.M., 2000. ‘Deciphering gender in Minoan dress’ in A.E. Rautman (ed.), Reading the Body. Representations and Remains in the Archaeological Record (Philadelphia, Pa.): 111-23.

Marmor, M.F. and J.G. Ravin, 1997. The Eye of the Artist (St. Louis, Mo.). McCallum, L.R., 1987. Decorative program in the Mycenaean palace of Pylos: the megaron frescoes (PhD dissertation, University of Pennsylvania).

Leonard, A., Jr., and E.H. Cline, 1998. ‘The Aegean pottery found at Megiddo: an appraisal and reanalysis’, BASOR 309: 3-39.

McNeill, W.H., 1995. Keeping Together in Time. Dance and Drill in Human History (Cambridge, Mass.)

van Leuven, J., 1989. ‘The Religion of the Shaft Grave Folk’ in R. Laffineur (ed.), Transition: le Monde Égéen du Bronze Moyen au Bronze Récent (Aegaeum 3, Liège): 191-201.

Mee, C.B. and W.G. Cavanagh, 1984. ‘Mycenaean tombs as evidence for social and political organisation’, OJA 3: 45-64. Mellaart, J., 1968. ‘Anatolian trade with Europe and Anatolian geography and culture provinces in the Late Bronze Age’, AnatSt 18: 187-202.

Lévi-Strauss, C., 1958. Anthropologie Structurale (Paris). Linares, O.F., 1977. Ecology and the Arts in Ancient Panama: On the Development of social rank and symbolism in the Central Provinces (Studies in PreColumbian Art and Archaeology 17, Washington DC).

Moore, A.E. and W.D. Taylour. 1999. Well Built Mycenae: The Helleno-British Excavations within the Citadel at Mycenae 1959-1969. Fascicule 10: The Temple Complex. W. D. Taylour, E. B. French and K. A. Wardle (eds.). (Oxford).

Livingstone, M.S., 1988. ‘Art, illusion and the visual system’, Scientific American 256: 78-85.

Morgan, L., 1988. The Miniature Wall Paintings of Thera: A Study in Aegean Culture and Iconography (Cambridge).

Livingstone, M.S., 1990. ‘Segregation of form, color, movement and depth processing in the visual system: Anatomy, physiology, art and illusion’ in B. Cohen and I. Bodis-Wollner (eds.), Vision and the brain (New York): 119-38.

Morgan, L., 1995. ‘Frontal face and the symbolism of death in Aegean glyptic’ in W. Müller (ed.), Sceaux Minoens et Mycéniens. CMS, Beiheft 5 (Berlin): 135-49.

Livingstone, M.S. and D.H. Hubel, 1988. ‘Segregation of form, color, movement and depth: Anatomy, physiology and perception’, Science 240: 740-9.

Morgan, L., 2000. ‘Form and meaning in figurative painting’ in S. Sherratt (ed.), The Wall Paintings of Thera. Proceedings of the First International Symposium, Vol.II (Athens): 925-46.

Livingstone, M.S. and D.H. Hubel, 1995. ‘Through the eyes of monkeys and men’ in R. L. Gregory, J. Harris, P. Heard and D. Rose (eds.), The Artful Eye (Oxford): 5265.

Morris, C., 1990. ‘In pursuit of the white tusked boar: Aspects of hunting in Mycenaean society’ in R. Hägg and G. C. Nordquist (eds.), Celebrations of Death and Divinity in the Bronze Age Argolid (Stockholm): 149156.

Loader, N.C., 1998. Building in Cyclopean Masonry (SIMA-PB 148; Jonsered). Loewy, E., 1930. ‘Ursprünge der bildenden Kunst’, Almanach der Akademie der Wissenschaften in Wien.

Mountjoy, P.A., 1993. Mycenaean Pottery: an Introduction (Oxford University Committee for Archaeology, Monograph No. 36, Oxford).

Lolos, Y., 1987. The LHI pottery of the southwestern Peloponnesos and its local characteristics (Göteborg). Lynton, N., 1989. The Story of Modern Art (London).

Mountjoy, P.A., 1999. Regional Mycenaean Decorated Pottery (Rahden).

Marinatos, N., 1989. ‘The bull as adversary: some observations on bull-hunting and bull-leaping’, ΑΡΙΑΔΝΗ V: 23-32.

Musgrave, J.H., R.A.H. Neave, and A.J.N.W. Prag, 1995. ‘Seven Faces from Grave Circle B at Mycenae’, BSA 90: 107-36.

Marinatos, N., 1997. ‘Minoan and Mycenaean larnakes: a comparison’ in J. Driessen and A. Farnoux (eds.), La

Muskett, G. 2001. ‘The masks from the Shaft Graves in Grave Circles A and B at Mycenae’ in G. Vavouranakis

70

MYCENAEAN ART: A PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH (ed.), Past Conference Review, SOMA 2000, Assemblage 6

Le contexte guerrier en Égée à l’Âge du Bronze (Aegaeum 19; Liège and Austin TX): 267-74.

Muskett, G., 2002. ‘Kolonna in the Middle Bronze Age: the role of the sea’ in M. Georgiades and G. Muskett (eds.), The Seas of Antiquity: Proceedings of the First Liverpool Interdisciplinary Symposium in Antiquity (Liverpool): 6-17.

Parker Pearson, M., 1999. The Archaeology of Death and Burial (Stroud). Pelon, O., 1976. Tholoi, Tumuli et Cercles Funéraires (Paris).

Muskett, G., 2004. ‘Colour Coding and the Representation of Costumes in Mycenaean Wall Painting’ in L. Cleland and K. Stears (eds.), Colour in the Ancient Mediterranean World (BAR-IS 1267; Oxford): 659.

Pendlebury, J.D.S., 1930. Aegyptiaca. A Catalogue of Egyptian Objects in the Aegean Area (Cambridge). Perdikatsis, V., 1998. ‘Analysis of Greek Bronze Age wall painting pigments’ in S. Colinart and M. Menu (eds.), La couleur dans la peinture et l’émaillage de l’Égypte ancienne (Bari): 103-8.

Muskett, G. forthcoming (a). ‘Images of the Defeated: a good death in Late Bronze Age Greece?’ in D. Burton (ed.), Good Deaths, Bad Deaths (BICS Supplement). (Proceedings of the conference ‘Good Deaths, Bad Deaths’ held at the Institute of Classical Studies, London, July 2003.

Perrett, D.I., M. Harries, A.J. Mistlin and A.J. Chitty, 1990. ‘Three stages in the classification of body movements by visual neurons’, in H. Barlow, C. Blakemore and M. Weston-Smith (eds.), Images and Understanding (Cambridge): 94-107.

Muskett, G. forthcoming (b). ‘Images of Artemis in Mycenaean Greece?’in N. Bannister and N. Waught (eds.), Essence of the Huntress: the worlds of Artemis and Diana.

Perrett, D.I., M.W. Oram, M.H. Harries, R. Bevan, J.K. Hietanen, P.J. Benson et al., 1991. ‘Viewer-centred and object-centred coding of heads in the macaque temporal cortex”, Experimental Brain Research 86: 159-73.

Mylonas, G.E., 1969. ‘Ο πέμπτος λακκοειδής τáφος του κúκλου Α΄ των Μυκηνων’, AE: 125-42.

Perrett, D.I., E.T. Rolls and W. Caan, 1982. ‘Visual neurones responsive to faces in the monkey temporal cortex”. Experimental Brain Research 47: 329-42.

Mylonas, G.E., 1973. Ο ταφικóς Κúκλος Β’ των Μυκηνων (Athens).

Perrett, D.I., P.J. Benson, J.K. Hietanen, M.W. Oram and W.H. Dittrich, 1995. ‘When is a face not a face?’ in R. Gregory, J. Harris, P. Heard and D. Rose (eds.), The Artful Eye (Oxford, New York, Tokyo): 95-124.

Nikolaidou, M. and Kokkinidou, D., 1997. ‘The symbolism of violence in Late Bronze Age palatial societies of the Aegean: a gender approach’ in J. Carman (ed.), Material Harm: Archaeological Studies of War and Violence (Glasgow): 174-97.

Persson, A. W., 1931. Royal tombs at Dendra (Lund).

Nordquist, G.C., 1987. A Middle Helladic Village: Asine in the Argolid (Boreas 16, Uppsala).

Persson, A. W., 1942. New tombs at Dendra (Lund). Peterson, S.E., 1981. Wall Paintings in the Aegean Bronze Age: The Procession Frescoes (PhD Thesis, The University of Minnesota).

Nosch, M-L., 2004. ‘Red Coloured Textiles in the Linear B Inscriptions’ in L. Cleland and K. Stears (eds.), Colour in the Ancient Mediterranean World (BAR-IS 1267; Oxford): 32-9.

Pick, A.D. and H.L. Pick, 1978. ‘Culture and perception’ in E.C. Carterette and M.P. Friedman (eds.), Handbook of Perception, Vol. X (New York): 19-39.

Osborne, R., 1996. Greece in the making, 1200-479 BC (London).

Pini, I. (ed.), 1975. CMS, Band V, 2 (Berlin). Overbeck, J.C., 1989. Keos VII. Ayia Irini: Period IV. Part I: the stratigraphy and the find deposits. Mainz am Rhein.

Pini, I., 1983. ‘Chronological problems of some Late Minoan signet rings’, TUAS 8: 39-49. Pinsent, J., 1983. ‘Bull leaping’ in O. Krzyskowska and L. Nixon (eds.), Minoan Society (Bristol): 259-71.

Palmer, S. E., 1975. ‘The effects of contextual scenes on the identification of objects’. Memory and Cognition 3: 519-26.

Podzuweit, C., 1978. ‘Ausgrabungen in Tiryns 1977. Bericht zur spätmykenischen Keramik’, AA: 471-98.

Papadopoulos, T.J., 1999. ‘Warrior graves in Achaean Mycenaean cemeteries’ in R. Laffineur (ed.), Polemos: 71

GEORGINA MUSKETT Poursat, J-C., 1977a. Les Ivoires Mycéniens: essai sur la formation d’un art mycénien (Paris).

Riley, B., 1991. ‘The artist’s eye: Seurat’, Modern Painters 4 (2), Summer: 10-14.

Poursat, J-C., 1977b. Catalogue des Ivoires Mycéniens du Musee National d’Athènes (Paris).

Rizzolatti, G., C. Umilta and G. Berlucchi, 1971. ‘Opposite superiorities of the right and left cerebral hemispheres in discriminative reaction time to physiognomical and alphabetic material’, Brain 87: 41522.

Prag, J. and R. Neave, 1997. Making Faces Using Forensic and Archaeological Evidence (London). Profi, S., L. Weier and S.E. Filippakis, 1974. ‘X-Ray analysis of Greek Bronze Age pigments from Mycenae”, Studies in Conservation 19: 105-12.

Rodenwaldt, G., 1911. ‘Fragmente mykenischer Wandgemälde’, AM 36: 221-50. Rodenwaldt, G., 1912a. Palastes. (Athens).

Tiryns II.

Die Fresken des

Pronotariou-Deilaki, E., 1990. ‘The tumuli of Mycenae and Dendra’ in R. Hägg and G.C. Nordquist (eds.), Celebrations of death and divinity in the Bronze Age Argolid (Stockholm): 85-106.

Rodenwaldt. G., 1912b. “Votivpinax aus Mykenai”, AM 37: 129-140.

Rehak, P., 1984. ‘New Observations on the Mycenaean “Warrior Goddess”‘, AA: 535-45.

Rodenwaldt, G., 1921. Mykenai (Halle).

Rehak, P., 1992a. ‘Tradition and Innovation in the Fresco from Room 31 in the “Cult Center” at Mycenae’ in R. Laffineur and J.L. Crowley (eds.), ΕΙΚΩΝ: Aegean Bronze Age Iconography: Shaping A Methodology (Aegaeum 8; Liège): 39-62.

Rolls, E.T., 1992. ‘Neurophysiological mechanisms underlying facial processing within and beyond the temporal cortical visual areas’, Transactions of the Royal Society of London B.335: 11-21.

Der Fries des Megarons von

Ross, M. H., 1992. ‘Social Structure, Psychocultural Dispositions and Violent Conflict: Extensions from a Cross-cultural Study’ in J. Silverberg and J. P. Gray (eds.), Aggression and Peacefulness in Humans and Other Primates: 271-94 (New York and Oxford).

Rehak, P., 1992b. ‘Minoan Vessels with Figure-Eight Shields’, OpAth XIX: 115-124. Rehak, P., 1994. ‘The Aegean “Priest” on CMS I, 223’, Kadmos XXXIII: 76-84.

Rutter, J.B., 1990. ‘Pottery groups from Tzoungiza of the end of the Middle Bronze Age’, Hesperia 59: 375-458.

Rehak, P., 1995. ‘Enthroned figures in Aegean art and the function of the Mycenaean megaron’ in P. Rehak (ed.), The Role of the Ruler in the Prehistoric Aegean (Aegaeum 11, Liège and Austin TX): 95-118.

Rutter, J.B., 1992. ‘Cultural novelties in the Post-palatial Aegean world; indices of vitality or decline?’ in W.A. Ward and M. Sharp Joukowsky (eds.), The crisis years: the 12th century BC. From beyond the Danube to the Tigris (Dubuque, Iowa): 61-78.

Rehak, P, 1996. “Aegean Breechcloths, Kilts, and the Keftiu”, AJA 100: 35-51. Rehak, P., 1999. ‘The Mycenaean “Warrior Goddess” revisited’ in R. Laffineur (ed.), Polemos: Le contexte guerrier en Égée à l’Âge du Bronze (Aegaeum 19; Liège and Austin TX): 227-37.

Rutter, J.B., 2001. ‘Review of Aegean Prehistory II; the Prepalatial Bronze Age of the Southern and Central Greek Mainland’ in T. Cullen (ed.), Aegean Prehistory: A Review (AJA Supplement 1; Boston): 95-155.

Renfrew, C., 1985. The Archaeology of Cult: the Sanctuary of Phylakopi (London).

Ryan, T and C. Swartz, 1956. ‘Speed of perception as a function of mode and representation’, American Journal of Pyschology 69: 60-9.

Reusch, H., 1953. ‘Vorschlag zur Ordnung der Fragmente von Frauenfriesen aus Mykenai’, AA 68: cols.26-56. Reusch, H., 1956. Die zeichnerische Rekonstruktion des Frauenfrieses im böotischen Theben (Berlin).

Säflund, G., 1986. ‘Girls and gazelles. Reflections on Theran fresco imagery’ in Φίλια έπη εις Γεωργιον Ε. Μυλωναν δια τα 60 ετη του ανασκαφικου του εργου. A (Athens): 185-90.

Rhodes, G., S. Brennan and S. Carey, 1987. ‘Identification and ratings of caricatures: implications for mental representations of faces’, Cognitive Psychology 19: 473-97.

Sakellarakis, J.A., 1990. ‘The fashioning of ostrich-egg rhyta in the Creto-Mycenaean Aegean’ in D.A. Hardy, C.G. Doumas, J.A. Sakellarakis and P.M. Warren (eds.),

72

MYCENAEAN ART: A PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH Thera and the Aegean World III. Volume I: Archaeology (London): 285-308.

Solso, R., 2003. The Psychology of Art and the Evolution of the Conscious Brain (Cambridge, Mass.).

Sakellarakis, J.A., 1992. The Mycenaean Pictorial Style in the National Archaeological Museum of Athens (Athens).

Spyropoulos, T., 1973. ‘Ορχομενός’, ADelt B1 (Chr.): 258-63.

Sakellariou, A. (ed.), 1964. Corpus der Minoischen und Mykenischen Siegel, Band I (Berlin).

Steel, L., 1999. ‘Wine kraters and chariots: the Mycenaean Pictorial Style reconsidered’ in P.P. Betancourt, V. Karageorghis, R. Laffineur and W-D. Niemeier (eds.), Meletemata. Studies in Aegean archaeology presented to Malcolm H. Wiener (Aegaeum 20; Liège and Austin, TX): 803-11.

Sakellariou, A., 1971. ‘Scène de bataille sur un vase Mycénien en pierre?’, RA: 3-14.

Taylour, W.D., 1969. ‘Mycenae 1968’, Antiquity 43: 917.

Schiering, W., 1999. ‘Goddesses, dancing and flowergathering maidens in Middle Minoan vase painting’ in P.P. Betancourt, V. Karageorghis, R. Laffineur and W-D. Niemeier (eds.), Meletemata. Studies in Aegean archaeology presented to Malcolm H. Wiener (Aegaeum 20; Liège and Austin, TX): 747-50.

Tong, F., K. Nakayama, M. Moscovitch, O. Weinrib and N. Kanwisher, 2000. ‘Response properties of the human fusiform face area’, Cognitive Neuropsychology 17: 25779.

Sakellarakis, Y. and E. Sapouna-Sakellaraki, 1997. Archanes. Minoan Crete in a New Light (Athens).

Touchais, G., 1999. ‘La Grèce continentale au début du bronze récent (environ 1650-1450 av.J-C)’ in A. Caubet (ed.), L’acrobate au taureau. Les découvertes de Tell elDab’a (Égypte) et l’archéologie de la Méditerranée orientale (1800-1400 av. J-C) (Paris): 197-222.

Schiller, P.H., N.K. Logothetis and E.R. Charles, 1990. ‘Functions of the colour-opponent and broad-band channels of the visual system’, Nature 343: 68-70.

Treisman, A., 1986. ‘Features and objects in visual processing’, Scientific American 225.5: 106-15.

Segall, M.H., 1976. ‘Visual art: some perspective from cross-cultural psychology’ in D. Brothwell (ed.), Beyond Aesthetics: Investigations into the Nature of Visual Art (London): 98-114.

Treisman, A. M., 1988. ‘Features and objects: the Fourteenth Bartlett Memorial Lecture’, Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 40A: 201-37.

Shelmerdine, C.W., 1999. ‘Administration in the Mycenaean palaces. Where’s the Chief?’ in M.L. Galaty and W.A. Parkinson (eds.), Rethinking Mycenaean Palaces: New Interpretations of an Old Idea (Los Angeles, Ca.): 1924.

Trevarthen, C., 1995. ‘Mother and baby - seeing artfully eye to eye’ in R. Gregory, J. Harris, P. Heard and D. Rose (eds.), The Artful Eye (Oxford, New York, Tokyo): 157200.

Shelmerdine, C.W., 2001. ‘Review of Aegean Prehistory VI. The Palatial Bronze Age of the southern and central Greek mainland’ in T. Cullen (ed.), Aegean Prehistory: A Review (AJA Supplement 1; Boston): 378-81.

Tsountas, C., 1887. ‘ Άρχαιότητες έκ Μυκήνων’, AE: 156-72. Tsountas, C., 1888. ‘Άνασκαφάι τάφων εν Μυκήναις’, AE: 119-79.

Siedentopf, H., 1991. Alt-Ägina IV.2: Mattbemalte Keramik der Mittleren Bronzezeit (Mainz).

Tsountas, C. 1896. ‘Γραπτή στήλη έκ Μυκήνων’, AE: 122.

Silverberg, J. and J.P. Gray, 1992. ‘Violence and Peacefulness as Behavioral Potentialities of Primates’ in J. Silverberg and J. P. Gray (eds.), Aggression and Peacefulness in Humans and Other Primates: 1-36 (New York and Oxford).

Tsountas, C. and J. I. Manatt, 1897. The Mycenaean age: a study of the monuments and culture of pre-Homeric Greece (Boston and New York).

Sinclair, A., 1995. ‘The technique as a symbol in Late Glacial Europe’, World Archaeology 27: 50-62.

Ungerleider, L.G. and M. Mishkin, 1982. ‘Two cortical visual systems’ in D. J. Ingle, M.A., Goodale and R.J. Mansfield (eds.), Analysis of visual behavior (Cambridge Mass.): 549-80.

Smith, W.S., 1965. Interconnections in the Ancient Near East: a study of the relationships between the arts of Egypt, the Aegean and Western Asia (New Haven).

Ventris, M. and J. Chadwick, 1973. Documents in Mycenaean Greek (Cambridge).

73

GEORGINA MUSKETT Vermeule, E.T., 1965. ‘Painted Mycenaean Larnakes’, JHS 85: 123-148.

Woodford, S and M. Loudon, 1980. ‘Two Trojan Themes: the iconography of Ajax carrying the body of Achilles and of Aeneas carrying Anchises in Black Figure vase painting’, AJA 84: 39-40.

Vermeule, E.T., 1972. Greece in the Bronze Age (Chicago).

Wright, J.C., 1984. ‘Umpiring the Mycenaean Empire”, TUAS 9: 58-70.

Vermeule, E.T., 1975. The Art of the Shaft Graves at Mycenae (Cincinatti).

Wright, J. C, 1990. ‘An Early Mycenaean Hamlet on Tzoungiza at Ancient Nemea’ in P. Darcque and R. Treuil (eds.), L’habitat égéen préhistorique (BCH Supplément XIX, Athens): 347-57.

Vermeule, E.T., 1979. Aspects of Death in Early Greek Art and Poetry (Sather Classical Lectures, Vol. 46, London). Vermeule, E.T. and V. Karageorghis, 1982. Mycenaean Pictorial Vase Painting (Cambridge, Mass.).

Wright, J.C., 1995. ‘From Chief to King in Mycenaean Society’ in P. Rehak (ed.), The Role of the Ruler in the Prehistoric Aegean (Aegaeum 11, Liège and Austin TX): 63-80. Wright, J.C., J.F. Cherry, J.L. Davis, E. Mantzourani, S.B. Sutton and R.F. Sutton, Jnr., 1990. ‘The Nemea Valley Archaeological Project: A Preliminary Report’, Hesperia 59: 579-659.

Voutsaki, S., 1995. ‘Social and political process in the Mycenaean Argolid: the evidence from the mortuary practices’ in R. Laffineur and W-D Niemeier (eds.), Politeia: Society and State in the Aegean Bronze Age (Aegaeum 12; Liège and Austin, TX): 55-66. Voutsaki, S., 1997. “The creation of value and prestige in the Aegean Late Bronze Age’, JEA 5: 34-52.

Xenaki-Sakellariou, A., 1996. ‘Les gobelets de Vapheio. Archetypes de la koine Creto-Mycénienne’ in E. de Miro, L. Godart and A. Sacconi (eds.), Atti e Memorie del Secondo Congresso Internazionale de Micenologia (Rome): 1339-45.

Voutsaki, S., 1999. ‘Mortuary display, prestige and identity in the Shaft Grave era’ in Eliten in der Bronzezeit. Ergebnisse zweier Kolloquien in Mainz und Athen, I (Römisch-Germanisches Zentralmuseum. Forschungzinstitut für vor- und frühgeschichte. Monographien Band 43,1; Mainz): 103-17.

Xenaki-Sakellariou, A. and C. Chatziliou, 1989. “Peinture en metal” à l’époque mycénienne (Athens). Young, W.J., 1969. ‘Appendix: Laboratory analysis of plaster and pigments’ in M.L. Lang, The Palace of Nestor at Pylos in Western Messenia, Vol. II: The Frescoes (Princeton): 229-30.

Wace, A.J.B., 1953. ‘Mycenae 1939-1952. Preliminary Report on the Excavations of 1952’. BSA 48: 3-18. Wace, A.J.B., 1954. ‘Mycenae 1939-1953. The House of Shields’. BSA 49: 235-8.

Young, M.P. and S. Yamane, 1992. ‘Sparse population coding of faces in the inferotemporal cortex’, Science 256: 1327-31.

Wachsmann, S., 1987. Aegeans in the Theban Tombs (Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta 20; Leuven).

Younger, J.G., 1973. ‘The Vapheio Gems: reconsideration of the find-spots’, AJA 77: 338-40.

Walter, H., 1981. ‘Ανασκαφή στο Λόφο Κολώνα, Αίγινα, 1981-1982’, AAA 14: 179-84.

a

Younger, J.G., 1976. ‘Bronze Age representations of Aegean bull leaping’, AJA 80: 125-37.

Walter H. and Felten F., 1981. Alt-Ägina. Band III.1. Die vorgeschichtliche Stadt: Befestigungen, Häuser, Funde (Mainz).

Younger, J.G., 1985. ‘Aegean Seals of the Bronze Age: Stylistic Groups IV’, Kadmos 24: 34-73.

Wedde, M., 1999. ‘War at sea: the Mycenaean and Early Iron Age oared galley’ in R. Laffineur (ed.), Polemos: Le contexte guerrier en Égée à l’Âge du Bronze (Aegaeum 19; Liège and Austin TX): 465-76.

Younger, J.G., 1991. ‘Seals? from Middle Helladic Greece’, Hydra 8: 35-54. Younger, J.G., 1992. ‘Bronze Age representations of Aegean jewelry’ in R. Laffineur and J.L. Crowley (eds.), ΕΙΚΩΝ: Aegean Bronze Age Iconography: Shaping A Methodology (Aegaeum 8; Liège): 257-93.

Welter, G., 1938. Aigina (Berlin). Whitley, J., 1991. Style and Society in Dark Age Greece (Cambridge).

Younger, J.G., 1997. ‘The stelai of Mycenae Grave Circles A and B’ in R. Laffineur and P.P. Betancourt (eds.), TEXNH: Craftsmen, Craftswomen and 74

MYCENAEAN ART: A PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH Craftsmanship in the Aegean Bronze Age (Aegaeum 16, Liège and Austin TX): 229-39. Younger, J.G., 1998. Music in the Aegean Bronze Age (SIMA-PB 144; Jonsered). Zeki, S.M., 1978. ‘Functional specialisation in the visual cortex of the rhesus monkey’, Nature 274: 423-8. Zeki, S., 1992. ‘The Visual Image in Mind and Brain’, Scientific American, September 1992: 43-50. Zeki, S., 1999. Inner Vision (Oxford). Zeki, S. and Marini, I., 1998. ‘Three cortical stages of colour processing in the human brain’, Brain 121: 166985. Zerner, C., 1990. ‘Ceramics and Ceremony: Pottery and Burials from Lerna in the Middle and Early Late Bronze Ages’ in R. Hägg and G.C. Nordquist (eds.), Celebrations of death and divinity in the Bronze Age Argolid (Stockholm): 23-34. Zwierlein-Diehl, E. 1969. Antike Gemmen in deutschen Sammlungen, Band 2 (München)

75