Mochlos IC: Period III. Neopalatial Settlement on the Coast: The Artisans' Quarter and the Farmhouse at Chalinomouri. The Small Finds (Prehistory Monographs) [Illustrated] 193153408X, 9781931534086

Citation preview

MOCHLOS IC Period III. Neopalatial Settlement on the Coast: The Artisans’ Quarter and the Farmhouse at Chalinomouri. The Small Finds

Mochlos IC Period III. Neopalatial Settlement on the Coast: The Artisans’ Quarter and the Farmhouse at Chalinomouri The Small Finds

Frontispiece. Stone vases in various stages of manufacture: IC.176, IC.169, IC.171, IC.170 (S 244, 100, 242, 233; from top to bottom). Drawn by Doug Faulmann.

PREHISTORY MONOGRAPHS 9

Mochlos IC Period III. Neopalatial Settlement on the Coast: The Artisans’ Quarter and the Farmhouse at Chalinomouri The Small Finds by Jeffrey S. Soles, Costis Davaras, Joanna Bending, Tristan Carter, Despina Kondopoulou, Dimitra Mylona, Maria Ntinou, Ann M. Nicgorski, David S. Reese, Anaya Sarpaki, Werner H. Schoch, Mary Ellen Soles, Vassilis Spatharas, Zophia A. Stos-Gale, Donald H. Tarling, and Christopher Witmore series editors Jeffrey S. Soles and Costis Davaras

Published by INSTAP Academic Press Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 2004

Design and Production INSTAP Academic Press Printing Sun Printing House, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Binding Hoster Bindery, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Mochlos IC Period III. Neopalatial settlement on the coast, the artisans’ quarter and the farmhouse at Chalinomouri : the small finds / Jeffrey S. Soles ... [et al.]. p. cm. — (Prehistory monographs ; 9) Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 1-931534-08-X (alk. paper) 1. Mochlos Plain (Greece)—Antiquities. 2. Excavations (Archaeology)—Greece—Mochlos Plain. 3. Minoans—Greece—Mochlos Plain. I. Soles, Jeffrey S., 1942- II. Series. DF221.C8M66 2004 939’.18—dc22 2004007630

Copyright © 2004 INSTAP Academic Press Philadelphia, Pennsylvania All rights reserved Printed in the United States of America

Table of Contents LIST OF TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .ix LIST OF FIGURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .xi LIST OF PLATES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .xv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .xvii ABBREVIATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .xix INTRODUCTION Jeffrey S. Soles and Costis Davaras . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 1. THE MOCHLOS SHIP CUP Costis Davaras . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3 2. CERAMIC, STONE, BONE, AND SHELL OBJECTS Jeffrey S. Soles, Ann M. Nicgorski, Mary Ellen Soles, Tristan Carter, and David S. Reese . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17 3. THE METAL FINDS AND THEIR GEOLOGICAL SOURCES Jeffrey S. Soles and Zophia A. Stos-Gale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .45 4. THE STONE IMPLEMENTS Tristan Carter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .61 5. MINERALS AND ROCKS Tristan Carter and Christopher Witmore . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .109 6. FAUNA AND FLORA David S. Reese, Dimitra Mylona, Joanna Bending, Anaya Sarpaki, Werner H. Schoch, and Maria Ntinou . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .117 7. CONCLUSIONS Jeffrey S. Soles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .139

viii

MOCHLOS NEOPALATIAL SETTLEMENT ON THE COAST

APPENDIX A. RADIOCARBON RESULTS Jeffrey S. Soles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .145 APPENDIX B. AN ARCHAEOMAGNETIC STUDY OF THE LM IB KILNS Donald H. Tarling, Despina Kondopoulou, and Vassilis Spatharas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151 BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .159 CONCORDANCE A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .175 CONCORDANCE B . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 187 INDEX . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .195 TABLES FIGURES PLATES

List of Tables 1.

Metal compositions of finds from the Artisans’ Quarter and Chalinomouri (arranged according to the find spot).

2.

Lead isotope ratios of metal finds from the Artisans’ Quarter and Chalinomouri (arranged according to ore source).

3.

Metals from the Artisans’ Quarter and Chalinomouri, ores from Lavrion and Bolkardag, and Cypriot ores and slags.

4.

Lead isotope ratios for the copper and lead metal from the Artisans’ Quarter and Chalinomouri and other LM sites.

5.

Sources of copper used in LM I Crete (excluding Mochlos).

6.

The origin of copper metal from the Artisans’ Quarter and Chalinomouri.

7.

Ground stone tool types (GS.T) at the Artisans’ Quarter and Chalinomouri.

8.

Raw materials represented in the Artisans’ Quarter and Chalinomouri ground stone assemblages.

9.

Balance weights and sub-cuboid “polishers,” ranked in order of descending weight.

10.

Raw materials in the Artisans’ Quarter Buildings A and B ground stone assemblages.

11A. The Artisans’ Quarter obsidian: total assemblage. 11B. The Artisans’ Quarter obsidian: blade assemblage. 12.

Correlation of ground stone tool type (GS.T) and raw material.

13.

Ground Stone Tool Types (GS.T) at the Artisans’ Quarter Buildings A and B.

14.

Relative quantities of retouched implements in later Aegean Bronze Age obsidian assemblages

15.

Distribution of obsidian at the Artisans’ Quarter.

16.

Current totals of obsidian from Neopalatial structures at Mochlos and Chalinomouri.

17A. Utilized obsidian from the Artisans’s Quarter, by blank type and overall assemblage. 17B. Utilized chipped stone from the Artisans’ Quarter, by blank type and overall assemblage. 18.

Average width and thickness of blades from the plein temps de débitage from Minoan and Cycladic contexts.

x

MOCHLOS NEOPALATIAL SETTLEMENT ON THE COAST

19. Environmental sampling. 20. Age of ovis/capra remains from the Artisans’ Quarter. 21. Age of sus remains from the Artisans’ Quarter. 22. Butchered bones from the Artisans’ Quarter. 23. Burned mammal bones from the Artisans’ Quarter. 24. Marine invertebrates from the Artisans’ Quarter (1,221 individuals). 25. Age of ovis/capra remains from Chalinomouri. 26. Artisans’ Quarter and Chalinomouri: fish size distribution. 27. Artisans’ Quarter and Chalinomouri: fish anatomical part representation. 28. Artisans’ Quarter and Chalinomouri: fish bone preservation by building and room. 29. Artisans’ Quarter, Building A: fish species representation by room. 30. Artisans’ Quarter Building B: fish species representation by room. 31. Chalinomouri: fish species representation by room. 32. Artisans’ Quarter and Chalinomouri: fish bone measurements. 33. Information on ecology and potential fishing methods for the fish species recovered from the Artisans’ Quarter and Chalinomouri. 34. Summary of plant remains in the 136 samples from the Artisans’ Quarter and Chalinomouri (115 water floated and 21 hand collected). 35. Measurements of dimensions of Olea europaea stones from Mochlos. 36. Calculated ratio of diameter/length for Olea europaea stones from Mochlos. 37. Results of Formula 2 based on measurements of dimensions of Vitis seeds. 38. Results of Formula 3 based on measurements of dimensions of Vitis seeds. 39. Summary of wood remains from the Artisans’ Quarter and Chalinomouri. 40.

Radiocarbon determinations for samples from the Artisans’ Quarter and Chalinomouri.

41.

Site mean directional values.

42.

Palaeo-intensity determinations (Sites ML3 and ML5).

43. Archaeomagnetic directions at Late Minoan sites in the Aegean. 44. Sample intensity, weight, directional analyses, and color.

List of Figures Scale 1:3 unless otherwise indicated.

1A. The Mochlos Ship Cup, IB.202. 1B. Unrolled frieze with reconstructed ships, IB.202. 1C. The seal of Makrygialos. 2A. The Mochlos signet ring. 2B. The signet ring in the Stathatos Collection. 2C. Talismanic cabin-ship with M-like akrostolion. 2D. The seal of Makrygialos as drawn by T. Phanourakis. 3.

Bats: IC.1–9, IC.11, IC.12.

4.

Drains: IC.14–16.

5.

Drains: IC.17, IC.19, IC.20, IC.22, IC.23, IC.26.

6.

Feet: IC.27, IC.28; lamp: IC.29; clay and stone molds: IC.30, IC.31, IC.33–35, IC.168.

7.

Rectangular work slabs: IC.36–40, IC.44, IC.52.

8.

Circular and plano-convex slabs: IC.53, IC.56–58, IC.60.

9.

Plano-convex slabs: IC. 61, IC.62, IC.66, IC.75.

10. Stands: IC.83–85; loomweights: IC.88, IC.89, IC.93, IC.94, IC.99, IC.100–108. 11. Loomweights: IC.109–113, IC.116, IC.120–124, IC.126, IC.129–133, IC.135, IC.136, IC.139, IC.140, IC.144, IC.145. 12. Loomweights: IC.147–157. Potter’s wheels: IC.158, IC.159, IC.163. 13. Potter’s wheels: IC.160–162. Miscellaneous clay objects: IC.86, IC.87, IC.164, IC.165, IC.167. 14. Unfinished stone objects: IC.169–172; finished stone vases: IC.173–176; lamp: IC.177. 15. Finished stone lids: IC.178–184; fragmentary stone vases: IC.185–190. 16. Fragmentary stone vases: IC.191–203.

xii

MOCHLOS NEOPALATIAL SETTLEMENT ON THE COAST

17. Fragmentary stone vases: IC.204–206; miscellaneous stone objects: IC.207–210; fossils: IC.211–214. 18. Miscellaneous bone objects: IC.215–220; triton shells: IC.221–223, IC.225. 19. Copper ingots: IC.226, IC.232, IC.241–243; copper and bronze strips: IC.245–248; casting waste or spill: IC.249, IC.250. 20. Copper and bronze objects: IC.267–277. 21. Bronze bowls and other copper and bronze scrap: IC.278–283, IC.285. 22. Miscellaneous copper and bronze scrap: IC.284, IC.286, IC.287, IC.289, IC.291–IC.296; lead weights and scrap: IC.297–301. 23. Implements with pecked or battered ends (hammerstones): IC.303–305, IC.309; implements with pecked circumferences and one or two abraded faces (hammerstone/grinders): IC.319, IC.324, IC.325. 24. Pestle: IC.328; handstones: IC.329, IC.330, IC.335; implements with heavy abrasive wear (grinders): IC.342, IC.344, IC.345. 25. Sub-cuboid polishers and grinders: IC.353, IC.356, IC.357, IC.359; trapezoidal cobbles with abraded facets: IC.361, IC.362; irregularly shaped implements (polishers): IC.363, IC.364, IC.376; elongated cobbles and pebbles with areas of light abrasion: IC.378, IC.379, IC.381, IC.384; differently weathered cobbles: IC.386, IC.388. 26. Drill-guides: IC.389–392, IC.394, IC.395; drill cap: IC.396; engravers and piercers: IC.397, IC.398; palette: IC.405. 27. Saddle querns: IC.401–403. 28. Whetstones: IC. 406–408; tables: IC.412, IC.413. 29. Mortars: IC.416, IC.417; tripod mortar: IC.420. Basins IC.423, IC.425. 30. Basin: IC.424; balance weights: IC.427–IC.429; biconically perforated weights: IC.432–434. 31. Weights: IC.435, IC.437; loomweight: IC.436; bore-core: IC.446; miscellaneous stone implements: IC.453–455. 32. Pivot stones: IC.447–449. 33. Generalized reconstruction of the pressure-flaked blade manufacturing sequence at Late Neopalatial Mochlos. 34. Obsidian cores: IC.457–463; primary and secondary flakes: IC.465–467. 35. Obsidian secondary and tertiary flakes: IC.468–471, IC.473–478, IC.483. 36. Obsidian blades of initiation: IC.486; primary series blades: IC.487–489, IC.492; blades from the plein temps de débitage: IC.495–509. 37. Obsidian blades from the plein temps de débitage: IC.510, IC.511, IC.513–517; rejuvenation flakes: IC.519–522. 38

Calibration of radiocarbon age to calendar years: Mochlos samples 1–3.

39. Calibration of radiocarbon age to calendar years: Mochlos samples 4–6. 40. Calibration of radiocarbon age to calendar years: Mochlos samples 7–9.

LIST OF FIGURES

xiii

41A. Calibration of radiocarbon age to calendar years: weighted average of samples 1, 2, 3, 5, and 6. 41B. Calibration of radiocarbon age to calendar years: weighted average of samples 2, 3, 5, and 6. 42.

Sketch plans of Kilns A and B (ML3 and ML4).

43.

Sketch plan of Chalinomouri Kiln (ML5).

44.

Stereographic projections of the sample directions.

45A. Palaeointensity determination for specimen ML3.3a. The change of NRM (natural remanent magnetization) and TRM (laboratory induced thermal remanent magnetization) as a function of temperature. 45B. Palaeointensity determination for specimen ML3.3a. The ratio of the NRM/TRM intensities as a function of temperature. 46.

Stereographic plot of the mean Crete LM IA/B and LM IB directions, the two volcanic phases on Santorini (Thera), and the Mochlos sites.

List of Plates 1A. The Makrygialos seal. 1B. Seal with palm trees and cairn. 1C. Detail of the Fleet Fresco. Miniature Fresco from the West House, Thera. 2.

Bats: IC.2–8.

3.

Drains: IC.14–16, IC.20.

4.

Feet and molds: IC.27, IC.28, IC.30–34.

5.

Work slabs: IC.37, IC.38, IC.56, IC.58, IC.60.

6.

Spinning bowls and loomweights: IC.83–85, IC.93, IC.101, IC.102, IC.106, IC.111, IC.116, IC.120, IC.154.

7.

Loomweights and potter’s wheel: IC.131, IC.147–151, IC.153, IC.154, IC.156–158.

8.

Potter’s wheels and miscellaneous clay objects: IC.86, IC.87, IC.159–162, IC.164, IC.165 .

9.

Stone vases: IC.169–175.

10. Stone vases: IC.176, IC.177, IC.180, IC.181, IC.183, IC.184, IC.186, IC.187. 11. Stone vases: IC.192–198, IC.203, IC.205, IC.206. 12. Miscellaneous stone, bone, and shell objects: IC.207, IC.209–211, IC.216, IC.217, IC.219, IC.220, IC.221–223. 13. Copper ingot fragments: IC.226–240, IC.241–244. 14. Strips and waste (spill): IC.245–247, IC.249–256, IC.258–266. 15. Bronze objects: IC.267–277. 16. Bronze and lead objects: IC.279–282, IC.284, IC.286, IC.289, IC.293–295, IC.297, IC.298, IC.301. 17. GS Type 1, implements with pecked or battered ends (hammerstones): IC.303–305, IC.309, IC.310, IC.313; GS Type 2, implements with pecked circumferences and one or two abraded faces (hammerstones/grinders): IC.317–319, IC.322, IC.325, IC.326. 18. GS Type 3, pestle: IC.328; GS Type 4, handstones: IC.329, IC.330, IC.332–334; GS Type 5, implements with heavy abrasive wear (grinders): IC.340, IC.342, IC.344–346.

xvi

MOCHLOS NEOPALATIAL SETTLEMENT ON THE COAST

19.

GS Type 6a, sub-cuboid cobbles with abraded facets (sub-cuboid polishers): IC.353–356; GS Type 7, trapezoidal cobbles with abraded facets: IC.361, IC.362; GS Type 8, irregularly shaped implements with light abrasive wear (polishers): IC.363, IC.364, IC.369, IC.371–374, IC.429.

20.

GS Type 9, elongated cobbles with areas of light abrasion (polisher/applicators): IC.378–381, IC.383; GS Type 10, differentially weathered cobbles (grinders): IC.385–388; GS Type 13, engravers and piercers: IC.397, IC.398.

21.

GS Type 11, drill-guides: IC.389–395; GS Type 6b, drill-wedge: IC.360; GS Type 26, bore-core: IC.446.

22.

GS Type 14, saddle querns: IC.401–403; GS Type 15, palette: IC.405; GS Type 16, whetstones: IC.406–409.

23.

GS Type 17, anvil: IC.410; GS Type 18, tables: IC.412, IC.413.

24.

GS Type 19b, tripod mortar: IC.420; stone implements from Building B, Room 8: IC.334, IC.335, IC.355, IC.363, IC.371, IC.406.

25.

GS Type 20, basins: IC.424, IC.425; GS Type 21, balance pan weights: IC.427, IC.428; GS Type 22, biconically perforated weights: IC.430–434; GS Type 25, naturally perforated weights: IC.437–439, IC.442–445.

26.

Stone implements from Building A, Room 1: IC.346, IC.359, IC.360, IC.368, IC.381, IC.389, IC.397, IC.398, IC.409, IC.429, IC.446; GS Type 27, pivot stones: IC.448–451; GS Type 28, miscellaneous, pumice implement: IC.455; CS Type 1, obsidian nodule: IC.456.

27A. Fish bones from the Artisans’ Quarter and Chalinomouri. Otoliths and other anatomical parts. 27B. Fish bones from the Artisans’ Quarter and Chalinomouri. Otoliths and other anatomical parts. 27C. Fish bones from the Artisans’ Quarter and Chalinomouri. Spine from Building B, Room 9, in the Artisans’ Quarter, showing cut marks. 28.

Olive stones from the Artisans’ Quarter.

29A. Olea europaea. Transverse section, X90. 29B. Olea europaea. Tangential longitudinal section, X350. 29C. Olea europaea. Radial longitudinal section, X250. 29D. Pinus brutia-P. halepensis-P. pinea. Transverse section, X100. 29E. Pinus brutia-P. halepensis-P. pinea. Tangential longitudinal section, X300. 29F. Pinus brutia-P. halepensis-P. pinea. Radial longitudinal section, X901.

Acknowledgments The excavation of the Artisans’ Quarter at Mochlos and the farmhouse at Chalinomouri was a joint Greek-American collaboration sponsored by the University of North Carolina at Greensboro and the Archaeological Institute of Crete under the auspices of the Greek Ministry of Culture and the American School of Classical Studies at Athens. The editors are grateful to the Greek Archaeological Service for granting the excavation permit, to the staff of the 24th Ephoreia in east Crete for facilitating the work, and to all of these organizations for their assistance in seeing the project through to a successful completion. The Institute for Aegean Prehistory and the National Endowment for the Humanities provided the major funding for the excavation, but numerous individuals also contributed financial support, including Philippe and Marion Lambert and Karen Morely Westcott. The Institute for Aegean Prehistory also provided the major funding for the study seasons which followed the excavation and made the publication a reality. The Samuel H. Kress Foundation was particularly helpful in supporting our conservation efforts. Additionally, all the authors of the book would like to thank their respective universities and academic institutions for providing support in various ways during the preparation of this volume. They include the University of Athens, the University of North Carolina at Greensboro, Willamette University, Stanford University, the Field Museum of Natural History, the North Carolina Museum of Art, the Isotrace Laboratory at the University of Oxford, the British Academy, the Science Research Council of Great Britain, the University of Sheffield, the University of Plymouth, the Laboratory for Quaternary Wood Research in Adliswil, Switzerland, the University of Valencia in Spain, the Wiener Laboratory of the American School of Classical Studies in Athens, the University of Thessaloniki, the University of Crete, and the Institute of Mediterranean Studies in Rethymno. A large number of individuals have made this part of Mochlos vol. I possible, either as direct contributors to its various chapters or as researchers or technicians who assisted in the work that went into the preparation of these chapters. The volume editors would like to thank the various chapter authors listed in the Table of Contents and the individuals who worked behind the scenes and contributed to the book in other ways. For Chapter 1 we are particularly grateful to Ann Nicgorski who helped to edit the original manuscript. For Chapters 2, 3, and 5 we are indebted to an array of undergraduate and graduate students from many universities who helped with the measuring and weighing of cataloged items. They include Kate Kilackey, Christopher Wilson, Jason Galbraith, Astrid Van Giffin, Jerrie Lee Parpart, and Sara

xviii

MOCHLOS NEOPALATIAL SETTLEMENT ON THE COAST

Jarmer. The editors and authors of Chapter 3 would like to thank Neil Boulton of the Isotrace Laboratory at Oxford University who performed the lead isotope and energy dispersive X-ray fluorescence (ED XRF) analyses for the metals. We are also thankful to Demetrios Anglos of the Foundation for Research and Technology, Hellas, who did the Laser-Induced Breakdown Spectroscopy (LIBS) analyses for these metals. For Chapter 6 we are indebted to many individuals who contributed toward the collection and processing of environmental material over many years. Students who washed and/or sorted the residues from the water flotation program include Maureen Smyth, Jessie Hastings, Brian Shelbourne, Maria Droungaki, Penelope Roumanou, and Dimitra Mylona. Niki Spanou, Dimitra Mylona, and Lena Mandalara sorted most of the flot. For Appendix A we are also indebted to Darden Hood of Beta Analytic who calculated the weighted average radiocarbon age for the LM IB carbon samples. We would like to thank Robert Grill for Concordances A and B at the end of the book. As always, we are grateful to the staff members of the Institute for Aegean Prehistory Study Center in East Crete, particularly members of its publication support team. Doug Faulmann provided all of the drawings for Chapters 2 and 3. Stephania Chlouveraki and Michel Roggenbucke performed most of the conservation on the small finds cataloged in Chapters 1, 2, and 3. Kathy May photographed these objects and composed the layout for the plates in the book. In addition to these members of the INSTAP team, we are also grateful to several other individuals who contributed in these efforts. We are indebted to the late Thomas Phanourakis, the expert artist of the Herakleion Museum, for the drawing of the Makrygialos seal discussed in Chapter 1. We thank Laura Labriola and Cathy Pack for their hard work in illustrating the stone implements in Chapter 4. We are also grateful to Stavroula Golfomitsou who served as metal conservator and preserved the bronze objects discussed in Chapter 3. Without her meticulous reconstruction of the bronze bowls discussed in this chapter, it would have been impossible to identify their original shapes. Several authors would also like to thank various individuals for their support and suggestions in writing their respective chapters. Tristan Carter is grateful to a number of colleagues for their invaluable help in the preparation of Chapter 4 on stone implements, particularly Harriet Blitzer and Doniert Evely, plus Philip Betancourt, Andy Bevan, John Clark, Cesare Dannibale, Heidi Dierckx, Chris Doherty, Karl Taube, Mike Lewis, Jennifer Moody, Jim Muhly, Polymnia Muhly, Scott Pike, Hara Procopiou, Cemal Pulak, and David Reese. Tristan Carter and Christopher Witmore are grateful to Sidney Carter for his critique of the stones and minerals identified in Chapter 5. Anaya Sarpaki and Joanna Bending would like to thank E. Panagiotakopoulu for verifying dung as insect dung, as well as discussing olive infestation, and Mike Charles, University of Sheffield, for permission to use University facilities in order to check seeds of the Bioarchaeology Laboratory’s collection. The author of Appendix A would like to thank Darden Hood, Tom Brogan, and Malcolm Wiener for their suggestions. Jeffrey S. Soles Costis Davaras

Abbreviations The following abbreviations are used in this volume:

A A.1, A.2, etc. Am2 Am2/g B B.1, B.2, etc. CF Ch Ch.1, Ch.2, etc. Chap. d. dims. EBA ED XRF EH EM est. ext. F FN g GS h. HM int.

Building A, Artisans’ Quarter Building A, Room 1, etc. ampere meter squared ampere meter squared per gram Building B, Artisans Quarter Building B, Room 1, etc. coarse fabric Chalinomouri Chalinomouri, Room 1, etc. Chapter diameter dimensions Early Bronze Age Energy Dispersive X-ray Fluorescence Early Helladic Early Minoan estimated exterior fused Final Neolithic gram ground stone height Herakleion Museum interior

kg LBA LC Le LM mA/m MDA MH MM MNI m max. mos. mT n. NM NR pres. R T UF w. yrs. -/- -

kilogram Late Bronze Age Late Cycladic left Late Minoan milli amps per meter maximum deviation angle Middle Helladic Middle Minoan Minimum Number of Individuals meter maximum months milli tesla (magnetic field unit) note National Archaeological Museum in Athens North Room, Building A, Artisans’ Quarter preserved right tesla unfused width years complete/fragments

Introduction Jeffrey S. Soles and Costis Davaras

This book contains the small finds, including artifacts and ecofacts, from the Artisans’ Quarter and the Chalinomouri farmhouse, which the GreekAmerican Excavations at Mochlos uncovered in the summers of 1990–1994. It is the third part of Volume I in the Mochlos Publication Series, in which Part A deals with the stratigraphy, architecture, and functions of the two sites and Part B deals with the Neopalatial pottery. Like Part B, it provides more detailed information about finds that are discussed in their contexts in Part A and listed after the room by room descriptions in that part of the volume. It also treats individual items as distinct groups in a synthetic fashion and provides a body of comparable material from other Minoan sites. This part completes the publication of these two coastal sites, and it should also prove a useful addition to the resources available for studying the material remains of Minoan civilization. Chapter 1 explores the meaning of the most remarkable find among the pottery from the two sites—the enigmatic Ship Cup, with its frieze of three ships encircling the cup. Chapter 2 contains the catalog of all ceramic, stone, bone, and shell

objects that were inventoried from the excavation. These objects include tools used in manufacturing processes, as well as products, and they permit a further discussion of the manufacturing techniques that are described in Part A of the volume. Chapter 3 contains the catalog of all metal finds from the excavation, including raw materials, waste, and final workshop products, and discusses the geological sources of the copper ingots, lead objects, and certain bronze objects. Chapter 4 lists all ground and chipped stone implements collected from the excavation. It gives the identification of the source of non-local stone and discusses the manufacturing techniques used to create these implements and their uses. Chapter 5 describes the mineral resources employed in the various craft activities at the two sites, particularly in metal working and stone vase making. Chapter 6 discusses the faunal remains, including mammal, shell, and fish remains, and the floral remains, including wood charcoal as well as seeds. It gives some indication of the various foods available to the artisans and farmers who lived there. The conclusions in Chapter 7 discuss the evidence for trade and offer a theoretical model to explain

2

MOCHLOS NEOPALATIAL SETTLEMENT ON THE COAST

some of the choices that the artisans made in practicing their crafts. The two appendices address the chronology of the period when the Artisans’ Quarter and the Chalinomouri farmhouse were in use. Appendix A gives a series of nine radiocarbon dates obtained from the excavation, and Appendix B contains an archaeomagnetic study of the three kilns found in the excavation. The bulk of this part of the volume, Chapters 2, 3, 4, and 5, is especially indebted to the work of R.D.G. Evely who provided in his two volume work on Minoan Crafts a comprehensive and detailed examination of many tools and techniques that are discussed here.1 Like Evely, the authors of this volume attempted to discuss the different aspects of the pursuit of a craft by providing catalogs of different tool types and products and by examining details of the manufacturing process revealed by these objects. The discussion of manufacturing processes is limited by the evidence at hand, however, because neither the Artisans’ Quarter nor the Chalinomouri farmhouse preserved all of the equipment that might be

needed for the various craft and farming activities that occurred at these two sites. For a more comprehensive picture and the historical background of these tools and processes, the reader should turn to Evely’s work and to the specialist studies referenced in the footnotes. There is also little discussion of the socio-economic conditions of the artisans and farmers whose tools are examined in this part of the volume. For this, the reader should turn to Part A of the volume where such discussion, which is largely theoretical, is located in the conclusions in Chapters 3 and 5. Small items of everyday life, such as the objects in this book, reflect wider aspects of society. They reveal how Minoans constructed their buildings and made their pottery, bronzes, and stone vases, but they also provide interesting insights into the behavior and beliefs of individual Minoans as well as the religious and sociopolitical structure of their society. The objects inventoried in this book have a small, but important part to play in the reconstruction of Minoan civilization, which is our ultimate goal.

Introduction Note 1. Evely 1993, 2000.

1

The Mochlos Ship Cup Costis Davaras

Introduction: the Painted Scene A rounded cup, IB.202 (P 472), was found broken and only about one-third extant in Room 2 of Building A in the Artisans’ Quarter. It displays three remarkable crescent-shaped ships in a frieze on the shoulder (Fig. 1).1 Below the ships are a pair of two horizontal bands, each with one added white line, that may have been intended to convey the impression of the ships floating on the sea. Although the surface is badly worn, clearly the ships are solidly painted in a sketchy and highly stylized manner. Only small parts of each ship are preserved, but because the ships appear to be basically identical to one another, it is possible to make a reasonable reconstruction (Fig. 1B). Side A of the cup, with the leftmost part of the frieze, is the least well preserved. All that can be seen here is the left end of one ship and part of a mysterious, oblong object that rises from the horizontal band below. As the cup is turned to the side opposite the handle, a second ship appears. Only about one third of this ship is preserved, i.e. the left side representing an end and part of the hull. On Side B of the cup, the right half of a third ship is shown with the end and part of the hull occupying

the extreme right part of the frieze. The hull of this ship touches the horizontal band below. To the right of this third vessel is the handle, which is solidly slipped with added white horizontal slashes. The ships belong to a well known, oblong, crescent-shaped type that exhibits ends rising high. Because only one partly effaced end is preserved in all three cases, it is unclear whether both ends of the three ships rose equally high, or whether one end rose higher than the other. In all three cases, the preserved end, rising up to the band that decorates the cup’s rim, displays a double ornament set at an almost right angle to this end, consisting of two small parallel crescents pointing downward. This somewhat enigmatic motif appears on other ships, and it has been described in the literature as a “barbed point,”2 a “pronged ornament,” a fleur-de-lys, an akroterion, or, more exactly, an akrostolion. The preserved ends of the three ships do not rise at the same angle. Those of the first and third ships appear to rise steeply at almost 80°, curving the hull sharply like a sickle, while the preserved end of the second ship in the middle rises smoothly at about 45°. This fact might give the impression that

4

MOCHLOS NEOPALATIAL SETTLEMENT ON THE COAST

the extremity of the second ship represents a different end of the ship compared to the first and third ships. However, this impression cannot be correct because the akrostolion is typically found on the prow of a vessel, so three prows of three different vessels should be represented here. Two objects are placed vertically on board the third ship (Side B), and the same objects were probably repeated on the other two ships because they are so similar in all other respects. The first is a ladder-like object that rises perpendicularly next to the prow. On the third ship, it is mostly preserved, although effaced in the upper part; on the second ship, it also appears, although only its left side is preserved. Both ladder-like objects display six horizontal, rung-like lines, although the second ship may have a seventh, placed somewhat obliquely below the others and slightly protruding beyond the perpendicular post. That of the third ship touches the hull with one post, while the other post stands in the air above the curving hull. Another strange element rises near the center of the hull on the third ship. It resembles a sketchily painted “arrowhead” pointing upward, or perhaps a mast with its rigging incomprehensibly falling down to the hull, at one point touching it. As the second ship is much less preserved than the third, nothing remains of this element. On the first ship, neither the ladder-like object nor the “arrowhead” is preserved. The objects on board the ships have an emblematic character as if they summarily allude to some iconographic scene that would have been wellknown to the Minoan onlooker, one that was clearly and frequently depicted in other contexts. These objects would be virtually incomprehensible today, however, and they would give rise to various explanations or speculations, had not a unique seal come to light two decades ago at the LM IB villa of Makrygialos.3 This seal (Fig. 1C; Pl. 1A), a masterpiece of glyptic art equal to a fine gold ring and perhaps originally covered with gold foil, shows a scene that serves as an “archetypal picture” or Urbild. With its help we can gain insight into the meaning of the enigmatic Ship Cup from Mochlos and decode what is here summarily executed in a formula-like, hieroglyphic way, understandable only to the contemporary onlooker. Indeed, Minoan art often works in this way. Consider, for example, the inadequate architectural representations or the

conceptual rendering of the landscape in frescoes— images that did not reflect the real world, but rendered it in a conventional way that was supposed to be decoded by the “initiated” eye of the contemporary spectator.4 The Makrygialos seal shows an extraordinary scene with a cult ship or boat carrying a priestess making the typical Minoan adoration gesture, with one fist above or between her eyes, while she stands in front of a sacred palm tree rising in the middle of the hull.5 This tree, a real arbor or albero (the Latin and Italian words for “tree” and “mast” are the same), was believed by some experts in Minoan glyptic art to be an actual mast with rigging somehow “sagging.” The ship, therefore, was described with “two stays [that] hang slackly [on] either side of the mast,” with the specific difference, of course, that the stays are concave, as they should be, not convex like on the Ship Cup from Mochlos.6 An ikrion is placed next to the tree near the ship’s rising end on the Makrygialos seal. It could also be described as an altar-like wooden shrine or enclosure, similar to the example on the ship in the famous, now lost, Mochlos ring (Fig. 2A).7 Whereas the scene on the Mochlos ring is clearly mythological or transcendental because the goddess herself is visiting a coastal sanctuary on board her selfpropelled, magical boat, one end of which is formed like a hippocampus or a dragon head, the scene on the Makrygialos seal represents a real ritual action that was aptly postulated more than three decades ago by St. Alexiou.8 The high priestess of the Sea Goddess at this coastal villa takes part in a very important ceremony.9 She is seen raising her hand, certainly not in mourning,10 but probably in connection to the holy palm tree and perhaps related to an epiphany. In any case, the important fact revealed by the Makrygialos seal is the existence of a previously unknown Minoan ritual, the transference of a holy tree on board a ship along with a light, wooden construction, perhaps from or to some coastal shrine. The scene summarily shows the culminating point of the ceremony with only the three most important elements: the tree, the wooden construction, and the priestess, or the goddess herself, in the case of the Mochlos ring The unexpected appearance on the Mochlos Ship Cup of three boats formulaically displays the same essential elements including the palm tree with its

THE MOCHLOS SHIP CUP

crown drooping in an exaggerated way, the characteristic wooden construction, and perhaps the priestess or goddess in the missing places. Such pictures were commonplace at this time and immediately recognizable even if the picture became hardly intelligible, like a hieroglyphic sign developing into a cursive script sign, as it were. If this conclusion is valid, then the scene suggests that such a ritual, where a holy tree was transported on board a cult ship, was a common and important ceremony in the Minoan world. The reason three ships performing the same ceremony are represented on one cup is unclear. It is possibly a simple case of the triplication of a sacred motif or ritual ceremony on a cup designed to play

5

some important role in this ceremony. This triplication may even enhance the numinous influence of the cup, or rather of the liquid inside it, like the reduplication of the edges of a double axe or of horns of consecration. An alternative interpretation is that the three similar ships on the Mochlos Ship Cup represent as pars pro toto a procession with a flotilla of cult ships in some sea ritual, possibly a spring festival, perhaps not unlike the famous Fleet Fresco from Thera.11 Such ship processions were known also in later times and places, like the navigium Isidis or the famous ships at Nemi that were supposed to have been used for processions in the cult of Diana Nemorensis.

The Iconographic Elements of the Ship Cup The Akrostolion and the Prow The unusual ornament at the extremity of the ships is variously known in the scholarship on Minoan glyptic arts as a “pronged ornament” or fleurde-lys.12 It is sometimes considered a “puzzling feature,”13 although Sp. Marinatos correctly identified it as an akrostolion, according to an ancient word designating the prow’s extremity.14 This ornament, seen on the ships of the talismanic seals,15 consists of a tripartite combination in which a long central point is framed by two almost rectangular hooks pointing downward that actually resembles a very stylized and linear fleur-de-lys. There is no difficulty in recognizing the akrostolia on the Mochlos Ship Cup, although the hooks are redoubled and curvilinear, not angular, probably because there is more space in this vase painting than in glyptic representations to depict this ornament more accurately, i.e. redoubled. Similarly, on the splendid, large ring of the Stathatos Collection said to come from Thebes and now in the National Archaeological Museum in Athens,16 the ample space also allows for a more realistic representation of details than on the much narrower field of the talismanic seals because the akrostolion does feature a double pair of hooks as on the

Mochlos Ship Cup (Fig. 2B). The hooks on the ring, however, are rectangular, perhaps because this shape was easier for the ring carver to execute. The same ornament takes another, oversimplified form like a solid, bifurcated end in the ships on the MM II prisms.17 In this class of seals, however, the ships have a hull with an angular contour of equal width, representing an even more stylized vessel. D. Gray was persuaded that this bifurcation, usually seen on the ship’s higher end, represents the stern.18 She was perhaps led to this viewpoint because she thought the bifurcation imitated a fish tail, the whole vessel thereby taking the form of a fish and possibly personifying it. A. Evans also saw a type of ship whose prow “terminates either in a barbed point or a kind of open beak,” evidently again like a fish.19 Against Gray’s interpretation, A. Onassoglou correctly argued that this bifurcation is nothing other than an extremely stylized akrostolion. Gloriously decorated akrostolia are, of course, much more realistically depicted in great detail in the Fleet Fresco from the West House at Thera (Pl. 1C). The glyptic representations of akrostolia (as well as those of the Mochlos Ship Cup) are clearly stylized versions in various degrees of the real decoration, or even a

6

MOCHLOS NEOPALATIAL SETTLEMENT ON THE COAST

cipher of it, that were immediately recognized by a Minoan viewer even on a tiny scale. The same is true regarding Sign 64B of Linear B, which “represents the prow of a ship with a foliated akroterion.”20 M. van Effenterre suggested that prows with a kind of hook, reminiscent of the fleurde-lys as well as “hooks and ornaments such as flowers etc., in whichever direction they are figured on top of a ship’s extremity, normally indicate the prow.”21 Rarely, however, ships do display one bifurcated or fleur-de-lys-type akrostolion at each end. Such depictions are, of course, nothing other than representations of ships with a conventional ornamental character.22 Thus, the existence of three akrostolia on the Mochlos Ship Cup does not necessarily prove that the preserved images should be identified as three prows, although the alternatives are improbable. Space is available in the frieze for three ships. The extremity with the akrostolion should be the higher end, although the other extremity can in some cases be almost equal in height. In the case of the Mochlos Ship Cup, the other end of all three ships is missing, but normally it would be lower. Of course, more cannot be said here. On this old and much discussed problem, from 1899 to today, concerning which end is higher in prehistoric ships, the answer unexpectedly came from a clay ship model in the Mitsotakis Collection,23 where the high prow contrasts with the low stern. These upcurving prows that appear in artistic representations must correspond to real examples, which were undoubtedly very useful in cleaving the heavy surf of the Mediterranean Sea. L. Basch, in his monumental work about ancient ships in general, made the bold suggestion that the Minoan fleur-de-lys ornament should be identified as a linear rendering of a flying bird with spread

wings represented at the prow’s extremity.24 Basch’s theory found the support of another authority on ancient ships, A. Göttlicher, who even described it as “zwingend und logisch.”25 If this daring theory were valid, the evidence brought by the Mochlos Ship Cup should indicate that it is a question of two birds, one behind the other, in a group flight formation. But, if the ship personifies some creature, e.g.the hippocampus or dragon of the lost Mochlos Ring, which is placed at the stern but undoubtedly turns into the ship, one would normally expect to see just one bird instead of two. In the Theran Fleet Fresco, however, whole lions looking toward the rear form the stern’s extremity, while the prow is decorated by the elaborate akrostolion (Pl. 1C). In this case, the lion can perhaps personify the ship. But when the lion is painted on the hull’s side with a series of dolphins swimming in the same or opposite direction, or when a series of birds flying toward the prow appear on the hull of another ship, these are perhaps magico-religious paintings featuring strong or swift creatures, certainly not personifications of the vessel. Basch’s thesis about a bird on the prow is seemingly untenable because of the fact that among the elaborate ornaments on some of the Theran ships’ akrostolia, we can see clearly a hook-like rectangular element,26 the function of which is not absolutely clear yet it closely resembles the upper side of a fleur-de-lys. If so, the fleur-de-lys proper should be pars pro toto of a complete, elaborate akrostolion heavy with symbolic elements like those of the Theran ships, summarily but very clearly designed for the smaller field of a seal or vase. In any case, we may perhaps postulate a certain association between this fleur-de-lys and the Minoan sacred lily because of the quite exceptional emphasis given to this special form of the akrostolion.

The Palm Tree The transportation of an upright tree on board a ship seems like a very strange idea to the modern viewer. Even before the appearance of the Makrygialos seal, however, Minoan glyptic iconography (e.g.the Mochlos Ring) attested to this unknown ritual. Because the combination of tree and boat was seemingly incongruous, some early scholars

wrongly supposed that the tree was not meant to be on board the ship, but on dry land extending invisibly in the background. Now we can be convinced of the contrary. N. Marinatos, in her study about tree shrines and tree rituals in Minoan art, observes that “no tree grows naturally from the terrain” and that “it is very

THE MOCHLOS SHIP CUP

likely that we are dealing with transportable plants,”27 repeating a remark made by earlier scholars and now fully justified. However, Marinatos’ lengthy speculation about the tree being brought perhaps from the wilderness, placed atop a shrine in connection with a season of fertility or prosperity, and then eventually destroyed as a corollary to a new beginning, must of necessity stay sub judices. In all the cases, the trees are transported in a ship, but let us be reminded that, as Evans remarked, “the tree itself was at times endued with a mysterious power of locomotion and the fable of trees going forth to choose a king (Judges IX, 8ff.) may find its origin in a circle of ideas still represented in modern folklore.”28 Evans also quoted Macbeth (Act IV, Scene 1). Of course N. Marinatos, in the paper mentioned above, discussed trees on top of shrines, while the trees depicted on the Mochlos Ship Cup are represented next to a shrine (the ikrion as suggested below). These trees also should be identified as palm trees, the Minoan sacred trees par excellence, as Marinatos also demonstrated.29 Some time ago I collected many diverse parallels from several cultures of a tree being transported in a boat.30 Evidently the Minoans adopted this ritual from other cultures like those of Egypt and Mesopotamia, especially because the palm tree was also the Oriental sacred tree, or the Tree of Life. If we are not sure that N. Marinatos correctly argued that

7

the sacred tree was destroyed by a devotee bending it out of shape, thus ending a “festival time” period,31 we can be fairly sure that the palm tree, as a tree of life, represents fertility and even distinctly shows the male or female sex (foi'nix oJ ejrshn or foi'nix hv balanhfovro" according to Herodotos). In the later Greek tradition, it is exactly this tree that Leto, certainly a survival of the Minoan Mother Goddess, grasped when she gave birth to Apollo and Artemis on Delos with mogostokos Eileithyia in attendance, who was a Cretan goddess with a Cretan xoanon on Delos.32 This island itself, with its famous palm tree, was considered to be like a ship, not resting directly on the sea bottom, but floating on the top of the sea— a fair parallel to the Makrygialos seal and the Mochlos Ship Cup. Of course, according to Thales, soil itself floated on the water rather like wood. In addition, curiously enough, the island of Crete itself was called foi'nix.33 In both cases we have mentioned, the palm trees cannot be considered saplings because they obviously display a full grown, heavily drooping crown. This is the reason why the palm tree on the Makrygialos seal was misunderstood as a “sagging rigging” even by experts. It would be out of place to discuss here the insistent connections between the palm tree and the bull often seen in glyptic art and even frescoes.34

The “Altar,” “Shrine,” or Ikrion—An Enclosure? The high, ladder-like construction (an expression used by M. Nilsson) on board the three ships on the Mochlos Ship Cup was evidently made of a light material like wood, which was easily transportable on a vessel.35 The relatively simple fabrication consists of a basic rectangular frame connected by five or six horizontal bars.36 It is not possible to say with certainty whether this construction is really an ikrion or cabin, an altar, or a shrine, or whether it is movable or fixed on board. On the talismanic seals, a similar construction consisting of two or three upright poles with latticework between them has been called a “cabin” (Fig. 2C). The class of ships that feature

this construction is therefore known as Kajütenschiffe (“cabin-ships”).37 This structure was first interpreted as a cabin by V. Stais in 1915,38 although later scholars totally misunderstood, identifying it instead as a fish or as some kind of freight. In any case, it seems to be open at the top, so it is not a real cabin in the modern sense. This apparent cabin of the ships on the talismanic seals is placed next to the prow,39 exactly like the extant feature on the two ships of the Mochlos Ship Cup. Therefore, on the third ship of the Mochlos vessel, where only the akrostolion of the prow is preserved, a similar “cabin” probably should appear in the same position. However, the placement of the

8

MOCHLOS NEOPALATIAL SETTLEMENT ON THE COAST

ikria in these artistic representations is not realistic, but rather “hieroglyphic,” corresponding to the style of drawing This basic cabin or ikrion was also depicted in great detail in the Theran West House on the ships of the Fleet Fresco. This time it is shown next to the stern with a person inside it (Pl. 1C). In a neighboring room, additional ikria are represented even more elaborately on a grand scale as separate units arranged in a row. The same can be seen in a simpler way and smaller scale on the ring of the Stathatos Collection mentioned above (Fig. 2B). It is noteworthy that on this ring the cabin is placed near the stern, as on the Theran ships. This placement probably more exactly reflects the real situation, whereas the cabin near the prow is possibly a more conventional “formulaic” way of rendering the essential elements of the picture, especially if the rear part of the hull is omitted. In the case of the ships on the Mochlos Cup, the painter probably wanted to include an element in the picture other than the palm tree, perhaps a human figure, which is now missing, and this explains why the “cabins” appear next to the prows. This unrealistic placement of these “cabins” exemplifies Nilsson’s “oracular evidence,” as mentioned by Onassoglou,40 meaning that in a “formulaic” representation not every detail is trustworthy. Also, the placement of the “cabin” construction should be near the stern for stability. The structures on the Mochlos Ship Cup do not, after all, seem to depict this kind of Theran “cabin” or ikrion, whose sides were covered with a bull or ox hide. Rather, some kind of wooden, altar-like “shrine” consisting of perpendicular and horizontal bars like a “ligature” of several H’s is illustrated. This kind of construction is also seen in glyptic art, sometimes as an obvious altar on top of a mountain, like on a gold ring from Tholos Tomb 4 at Pylos41 and another example from Aïdonia Korinthias,42 or again as the enclosure of the sacred tree on board the goddess’ magical boat on the lost Mochlos ring. It is also interesting to note on a recently published seal, probably from Crete, a female figure in front of a palm tree and an altar “saluting” in the typical Minoan way.43 As far as the Mochlos Ring is concerned, this wooden construction may be nothing more than a planter containing the sacred tree, not an enclosure,

according to N. Marinatos.44 In fact, the same idea had been suggested long ago by R. Vallois: “D’après les proportions et la situation, il faut imaginer un coffre en bois rempli de terre végétale.”45 Certainly, on the Mochlos Ship Cup, these elements could be depicted independently as hieroglyphs in a parataxis. In any case, the construction on board the Mochlos Ring ship closely resembles the shrine depicted on land as well as the Mochlos Ship Cup structures. It is also important to note here that the goddess is arriving on the Mochlos ring, not departing, as N. Marinatos and L. Morgan before her correctly argued. This conclusion means that the dragonhead-shaped extremity of the Mochlos Ring ship is the stern and not the prow as usually interpreted; the latter is a variant of the fleur-de-lysshaped akrostolion, albeit a very elaborate one. In any case, I. Pini’s doubts about whether the enclosure with the sacred tree on the Mochlos ring is to be seen on board the ship or behind it on land seem today unjustified.46 For that matter, the same is true regarding a seal in Oxford where V.E.G. Kenna sees a “jetty” above an impossibly “three-masted ship,” which is clearly a typical “talismanic” “cabinship.”47 There is one other example of the multi-Hshaped “altar” that appears on the Mochlos ring where, in a double version, only the upper bars are straight while both the lower pairs are crescentlike.48 Probably the various shapes of the “altar” are a case of rendering the same thing conventionally in several versions. A similar explanation also pertains to the latticework on the talismanic seals (Fig. 2C). Onassoglou does not believe it is a mere filling ornament but the rendering of some real element.49 Curiously, this multi-H-like “altar” or “enclosure” is seen again on the Mochlos ring next to the fleurde-lys akrostolion as a Linear A sign,50 indeed a very linear, essential abbreviation. This “altar” construction on the ships of the Mochlos Cup is also depicted as an “impressionistic” cipher, an essential part of the cult ships according to the painter’s style. But to the modern eye, it appears to suggest the instability of the vessel. Nevertheless, these constructions do closely resemble representations of Minoan/Mycenaean altars that are evidently made of wood as seen on mountain tops. Therefore, these constructions on ships can be taken in concreto if we bear in mind that, according

THE MOCHLOS SHIP CUP

to tradition, there was a wooden altar on a mountain in Boeotia where the famous wooden daidala were burned, a fact with counterparts in Minoan Crete.51 Perhaps the difference between both types of these characteristic constructions on board, the “cabin”/ikrion and the “altar”/“shrine” or “enclosure,” only seems great.52 Maybe there is a certain degree of hybridization of various cultic elements. The religious nature of the latter is obvious, but the religious nature of the former should not be doubted, as already B. Rutkowski and later L. Morgan and M. Shaw have argued,53 despite a certain skepticism by Onassoglou who favors a more prosaic “captain’s cabin” that is nevertheless roofless like an enclosure

9

and permeated with religious elements as in the case of the Theran Fleet. Now, if some kind of enclosure is meant in these pictures, then the sacred tree normally should be represented inside it, as in the case of the Mochlos Ring where representation is elaborately rendered. In the case of the Makrygialos seal, where the field is too tiny to allow a more realistic representation, or in that of the Mochlos Ship Cup with its strong “formulaic” character, an unrealistic or rather “surrealistic” rendering of the essential elements in a parataxis occurs quite like a hieroglyph—a clear case of Nilsson’s “oracular evidence” as mentioned above.

The Unidentified Object—A Talismanic Spray? On the Mochlos Ship Cup, in front of the prow of the second ship, there is a fragmentary oblong object of curvilinear shape with three small protuberances on the upper side (Fig. 1B). The lower side shows no such protuberances. A second such object may also have appeared in front of the first ship where small dot(s) of paint appear just above the break. The object is undoubtedly painted in the same extremely stylized “formulaic” manner as the ships, but its meaning was no doubt instantly “decoded” by the Minoan onlooker. It has no necessary factual relation to the ship, seems not to be a mere filling ornament, is in no way simply decorative, and it resembles nothing that could be related to the sea, e.g. a fish or a reef. Neither can it possibly represent the land or something related to it. A likely interpretation is that it represents a talismanic spray. Indeed, such a spray is regularly combined with the class of “talismanic” ships as well as with the earlier Protopalatial ships, but no explanation has been given for the presence of this “spray” or “branch motif,” as it is called. Sometimes the motif is so oversimplified as to be unrecognizable or misunderstood. For example, on a Prepalatial seal in Herakleion, a ship with a high, bifurcated prow appears,54 in front of which is a crescent-shaped branch with its foliage on only one side. The author identified it tentatively with reefs. The identification of the higher end as the prow to the right is corroborated by the appearance of two

fish below the hull, which swim in the same direction as the ship. They certainly represent the natural environment, but not so the presumed “reefs.” Similarly, on another seal in the Mitsotakis Collection, two fish swim below the hull in the direction of the higher, bifurcated end of the ship,55 but no branch appears there. The same misunderstanding happened with respect to a seal from Mallia, where it is presumed that “ahead of the bow is a quantity which might well represent a fish.”56 In fact, it is an extremely simplified branch, having just two “leaves” on one side. On two ships with a higher bifurcated end found on Protopalatial prisms,57 the direction is also indicated by the series of oars below the hull, which always point to the stern. In front of the high prow, a huge branch is again depicted, in one case with the foliage likewise conventionally shown on only one side. Often the spray is not put in front of but above the bifurcated prow,58 or high above the ship.59 Sometimes this motif is multiplied. Because this talismanic spray regularly accompanies the talismanic ship, clearly it is intimately connected to the ship as a “determinative” to its “codified” meaning. Of course, several other meanings have been given to the branch motif in glyptic iconography.60 This talismanic spray, when clearly represented with ample space around it, usually looks very much like a palm branch. Of course, this appearance could be the result of the carver’s tool that led

10

MOCHLOS NEOPALATIAL SETTLEMENT ON THE COAST

to an inevitable stylization of the branch motif. However, one is almost tempted to interpret it more literally as a palm branch. It possibly could be a “determinative” indicating that the ship is indeed a cult ship carrying a palm tree on board as on the Makrygialos seal, the Mochlos Ship Cup, and evidently on a seal in the British Museum.61 With commendable caution, this latter seal has not been interpreted in the publications where it appeared, but it clearly represents a palm tree carried upright

on board a ship, although its trunk does not touch the hull.62 Onassoglou more daringly writes that “das pflanzliche Füllelement nimmt bei KO 23 eine konkrete Form an, also einer Palme, die erhebt vom Bug über die Kajüte” (in fact next to it).63 Onassoglou does not go so far as to recognize that it is not a question of a mere “Füllelement,” i.e. a “filling element,” but of a pars pro toto “determinative” of the cult ship.

The Ship Cup and the Minoan Hieroglyphic Script The manifest “hieroglyphic” painting style of the ships on the Mochlos Ship Cup leads inevitably to a comparison with the Minoan hieroglyphic script itself. Such a comparison is now greatly facilitated by the recently published Corpus Hieroglyphicarum Inscriptionum Cretae (CHIC).64 This unusual connection between painting and writing on Crete brings to mind western Europe in the 12th century where “painting was indeed on the way to becoming a form of writing in pictures.”65 Here it is best to quote some parallel thoughts of P. Warren, who profited greatly from E.H. Gombrich’s classic book, Art and Illusion. Warren writes, We may, then, agree that Minoan images...not only have their sensory properties, but are also an encoding of some part of the total range of belief. Deconstruction of the image into any component parts it may have may be one means of moving towards understanding part of the Minoan world of thought, or of decoding their visual language and reading it with some comprehension.66

As a matter of fact, it seems that everything in the picture on the Mochlos Ship Cup corresponds to a syllabogram of this script: 1. The ship is, of course, Sign 040 in CHIC.67 This sign has correspondences in both Linear A and B.68 Like the ships on the talismanic seals, the hieroglyphic ships regularly feature an akrostolion at the higher end, which is clearly distinguished as the prow by the direction of the oars pointing aft.69 In fact, Number 309b in

CHIC probably displays the most perfect extant fleur-de-lys-type akrostolion that is greatly enlarged in an “expressionistic” way with respect to the vessel, evidently in order not to leave any doubt about its identification. 2. The “unidentified” object (talismanic spray) before the second ship on the Mochlos Ship Cup is probably a stylized and incomplete version of Sign 025,70 which is a linear, “palmlike” branch classified in CHIC in the large group of “vegetables.”71 Before the appearance of the very cautious CHIC, this sign was known more specifically as the “palm-branch” sign.72 It regularly accompanies the hieroglyphic version of the “libation formula.”73 As Evans remarked, “this sign is distinguished by showing off-shoots on only one side,” exactly like the object on the Mochlos Ship Cup that is especially close to Evans’ Sign 100d. 3. The “altars” or “shrines” should certainly be identified with Sign 038, which is classified in the group of “buildings and parts of buildings.” Very often this sign takes the form of the “altars” on the Mochlos Ship Cup,74 sometimes even with the same number of horizontal bars. This hieroglyphic sign possibly has simplified correspondences both in Linear A and B.75 According to Evans this sign corresponds to the well known—albeit too arbitrarily

THE MOCHLOS SHIP CUP

dubbed—“gate” sign, “which may also signify an ‘enclosure’ generally; one of the most consistently recurring.”76 Evans sees two distinct classes of this sign depending on whether the bars are (a) horizontal, as in the case of the Mochlos Ship Cup, or (b) vertical. Sign 45 is closely related to this “gate.” According to Evans, “this sign seems to be rather a hurdle or section of a fence, and may in its origin be a differentiation of the preceding, with which it is closely allied.”77 4. Finally the palm tree could be Sign 049, tentatively classified in the group of “arms” because it is here identified as an arrowhead following Evans,78 despite one round point on top and two at the end of its extremities, i.e. the “branches.” Although this comparison is very speculative, the palm tree on the third ship of the Mochlos Cup is not too far removed in its general appearance from this much typified sign. It even displays a round extremity on its left branch. Anyway, the combination of the palm tree and the small round objects at the extremities of its branches is not unknown in glyptic art, as can be seen on a seal (Pl. 1B).79 In this case, however, these round objects are multiplied, and they are usually interpreted as a cairn or holy herme from which the palm tree or branches “sprout” or with which they are combined. Curiously, these round extremities appear again at the ends of the three left branches of the palm tree on the Makrygialos seal, not in the CMS drawing (Fig. 1C), but in the original drawing by the late Thomas Phanourakis (Fig. 2D)—the expert artist of the Herakleion Museum—that was published before the CMS.80 In the very meticulous later drawing that enlarges every minute detail not seen by the naked eye, the CMS draftsman saw these round elements rather as the tops of the upright bars of the “altar.” It is difficult to say which picture is more accurate, but Phanourakis’ rendering more faithfully conveys the general impression given to the onlooker as seen by the naked eye (Pl. 1A), not through a magnifying glass. Of course, these round elements could also be interpreted simply as beam ends, as in many representations of Minoan buildings, unless they are related to the “palm-branches”

11

framing the Minoan goddess on the famous gold pendant from Shaft Grave III at Mycenae, which end in similar “spheres.”81 In any case, it is important to note that Sign 031, which tentatively belongs to the CHIC group of “vegetables,”82 is very similar to Sign 049; however, it is standing, not hanging, and the three points at its extremities are aligned at the same height and point upward. Perhaps they are basically the same sign. The inverse direction is probably not a decisive element, and this is also the case with respect to other signs. CHIC, however, correctly differentiates the two signs and perhaps there is some minor difference in meaning that eludes us today. It is unlikely however that Sign 049 is a “vegetable” and Sign 031 is a “weapon,” namely an “arrowhead.” When the latter is represented in a more pictorial way, it very often displays palm-leaf-like “offshoots” at its base,83 a resemblance which cannot be coincidental. Such offshoots are a regular feature of palm tree representations in vase painting, especially on LM III larnakes. This “tripartite” vegetal “hieroglyphic” scheme passed to other species, e.g. the “quasi-heraldic” lilies of Thera,84 with exactly the same offshoots at the base. Evans thought that this Y sign represented a plant with shoots springing from the sides of the stem while “triple fruits and flowers rise from the summit,” and suggested the possibility of silphium trade.85 If indeed both signs represent the palm tree, then perhaps there is some smaller differentiation between them; e.g. Sign 049 could be a large, fully grown tree with a heavy, drooping crown and Sign 031 could be a young sapling, possibly like the one Odysseus saw near Apollo’s altar at Delos: Dhvlw/ dhv pote toi'on jApovllwno" para; bwmw/' foivniko" nevon e[rno" ajnercovmenon ejnovhsa (Odyssey 6.162–163).

This description again brings to mind the seal with palm branches or sprouts combined with a cairn or holy herme that was mentioned above (Pl. 1B). A long prism from Crete, now in Athens,86 supports this interpretation. It repeats the branch Sign 025 no less than six times (a fact that drew Evans’ attention),87 and shows the boat Sign 040 once with an elaborate akrostolion, and Sign 049 once, in addition to the X-sign that is the usual initial

12

MOCHLOS NEOPALATIAL SETTLEMENT ON THE COAST

mark. Now, if Sign 049 really is a palm tree, then the “context” is not essentially different from the picture on the Mochlos Ship Cup.88 If one dared to “transliterate” grosso modo the central image on the Mochlos Ship Cup into the signs of the Cretan hieroglyphic script, the following “sequence” would result: 025-040-038-049-? This possible “pictorial sequence”—in which the signs do not belong to a real hieroglyphic “sentence” composed by syllabograms, but instead they form an actual picture with each “syllabogram” in its proper pictorial place—is not unthinkable in terms of this script. In fact, on three-sided prisms, the sequence 038-031-025, as well as other combinations probably of a formulaic character, are seen three times. If such comparisons are legitimate, we could perhaps see the painting on the Mochlos Ship Cup as a pictorial rendering of a hieroglyphic inscription, or the hieroglyphic formula on a prism seal might be the earlier written version of such a picture despite the time lag and the difference of material. In both cases, the same underlying thought represents a long established ritual, and it could have been expressed in very different ways. To recapitulate, the palm tree on the Mochlos Ship Cup would have had but a slight chance of being “deciphered” were it not for the Makrygialos seal, which was interpreted correctly as displaying a palm tree on board and not an imaginary, inversely concave “sagging or slack rigging.” Now that the Mochlos Ship Cup has been interpreted correctly with a palm tree on board, it is possible to interpret Sign 049 as a palm tree, and Sign 031 as a possible variant of it. Further speculative thought is certainly to be avoided. The “hieroglyphic” and “formulaic” representations on the Mochlos Ship Cup possibly allow some comparisons to the Cretan hieroglyphic script, although surely no more than mere conjectures can be drawn. If these comparisons are valid, then the Mochlos Ship Cup may be a “pictorial precursor” of the later stirrup jars with Linear B inscriptions on their shoulders, although there is no evidence that these vessels were used in cult. In addition, the unique “pictorial hieroglyphs” or “pictorial formula” of the Mochlos Ship Cup suggest that perhaps other Minoan images outside the glyptic arts may sometimes have a “hieroglyphic” character.

It is curious to note, by way of comparison, that the final paragraph of the last paper by the late E. Grumach,89 suggests the possibility that some representations of dolphins and other marine creatures on larnax panels in combination with double axes on the other side are, in fact, a pictorial rendering of a magic formula. According to Grumach, this formula could be tantamount to the famous Minoan libation formula seen in Linear A script on libation tables and vessels. After all, as E. Gombrich remarks, “We do well to remember, once in a while, that pictures and letters are really blood relations.”90 Likewise in Egypt, as E. Russmann remarks, “Figural art and hieroglyphic writing developed together as parts of a single system, in which they were not only interdependent, but not infrequently interchangeable.”91 As J. Papadopoulos notes, “The fact that painting and writing are indistinguishable in Egypt finds an interesting Greek parallel, inasmuch as the Greek word gravfein means to write and to paint. It’s also the word used for inscribing and incising as well.”92 If indeed the idiosyncratic Minoan art had a tendency not to differentiate a formulaic picture from a written formula, both having a magical function, then perhaps we can partly answer, as N. Marinatos recently asked, “why the Minoans, although they had a script, never used it in connection with visual narration.”93 We should also bear in mind that outstanding scholars like S. Morris and S. Hiller have seen a formulaic depiction comparable to the literary epic in the famous Fleet Fresco from the West House at Thera, a fresco and a building that abound in painted ikria.94 So J. Wohlfeil seems to be quite right when she concludes regarding the Fleet Fresco, “Die Bedeutung der Bilder ist sehr komplex; sie übernehmen die Funktion von Schrift, Bild und Sprache gleichzeitig.”95 If our suggestion is true, we should be extremely cautious in our interpretations of Minoan iconography in a too literal, in concerto way; instead I would like to suggest a more symbolic, in abstracto way of “reading Minoan art.” As many have pointed out, things happen in art that do not happen in reality. Failing to understand this axiom could lead to gross misinterpretations in understanding the idiosyncratic idiom or narrative of the Minoan artist. More than enough has been said on this subject, rather as a hint to further research; if indeed this can really be a working hypothesis videant doctiores.

THE MOCHLOS SHIP CUP

13

Conclusions The Mochlos Ship Cup, along with the Mochlos Ring and the Makrygialos seal, indicate that the Minoans had an important ceremony in which a cult ship transported a sacred tree. This was usually a palm tree with its planter, an enclosure, or a wooden altar. The boat originated from some place, perhaps Knossos or another palace, and journeyed to another place, possibly in the wilderness. Perhaps the boat traveled from a coastal shrine to another during a festival, perhaps connected with the spring renewal of nature as has been argued for the Theran Fleet Fresco, where nevertheless no tree appears. The clear “formulaic” or “hieroglyphic” character of the representation on the Mochlos Ship Cup supports this interpretation. If such a festival took place, it would have been one of the main Minoan religious festivals, already established in Protopalatial, if not Prepalatial times. And if this conclusion is correct, it is not remarkable that artistic evidence, such as seals, rings, or vase paintings, has been found in important coastal settlements like Mochlos or Makrygialos. Furthermore, perhaps there is some inner relationship between the arrival of the sacred tree and that of the goddess, a figure seen only in the Mochlos Ring. The goddess is possibly invisible, or her epiphany is implicit in the tree. In both cases we can agree with W. Burkert, that “die Ankunft des Neuen, die Ankunft der Göttin im Schiff, dies ist ein uraltes, über Jahrtausende zurückzuverfolgendes Motiv, das als Bild des ‘Advents’ noch in unseren Liedern klingt.”96 To see the ship on the Mochlos Ring as arriving, according to the excavator,97 and not as departing, according to Evans,98 is a question of correctly understanding Minoan narrative style—a subject recently and thoroughly discussed by N. Marinatos with respect to other themes. Thus, doubts about “the rules of the Minoan picture language” do not seem justified any more.99 Accordingly, we should see the ships on our cup as arriving, not departing, with their precious, numinous load that is probably not an object of worship per se, but perhaps it is tantamount to an epiphany of the goddess.100 The boat itself should belong to the special class of “cult boat” that was correctly identified by Sp. Marinatos, who also ascribed the boats on the Phaistos Disc to this class.101

In any case, because of the Mochlos Ship Cup, the sacred tree is now a focus of ritual action in Minoan vase painting as well as in Minoan glyptic art, as N. Marinatos recently argued102 in relating the trees carried on board to those atop shrines or growing from the rocky terrain. It is, however, a pity that the missing parts of the Mochlos Ship Cup are exactly those that might enable us to more precisely understand this ritual action, although these missing parts were certainly also represented in a similarly formulaic manner. Nevertheless, despite its fragmentary state, the Mochlos Ship Cup and the Makrygialos seal are contemporary pieces of evidence and go de pair, one in vase painting from the north coast and the other in glyptic art from the south coast. To recapitulate, the cursory, formulaic, and abstract style of the painted images on the Mochlos Ship Cup suggests that these pictures were well known symbols to the Minoan onlookers. They evidently represent a climactic moment in an important ritual involving the arrival of a sacred tree on a cult ship during a major sea festival that was well known all over Crete. With the Mochlos Ship Cup, the evidence for this ritual has now begun to accumulate and will perhaps in the future allow us to acquire a more accurate understanding of it and its nexus of religious concepts. Indeed, it seems that we are now about to uncover a previously unsuspected, multifaceted, and major Minoan ritual, the clarification of which could illuminate many aspects of Minoan religion. That this ritual is related to the marine aspect of the Great Goddess seems likely, whether it is a palm tree or some other species of tree that is being transported, whether the ships contain priestly persons in cabins (as in the Theran Fleet) or in front of empty cabins, or whether the goddess herself is arriving Clearly the common denominator in all these scenes is the arrival of the cult ship or boat carrying a sacred tree, an “altar” or “shrine,” or a sacralized “cabin” with a priestly person or a goddess inside or next to it. It seems likely, therefore, that the ritual represented in these scenes is related to a major festival that celebrates the renewal of nature, in this case representing some myth connected to the hoary and still surviving archetypal conception of cyclic

14

MOCHLOS NEOPALATIAL SETTLEMENT ON THE COAST

time. This time is possibly the month Plowistos, or rather its Minoan prototype, according to the wellknown brilliant interpretation by L.R. Palmer of the word po-ro-wi-to-jo, postulated for other cult ship processions on the opening of the navigation period. By the way, it is also curious to note that in prehistoric Nordic rock-engravings of ships we often see ships featuring aloft two signs, one closely resembling our “altar” or Sign 038 and the other

closely resembling our “palm tree” or “branch.”103 It is not improbable that in these Hyperborean parts of the world Minoan signs find their symbolic echo, as is the case with the unmistakable sign of the Labyrinth that is so often seen in coastal rock-engravings, magical symbols of pilotage and guidance, and Medieval symbols found all over the Bothnian coast in Scandinavia that were inherited from ancient times.104

Chapter 1 Notes 1. The cup was reconstructed from 16 pieces. It has been restored with plaster gap fill. The surface is badly abraded, but the painted decoration is still readable. For the catalog description of the cup and a discussion of the shape, see Mochlos vol. IB, Chap. 3, fig. 7, pl. 7. 2. Evans 1909, p. 203, sign number 57. 3. Davaras 1980, p. 71 and n. 191; 1989, p. 327, fig. 189; 1992, p. 60, number 55. 4. Cf. Farnoux 1990, p. 142, for a good discussion of this subject. 5. Cf. Davaras 1992b, pp. 246–247, where it is argued that we have a case of “internal epiphany” or visio beatifica. 6. Betts 1973, p. 329, fig. 6. 7. Seager 1912, pp. 89–91, fig. 52; CMS II.3, number 252. 8. Alexiou 1964, p. 99. 9. See Davaras 1997, p. 10. 10. As commented by Goodison 1988, p. 169, fig. 28. 11. Doumas 1992, pls. 68–85. 12. E.g., M. van Effenterre 1978. 13. Cf. Betts 1973, pp. 332–337; Sourvinou-Inwood 1973, p. 152. 14. Marinatos in Gray 1974, p. 145. The akrostolion of the prow corresponds to the aphlaston of the stern. 15. Evans 1935, p. 446. 16. Sakellarakis 1982, p. 201, number 167. 17. Cf. Onassoglou 1985, p. 33 and n. 201 with some examples. See also CMS II.2, number 276b, from Adromyloi, Siteia. 18. Gray 1974, p. 40. 19. Evans 1909, p. 203, sign number 57. 20. Evans 1952, p. 22. 21. M. van Effenterre 1978, p. 595. 22. Onassoglou 1985, pp. 29 and 32. 23. Davaras 1984, pp. 67–72. 24. Basch 1987, pp. 107–112. 25. Göttlicher 1988, p. 760.

26. Doumas 1992, pls. 73–75, and especially pl. 83. 27. N. Marinatos 1989, p. 139; 1990, p. 85. 28. Evans 1901, p. 134. 29. N. Marinatos 1989, p. 136 and n. 52. Cf. already Rutkowski 1981, pp. 51–52. 30. Davaras 1988. 31. N. Marinatos 1990, p. 87. 32. Cf. Capdeville 1995, p. 243. 33. Cf. Capdeville 1995, p. 242. 34. See Palmer 1983. 35. Nilsson 1950, p. 269. 36. About the tree shrines in glyptic art, cf. N. Marinatos 1990, p. 85. 37. Onassoglou 1985, pp. 28–35, pls. 12–13. 38. Onassoglou 1985, pp. 29–30 and n. 183. 39. Onassoglou 1985, p. 30. 40. Onassoglou 1985, p. 30 and n. 188. 41. CMS I, number 292. 42. Krystalli-Votsi 1989, p. 40, pl. 51, 7a–b, with comparisons. 43. N. Marinatos 1988, p. 139, fig. 5. 44. N. Marinatos 1993, pp. 163–164, fig. 150. 45. Vallois 1926, p. 126, followed by others. 46. CMS II.3, p. 60, on number 252. 47. Kenna 1960, number 288. 48. Onassoglou 1985, pl. 13, number KS 22. 49. Onassoglou 1985, p. 32. 50. Cf. Onassoglou 1985, p. 34 and n. 211. 51. Cf. Burkert 1979, p. 134. 52. As named also by N. Marinatos 1989, p. 132, for the Makrygialos seal or by several scholars like Hood 1971, p. 139, or Furumark 1988, p. 85, for the Mochlos ring. Sourvinou-Inwood 1973, pp. 150–153, sees a free-standing stepped construction related to Egyptian art.

THE MOCHLOS SHIP CUP

53. Rutkowski 1981, pp. 54–55, fig. 16; Morgan 1988, p. 630; M. Shaw 1980, p. 178. 54. CMS II.1, number 287b. 55. CMS V, Supplement 1A, number 330. 56. Kenna 1960, number K 49a=Gray 1974, number A9, fig. 6c. 57. CMS II.2, numbers 261b and 276b. 58. E.g., CMS V, Supplement 1A, number 334. 59. E.g., CMS VIII, number 55; VII, number 227, correctly recognized as a “talismanic spray aloft;” XI, number 219, again recognized as “ungewöhnlich das Zweigmotiv.” 60. Cf. Warren 1995, p. 976, n. 9. 61. Gray 1974, number C 23; CMS VII, number 72. 62. Cf. Rutkowski 1981, p. 63, fig. 20, 4. 63. Onassoglou 1985, p. 31, pl. 13, number KO 23. 64. Olivier and Godart 1996. 65. Gombrich 1995, p. 182. 66. Warren 1995, p. 973. 67. Olivier and Godart 1996, pp. 17, 401; cf. Evans 1909, p. 203, sign number 57, a ship. 68. Olivier and Godart 1996, p. 19. 69. E.g., Olivier and Godart 1996, p. 401, numbers 191, 298a, 309b. 70. Cf. Evans 1909, p. 217, sign number 97, a “tree with ascending branches.” 71. Olivier and Godart 1996, p. 17. 72. Evans 1909, p. 218, sign number 100. 73. Cf. Grumach 1968, p. 11. 74. Olivier and Godart 1996, pp. 399–400, e.g., numbers 200, 204a, 212a, 275a, 300b, etc. 75. Olivier and Godart 1996, p. 17. 76. Evans 1909, p. 190, sign number 44. 77. Evans 1909, p. 199. 78. Evans 1909, p. 185, sign number 13.

79. 80. 81. 82. 83.

15

Evans 1921, p. 275, fig. 204d. Davaras 1989, p. 327, fig. 189. Higgins 1980, p. 85, pl. 61. Olivier and Godart 1996, pp. 15–17. E.g., Olivier and Godart 1996, p. 397, numbers 254a and c, 273b, 274c, 276b, 298c, 312b. 84. Doumas 1992, pls. 36–37. 85. Evans 1909, p. 215, sign number 92. 86. NM 8915: Evans 1909, pp. 154, 217, catalog number P.26a; Olivier and Godart 1996, p. 276, number 294(3)a. 87. Evans 1909, p. 217. 88. It should be noted that this seal has been recently interpreted in a different way by Best 1997, p. 9, fig. 8. 89. Grumach 1968, pp. 25–26. 90. Gombrich 1995, p. 53. 91. Russmann 2000, p. 73. 92. Papadopoulos in Discussion after Russman 2000, p. 75. 93. Marinatos in Discussion after Warren 2000, p. 384. 94. Morris 2000; Hiller 1990. 95. Wohlfeil 1997, p. 145. 96. Burkert 1971, p. 175. 97. Seager 1912, p. 90. 98. Evans 1935, p. 952, followed by other scholars. 99. Jung 1989. 100. Cf. also N. Marinatos 1989, p. 136. 101. Sp. Marinatos 1933, pp. 223–235: “Bateaux de culte.” 102. N. Marinatos 1989. 103. von Salis 1930, pp. 39–40, figs. 36–37. 104. Westerdahl 1995, p. 271, fig. 1. The manuscript for this chapter was submitted before the excellent treatise of M. Wedde appeared (Wedde 2000), and I am happy to see that we agree on the main points regarding the very difficult hermeneutics of the much discussed—and usually misunderstood—Minoan ship imagery.

2

Ceramic, Stone, Bone, and Shell Objects Jeffrey S. Soles, Ann M. Nicgorski, Mary Ellen Soles, Tristan Carter, and David S. Reese

Ceramic, stone, and other miscellaneous small finds from Buildings A and B in the Artisans’ Quarter and the farmhouse at Chalinomouri are presented in this chapter. They provide considerable evidence for the various activities that were carried out at these two sites. Many of the ceramic, stone, and bone finds are tools and products that were associated with craft production in the Artisans’ Quarter. The remains of bats, large rectangular work slabs, and potter’s wheels provide evidence for pottery production. Stone vases that were found in

fragments or various stages of completion, as well as a group of fossil asteroids, offer support for stone vase production. Stone and clay molds and at least one of the rectangular work slabs preserve evidence for metallurgy. A large array of loomweights, several plano-convex slabs, spinning bowls, and certain bone and ceramic tools substantiate textile production. Other small finds played a role in the everyday activities of the artisans and farmers who lived at these two sites. These include drains, lamps, votive feet and stands, and triton shells.

Ceramic Objects Jeffrey S. Soles, Anne M. Nicgorski, and Mary Ellen Soles

Bats Fragments of thirteen bats were identified in the Artisans’ Quarter, eleven from Building B, and two

from Building A. These circular slabs with tapered or beveled edges were smoothed on the top and

18

MOCHLOS NEOPALATIAL SETTLEMENT ON THE COAST

usually left rough on the bottom where a circular groove is sometimes located near the outer edge. They vary in thickness from 0.015–0.029 m, and the two that are best preserved (IC.3, IC.6; C 328, 507) have estimated rim diameters of 0.33 and 0.37 m. All examples preserve the whole profile, but they are less than one-quarter extant. With one exception, they are made of the local coarse, phyllite tempered clay, CF Type 1.1 A few of these bats are also slipped. The exception (IC.13; C 622) is made of a coarse clay tempered with many small to large granodiorite inclusions, CF Type 7, and is imported from the area around Gournia. Interestingly, it may also be one of the earliest of the bats because it lay at the very bottom of the potter’s pit behind Building A. It is often difficult to distinguish between bats, lids, and circular work slabs when they are fragmentary and no longer in situ. Few bats have been identified in other excavations,2 and it is possible that a bat could also have functioned as a handleless lid or a work slab, and vice versa, provided that the diameter of the circular slab is not greater than 0.40–0.44 m, i.e. the diameter of the potter’s wheel. The function of the bat, however, is to serve as a portable surface on which a pot may be spun without actually using the surface of the wheel. It is affixed to the wheel with raw clay, and the rough undersides and grooves would help secure the bat in place. It may also be removed from the wheel with the pot still in place so the pot can harden elsewhere and the wheel can continue in use. The most important criterion used here to identify bats then is the tapered or beveled edge that enables the potter to take hold of the bat and lift it off the wheel.3 No example was found still in situ on top of a potter’s wheel, but the clay used to fix a bat in place was found still in situ on top of a potter’s wheel (IC.158; C 227), and it indicates that bats were used in pottery production. Most cataloged examples were also found in contexts where pottery production was taking place. Eleven bats were found in and around Building B where six potter’s wheels were also located. Four of these bats (IC.4, IC.7, IC.8, IC.9; C 344, 528, 529, 560) were found in Room 10 where one of the wheels (IC.162; C 405) was also located, one (IC.2; C 108) was found in the rear yard of Building B where another wheel (IC.163; C 585) was located, and two (IC.10,

IC.11; C 572, 573) were found in the kilns where they may have remained after being used to carry unfired vases to the kilns. One (IC.13; C 622) lay in the bottom of the potter’s pit behind Building A where it may have broken off while in use. IC.1 (C 77; B.road; 1601; Fig. 3). Bat. One piece. Th. 0.024. CF Type 5: very dark gray (5YR 3/1). Smooth upper surface, beveled side. IC.2 (C 108; B.RY; 2807.1; Fig. 3, Pl. 2). Bat. One piece. Est. d. 0.22, th. 0.019. CF Type 1: reddish yellow (5YR 6/8). Smooth upper surface, beveled sides. IC.3 (C 328; B.3; 609.4; Fig. 3, Pl. 2). Bat. One piece. Est. d. 0.33, th. 0.028. CF Type 1: reddish yellow (5YR 6/6). Circular slab with tapered edge, smooth on the top, and rough on the bottom where a shallow, circular groove is located near the edge. Buff slip on upper surface. IC.4 (C 344; B.10; 2011.1; Fig. 3, Pl. 2). Bat. One piece. Est. d. 0.38. Th. 0.028. CF Type 1: dark gray (5YR 4/1), burned phyllite. Circular slab with beveled edge and groove around exterior, flat base. IC.5 (C 376; B.alcove; 2110.3; Fig. 3, Pl. 2). Bat. One piece. Th. 0.023. CF Type 1: light red (2.5YR 6/8). Circular slab with beveled edge, smooth on the top, and rough on the bottom. Buff slip on all surfaces. IC.6 (C 507; B.9; 1705.2; Fig. 3, Pl. 2). Bat. One piece. Est. d. 0.37, th. 0.017. CF Type 1: light red (2.5YR 6/8). Circular slab with thickened and rounded edge, smooth on the top, and rough on the bottom where a shallow, circular groove is located near the outer edge. IC.7 (C 528; B.10; 2103.2; Fig. 3, Pl. 2). Bat. One piece. Est. d. 0.30, th. 0.016. CF Type 1: red (2.5YR 5/6). Circular slab with flat upper surface, rounded edge, and rough bottom. Indentation around upper surface near outer edge. IC.8 (C 529; B.10; 2103.2; Fig. 3, Pl. 2). Bat. One piece. Est. d. 0.36, th. 0.021. CF Type 1: dark reddish gray (5YR 4/2). Circular slab with flat upper surface with tapered edge. Unslipped. IC.9 (C 560; B.10; 2012; Fig. 3). Bat. One piece. Est. d. 0.24, th. 0.015. CF Type 1: reddish yellow (7.5YR 7/8). Circular slab with flat upper surface with tapered edge sloping inward to flat underside. IC.10 (C 572; Kiln A; 2901.5). Bat. One piece. Est. d. 0.42. Th. 0.013–0.024. CF Type 3: pinkish gray (7.5YR 6/2). Circular slab with tapered edge and shallow groove between two circular ridges around lower surface. Buff slipped on all surfaces. IC.11 (C 573; Kiln B; 2801.2; Fig. 3). Bat. Mended from two pieces. Th. 0.029. CF Type 1: light red (2.5YR 6/6). Circular slab with tapered edge, smoothed on top. Buff slipped on all surfaces.

CERAMIC, STONE, BONE, AND SHELL OBJECTS

IC.12 (C 574; A.7; 801.2; Fig. 3). Bat. One piece. Est. d. 0.30. Th. 0.018. CF Type 1: light red (2.5YR 6/6). Circular slab with tapered edge, smoothed on top and bottom, with raised ridge around bottom.

19

IC.13 (C 622; A.RY; 2315N.5). Bat. One piece. Th. 0.022. CF Type 7: yellowish red (5YR 5/6). Circular slab with tapered edge, worn smooth on top.

Drains Thirteen drains, including two flat drain plates, were found in the excavation, eleven from the Artisans’ Quarter and two from Chalinomouri. All were handmade of the same coarse phyllite tempered fabric, CF Type 1, with flat bases and straight or slightly convex side walls set at right angles to the base. They were usually water wiped and smoothed on the interior and along the top of the side walls, but they were quite rough and unfinished on the base and lower part of the side wall. Only one example (IC.26; C 595) was slipped on all its surfaces. None is complete. The longest preserved piece measures ca. 0.37 m; they vary in width from 0.078–0.152 m, and in height from 0.052–0.093 m. Most are broken at both ends and only four (IC.15, IC.16, IC.18, IC.26; C 141, 216, 345, 595) preserve one end of the drain. Two different types of ends are represented. One variety ends in a broad flat plate, which projects from the side walls (IC.15, IC.18), while the other ends right at the side walls (IC.16, IC.26). None was found in situ or shows any particular sign of wear, but several were found in contexts which might nevertheless suggest how they were used. At least three may be associated with vats. Number IC.20 (C 358) from Chalinomouri was found in Room 6 on the floor near a two-stepped corner platform, along with fragments of a basin or vat of the sort often used in the production of olive oil or wine (IB.279; P 2962), and the drain may well have functioned to carry liquid in one of these processes. Number IC.17 (C 315) was also found in a room with corner platforms, Room 10 in Building B, where fragments of two vats (IB.282, IB.291; P 3004, 3137) were found and food preparation appears to have occurred. Number IC.24 (C 517) was also found in association with two vats (IB.271, IB.290; P 2327, 3136) in Room 2 of Building A where food was prepared. Drains have been found in similar contexts associated with vats elsewhere in Crete,4 and the drains often appear to have been designed to function with vats.

Others were found without vats, however, often in exterior spaces where they may have been serving as gutters. Three examples appear to have fallen from the roof of Building B. Numbers IC.16 (C 216), a drain end, and IC.25 (C 519) were both found with the wall and roof collapse along the outer north side of Building B, Room 7, while number IC.18 (C 345), a drain plate, was found in the surface material above Kiln A. Numbers IC.16 and IC.25 probably sat along the edge of the roof draining rain water toward the coast. The roof of Building B stepped down toward that side of the building, and the drains would have collected water from the higher roof levels to help prevent the roof from leaking.5 Number IC.18 probably drained water off the roof of Room 13, an addition to the building that possibly sat at a lower level than the adjacent roof of the building above Room 10. Drain plate IC.15 (C 141) was found in the street just outside the entrance to Building B, and drain end IC.26 (C 595) was found in the street near the southeast corner of Building B. Number IC.26 was actually slipped and looks as if it was designed for heavy use. Both of these objects may also have been used as roof gutters that fell into the street at an early stage in the building’s collapse, or because they actually lay at street level, they may have always been street gutters. A drain terminating in a “broad flat plate” identical to IC.15 lay still in situ in a street at Palaikastro where it led water from the interior of a room through a wall and out into a blind alley.6 Apparently drain plates could be used in two ways: as spouts on drain ends at ground level as in the Palaikastro example, or as collector plates on roofs to collect water into the narrow part of the drain that served as a gutter spout as in the Thera examples. Drains appear to have been used in the same ways at the neighboring towns of Gournia and Pseira and at other sites in eastern Crete.7 Hawes noted them in “all parts of the site” at Gournia and identified them as “gutters” that were used “both for draining streets

20

MOCHLOS NEOPALATIAL SETTLEMENT ON THE COAST

and as house gutters.”8 One of the street gutters is still in situ at the southwest corner of the palace.9 They were also found with vats and benches inside Houses De and Dd at Gournia where they appear to have been used in food processing.10 Like the Mochlos drains, they come in a range of widths, from 0.069–0.105 m, but there is no correlation at either site between width and function. IC.14 (C 97; A.6; 722.2; Fig. 4, Pl. 3). Drain. One piece broken at both ends, preserving whole profile with base and side walls. Pres. length 0.19, w. 0.078, h. 0.056. CF Type 1: light red (2.5YR 6/8). IC.15 (C 141; A-B road; 1602.1; Fig. 4, Pl. 3). Drain plate. One piece preserving whole plate, broken on one side. Length 0.232, max. w. 0.192, w. at attachment to drain 0.15, th. 0.038. CF Type 1: reddish yellow (5YR 6/6). Roughly rectangular flat plate with rounded edges, flat on the underside. Broken at juncture with drain where the sides begin to curve in and up. IC.16 (C 216; B.7; 1901.2; Fig. 4, Pl. 3). Drain. Mended from nine pieces, with one non-joining piece; preserving whole profile with base, side walls and one end. Pres. length 0.376, w. 0.108, h. 0.074. CF Type 1: reddish yellow (5YR 6/6). One end of a clay drain with slightly convex side walls and rounded lip; base slightly rounded at end. From surface above Building B, Room 7. IC.17 (C 315; B.10; 2011.3; Fig. 5). Drain. One piece mended from two fragments broken at both ends, plus one non-joining fragment; preserving one side wall and part of base. Pres. length 0.304, pres. w. 0.11, h. 0.093. CF Type 1: reddish yellow (7.5YR 6/6). Part of a clay drain with slightly convex side wall and squared lip. IC.18 (C 345; Kiln A; 2901.2) Drain plate. One piece preserving part of base and one side wall Pres. length 0.048, h. 0.029. CF Type 1: reddish yellow (5YR 6/6). Fragment of a plate with rounded lip, convex side wall, and flat base. Broken at juncture with drain where the sides begin to curve in and up. From surface above Kiln. IC.19 (C 352; A.RY; 2307.3; Fig. 5). Drain. One piece broken at both ends, preserving one side wall and part of base. Pres. length 0.146, h. 0.056. CF Type 1: reddish

yellow (5YR 6/6). Part of a clay drain with slightly convex side wall and tapered lip. IC.20 (C 358; Ch.6; 311.3; Fig. 5, Pl. 3). Drain. One piece mended from eight sherds, preserving whole profile with base and side walls; broken at both ends. Pres. length 0.305, w. 0.152, h. 0.082. CF Type 1: reddish yellow (5YR 7/6). Drain with flat base, rough on the underside, and straight sides with rounded lip. IC.21 (C 480; B.RY; 2809.1). Drain. One piece broken at both ends preserving one side wall and part of base. Pres. length 0.122, pres. w. 0.069, pres. h. 0.053. CF Type 1: very pale brown (10YR 7/4). IC.22 (C 496; Kiln B; 2808.1; Fig. 5). Drain. Mended from three pieces preserving one side wall with part of base, broken at both ends. Pres. length 0.168, h. 0.074. CF Type 1: yellowish red (5YR 5/6). Drain with flat base and convex side wall with rounded lip. Unlike the rough bases of other drains, the base of this drain has been smoothed. IC.23 (C 516; Ch.4; 1308.2; Fig. 5). Drain. One piece broken at both ends preserving one side wall with part of base. Pres. length 0.10, h. 0.077. CF Type 1: light red (2.5YR 6/6). IC.24 (C 517; A.2; 212.3 part 2). Drain. Mended from three pieces preserving one side wall and edge of base, broken at both ends. Pres. length 0.14, pres. w. 0.028, h. 0.059. CF Type 1: red (2.5YR 5/6). Rectangular drain with flat base and slightly convex side wall with rounded lip. IC.25 (C 519; B.7; 1501.7). Drain. One piece broken at both ends preserving one side wall and edge of base. Pres. length 0.066, h. 0.052. CF Type 1: reddish yellow (5YR 6/6). Drain with flat base and slightly convex side wall with rounded lip. From wall and roof collapse north of room. IC.26 (C 595; B road; 25/2602; Fig. 5). Drain. Mended from three pieces preserving one side wall, base, and one end. Pres. length 0.276, w. 0.096, h. 0.092. CF Type 1: reddish yellow (5YR 6/6). Drain with flat base, slightly convex side wall with squared lip, and roughly squared end. Buff slip on all surfaces.

Feet Two clay feet were found in Building A in the Artisans’ Quarter, both made from the local phyllite tempered fabric, CF Type 1. One foot (IC.27; C 20) is undecorated and pierced with a hole through the calf; it was used as an amulet, an object that provided supernatural protection, perhaps against snake bites or other mishaps while traveling.11 The other foot (IC.28; C 129) is decorated with a thin

buff slip and is much larger. It was found on the floor of Room 6, located just underneath the concrete foundation of the modern house that lies along the south of the room. Because of its location in a workshop, one might assume that it had a practical function and compare it to the shoemaker’s lasts at Gournia.12 It differs in shape from these lasts, however, and lacks the hole through the top and side

CERAMIC, STONE, BONE, AND SHELL OBJECTS

that was used for a cord to pull the last out of the finished boot. Unlike the lasts, it also has a pointed upturned toe, and it is virtually identical in size and shape to the feet from the shrine in Room 18 at Mallia.13 It should be compared to these, therefore, and identified like them as a votive foot or as part of a divine image.14 The miniature vessels found in the room also have a votive character, and the foot may have been the focus of a small shrine. In view of the finds from Building B, Room 1, it seems likely that a shrine might be located in the midst of an industrial quarter.15

21

IC.27 (C 20; A.2; 212.5 part 3; Fig. 6, Pl. 4). Foot amulet. Intact except for small chip on instep. Length 0.052, w. 0.021, h. 0.046. CF Type 1: reddish yellow (5YR 6/6) with many medium sized inclusions. Left foot with lower calf wearing pointed boot with upturned toe, pierced with horizontal hole, dims. 0.0012 by 0.002, through calf. Unslipped. Cf. Branigan 1970. IC.28 (C 129; A.6; 713.3; Fig. 6, Pl. 4). Votive foot. Mended from four fragments, nearly complete. Length 0.112, w. 0.046, h. 0.091. CF Type 1: red (2.5YR 5/8) with many large inclusions. Left foot with ankle and lower calf, wearing boot with pointed, upturned toe. Thin buff slip. Cf. Chapouthier and Demargne 1942, fig. 3.

Lamps The conical cup was used as the standard lamp in the Artisans’ Quarter and probably at Chalinomouri too. Seven conical cup lamps were inventoried from Building A (IB.2, IB.2A, IB.8, IB.11, IB.12, IB.33, IB.112; P 57, 60, 111, 177, 181, 240, 2159), and nine fragments were counted in the floor deposits of the building. Three were inventoried from Building B (IB.56, IB.72, IB.119; P 505, 1169, 2519) and three fragments were counted in its floor deposits. Most of these come from rooms where people appear to have been living, eating, and sleeping. No conical cup lamps were inventoried from Chalinomouri and only one fragment was counted in its floor deposits, from a room that was used primarily for storage. It would probably not be too implausible to deduce that the farmers at Chalinomouri went to bed early, while the artisans stayed up later. The cups that were used as lamps are identical in fabric and shape to every other conical cup and were designed to serve as drinking cups, but they were apparently expropriated and put to another use, perhaps even after they were already used for their original purpose. They are identifiable only by the burn marks on their rims. Usually there is a single burn mark on each cup that was probably made by a wick hanging over the edge, but occasionally a larger area over the interior of the cup is blackened. Normally it would be assumed that olive oil was used as the fuel. However, lipid analyses of absorbed residues in one of the lamps (IB.12; P 181) using gas chromatography and mass spectrometry reveal that the lipid extracts comprise mixtures of wax esters, long chain alcohols, and alkanes that

occur widely in plant epicultural waxes and insect waxes, notably beeswax.16 Analyses of other lamps from Mochlos produced similar results, so it appears that beeswax was used as another fuel in addition to olive oil. Only two clay vases were found that were specifically designed to serve as lamps. They belong to two different varieties. One type (IC.29; C 317) is a standard Minoan hand lamp with a well defined bowl, an incurved rim, a spout at one side, and a handle opposite. Like so many of the conical cup lamps, it lay in a room, Room 9 in Building A, which is believed to have been used for eating and sleeping. It has many parallels at Minoan sites all around Crete.17 The other type (IB.606; P 257) might be described better as a votive lamp because of its unique shape and location in what appears to have been a bench shrine.18 Three stone lamps were also located in Building B in the Artisans’ Quarter, all three of which are likely products of the workshop. One of these is a hand lamp (IC.171; S 242), which was still unfinished at the time of the building’s destruction; another is a pumice lamp (IC.177; S 256) that was still in production; the third is a pedestalled lamp (IC.197, IC.203; S 231, 247), which had been broken and discarded probably sometime before the building’s destruction. IC.29 (C 317; A.9; 1912; Fig. 6). Lamp. One piece preserving whole profile, less than one-quarter extant. H. 0.028. CF Type 1: reddish yellow (5YR 6/6). Fragment of lamp with incurved rim, convex side wall, and flat base; half of spout preserved, handle missing.

22

MOCHLOS NEOPALATIAL SETTLEMENT ON THE COAST

Molds Seven molds for casting bronze were identified in the Artisans’ Quarter, including six ceramic and one stone, all but one from Building A. Five of the clay molds (IC.30, IC.31, IC.33, IC.34, IC.35; C 94, 95, 502, 503, 599) are closed molds that were made by the lost-wax method. One was an open, singlepiece mold (IC.32; C 161), which was designed to be covered with a flat lid, while the stone mold (IC.168; S 44 discussed below) may have been intended to serve as a two-piece or bivalve mold. Three came from Room 1, two from Room 2, and one from Room 9, all rooms in Building A where there was also a good amount of bronze waste, droplets that might have fallen onto the floor during the actual pouring process. While stone molds are attested at several Minoan sites, clay molds are destroyed in the manufacturing process and are rarely found even though they must have been commonly employed in Minoan metallurgy.19 The two closed molds (IC.30, IC.31; C 94, 95), which are intact and practically identical to each other, were used for casting a pair of handles for a large bronze bowl like those found in main settlement buildings on the island, including CA 25 and 106 that both used vertical basket handles with round sections attached with rivets at the rim of the bowl.20 The molds are semi-circular or horseshoeshaped, a maximum of 0.076 m wide, and round in section, ca. 0.023 m in exterior diameter; each has a circular channel on the interior ca. 0.01 m in diameter. They resemble the handles in shape and dimensions because the width of the molds at their widest point and the diameter of the interior channel are about the same as the width and diameter of the handles. Each mold was shaped around a wax cartoon of the handle, which had a rivet hole pierced through the wax near each end and a small rim notch cut in the wax ca. 0.01 m above the rivet hole. The wax cartoon was covered first with a layer of fine clay (investment clay) as little as 0.001 m thick that covered it completely. After this first layer of clay had dried, it was overlaid with a thicker layer of coarse clay (envelope clay) that did not cover the mold everywhere, however, because it was designed to strengthen certain areas of the mold, notably the ends and underside.21 The two clays are very similar to each other except that the inclusions are much

larger and more numerous in the envelope clay. Mold IC.31 was broken so that it was possible to examine the interior channel. The handle was not designed to have any surface decoration, so the fine clay carried only the smooth contours of the wax cartoon. Toward the end of each channel, however, the fine clay reproduced each rivet hole as a cylindrical bar of clay, extending from one side of the channel to the other, and the rim notch above each hole as a low ridge of clay. The molds are completely enclosed except for pouring cups at the top, each provided with a small hole that served two purposes. The molds were fired in a kiln before being used, so the original wax cartoon was melted and evacuated through these holes, probably during the firing process. When the molds were ready to be used, the molten metal would be poured into the molds through the same holes, allowed to set, and then the mold itself would be broken to extract the bronze handles. The molds could be used only once and then had to be thrown away. The finished handles could be adjusted slightly in width, but they were designed with notches so they could sit flush against the rim of the bowl and be riveted to its sides with little additional work.22 Numbers IC.33, IC.34, and probably IC.35 (C 502, 503, and 599) are parts of three other closed molds. Number IC.34 still preserves the interior layer of investment clay, ca. 0.003 m thick, with bronze residue adhering to its surface, as well as the envelope clay that is up to 0.01 m thick. The two clays are the same except that one is fine and the other is coarse, as in the case of IC.30 and IC.31. Unlike IC.30 and IC.31, where the color of the clays is the same, the investment clay of this mold burned and turned a bluish gray color probably during casting, while the envelope clay retained its original reddish yellow color.23 Numbers IC.33 and IC.35 (C 502 and 599) have both lost the investment clay and retain only the coarse envelope clay. Number IC.33, which is up to 0.01 m thick, is so intensely fired as to be thoroughly vitrified. Only the interior surface of IC.35 was burned, while the exterior retained its reddish brown color. Number IC.34 (C 503) is an oblong mold that preserves a flat interior surface, about 0.036 m wide, and part of the side wall, about 0.005 m high. The interior

CERAMIC, STONE, BONE, AND SHELL OBJECTS

surface appears to be sloping up toward the sharp end of a blade, perhaps an axe or chisel. Number IC.33 preserves one curving section of the mold, part of the base, and part of the side wall up to the point where it began to curve over the top of the wax cartoon. It appears to belong to an object that was slightly curved and fairly thick, perhaps another handle like IC.285 (CA 165), which fits inside the mold rather well. Number IC.35 may be another oblong mold like IC.34. It differs from the other examples in the thickness of the envelope clay, which is up to 0.022 m thick. It could also be a piece of mud plaster that was set against a wooden beam, which burned when the building was destroyed. Additional evidence for such mud plaster, however, was lacking. It resembles IC.34 in that it preserves a flat interior surface and part of a side wall about 0.005 m high. The interior surface varies in width from 0.024 m to as much as 0.035 m. It may have served as a mold for another blade, preserving the section where the blade narrowed toward one end, such as a knife like IC.277 (CA 116) or a tool like spatula IC.276 (CA 105) that flared out towards the end opposite the heel. The two open molds (IC.32, IC.168; C 161, S 44) were both designed to be covered when used. Number IC.32 was a single mold with the matrix enclosed within the face of the mold. It would have been suitable for casting a small billet. Number IC.168 is too poorly preserved to be sure of its intended purpose. It was probably not yet finished and may have broken during manufacture. It preserves part of a narrow channel, 0.019 m long and up to 0.003 m wide at the broken end of the mold, which joins an oval depression, measuring 0.01 by 0.014 by 0.008 m. It might belong to half of a bivalve mold, the other half of which is missing. In this case, the channel was possibly intended to serve as a sprue and the hole for a circular object like a rivet head, the shaft of which was cut in the other half of the mold. The metal workers would have needed a good supply of rivets, so it would make sense to cast them in a reusable mold. The molds represent different stages of production. Numbers IC.33, IC.34, and IC.35, which are

23

all blackened by heat, had actually been used and discarded. The stone mold looks as if it was still in the process of being shaped and was not quite ready to use. The two closed molds IC.30 and IC.31 lay together beside a bench in Room 1 where they were probably just about to be used when the building was abandoned. Number IC.32 was also waiting to be used. IC.30 (C 94; A.1; 113.4; Fig. 6, Pl. 4). Mold. Intact. H. 0.067, max. w. 0.075, cup d. 0.029, dims. of pouring hole 0.007 by 0.014. FF: fine clay with a few small white inclusions, overlaid with coarse, black (CF Type 5; 5YR 2.5/1). Horseshoe-shaped mold with pouring hole surrounded by slightly raised rim opening into a narrow interior channel. Found with IC.31 (C 95). IC.31 (C 95; A.1; 113.4; Fig. 6, Pl. 4). Mold. Mended from two pieces, complete. H. 0.073, max. w. 0.076, cup d. 0.023, pouring hole d. 0.013, interior channel d. 0.01, rivet hole d. ca. 0.003, h. of rim notch 0.002. Clay and shape as above. IC.32 (C 161; A.9; 1909.1; Pl. 4) Mold. Intact. 0.03 by 0.047 by 0.018. FF: fine, reddish yellow (5YR 6/6) with a few small white and gray inclusions. Flat, ovoid object with rectangular matrix (length 0.019) in center of one side suitable for a small billet. Cf. H. and E. Catling 1984, p. 220, Pl. 207, Number 7. IC.33 (C 502; A.2; 208.2; Fig. 6, Pl. 4). Mold. One piece preserving part of base and side wall. Pres. length 0.042, pres. w. 0.015, pres. h. 0.02. CF Type 5: black (5YR 2.5/1). Fragment with flat base and irregular side wall, partly straight and partly curving inward. Badly burned throughout and vitrified from intense heat. IC.34 (C 503; A.2; 212.3 part 2; Fig. 6, Pl. 4). Mold. One piece broken on all edges, preserving base and lower side wall. Pres. length 0.063, pres. w. 0.055, th. 0.013; w. of interior matrix 0.036, pres. h. of side wall 0.005. CF Type 1: reddish yellow (5YR 6/6) burned on interior surface. Fragment of oblong mold with flat base and flat interior surface with thick, curving side walls. Bronze residue adhering to interior depression, probably from casting a blade. IC.35 (C 599; B.2; 20/2418W; Fig. 6). Mold. Mended from two pieces, broken on all edges, preserving base and side wall. Pres. length 0.08, pres. w. 0.052, th. 0.022; w. of interior matrix 0.024–0.035, pres. h. of side wall 0.005. CF Type 1: light reddish brown (5YR 6/4) burned on interior surface. Fragment of oblong mold with irregular base and flat interior surface with thick side wall.

24

MOCHLOS NEOPALATIAL SETTLEMENT ON THE COAST

Slabs With only one exception, the work slabs found in the Artisans’ Quarter belong to three different types. The most common, Type A, are rectangular slabs, flat on top and bottom, with fairly straight edges. Seventeen of these are cataloged, but many other very small fragments, which may or may not belong to these 17 cataloged examples, were also found and not included in the catalog. A smaller group, Type B, which seems related to Type A, is circular with rounded edges and also flat on top and bottom. Only seven of these are cataloged, and, like the Type A group, they represent an unknown percentage of the total in use. A third variety, Type C, is elliptical and plano-convex. Twenty-three of these, mostly preserving whole profiles, were cataloged and included virtually every example that was found. All three types are made of a very coarse, red (2.5YR 5/6) or reddish yellow (7.5YR 6/6) clay with many large phyllite inclusions, CF Type 1. The plano-convex slabs are even coarser, however, with inclusions of grog temper, and their fabric is basically the same as mud bricks. All the slabs are water wiped and smoothed on the upper surface and edges, but they are unfinished and rough on the underside. These objects are quite heavy even though they come in different sizes. The rectangular slabs normally range in thickness from 0.042–0.054 m, although one example is only 0.025 m thick. The most complete example (IC.37; C 206), which has three sides still preserved, is either 0.385 m long or 0.385 m wide and weighs 2.82 kg. The circular slabs are somewhat less thick, ranging from 0.028– 0.044 m in thickness; two of the better preserved examples (IC.56, IC.58; C 380, 510) have estimated diameters of 0.58 and 0.70 m. The plano-convex slabs are 0.08–0.10 m thick. Number IC.60 (C 482), which is complete, weighs over 10 kg. The slabs were not found at Chalinomouri, and they were designed to serve a craft function, whatever their secondary use may have been. Types A and B probably had several functions. The rectangular slab (IC.38; C 207), whose surface was marked by a hot bronze knife, indicates that one function was to provide a surface for hot metal objects that were placed there after casting to cool. Three examples (IC.54, IC.55, IC.57; C 99, 134, 490) come from Room 4 of Building A, where bronze was

worked and where the slabs may have been used in this way or in some related way. While they could not have withstood any hammering without breaking, they might also have been used, for example, to rest newly made objects that were being polished because several slabs come from the Rear Yard of Building A where this activity seems to have been taking place. Still others come from Building B, and they were probably being used in pottery production. Five slabs were found in Room 10, one of the pottery production centers in the building. Number IC.44 (C 497) was found with amphora IB.387 (P 2967) and was apparently being used as a base or table for this vase, perhaps while it was still being worked. Numbers IC.39, IC.40, and IC.51 (C 289, 342, 525) were scattered in the northeast quarter of the room and were probably once used in the same way. Number IC.52 (C 600), found in the rear yard behind Building B with pottery that appears to have been set to one side after removal from the kiln, also provided a surface where one of these newly fired pots could be set to cool. Still other examples come from Kiln A, and both these and others that show traces of burning were probably used as shelves in the kiln.24 The interior dividing walls of Kiln A, which supported these shelves, were themselves partly constructed out of these slabs. The slabs formed an important part of the potter’s tool kit, and they could be used for a variety of additional purposes. Number IC.55 (C 134) from Building A was found with pebbles of red ocher, and the slabs could probably withstand the grinding of such material to make pigments for pottery paints or textile dyes. They could also be used for kneading clay in preparation for making pottery. Some of the circular slabs might have made good bats were it not for their find spot in Building A, and, like IC.58 (C 510), they are probably too large in diameter. Some examples are also found in rooms that were being used primarily for food preparation, eating, and living space, where there was very little evidence for craft activity. These slabs and others that are slipped on their upper surfaces and sides, including IC.37, IC.41, and IC.42 (C 206, 347, 349), may have been used as simple tables on which food was placed.

CERAMIC, STONE, BONE, AND SHELL OBJECTS

The plano-convex slabs appear to have been associated with textile production because they supported upright wooden poles belonging to a warp stand or to the loom itself.25 Most were broken and reused as building material, but IC.60 (C 482) was still intact and in situ in Room 2 of Building B. Measuring ca. 0.37 by 0.43 by 0.08 m, it is made of poorly fired clay with a flat, unfinished base and a rounded, convex surface that was smoothed with water. It is notched with four holes around its perimeter, one at each end and one midway along each side, where wooden pegs were placed to hold it firmly in position; it was also completely pierced with two holes on top, which are placed along its longer axis. The slab lay on the floor in the room with its long axis parallel to the east wall, ca. 1.25 m from the wall, and was almost certainly used as a warp stand to measure the correct length of warp for a vertical loom.26 The two holes in the center of the slab supported two wooden sticks at one end of the warp, the other end of which was probably attached to the eastern wall. After spinning, thread was placed around the upright sticks of the stand, which was itself held in place with four pegs, and stretched to a uniform length to another warp stand, or in this case probably to a stick supported on the east wall of the room. It measured a warp ca. 1.25 m long, but it could be moved to measure a shorter or longer warp. Once measured, the sticks could be removed from the slab with the warp in place, and the warp could then be transferred on the sticks to a nearby loom. The loom may or may not have been located in the same room, but loomweights IC.104 and IC.120 (C 243, 485) in the room may well have been associated with it. None of the other plano-convex slabs were still in situ. Seventeen fragments (IC.62–76, IC.81, IC.82; C 533–547, 552, 553) were found in the wall collapse of Kiln A, and the fragment of an eighteenth piece (IC.77; C 548) lay on top of the wall dividing the two flues where it may have been used as part of the wall or as a shelf. Still other fragments (IC.78, IC.79; C 549, 550) were reused in the construction of the screen wall behind the building. Two fragments (IC.74, IC.80; C 545, 551) each preserve one of the two holes that are pierced through the center of the slabs. Both were clearly once warp stands like IC.60 (C 482). But two fragments (IC.61, IC.77; C 532, 548) seem to have served originally as supports

25

for larger upright posts. They were each designed to be placed at the base of a post, measuring 0.07–0.08 m in width and 0.09– 0.13 m in length, and to help hold it in place. If looms were placed on the roofs of the buildings, as believed, such slabs were probably needed to serve as weights at the base of the loom poles. Like the warp stands, they could also be adjusted to accommodate looms of different lengths.

Type A IC.36 (C 122; B.9; 1702.2; Fig. 7). Work slab. One piece preserving corner of slab. Pres. dims. 0.134 by 0.155, th. 0.054. Corner of rectangular work slab with smoothed upper surface and side walls, rough lower surface. IC.37 (C 206; B.7; 1902.1; Fig. 7, Pl. 5). Work slab. Mended from two pieces, broken on one side, preserving three sides. Length 0.385, pres. w. 0.223, th. 0.05. Rect angular work slab with flat upper and lower surfaces; smoothed and buff slipped on top and on three sides, underside left rough. IC.38 (C 207; B.7; 1910.2; Fig. 7, Pl. 5). Work slab. One fragment mended from two pieces, broken on two sides, preserving one corner and two sides of slab. Pres. dims. 0.147 by 0.236, th. 0.05. A rectangular work slab with flat upper and lower surfaces and straight sides, water wiped and smoothed on top and sides, rough and unfinished on bottom. Impression of a bronze knife left in soluble copper salts on upper surface of slab. Surrounded by a burned gray/black line, the impression preserves the shape of a knife, which was placed on the slab while still hot from casting, causing it to mark the surface of the clay. The impression belongs to an oblong, triangular knife with a projecting flange for the attachment of a handle, ca. 0.175 long from end to end, 0.027 wide at the heel, the widest point of the blade, and 0.011 wide at the flange. IC.39 (C 289; B.10; 2301.1; Fig. 7). Work slab. Mended from three pieces, preserving corner of slab, plus one non-joining body fragment. Pres. dims. 0.174 by 0.229, th. 0.05. Rectangular slab with flat upper and lower surfaces and straight sides; very pale brown slip on top and sides (10YR 7/3), rough and unfinished on bottom. Traces of burning on one edge. IC.40 (C 342; B.10; 2103.2; Fig. 7). Work slab. One piece preserving corner with two finished edges. Pres. dims. 0.132 by 0.169, th. 0.046. Rectangular slab with flat upper and lower surfaces and straight sides; very pale brown slip on top and sides, rough and unfinished on bottom. IC.41 (C 347; B.10; 24/1510.2). Work slab. One piece broken on all sides. Pres. dims. 0.22 by 0.23, th. 0.032– 0.044. CF Type 5: burned clay. Slab with flat upper surface, rough and unfinished on bottom. Buff slip on upper

26

MOCHLOS NEOPALATIAL SETTLEMENT ON THE COAST

surface. Warped with cracks in the clay from burning. Circular impression on top made before or during firing. IC.42 (C 349; B.13E; 2503.2). Work slab. Mended from two pieces preserving large corner fragment with two finished edges. Pres. dims. 0.18 by 0.225, th. 0.052. Rectangular slab with flat upper and lower surfaces and slightly rounded edges; very pale brown slip (10YR 8/3) on top and sides, rough and unfinished on bottom. IC.43 (C 365; Kiln A; 2901.3). Work slab. One piece preserving small fragment of surface. Pres. dims. 0.047 by 0.085. Work slab with squared edge, straight side, smoothed on top and side. IC.44 (C 497; B.10; 2012; Fig. 7). Work slab. Mended from two pieces preserving one corner. Pres. dims. 0.128 by 0.176, th. 0.041. Rectangular slab with smooth upper surface, straight sides and rough bottom, top surface slipped in white (10YR 8/1). IC.45 (C 509; A.RY; 2307.2). Work slab. One piece preserving one corner of slab. Pres. dims. 0.075 by 0.114, th. 0.025. Rectangular slab with flat upper and lower surfaces and straight sides with small cylindrical notch at edge. This slab is unusual because it is so thin and it is smoothed on top and bottom. IC.46 (C 511; B.10; 24/2510.1). Work slab. Three non-joining fragments, including two preserving two sides with corners, and one preserving one side, probably belonging to the same slab. Pres. dims. 0.0179 by 0.22, th. 0.046; 0.18 by 0.218, th. 0.046; 0.08 by 0.103, th. 0.046. Traces of buff slip on upper surface of smaller fragment. IC.47 (C 512; B.10; 24/2519.1). Work slab. One piece preserving part of top, bottom, and edge. Pres. dims. 0.082 by 0.13, th. 0.042. IC.48 (C 514; Kiln A; 2910.2). Work slab. One piece preserving part of top, bottom, and edge. Pres. dims. 0.088 by 0.111, th. 0.042. Rectangular slab with flat upper and lower surfaces and straight sides; pale buff slip on top and side, rough and unfinished on bottom. IC.49 (C 522; A.RY; 2307.2). Work slab. One piece preserving one side of slab. Pres. dims. 0.069 by 0.107, th. 0.025. Rectangular slab with flat upper and lower surfaces and straight sides. This slab is unusually thin for a rectangular work slab. IC.50 (C 524; B.10; 24/1510.2) Work slab. One piece preserving part of top, bottom, and edge. Pres. dims. 0.056 by 0.069, th. 0.042. Burning on edge. IC.51 (C 525; B.10; 2103.2). Work slab. One piece preserving one side of slab. Pres. dims. 0.113 by 0.148, th. 0.038. Rectangular slab with flat upper and lower surfaces and straight sides. Buff slip on upper surface. IC.52 (C 600; B.RY; 2806; Fig. 7). Work slab. Mended from two pieces preserving large corner fragment with two finished edges. Pres. dims. 0.165 by 0.203, th. 0.054. Rectangular slab with flat upper and

lower surfaces, smooth on top. Very pale brown slip (10YR 8/3) on top and sides; rough and unfinished on bottom.

Type B IC.53 (C 75; A.8; 808.3; Fig. 8). Work slab with hole. Six non-joining fragments, including three with finished edges and three body sherds broken on all sides. Pres. dims. of largest piece with edge and hole 0.11 by 0.11; others 0.075 by 0.086, 0.066 by 0.085, 0.09 by 0.091, 0.036 by 0.051, 0.034 by 0.041; th. 0.03. Circular slab with flattened upper and lower surfaces and one extant hole (d. 0.015) near edge. Unslipped. IC.54 (C 99; A.4 pit; 718.1). Work slab. One fragment with part of one edge preserved. Pres. dims. 0.22 by 0.23, th. 0.044. Circular slab with smooth upper surface, one rounded edge preserved, and very coarse base. Unslipped. IC.55 (C 134; A.4; 710.1). Work slab. One fragment broken on all edges. Pres. dims. 0.126 by 0.169, th. 0.033. Circular slab with flat upper and lower surfaces, traces of burning on both surfaces. IC.56 (C 380; A.RY; 2307.2; Fig. 8, Pl. 5). Work slab. One piece preserving whole profile. Est. d. 0.58, th. 0.028. Large circular slab with smooth upper surface, rounded edges, and rough underside. IC.57 (C 490; A.4; 213.1; Fig. 8). Work slab. Two joining pieces preserving small part of edge. Pres. dims. 0.111 by 0.146, th. 0.039. Circular slab with flat upper surface, rounded edge, and roughened underside. IC.58 (C 510; A.RY; 2301.2; Fig. 8, Pl. 5). Work slab. One piece preserving part of rim. Est. d. 0.70, th. 0.034. Large circular slab with flat upper and lower surfaces and rounded edge with shallow groove at base; smooth on top and rough on bottom. IC.59 (C 523; A.RY; 2307.2). Work slab. One piece preserving an interior portion of slab with flat upper and lower surfaces. Pres. dims. 0.102 by 0.104, th. 0.031. CF Type 5: coarse burned clay. It is impossible to determine whether this slab was round; only its thickness suggests that it might have been.

Type C IC.60 (C 482; B.2; 20/2418W; Fig. 8, Pl. 5). Planoconvex slab. Intact. Length 0.432, w. 0.37, max. th. 0.08. CF Type 1: coarse red to light brown (2.5YR 5/8–7.5YR 6/4) with many large inclusions of grog temper (2.5YR 5/8). Plano-convex slab, notched at both ends and midway on both sides and pierced with two holes placed on the long axis (d. of holes 0.01–0.012.) Smoothed on top, rough on the underside. Lightly fired. IC.61 (C 532; B.10; 24/2511; Fig. 9). Plano-convex slab. One piece broken on two sides preserving whole profile. Pres. length 0.18, pres. w. 0.11, th. 0.085. Inner

CERAMIC, STONE, BONE, AND SHELL OBJECTS

surface, slightly rounded with dims. 0.08 by 0.13, where it may have rested around the base of a vertical post. Upper surface incised with three diagonal lines, two parallel to each other, two joining at an acute angle. IC.62 (C 533; Kiln A; 2907.1; Fig. 9). Plano-convex slab. One piece broken on two sides preserving whole profile. Pres. length 0.115, pres. w. 0.095, max. th. 0.07. IC.63 (C 534; Kiln A; 2907.1). Plano-convex slab. One piece broken on three sides preserving whole profile. Pres. length 0.12, pres. w. 0.09, max. th. 0.06. IC.64 (C 535; Kiln A; 2907.1). Plano-convex slab. One piece broken on four sides preserving upper and lower surface. Pres. length 0.13, pres. w. 0.125, max. th. 0.077. IC.65 (C 536; Kiln A; 2907.1). Plano-convex slab. One piece broken on three sides preserving whole profile. Pres. length 0.095, pres. w. 0.08, max. th. 0.07. IC.66 (C 537; Kiln A; 2907.1; Fig. 9). Plano-convex slab. One piece broken on two sides preserving whole profile. Pres. length 0.185, pres. w. 0.165, max. th. 0.07. IC.67 (C 538; Kiln A; 2907.1). Plano-convex slab. One piece broken on three sides preserving whole profile. Pres. length 0.11, pres. w. 0.095, max. th. 0.06. IC.68 (C 539; Kiln A; 2907.1). Plano-convex slab. One piece broken on four sides, preserving outer edge of original slab and one side cut back for reuse as a brick. Pres. length 0.12, pres. w. 0.095, pres. th. 0.06. IC.69 (C 540; Kiln A; 2907.1). Plano-convex slab. One piece broken on three sides preserving whole profile. Pres. length 0.09, pres. w. 0.07, max. th. 0.045. IC.70 (C 541; Kiln A; 2907.1). Plano-convex slab. One piece broken on three sides preserving whole profile. Pres. length 0.18, pres. w. 0.13, max. th. 0.085. IC.71 (C 542; Kiln A; 2907.1). Plano-convex slab. One piece broken on three sides preserving whole profile. Pres. length 0.09, pres. w. 0.08, max. th. 0.06. IC.72 (C 543; Kiln A; 2907.1). Plano-convex slab. One piece broken on three sides preserving whole profile. Pres. length 0.18, pres. w. 0.14, max. th. 0.07.

27

IC.73 (C 544; Kiln A; 2907.1). Plano-convex slab. One piece broken on four sides preserving upper and lower surface. Pres. length 0.15, pres. w. 0.13, max. th. 0.07. IC.74 (C 545; Kiln A; 2907.1). Plano-convex slab. One piece broken on four sides preserving upper and lower surface with hole. Pres. length 0.15, pres. w. 0.09, max. th. 0.11, approximate d. of hole 0.015. IC.75 (C 546; Kiln A; 2907.1; Fig. 9). Plano-convex slab. One piece, mended from three pieces, broken on three sides preserving whole profile. Pres. length 0.155, pres. w. 0.135, max. th. 0.09. IC.76 (C 547; Kiln A; 2907.1). Plano-convex slab. One piece broken on three sides preserving whole profile. Pres. length 0.135, pres. w. 0.11, max. th. 0.07. IC.77 (C 548; Kiln A; 2907.1). Plano-convex slab. One piece broken on three sides preserving upper and lower surfaces and inner profile. Pres. length 0.105, pres. w. 0.105, max. th. 0.09. The inner surface of this piece, slightly rounded and measuring 0.07 by 0.09 m, may have rested against the base of a vertical support. IC.78 (C 549; B.RY; 2904.1). Plano-convex slab. One piece broken on two sides preserving rounded corner of slab. Pres. length 0.24, pres. w. 0.145, max. th. 0.082. IC.79 (C 550; B.RY; 2904.1). Plano-convex slab. One piece broken on three sides preserving whole profile. Pres. length 0.165, pres. w. 0.17, max. th. 0.092. Burned on top. IC.80 (C 551; B.RY; 2904.1). Plano-convex slab. One piece broken on two sides preserving whole profile with rounded corner. Pres. length 0.24, pres. w. 0.19, max. th. 0.105. Remains of hole with approximate d. of 0.013. IC.81 (C 552; Kiln A; 2907). Plano-convex slab. One piece broken on two sides preserving whole profile with rounded corner. Pres. length 0.165, pres. w. 0.14, max. th. 0.078. IC.82 (C 553; Kiln A; 2907). Plano-convex slab. One piece broken on three sides preserving whole profile. Length 0.19, w. 0.18, max. th. 0.083.

Stands Two cylindrical stands and one lid, including one stand found in the road next to Building B (IC.84; C 508) and the other stand and lid (IC.85, IC.83; C 569,184) found in Room 1 at Chalinomouri, appear to have served related functions. They are all made of the same CF Type 1 reddish yellow clay, with the lid’s clay somewhat finer. The lid has a central hole and two knob handles that project from the sides of

the lid opposite each other. The upper part of IC.84 is missing, but both stands have the same hollow, splaying base. Number IC.84 is somewhat smaller in diameter with an upper diameter of 0.116 m, while IC.85 has a rim diameter of 0.159 m; its wall is slightly thicker than that of IC.85, and it may have been similar in height. Number IC.85 has a slightly outturned rim that is pinched at two points

28

MOCHLOS NEOPALATIAL SETTLEMENT ON THE COAST

opposite each other, forming two flat grooves in the rim and two small indentations on the interior. While stands of this sort are commonly used as pot stands,27 the pinched indentations on the rim of IC.85 suggest that it was used to support something other than a pot. A lid like IC.83 may have been designed to sit on top of such a stand with its handles resting on the rim grooves or perhaps even in the interior indentations just below the rim. This lid was found with IC.85, but it is too small to have been used with it. Measuring 0.11 m in diameter, it would however have fit on top of a stand about the size of IC.84. Such a lid could be used in spinning thread from a ball of yarn, which sat inside the stand. The lid would keep the ball from jumping out of the pot and also provide tension to pull against it.28 In this case, the stand could be used with such a lid to serve as a spinning bowl. Number IC.84 may or may not have served in the same way depending on the reconstruction of its rim. If it had a

plain rim without grooves, it would have served as a simple pot stand. IC.83 (C 184; Ch.1; 2210; Fig. 10, Pl. 6). Lid with central hole. Intact. D. 0.11, th. 0.017. CF Type 1: reddish yellow (7.5YR 6/6). Flat, round disc with central hole, 0.017 in diameter, and two knob handles, each 0.01 long and 0.011 in diameter, located opposite each other. Probably used as a spinning lid, although no string grooves are worn in the central hole. IC.84 (C 508; A-B road; 25/2601; Fig. 10, Pl. 6). Stand. Mended from three pieces preserving one end. Pres. h. 0.107, upper d. 0.116, base d. 0.126. CF Type 1: reddish yellow (5YR 6/6). Cylindrical stand with hollow splaying base. Wheelmade. IC.85 (C 569; Ch.1; 2210; Fig. 10, Pl. 6). Stand. Mended from six pieces; nearly complete except for chips along rim and one body gap. H. 0.126, rim d. 0.159, base d. 0.153. CF Type 1: reddish yellow (7.5YR 6/6). Cylindrical stand with slightly outturned rim and hollow splaying base; rim pinched at two points opposite each other, forming two grooves on rim, 0.011–0.014 wide, and small indentations on interior, each 0.013 in diameter. Wheelmade.

Tools A few pot sherds that appear to have been used as tools were excavated in the Artisans’ Quarter. Some may have been used as polishers or burnishers in pottery production, and others as tools in textile production. Most are fragmentary sherds that were re-used as tools, but the two cataloged below appear to have been designed as tools from the beginning and may never have had any other function. They are both rather delicate, and because they were found in rooms with loomweights, they may have been used in textile production.29

IC.86 (C 493; A.4; 718.1; Fig. 13, Pl. 8). Beater? Mended from four pieces preserving three finished edges. Length 0.071, w. 0.046, th. 0.004. CF Type 1: yellowish red (5YR 5/6) with many large inclusions. Slightly curved, rectangular slab with squared edges. IC.87 (C 505; A.2; 212.4 part 4; Fig. 13, Pl. 8). Spool? Mended from two pieces, complete. Length 0.083, w. 0.023, th. 0.01. FF: medium, reddish yellow (5YR 6/6) with some medium-sized gray, white, and reddish brown inclusions. Oblong tool with one hooked end. Smoothed on all surfaces from rubbing.

Weights Sixty-three clay weights, most of them loomweights of various types, were found in the Artisans’ Quarter scattered on the floors of many rooms as well as in the wall and roof tumble above and often outside in the surrounding spaces. Six more weights were found at Chalinomouri in similar circumstances. The scattered find spots of these weights, including one (IC.155; C 230) that was recomposed from two pieces found far apart and at

different levels in the Artisans’ Quarter, and the location of many examples in wall and roof tumble (approximately 27% of the total), suggest that some, if not all, fell from the roofs where the actual looms were set up.30 Most of these weights are locally produced from the familiar coarse, reddish yellow, phyllite tempered CF Type 1. Two exceptions (IC.133, IC.134; C 85, 101) are made from the coarse and generally

CERAMIC, STONE, BONE, AND SHELL OBJECTS

buff colored, non-phyllite fabric with granodiorite inclusions, CF Type 10a, that is typical of objects produced at Gournia.31 These exceptions probably were not imports because simple clay weights had no intrinsic value.32 Nevertheless, such weights were of great value to the craftswoman making her cloth, and they were probably transported with her upon her “marriage” or in a short-distance migration. Therefore, the appearance of these granodiorite tempered loomweights at Mochlos may indicate the practice of exogamy or some other kind of migration from Gournia to Mochlos. Six basic types of clay weights have been classified: elliptical, rounded, disc-shaped (usually grouped together and identified in most literature as “flat discs”), trapezoidal or pyramid-shaped, spher33 ical, and reused pot-sherd weights. Most common is the large, elliptical Type A that usually has a flattened and grooved upper edge and a single hole. Thirty examples of this type have been cataloged.34 A few of these large elliptical weights (IC.90, IC.103, IC.123; C 34, 233, 515) have two holes, and some have a rounded, ungrooved upper edge.35 One example (IC.112; C 327) is buff slipped, but all others are undecorated. All of these large elliptical weights are relatively heavy, ranging between 150–270 g. Six examples of a lighter, mediumsized variant of the type (IC.88, IC.94, IC.104, IC.108, IC.122, IC.124; C 27, 102, 243, 318, 504, 520) have also been cataloged, ranging between 70– 150 g.36 In addition, five examples of a small variant of the type (IC.106, IC.110, IC.111, IC.113, IC.118; C 306, 324, 325, 338, 359) have been cataloged, ranging between 30–70 g.37 The second most numerous category, Type B, is rounder, but it also generally has a flattened and grooved upper edge and a single hole. Seventeen examples of this type have been cataloged, ranging between 80–160 g.38 Three examples (IC.132, IC.140, IC.144; C 73, 298, 427) have two holes instead of one. Discshaped loomweights always with two holes constitute Type C, and they are less common with only four cataloged examples (IC.147–150; C 137, 162, 198, 554), ranging between 60–70 g.39 These often have a grooved upper edge. Another uncommon type of weight, Type D, is trapezoidal with two holes, ranging between 40–65 g.40 Four examples of this type (IC.151–154; C 25, 63, 231, 237) have been cataloged. One pierced, spherical weight

29

(IC.155; C 230) with four vertical grooves, Type E, weighs 158 g. This type becomes popular elsewhere in the LM I period, so it is somewhat surprising that only one example was found.41 Two potsherds (IC.156, IC.157; C 36, 190) punched with holes for reuse as weights constitute Type F, weighing 44 and 30 g respectively. The basic difference in weight between the large, elliptical weights, weighing 150–270 g, the medium-sized elliptical and round weights, weighing 70–160 g, and all the other weights, weighing less than 70 g, may be significant in interpreting their precise use. For instance, the larger weights were possibly used in the weaving of heavy, dense fabrics, while the smaller weights may have been used for finer or looser cloth.42 However, it is also possible that the craftswomen simply tied proportionately more warp threads to the larger weights and fewer to the smaller ones.43 Significantly, weights of the same type have flattened and grooved tops or rounded and ungrooved tops. E. Barber has suggested that some weights (possibly the ones with flattened and grooved tops), hanging from the warp behind the shed bar of a typical Minoan warpweighted loom, were possibly lashed to a rod to avoid excessive swinging and clanking with the movement of the heddle bar.44 Alternatively, P. Betancourt suggests that the loomweights with both flat tops and two holes may have been used with short rods tied on top in order to secure the vertical threads on a loom and keep them spaced evenly.45

Type A IC.88 (C 27; A.4; 712.1; Fig. 10). Loomweight. About three-quarters extant. H. 0.074, w. 0.056, th. 0.015. Pres. weight 62 g. CF Type 1: red (2.5YR 5/8). Roughly elliptical, medium-sized loomweight with rounded edges, flattened top, and a single hole (d. 0.014) near upper edge. IC.89 (C 28; B.5; 502.1; Fig. 10). Loomweight. About three-quarters extant. Pres. h. 0.088, w. 0.082, th. 0.026. Pres. weight 186 g. CF Type 1: reddish yellow (5YR 6/6). Large elliptical loomweight with rounded edges, flattened and grooved top, and a single hole (d. 0.022) near upper edge. IC.90 (C 34; B.3; 603). Loomweight. About onethird extant. Pres. h. 0.049, pres. w. 0.061, th. 0.03. Pres. weight 84 g. CF Type 1: reddish yellow clay (5YR 6/6). Large elliptical loomweight with rounded edges, flattened and grooved top, and two holes (d. 0.01) near upper edge.

30

MOCHLOS NEOPALATIAL SETTLEMENT ON THE COAST

IC.91 (C 37; B.7W; 1301.3). Loomweight. About one-quarter extant. Pres. dims. 0.046 by 0.068, th. 0.027. Pres. weight 80 g. CF Type 1: reddish yellow (5YR 7/6). Large elliptical loomweight with tapered edges, flattened top, and a single hole near upper edge. IC.92 (C 61; A.4; 712.2). Loomweight. About onequarter extant. Pres. h. 0.087, pres. w. 0.056, th. 0.032. Pres. weight 124 g. CF Type 1: yellowish red (5YR 5/8). Large, roughly elliptical loomweight with tapered edges, flattened top, and a single hole (d. 0.019) near upper edge. IC.93 (C 62; N.Terrace; 609.7; Fig. 10, Pl. 6). Loomweight. Nearly intact. H. 0.10, w. 0.086, th. 0.032. Weight 254 g. CF Type 1: reddish yellow (5YR 6/6). Large elliptical loomweight with rounded edges, flattened and grooved top, and a single hole (d. 0.015) near upper edge. IC.94 (C 102; A-B road; 1601.1; Fig. 10). Loomweight. Nearly complete. Pres. h. 0.065, w. 0.058, th. 0.022. Pres. weight 78 g. CF Type 1: coarse, yellowish red (5YR 5/6). Medium-sized elliptical loomweight with flattened top and a single hole (d. 0.009) near upper edge. IC.95 (C 116; B.5; 501.4). Loomweight fragment. Less than one-quarter extant. Pres. dims. 0.047 by 0.065, th. 0.019. Pres. weight 32 g. CF Type 1: reddish yellow (5YR 6/6). Probably large elliptical loomweight with one-half hole (d. 0.021) preserved. IC.96 (C 120; B.7; 1503). Loomweight fragment. Less than one-quarter extant. Pres. h. 0.056, pres. w. 0.04, th. 0.027. Pres. weight 44 g. CF Type 1: reddish yellow (5YR 6/6). Probably large elliptical loomweight with a single hole (d. 0.018) near upper edge. IC.97 (C 145; A-B road; 1904.1). Loomweight. About one-half extant. H. 0.096, pres. w. 0.053, th. 0.022. Pres. weight 106 g. CF Type 1: red (2.5YR 5/8). Large roughly elliptical loomweight with rounded edges, a flattened top, and a single hole (d. 0.023) near upper edge. IC.98 (C 147; A-B road; 1909.1). Loomweight. About one-quarter extant. Pres. dims. 0.041 by 0.076, th. 0.027. Pres. weight 80 g. CF Type 1: red (2.5YR 5/8). Probably large elliptical loomweight with flattened and grooved top, and a single hole (d. 0.019) near upper edge. IC.99 (C 177; B.4; 1806.1; Fig. 10). Loomweight. About one-half extant. Pres. h. 0.09, pres. w. 0.086, th. 0.029. Pres. weight 182 g. CF Type 1: reddish yellow (7.5YR 6/6). Large elliptical loomweight with rounded edges, flattened top, and a single hole (d. 0.017) near upper edge. IC.100 (C 182; B.8; 1712.1; Fig. 10). Loomweight. Nearly intact. H. 0.091, w. 0.08, th. 0.029. Pres. weight 204 g. CF Type 1: reddish yellow (5YR 6/6). Large elliptical loomweight with rounded edges and a single hole (d. 0.015) near upper edge. IC.101 (C 183; B.8; 1712.1; Fig. 10, Pl. 6). Loomweight. Intact. H. 0.105, w. 0.085, th. 0.033. Weight 268

g. CF Type 1: reddish yellow (5YR 6/6). Large elliptical loomweight with rounded edges, flattened and grooved top, and a single hole (d. 0.014) near upper edge. IC.102 (C 213; B.8; 1712.1; Fig. 10, Pl. 6). Loomweight. Intact. H. 0.101, w. 0.085, th. 0.026. Weight 216 g. CF Type 1: reddish yellow (7.5YR 7/6). Large elliptical loomweight with rounded edges, flattened and grooved top, and a single hole (d. 0.017) near upper edge. IC.103 (C 233; A.2; 212.4 part 1; Fig. 10). Loomweight. About one-half extant. Pres. h. 0.071, w. 0.076, th. 0.021. Pres. weight 114 g. CF Type 1: reddish yellow (5YR 6/6). Large elliptical loomweight with rounded edges, flattened top, and two small holes near upper edge. IC.104 (C 243; B.2; 303.2; Fig. 10). Loomweight. Intact. H. 0.083, w. 0.069, th. 0.024 Weight 148 g. CF Type 1: yellowish red (5YR 5/6). Medium-sized elliptical loomweight with rounded edges, flattened and grooved top, and a single hole (d. 0.01) near upper edge. IC.105 (C 304; B.9; 1705; Fig. 10). Loomweight. About three-quarters extant. H. 0.085, w. 0.07, th. 0.023. Pres. weight 158 g. CF Type 1: reddish yellow (5YR 6/6). Large elliptical loomweight with rounded edges, flattened and grooved top, and a single hole (d. 0.014) near upper edge. IC.106 (C 306; B.13W; 2505.2; Fig. 10, Pl. 6). Loomweight. Intact. H. 0.049, w. 0.04, th. 0.015. Weight 54 g. CF Type 1: red (2.5YR 5/6). Small elliptical loomweight with rounded edges, flattened and grooved top, and a single hole (d. 0.008) near upper edge. IC.107 (C 310; Clay bed; 3101.7; Fig. 10). Loomweight. About one-half extant. Pres. h. 0.065, pres. w. 0.061, th. 0.029. Pres. weight 110 g. CF Type 1: reddish yellow (7.5YR 6/6). Large elliptical loomweight with tapered and rounded edges, flattened and grooved top and a single hole (d. 0.011) near upper edge. IC.108 (C 318; B.8; 1712.1; Fig. 10). Loomweight. More than three-quarters extant. Pres. h. 0.062, w. 0.053, th. 0.021. Pres. weight 66 g. CF Type 1: red (2.5YR 5/6). Medium-sized elliptical loomweight with tapered edges and a single hole (d. 0.01) near upper edge. IC.109 (C 321; Kiln A; 2901.4; Fig. 11). Loomweight. About three-quarters extant. Pres. h. 0.076, w. 0.081, th. 0.036. Pres. weight 224 g. CF Type 1: light red (2.5YR 6/8). Large, roughly elliptical loomweight with rounded edges, lower part of a single off-center hole near upper edge. IC.110 (C 324; B.alcove; 2110.3; Fig. 11). Loomweight. Intact. H. 0.057, w. 0.049, th. 0.022. Weight 62 g. CF Type 1: red (2.5YR 5/8). Small elliptical loomweight with rounded edges and a single hole (d. 0.01) near upper edge. IC.111 (C 325; B.13W; 2505.1; Fig. 11, Pl. 6). Loomweight. Intact. H. 0.06, w. 0.052, th. 0.022. Weight 62 g.

CERAMIC, STONE, BONE, AND SHELL OBJECTS

CF Type 5: burned. Small elliptical loomweight with rounded edges, flattened and grooved top, and a single hole (d. 0.01) near upper edge. IC.112 (C 327; Kiln A; 2901.3; Fig. 11). Loomweight. About three-quarters extant. H. 0.094, w. 0.086, th. 0.031. Pres. weight 174 g. CF Type 5: burned core, buff slipped. (2.5Y 8/2). Large elliptical loomweight with rounded edges, grooved on top, and a single hole (d. 0.015) near upper edge. IC.113 (C 338; B.4; 2002.1; Fig. 11). Loomweight. About one-half extant. Pres. h. 0.042, pres. w. 0.04, th. 0.021. Pres. weight 30 g. CF Type 1: yellowish red (5YR 5/8). Small, roughly elliptical loomweight with rounded edges, flattened and slightly grooved top, and a single hole (d. 0.007) near upper edge. IC.114 (C 340; B.alcove; 2110.2). Loomweight. About one-third extant. Pres. h. 0.064, th. 0.0246. Pres. weight 70 g. CF Type 1: reddish yellow (5YR 6/6). Probably large elliptical loomweight with tapered edges and a single hole near upper edge. IC.115 (C 341; A-B road; 25/2600). Loomweight fragment. Less than one-quarter extant. Pres. h. 0.032. Pres. weight 34 g. Probably large elliptical loomweight with flattened top and a single hole near upper edge. IC.116 (C 343; A.RY; 2307.2; Fig. 11, Pl. 6). Loomweight. Intact. H. 0.08, w. 0.078, th. 0.025. Weight 162 g. CF Type 1: reddish yellow (5YR 6/6). Large elliptical loomweight with tapered edges, a flattened, slightly grooved top, and a single hole (d. 0.012) near upper edge. IC.117 (C 356; B.11; 2407.1). Loomweight fragment. Less than one-quarter extant. Pres. dims. 0.042 by 0.043, th. 0.023. Pres. weight 42 g. CF Type 1: reddish yellow (5YR 6/6). Large, probably elliptical loomweight with tapered edges. IC.118 (C 359; B.10-13; 2500.1). Loomweight. About three-quarters extant. Pres. h. 0.049, w. 0.051, th. 0.019. Pres. weight 46 g. CF Type 1: reddish yellow (5YR 6/6). Small, roughly elliptical loomweight with rounded edges and a single hole (d. 0.015) near upper edge. IC.119 (C 381; B.13; 2500.1). Loomweight fragment. Less than one-quarter extant. Pres. h. 0.025. Pres. weight 28 g. CF Type 1: red (2.5YR 5/6). Probably large elliptical loomweight with flattened and grooved top, and a single hole (d. 0.019) near upper edge. IC.120 (C 485; B.2; 20/2418W; Fig. 11, Pl. 6). Loomweight. Intact. H. 0.088, w. 0.074, th. 0.034. Weight 190 g. CF Type 1: coarse pink (7.5YR 7/4). Large elliptical loomweight with rounded edges, flattened and grooved top, and a single hole (d. 0.02) near upper edge. IC.121 (C 495; B.alcove; 2110.3; Fig. 11). Loomweight fragment. Less than one-quarter extant. Pres. w. 0.067, th. 0.023. Pres. weight 60 g. CF Type 1: yellowish

31

red (5YR 5/6). Large, probably elliptical loomweight with tapered edge. IC.122 (C 504; B.RY; 2404; Fig. 11). Loomweight. Intact. H. 0.075, w. 0.061, th. 0.0227. Weight 120 g. CF Type 1: reddish yellow (5YR 6/6). Medium-sized elliptical loomweight with rounded edges, flattened and grooved top, and a single hole (d. 0.011) near upper edge. IC.123 (C 515; Ch.6; 311.3; Fig. 11). Loomweight. About one-quarter extant. Pres. h. 0.04, th. 0.021. Pres. weight 46 g. CF Type 1: light red (2.5YR 6/6). Probably large elliptical loomweight with flattened top and two holes (d. 0.006) near upper edge. IC.124 (C 520; B.7; 1910.2; Fig. 11). Loomweight fragment. Less than one-quarter extant. Pres. h. 0.036. Pres. weight 14 g. CF Type 1: reddish yellow (5YR 6/6). Probably medium-sized elliptical loomweight with tapered edges, flattened top, and one extant hole (d. 0.011) near upper edge. IC.125 (C 521; Ch.6; 311.2). Loomweight. About one-half extant. H. 0.085, pres. w. 0.048, th. 0.02. Pres. weight 86 g. CF Type 1: reddish yellow (5YR 6/8). Large, roughly elliptical loomweight with tapered edges, flattened top, and one hole (d. 0.0007) near upper edge. IC.126 (C 527; Kiln A; 2907.3; Fig. 11). Loomweight. About three-quarters extant. H. 0.10, w. 0.08, th. 0.026. Pres. weight 140 g. CF Type 1: reddish yellow (7.5YR 7/6). Large elliptical loomweight with rounded edges, grooved top, and a single hole (d. 0.016) near upper edge. IC.127 (C 559; A.4; 805.1). Loomweight fragment. Less than one-quarter extant. Pres. h. 0.069, th. 0.02. Pres. weight 30 g. CF Type 1: reddish yellow (7.5YR 6/6). Probably a large elliptical loomweight with tapered edges. IC.128 (C 601; A.RY.Bin). Loomweight fragment. About one-quarter extant. Pres. h. 0.052, w. 0.059. Pres. weight 76 g. CF Type 1: reddish yellow (7.5YR 6/6). Probably an elliptical loomweight with flattened and grooved upper edge, rounded outer edges and a single hole (d. 0.014–0.017) near the top.

Type B IC.129 (C 7; B.3; 301 surface; Fig. 11). Loomweight. About three-quarters extant. H. 0.078, w. 0.073, th. 0.025. Pres. weight 112 g. CF Type 1: reddish yellow (7.5YR 6/6). Roughly round loomweight with rounded edges, flattened and grooved top, and a single hole (d. 0.009) near upper edge. IC.130 (C 26; A.4; 712.1; Fig. 11). Loomweight. Nearly complete. H. 0.087, w. 0.079, th. 0.024. Pres. weight 156 g. CF Type 1: yellowish red (5YR 5/8). Roughly round loomweight with tapered edges, flattened and grooved top, and a single hole (d. 0.013) near upper edge.

32

MOCHLOS NEOPALATIAL SETTLEMENT ON THE COAST

IC.131 (C 66; D; 900.surface; Fig. 11). Loomweight. About one-half extant. w. 0.072, th. 0.029. Pres. weight 110 g. CF Type 1: yellowish red (5YR 5/6). Round loomweight with rounded edges and one hole partly preserved near upper edge. IC.132 (C 73; Ch.NT; 13,403; Fig. 11). Loomweight. About one-third extant. Pres. h. 0.052, th. 0.021. Pres. weight 52 g. CF Type 1: red (2.5YR 5/6). Round loomweight with tapered edges, flattened and grooved top, and two holes (d. 0.005) near upper edge. IC.133 (C 85; B.6; 1310.2; Fig. 11). Loomweight. Nearly complete. Pres. h. 0.064, w. 0.06, th. 0.024. Pres. weight 82 g. CF Type 10a: light reddish brown (5YR 6/4). Round loomweight with rounded edges and a single hole (d. 0.01) near upper edge. Imported from Gournia, cf. IC.134 (C 101). IC.134 (C 101; A.8; 808.3). Loomweight. About one-half extant. Pres. h. 0.065, w. 0.075, th. 0.032. Pres. weight 144 g. CF Type 10a: very pale brown (10YR 8/3). Roughly round loomweight with rounded edges, flattened top, and a single off-center hole (d. 0.013) near upper edge. Imported from Gournia, cf. IC.133 (C 85). IC.135 (C 110; D surface; 1400; Fig. 11). Loomweight fragment. Less than one-quarter extant. Th. 0.021. Pres. weight 42 g. CF Type 5: burned. Round loomweight with tapered edge and one extant hole. IC.136 (C 111; D surface; 1000.1; Fig. 11). Loomweight fragment. Less than one-quarter extant. Th. 0.022. Pres. weight 48 g. CF Type 5: burned. Round loomweight with tapered edges. IC.137 (C 130; A-B road; 1606.2). Loomweight fragment. Less than one-quarter extant. Pres. h. 0.053, pres. w. 0.069, th. 0.022. Pres. weight 44 g. CF Type 1: yellowish red (5YR 5/6). Roughly round loomweight with flattened and slightly grooved top and a single hole (d. 0.013) near upper edge. IC.138 (C 152; A.9; 1909.1). Loomweight. Nearly complete. H. 0.064, w. 0.065, th. 0.024. Pres. weight 80 g. CF Type 3: reddish yellow (7.5YR 6/6). Roughly round loomweight with flattened top and a single offcenter hole near upper edge. IC.139 (C 286; B.10; 2102.1; Fig. 11). Loomweight. About three-quarters extant. Pres. h. 0.06, w. 0.064, th. 0.022. Pres. weight 84 g. CF Type 1: red (2.5YR 5/6). Roughly round loomweight with rounded edges, flattened top, and a single hole (d. 0.006) near upper edge. IC.140 (C 298; B.10; 2103.2; Fig. 11). Loomweight. About three-quarters extant. Pres. h. 0.051, w. 0.053, th. 0.023. Pres. weight 62 g. CF Type 8a: red (2.5YR 4/6). Roughly round loomweight with tapered edges, flattened and grooved top, and two holes (d. 0.006) near upper edge. IC.141 (C 323; B.10; 2011.2). Loomweight fragment. Less than one-quarter extant. Pres. h. 0.051, th. 0.015. Pres. weight 28 g. CF Type 1: yellowish red (5YR

5/6). Round? loomweight with tapered and rounded edges, and a single hole near upper edge. IC.142 (C 326; B.RY; 2902.1). Loomweight. About one-third extant. Pres. h. 0.051, th. 0.021. Pres. weight 62 g. CF Type 1: reddish yellow (5YR 6/6). Probably round loomweight with tapered and rounded edges and a single hole (d. 0.011) near upper edge. IC.143 (C 407; B.NE; 1501.8). Loomweight fragment. Less than one-quarter extant. Pres. h. 0.046, pres. w. 0.059, th. 0.012. Pres. weight 28 g. CF Type 5: burned, dark gray (5YR 4/1). Probably round loomweight with flattened top and a single hole (d. 0.012) near upper edge. IC.144 (C 427; Ch.yard; Fig. 11). Loomweight. More than three-quarters extant. Pres. h. 0.055, w. 0.063, th. 0.02. Pres. weight 64 g. CF Type 1: reddish yellow (5YR 6/8). Roughly round loomweight with flattened top, two holes (d. 0.009) near upper edge. IC.145 (C 498; B.3; 307; Fig. 11). Loomweight. About one-quarter extant. Pres. h. 0.051, pres. w. 0.057, th. 0.019. Pres. weight 52 g. CF Type 5: burned. Probably round loomweight with flattened top and a single hole (d. 0.014) near upper edge. IC.146 (C 526; B.12; 20/2408W). Loomweight. About two-thirds extant. Pres. h. 0.046, w. 0.056. Pres. weight 36 g. CF Type 1: reddish yellow (7.5YR 6/6). Probably round with rounded edges and a single hole near upper edge.

Type C IC.147 (C 137; A-B road; 1904.1; Fig. 12, Pl. 7). Loomweight. Nearly complete. H. 0.064, w. 0.057, th. 0.016. Pres. weight 60 g. CF Type 1: red (2.5YR 5/8). Roughly disc-shaped loomweight with two holes (d. 0.006) near upper edge. IC.148 (C 162; B.4; 1806.1; Fig. 12, Pl. 7). Loomweight. Nearly intact. H. 0.065, w. 0.061, th. 0.017. Pres. weight 68 g. CF Type 1: red (2.5YR 4/6). Discshaped loomweight with rounded edges and two holes (d. 0.008) near upper edge. IC.149 (C 198; Ch.4; 1207.3; Fig. 12, Pl. 7). Loomweight. Intact. H. 0.057, w. 0.058, th. 0.018 Weight 66 g. CF Type 1: red (2.5YR 5/8). Disc-shaped loomweight with rounded edges, flattened and grooved top, and two small holes (d. 0.004) near upper edge. IC.150 (C 554; B.alcove; 2110.2; Fig. 12, Pl. 7). Loomweight. About three-quarters extant. w. 0.063, th. 0.012. Pres. weight 48 g. CF Type 1: red (2.5YR 5/6). Disc-shaped loomweight with tapered edges, flattened top, and two holes (d. 0.007) near upper edge.

Type D IC.151 (C 25; A.4; 710.1; Fig. 12, Pl. 7). Loomweight. Intact. H. 0.048, w. 0.038, th. 0.023. Weight 48 g. CF

CERAMIC, STONE, BONE, AND SHELL OBJECTS

Type 1: yellowish red (5YR 5/8). Roughly trapezoidalshaped loomweight with rounded edges, flat top, and two holes (d. 0.004–0.005) near upper edge. Cf. IC.152 (C 63), an identical loomweight from this room. IC.152 (C 63; A.4; 805.1; Fig. 12, Pl. 7). Loomweight. Intact. H. 0.045, w. 0.038, th. 0.022 Weight 42 g. CF Type 1: yellowish red (5YR 5/8). Roughly trapezoidal loomweight with rounded edges, flattened top, and two holes (d. 0.003–0.005) near upper edge. Traces of burning. Cf. IC.151 (C 25) above. IC.153 (C 231; A.2; 212.1 part 1; Fig. 12, Pl. 7). Loomweight. Nearly intact. H. 0.052, w. 0.046, th. 0.024. Weight 62 g. CF Type 1: red (2.5YR 5/6). Roughly trapezoidal loomweight with rounded edges and corners and two small holes (d. 0.004) near upper edge. IC.154 (C 237; A.2; 212.3 part 3; Fig. 12, Pl. 7). Loomweight. Intact. H. 0.051, w. 0.039, th. 0.02. Weight 48 g. CF Type 1: red (2.5YR 5/6). Roughly trapezoidal loomweight with rounded edges, flattened top, and two small holes (d. 0.004) near upper edge.

33

Type E IC.155 (C 230; A.2; 212.4 part 1 and 2601.3; Fig. 12). Loomweight. About three-quarters extant. H. 0.053, w. 0.067. Pres. weight 158 g. CF Type 2a: reddish yellow (7.5YR 7/6). Spherical loomweight with four vertical grooves at regular intervals, hole (d. 0.014) through center. One piece of this loomweight was found in Room 2, the other about 20 m to the south outside the southeast corner of Building B. Cf. examples from Vathypetro (Marinatos 1952, pp. 596–597, pl. 7).

Type F IC.156 (C 36; D; 1103.1; Fig. 12, Pl. 7). Weight. One piece broken on three sides preserving straight upper edge. Pres. h. 0.05, w. 0.046, th. 0.014. Pres. weight 44 g. CF Type 8a: red (2.5YR 4/6). Sherd re-used as loomweight with two holes (d. 0.002) near upper edge. IC.157 (C 190; Ch.2; 21/2206.2; Fig. 12, Pl. 7). Weight. One sherd with punched hole (d. 0.004), re-used as weight. H. 0.049, w. 0.03. Weight 30 g. CF Type 8a: red (2.5YR 4/6).

Wheels Six potter’s wheels were found in Building B, two of which (IC.158, IC.160; C 227, 307) were still in use at the time of the building’s destruction and the other four of which were fragmentary. They belong to a class of large, disc-shaped wheels or wheelheads with sockets on their undersides, surrounded by collars, and elaborated rims.46 They have diameters that range from 0.401–0.44 m and rims that vary from 0.052–0.061 m in thickness. Number IC.161 (C 346) which has the thickest rim also has the widest diameter. The one intact example (IC.158; C 227) weighs 8.375 kg. They are all made of the same coarse, reddish yellow clay (5 or 7.5YR 6/6) with many large inclusions, CF Type 1. They are also water wiped or painted on all surfaces with a very pale brown slip (10YR 7/4). The wheels are flat on the upper surfaces except for a small ridge and shallow groove that sometimes runs around the circumference of the wheel beside the edge. The edges are rounded and provided with an inturned flange at their base that is more deeply undercut in some examples than in others, but was always designed to provide support for wooden struts. The undersides are decorated with any number of incised, grooved, or raised concentric lines

and sometimes other designs as well, all of which are intended to hold the clay in place which is used to attach the wheel to its wooden supports. Two varieties of wheels seem to be represented. In one example (IC.162; C 405) the socket is relatively deep and its surrounding collar was made as a separate piece, attached to the base of the wheel, and heavily scored to help support the clay that attached the top of the wooden pivot to the bottom of the wheel. The rim of this wheel is not preserved, but it may not have needed a deeply undercut flange to hold the wheel in place because the socket itself is deep and capable of supporting the pivot. In the other five examples the flange is pronounced. The one intact wheel belongs to this type. It has a shallow socket and less pronounced collar, and its socket was not capable of providing much support for the pivot. In this case, the wooden pivot could not have been inserted very far into the wheel, and the flange is undercut more deeply to provide the main support for wooden struts that ran from the pivot to the wheel and held it in place. The two varieties of wheels are made somewhat differently then. In both cases the wheel disc is itself made on a wheel and its rim and flange are probably formed at the same

34

MOCHLOS NEOPALATIAL SETTLEMENT ON THE COAST

time. In the second variety the socket and collar on the underside of the wheel are also made at the same time, but in the first variety the collar is made separately by hand. It is then attached to the center of the underside of the wheel after the surfaces that are designed to be attached to each other have been scored with slashes or holes to reinforce the actual join. These wheels were set up and used outside in a location like the potter’s pit behind Building A where the basal socket, which held the lower end of the wooden pivot, was found still in situ.47 Weighing over 8 kg, they were made to be heavy in order to create a centrifugal force when spun. They may not, therefore, have required an assistant to crank the pivot shaft, although there was certainly room for one in the potter’s pit. When not in use, they were removed from the pivot and stored inside the building. Once they broke and could no longer be used, pieces appear to have been saved or to have been reused as building material. One of the fragmentary wheels (IC.163; C 585) was reused like a mud brick in the screen wall bordering the rear yard of Building B. Another (IC.161; C 346) appears to have been used in the north part of the building, perhaps to fill a chink in the roof or in the mudbrick superstructure of the wall. IC.158 (C 227; B.8; 1712.1; Fig. 12, Pl. 7). Potter’s wheel. Intact except for small hole caused by pick. H. 0.052, max. d. 0.401, d. of top surface 0.37. Weight 8.375 kg. CF Type 1. Disc-shaped wheel. Upper surface with groove around circumference; underside with inturned flange to support wooden frame. Interior of underside constructed with central depression (d. 0.036) surrounded by five concentric grooves with a slightly raised ridge between the first and second groove, another raised ridge with incised radiating slashes at regular intervals between the second and third grooves, and incised diagonal slashes on either side of the fourth groove forming a decorative foliate pattern. Buff slip on top and bottom. The upper surface of the wheel preserves a considerable amount of coarse red clay (2.5YR 5/6) with many large phyllite inclusions, which was used to hold a bat in place. IC.159 (C 305; B.4; 2010.1; Fig. 12, Pl. 8). Potter’s wheel. One piece preserving whole profile with part of rim and wheel, less than one-quarter extant. H. of rim

0.053. CF Type 1. Disc-shaped wheel. Upper surface with rounded edge, deep groove, and smooth flat surface toward interior; underside with incurving, tapered edge and flat surface toward interior decorated with parts of two incised concentric lines near rim, followed by row of diagonal slashes, and third incised line. Buff slip (10YR 7/4) on all surfaces. IC.160 (C 307; B.4; 2002.1; Fig. 13, Pl. 8). Potter’s wheel. Three large non-joining pieces preserving full wheel profile, about three-quarters extant. One piece mended from two fragments preserving upper and lower surfaces, two pieces from three fragments preserving only lower surface. H. of rim 0.057, est. d. 0.42. CF Type 1. Disc-shaped wheel. Upper surface with slightly raised border; underside with inturned flange around edge, and five shallow, concentric grooves on surface. Water wiped. Diagonal slashes were incised in the clay around the underside of the original edge where the flange was to be added in order to reinforce its attachment. Parts of the flange have fallen off, however, as has the entire axle bowl. IC.161 (C 346; B.7W; 1301.3; Fig. 13, Pl. 8). Potter’s wheel. One piece preserving whole profile with part of rim and wheel, less than one-quarter extant. H. of rim 0.061, est. d. 0.44. CF Type 1. Disc-shaped wheel. Flat upper surface; underside with incurving and rounded flange, and three extant concentric raised ridges with grooves between. Water wiped. From wall and roof collapse above the western end of Room 7 and the North Terrace. IC.162 (C 405; B.10; 24/2510.2; Fig. 13, Pl. 8). Potter’s wheel. Two pieces preserving approximately half of axle bowl and rim H. of bowl 0.046, est. rim d. of bowl, outer d. 0.15, inner d. 0.10. CF Type 1. Fragment from the central underside of a potter’s wheel where the axle bowl connected to the wheel. Shallow bowl with broad squared rim covered with incised cross-hatching to help hold clay in place around wooden axle. Buff slip on surface. The bowl was made separately and attached to the wheel above; the base of the rim exterior where it joined the wheel is scored with a row of small holes that were poked in the clay to reinforce the join. IC.163 (C 585; B.RY; 2806 wall; Fig. 12). Potter’s wheel. One piece preserving whole profile with part of rim and wheel, less than one-quarter extant. H. of rim 0.059, est. d. 0.44. CF Type 1. Disc-shaped wheel. Upper surface with raised border, lower surface with a raised and tapered border and a shallow groove around the outer edge. Buff slip on surface. Reused as building material in screen wall at rear of building.

CERAMIC, STONE, BONE, AND SHELL OBJECTS

35

Miscellaneous IC.164 (C 115; B.7; 1503; Fig. 13, Pl. 8). Disc with raised edge. Mended from two fragments, preserving nearly half of small disc. D. 0.04, pres. h. 0.005. FF: very fine clay blackened in firing. Extremely thin disc with slightly convex floor, vertical rim with squared lip projecting around circumference on one side, broken along edge on underside. There is no parallel in the pottery for the thin clay fabric or peculiar shape of this disc. Too light and fragile to have served as a lid or any other useful purpose, it may have been used as a gaming piece. IC.165 (C 348; B.10-13 surface; 2500.1; Fig. 13, Pl. 8). Small spherical ball. Intact. D. 0.015. FF: medium, reddish yellow (5YR 6/6) with some medium-sized gray, white and reddish brown inclusions. Unslipped. One small, carefully shaped ball was found in the surface above the southeast corner of Room 10 and Room 13 in Building B. It resembles a modern day marble, and it is difficult to imagine what function, if any, it may have served. It is the sort of clay object that a potter might make just for the fun of it.

IC.166 (C 488; A.1; 111.2). Flux? One fragment. Pres. length 0.058, pres. w. 0.05. Very coarse, yellowish red, iron bearing clay (5YR 5/6) with phyllite inclusions. Magnetic. Possible flux for copper melting. IC.167 (C 621; B.RY; 2315N.3; Fig. 13). Crucible? One piece preserving part of base. Pres. dims. 0.055 by 0.065, th. 0.028. CF Type 1: reddish yellow (5YR 6/8) with many large inclusions; many holes left from chaff. Slightly concave interior with burned surface; irregular base with no trace of burning. This is the only crucible fragment from the site that could be identified with any degree of probability. Very little remains to suggest its shape, and no metallic residue is preserved on its inside surface, but it is identified tentatively on the basis of its curved and burned interior surface, its thickness, and its coarse fabric, all of which are typical features of crucibles elsewhere.48

Stone Objects Jeffrey S. Soles, Ann M. Nicgorski, Tristan Carter, and Mary Ellen Soles Evidence for the production of stone vases and other objects comes from both buildings in the Artisans’ Quarter and to a lesser extent from Chalinomouri. It includes raw material, unfinished and finished products, waste, and tools. The raw material consists of unworked cobbles of serpentinite (IC.596, IC.597; GS 965, 1386) and a nodule of black chert (IC.598, GS 1264). The unfinished objects include a siltstone mold (IC.168; S 44) and four vases, including a calcite jar (IC.169; S 100), a limestone table (IC.170; S 233) and lamp (IC.171; S 242), and an amphibolite block (IC.172; S 257), all of which look as if they were still being worked when the site was abandoned. The finished products include one alabastron (IC.173; S 186), three bowls (IC.174–176; S 40, 222, 244), and six lids (IC.178–184; S 3, 11, 22, 48, 161, 232, 239.) Two limestone tables (IC.412, IC.413; GS 1389, 1390; see Chap. 4), a palette of green micaceous schist (IC.405; GS 884; see Chap. 4), and six sandstone basins (IC.421–426;

GS 446, 548, 581, 707, 1300, 1341), which were in use in the Artisans’ Quarter when it was destroyed, were probably also products of this workshop. Only one stone object, a tripod mortar made of a pinkish gray trachyte (IC.420; GS 620; see Chap. 4) was imported to the site from abroad. In addition to these objects, there are a large number of very fragmentary stone vases. They are nearly all completely polished and appear, therefore, to belong to finished vases that were broken while they were being used or in the destruction of the Artisans’ Quarter. Some may have been broken in the course of manufacture, however. They were for the most part discarded after they broke, but some of the larger fragments were kept as raw material to be cut down and reused in the manufacture of new vases. The only actual waste to survive from the manufacturing process is an amphibolite bore core (IC.446; GS 526) found in Room 1 of Building A, and it is somewhat surprising that stone chips were not found. The absence of such chips appears,

36

MOCHLOS NEOPALATIAL SETTLEMENT ON THE COAST

however, to reflect the method of manufacture. For the most part, the soft stones were worked by different degrees of abrasion; little evidence of chisel or other cut marks is to be found on the surviving vases, despite the fact that this technique has been documented at Neopalatial Mochlos.49 The harder stones, particularly the reddish gray and gray limestones, were shaped by percussive techniques as evidenced by small depressions, or peck marks, on their surfaces, though these too were usually removed by the final stage of polishing the vessel. Stone vases, then, were the primary products of this lapidary workshop, although two beads, one

from Building A and one from Chalinomouri (IC.207, IC.208; S 46, 261), and a crystal lens from Building B (IC.209; S 16) might also have been produced here. The material used to produce these beads and the vast majority of the stone vases is a dark, grayish green serpentinite with white patches and veins, which is found in abundance along the Mochlos coast at Mavro Seli and Chalinomouri. Other materials include a fine, banded, gray/black limestone, a sandy, light reddish gray limestone, calcite, and amphibolite, all of which are also local.50

Unfinished Objects IC.168 (S 44; A.1; 111.2; Fig. 6, Pl. 4). Mold? Broken at one end. H. 0.02, pres. length 0.047, pres. w. 0.027. Siltstone. Rectangular fragment preserved with oval depression, measuring 0.01 by 0.014 by 0.008, and channel on top, 0.019 long and 0.003 wide, unfinished; possibly intended to serve as a bivalve mold for a bronze rivet. Cf. Betancourt in Betancourt and Davaras 1999, pp. 281– 282, fig. 59, p. 38, DA 124. IC.169 (S 100; A.4; 712.1; Frontispiece, Fig. 14, Pl. 9). Unfinished jar. One piece preserving whole profile. About three-quarters extant. H. 0.079, rim d. 0.08, base d. 0.054. Calcite, honey brown translucent. Truncated cone with round shallow indentation on top (d. of indentation 0.043); rough, unpolished surface. Traces of pecking on upper indentation and base. No drill marks. The vase maker looks as if he might have been intending to make a jar with straight sloping sides; cf. Warren 1969, Type 21 B. IC.170 (S 233; B.12; 20/2412W.1; Frontispiece, Fig. 14, Pl. 9). Unfinished table. Rectangular block. H. 0.095, length 0.242, w. 0.115. Banded light and dark gray limestone. Six sides in various stages of preparation: one side, perhaps intended to be the top of a table, completely finished with smooth surface, surrounded by flat edge on three sides (w. of edge 0.006–0.01); one side at right angles to top, flattened and smoothed with faint traces of original pecked surface; two ends rounded with many peck marks, but still unfinished; reverse side rough and unfinished with many peck marks; base unworked. The block is unusual because one surface and its edges on three sides have been so completely finished, while the remainder of the stone is unworked or still in a very preliminary stage of working. Usually all the surfaces of an unfinished vase would be worked more or less to the same degree. This would be the most labor

efficient method because the vase maker could be more certain of the outcome and abandon his effort should any defects develop in the progress of the work. The intended shape of this vase may explain the different approach, if the stone vase maker was planning to make a table with low legs; he would finish the top of the table first and then cut the legs out of the unworked part of the stone. The bottom of the stone would only need to be worked in cutting the feet. Here it looks as if the vase maker might be intending to shape two rounded feet at each end of the table, although he could still change the design of the feet if something went wrong. If he were planning to construct another type of vase, a block vase or kernos for example, he would probably want to work all six sides of his vase at the same time. Cf. Warren 1969, Type 38 B2. IC.171 (S 242; B.2; 20/2418W; Frontispiece, Fig. 14, Pl. 9). Unfinished lamp. One piece preserving complete bowl with crack on interior of bowl and minor chips along the edges, handle missing. H. 0.043, pres. length 0.127, w. 0.10, interior dims. of bowl 0.07 by 0.076. Sandy limestone, light reddish gray. Hand lamp with ovoid bowl with stepped rim, offset base, and single triangular wick cutting; stick handle opposite the wick cutting now missing. No traces of burning. Cf. Warren 1969, Type 24 IV. Numerous peck marks on interior of bowl and around edges and semi-worked spout indicate that this bowl is unfinished. The handle probably broke off during the course of manufacture and the vase maker abandoned the lamp. IC.172 (S 257; A.10; 2310N.3; Fig. 14, Pl. 9). Block. Intact. Dims. 0.139 by 0.155 by 0.093. Weight 5.25 kg. Amphibolite. Block worked into a regular 6 sided square form, presumably by percussion. All surfaces of the block preserve traces of pecking, and they are also

CERAMIC, STONE, BONE, AND SHELL OBJECTS

chipped in many places, but the block has also been smoothed by subsequent abrasion. It looks as if the vase maker intended to make a block vase or table, but he smoothed most surfaces before actually drilling the

37

stone. It is also possible that the block was finished, so then the traces of pecking are from its use as a minianvil or working surface. Cf. Hatzidhakis 1921, fig. 25.

Finished Vases The distinction between finished and fragmentary vases is somewhat arbitrary. All vases are cataloged as finished if half of the vase or more survives and shows no signs of having been left unfinished. All exterior surfaces are thoroughly polished, and interior surfaces have been smoothed, although they may still exhibit the horizontal striations left by the drill. Many of the fragmentary vases that are cataloged separately probably also once belonged to finished vases because they, too, have been completely polished. They are all less than one-quarter extant, however, mostly small bits and pieces.

Alabastron IC.173 (S 186; B.10; 2009; Fig. 14, Pl. 9). Alabastron. Mended from three pieces and nearly complete except for chips from rim and body. H. 0.035, ext. rim d. 0.032, int. rim d. 0.025, base d. 0.032. Breccia, reddish gray with white and reddish patches. Miniature vase with slightly everted rim with squared lip, compressed globular body, and slight disc base. Roughly smoothed exterior, drill rings on interior. Apparently a Protopalatial relic, cf. Warren 1969, Type 1.

Bowls IC.174 (S 40; B.NT; 1302; Fig. 14, Pl. 9). Bowl. Mended from three pieces preserving whole profile with one handle and half of base; about half extant. H. 0.077, ext. rim d. 0.097, int. rim d. 0.087, base d. 0.072. Serpentinite. Bowl with tapered lip, carinated body profile, and flat base; one horizontal lug handle extant on shoulder. Polished exterior, drill rings on interior with subsequent limited smoothing. Cf. Warren 1969, Type 7B; HM 1157 from Pseira. IC.175 (S 222; B.RY; 2806.1; Fig. 14, Pl. 9). Bowl. One piece preserving whole profile and base, about twothirds extant. H. 0.031, ext. rim d. 0.056, int. rim d. 0.045, base d. 0.03. Calcite. Small bowl with incurving, squared lip, conical body profile. Smoothed and polished except for slightly rough interior base. Cf. Warren 1969, Type 6B2. IC.176 (S 244; B.RY; 2803; Frontispiece, Fig. 14, Pl. 10). Bowl. Mended from several pieces preserving full

profile and part of base, about two-thirds extant. Pres. h. 0.066, ext. rim d. 0.115, int. rim d. 0.076, est. base d. 0.04. Serpentinite. High shouldered bowl with conical body profile, slightly rounded bottom, and five horizontal grooves on shoulder. Polished exterior, some drill marks on interior with subsequent limited smoothing. Cf. Warren 1969, Type 9A.

Lamp IC.177 (S 256; B.NT; 602.7; Fig. 14, Pl. 10). Lamp. Intact. H. 0.082, int. d. of bowl 0.085–0.093, depth of bowl 0.05, length 0.142, w. 0.095. Pumice. Irregular block with ovoid bowl and spout cut at one corner. Although this pumice bowl shows no trace of burning, it is identified as a lamp by analogy with a similar pumice block from the settlement on the island, S 309, which still retains carbon residue in its spout. If used as lamps, they probably would have burned beeswax because olive oil would have soaked through the porous stone.

Lids Seven lids were found in the Artisans’ Quarter. Five of these are small circular lids with a beveled edge and pawn shaped handle, and they belong to Warren’s Type 27IA. They range in height from 0.019–0.027 m and in upper diameter from 0.049–0.095 m. They are made of serpentinite, have been polished with an abrasive on the exterior and interior, and show traces of striations from the abrasive. One example (IC.184; S 239) is a variation of this type, but it is thicker, higher, and much heavier, and it has a larger handle and the edge of its rim is decorated. A seventh lid is a flat schist slab (IC.182; S 161) that was irregularly cut to fit over the top of a large storage jar; it is one of four such slabs found in Room 2 at Chalinomouri, but the only one still in situ. IC.178 (S 3; A.1; 111.1; Fig. 15). Lid. Nearly complete. H. 0.019, top d. 0.049, base d. 0.042, th. 0.008. The lid would fit nicely on either of the alabastra from the room. Cf. Warren 1969, Type 27IA. IC.179 (S 11; B.3; 307; Fig. 15). Lid. Nearly complete. H. 0.027, top d. 0.082, base d. 0.062, th. 0.01. Cf. Warren 1969, Type 27IA. IC.180 (S 22; A.7; 801.3; Fig. 15, Pl. 10). Lid. Intact. H. 0.022, top d. 0.095, th. 0.01. Cf. Warren 1969, Type 27IA.

38

MOCHLOS NEOPALATIAL SETTLEMENT ON THE COAST

IC.181 (S 48; A.7; 807.4; Fig. 15, Pl. 10). Lid. Intact. H. 0.024, top d. 0.07, base d. 0.064, th. 0.01. Handle off center. Highly polished surface. Cf. Warren 1969, Type 27IA. IC.182 (S 161; Ch.2; 21/2211; Fig. 15). Lid. Mended from two pieces, complete. Dims. 0.167 by 0.217, th. 0.007. Gray schist slab with six broken edges, forming an irregular hexagon. Deliberately modified by direct percussion. Used as lid for IB.414 (P 475). IC.183 (S 232; B.12; 20/2412W.1; Fig. 15, Pl. 10). Lid. Intact. H. 0.023, top d. 0.09, base d. 0.078, th. 0.009. Beveled edge shows cut marks by pointed instrument, probably a chisel. Cf. Warren 1969, Type 27IB.

IC.184 (S 239; B.2; 20/2418W; Fig. 15, Pl. 10). Lid. Intact, but heavily abraded on top, bottom, and edges of base. Pres. h. 0.047, base d. 0.071. Serpentinite. Circular lid with knob handle and three incised, concentric grooves around vertical edge. Originally polished on all surfaces. The lid fits nicely in the palm of your hand and was reused as a tool. The base has traces of use as a grindstone, but also as a hammer with centrally pecked depression. The top of the handle also portrays traces of percussion damage; the sides are heavily battered and abraded.

Fragmentary Vases IC.185 (S 32; A.4 pit; 718.1; Fig. 15). Cup or bowl fragment. Pres. h. 0.07, max. th. 0.008. Serpentinite. Rim fragment of cup or bowl with rounded lip and convex body profile. Polished on all surfaces. IC.186 (S 36; A.1; 111.2; Fig. 15, Pl. 10). Cup. One piece preserving part of rim and upper body. Pres. h. 0.043, est. rim d. 0.11. Fine limestone with dark gray veins. Bowl with everted rim and rounded upper body profile. Polished on all surfaces. Cf. Warren 1969, Type 17 E, IB.22 (P 227). IC.187 (S 57; B.9; 1603.1; Fig. 15, Pl. 10). Chalice. One piece preserving part of side wall and base with beginning of stem attachment. Pres. h. 0.053, est. base d. of bowl 0.055. Whitish gray limestone with vertical gray veins. Chalice with straight sloping sides and flat base with part of a circular stem attachment at center for insertion in pedestal base. Smoothed on all surfaces. Cf. Warren 1969, Type 15; Davaras 1997, p. 126, figs. 14 and 15 for a similar example in the same material. IC.188 (S 59; A-B road; 1606.2; Fig. 15). Bowl with curved profile. One fragment preserving half of the base and a small part of the lower body. Pres. h. 0.046, est. base d. 0.052. Serpentinite. Polished on the exterior and smoothed on the interior with tool marks still visible, including many vertical striations on walls, concentric striations on base from an abrasive, and circular incisions around base from a pointed tool defining the line between interior wall and base. Cf. Warren 1969, Types 6, 8. IC.189 (S 60; A-B road; 1606.2; Fig. 15). Bowl with curved profile. One fragment preserving small part of base and lower body. Pres. h. 0.052. Serpentinite. Polished on all surfaces. Cf. Warren 1969, Type 8? IC.190 (S 63; A-B road; 1606.2; Fig. 15). Bowl with carinated profile. One fragment preserving part of rim with horizontal lug handle. Pres. h. 0.029. Serpentinite. Polished with faint traces of horizontal striations on interior from an abrasive. Cf. Warren 1969, Type 7.

IC.191 (S 83; A-B road; 1602.1; Fig. 16). Open vase, probably a cup or bowl. One piece preserving small part of rim and upper body. Pres. h. 0.038, est. rim d. 0.11. Serpentinite. Polished on exterior, faint traces of drill rings on interior largely obscured by subsequent polishing. Cf. Warren 1969, Type 17? IC.192 (S 157; B.10; 24/2510.2 and alcove.2110.2; Fig. 16, Pl. 11). Jar. Two joining pieces preserving part of rim. Pres. h. 0.04, est. ext. rim d. 0.10, est. int. rim d. 0.08. Serpentinite. Rim sherd with squared lip and slightly convex body profile, probably belonging to a jar. Polished on the exterior and lip, including inner face of lip, with concentric drill rings on interior. Cf. Warren 1969, Type 18; cf. IC.198 (S 236). IC.193 (S 184; B.10; 2103.2; Fig. 16, Pl. 11). Composite vessel with spout. Mended from four pieces, preserving one bowl with spout and small parts of two more bowls. H. 0.049, ext. rim d. of bowl 0.042, int. rim d. 0.032. Serpentinite. Part of a small composite vessel or kernos, originally with three bowls, each with squared lip and cylindrical body, one in front with rim spout which is also pierced at base of spout with a hole (d. 0.007). Polished exterior; drill rings on interior. The concentric, horizontal striations left by the drill on the interior of the vase suggest that a single large drill with a diameter of 0.032 m, was used to drill out the cylindrical bowl while a much smaller drill with a diameter of 0.007 m was used for the spout hole. IC.194 (S 191; B.11; 2404; Fig. 16, Pl. 11). Stone vase. One piece broken on all edges. Pres. h. 0.075. Serpentinite. Fragment of vase with single off-center hole (d. 0.025–0.032). Polished exterior, hole with traces of drill rings with some subsequent smoothing. At least two different drills had to be used to cut the interior hole, a larger one at the top and a smaller one at the bottom. The vase was drilled twice, but probably never completed because the off-center core was never removed. It could belong to a bowl with curved profile, Warren 1969, Type 8, or perhaps even a pear shaped rhyton, Type 34.

CERAMIC, STONE, BONE, AND SHELL OBJECTS

IC.195 (S 196; B.10; 2103.2; Fig. 16, Pl. 11). Blossom bowl. One piece preserving part of rim and side, plus small non-joining pieces. Pres. h. 0.079, est. int. rim d. 0.09. Dark gray serpentinite with many white patches. Fragment of blossom bowl with hole mouth and rounded body with parts of two relief petals bearing two vertical ribs in the center. Polished exterior, smoothed interior with traces of striations from abrasive. Cf. Warren 1969, Type 5. IC.196 (S 197; B.13W; 2505.2; Fig. 16, Pl. 11). Cup. Three fragments preserving part of rim and side. Pres. h. 0.049, est. rim d. 0.06. Serpentinite. Part of a small cup with tapered lip and convex body profile. Polished exterior, smoothed interior with traces of concentric drill rings. Cf. Warren 1969, Type 17. IC.197 (S 231; B.11; 20/2406W.2; Fig. 16, Pl. 11). Lamp. Fragment of bowl with pendant lug handle. Serpentinite. Pres. h. 0.09, est. d. of bowl 0.15. Bowl with slightly rounded body profile and one pendant lug handle extant, probably belonging to a pedestalled lamp similar to Warren’s Type 24, P 311, 312. Probably related to pedestal IC.203 (S 247). Smoothed on all surfaces, but badly eroded. IC.198 (S 236; B.2; 20/2415W.2 and 3; Fig. 16, Pl. 11). Base of jar. Mended from three pieces preserving complete base. Pres. h. 0.033, base d. 0.075. Serpentinite. Cylindrical jar base. Polished on exterior surfaces, smoothed on interior with concentric drill marks still visible. Cf. Warren 1969, Type 18. IC.199 (S 240; B.12; 20/2408W.3; Fig. 16). Cylindrical jar. One piece preserving small part of rim. Pres. h. 0.034, est. rim d. 0.09. Serpentinite. Straight sided, perhaps cylindrical jar with squared lip. Polished exterior and lip, drill rings on interior with limited smoothing. Cf. Warren 1969, Type 18. IC.200 (S 241; B.2; 20/2418W; Fig. 16). Bird’s nest bowl. One piece preserving small part of rim, broken and worn on three sides. Pres. h. 0.04, est. rim d. 0.08. Serpentinite. Rim fragment of a high shouldered bird’s nest bowl. Polished on all surfaces. Broken ends smoothed from reuse as a polisher. Cf. Warren 1969, Type 3. IC.201 (S 245; Kiln B; 2801.2; Fig. 16). Bridge spout. One piece preserving rim and outer edge of one

39

side. Pres. length 0.041. Serpentinite. Fragment of spout with a tapered lip from a spouted bowl or jar. Polished on all surfaces. IC.202 (S 246; A.RY; 2301.3; Fig. 16). Bowl. One piece broken on all edges, preserving part of body. Pres. dims. 0.068 by 0.067 by 0.009. Serpentinite. Fragment of stone vase with rounded body profile, thicker at bottom and thinner at top. Smoothed on interior and exterior with faint traces of chisel marks on interior. IC.203 (S 247; B.12; 20/2412W.1; Fig. 16, Pl. 11). Pedestal of lamp. One piece preserving nearly complete pedestal base, lamp bowl broken away. Pres. h. 0.177, base d. 0.155. Serpentinite. Pedestal with flaring profile, underside slightly concave. Many traces of pecking on underside of base, but otherwise polished exterior. Probably related to IC.197 (S 231). Cf. Warren 1969, Type 24 IIB. The pedestal has two major cracks, one rising from the base and the other at its top, which probably developed after working the stone. The crack at the top of the pedestal would have damaged the bowl and may have caused it to split in half. The pedestal is large enough that part of it could be cut off and reused to make a smaller vase or lid. IC.204 (S 250; D; 1101.3; Fig. 17). Bowl. One piece preserving interior and exterior surface, broken on all sides. Pres. dims. 0.048 by 0.065 by 0.018. Sandy limestone, light reddish gray. Fragment of lower body preserving convex profile, probably belonging to bowl. Smoothed on interior and exterior. IC.205 (S 251; D surface; 1100; Fig. 17, Pl. 11). Bowl. One piece preserving small part of rim with handle and upper body. Pres. h. 0.031, est. rim d. 0.10. Serpentinite. Open vessel with rounded lip and horizontal lug handle attached at rim. Smoothed on interior and exterior. Cf. Warren 1969, Type 10. IC.206 (S 253; B.alcove; 2110.2; Fig. 17, Pl. 11). Cup handle. One piece broken at bottom preserving part of rim and half of handle. Est. rim d. 0.095. Fragment of a cup with a rounded lip and one vertical strap handle with a groove on top near each outer edge. Serpentinite. Polished on all surfaces with traces of horizontal striations on interior from abrasive. Cf. Warren 1969, Type 17.

Miscellaneous Objects Only five other stone objects were found in the excavation of the Artisans’ Quarter and Chalinomouri: two beads (IC.207, IC.208; S 46, 261), presumably for a necklace, one lens (IC.209; S 16) used as a magnifying glass probably to light a fire,51 and one incised stone (IC.210; S 31) that may have been used as a weight. The materials used for the

beads and lens are also used in the manufacture of the stone vases and suggest that these items are probably also products of the workshop. The incised stone on the other hand is made of a material that has not been found elsewhere on the site and may therefore be an import.

40

MOCHLOS NEOPALATIAL SETTLEMENT ON THE COAST

IC.207 (S 46; Ch.2; 21/2206; Fig. 17, Pl. 12) Bead. Intact. Length 0.014, d. 0.013. Cylindrical, pale gray bead with hole drilled lengthwise (d. 0.005). IC.208 (S 261; A.4; 810.3; Fig. 17). Bead. Intact. D. 0.0053, th. 0.0018. Serpentinite. Circular flat bead with small hole (d. 0.001). IC.209 (S 16; B.5; 501.3; Fig. 17, Pl. 12). Lens. Intact. D. 0.0133, th. 0.0041. Rock crystal. Plano-convex, disc-shaped lens. Found inside cooking pot, IB.491 (P 587), and probably used to light a fire. Cf. Sines and Sakellarakis 1987, p. 191, 193, fig. 3, from Knossos.

IC.210 (S 31; B.6; 1304.1; Fig. 17, Pl. 12). Weight? Intact. D. 0.033, th. 0.025. Weight 38.6 g. White limestone. Rounded pebble with linear sign incised on top with three incised lines around the circumference. Cf. the incised limestone pebble KN Zg that S. Hood identifies as a weight.52 A lead weight from Mochlos weighs one-half the amount of IC.210 (S 31), approximately one-third the standard Minoan unit of ca. 61 g, and several lead weights from Akrotiri weigh in the same range as IC.210 (S 31), from 39 to 42.5 g, which is twothirds of this unit.53

Fossils Three fossil asteroids (IC.211–213; S 25, 37, 49) were found in Room 4 of Building A. None shows any particular sign of wear, but each has a round, natural depression on its underside. Presumably they were collected and located in a workshop producing stone vases for a purpose. They might have made good drill caps because each fits neatly into the palm of the hand and could be used to steady the top of a rotating drill. A fossil scallop (IC.214; Sh 15) was also found in the rear yard of the same building. It is also unworked, but may have been collected to work into a palette or small pyxis for cosmetics like one from Akrotiri, Thera.54 Small fragments of other fossil scallops and oysters were also found in the residue of sieved floor material.

IC.211 (S 25; A.4; 719.1; Fig. 17, Pl. 12). Fossil asteroid. Intact. Rather worn surfaces. H. 0.029, length 0.078, w. 0.064. Weight 158 g. IC.212 (S 37; A.4; 116.2; Fig. 17). Fossil asteroid. Intact. H. 0.037, length 0.092, w. 0.087, circular depression 0.01. Weight 360 g. IC.213 (S 49; A.4; 801.3; Fig. 17). Fossil asteroid. Broken at one edge. H. 0.05, length 0.12, w. 0.098. Weight 492 g. IC.214 (Sh 15; A.RY; 2307.4; Fig. 17). Pecten (fossil scallop). One piece preserving both halves of shell, chipped at edges. Length 0.099, w. 0.091, th. 0.035. Not modified by man. Pliocene or Pleistocene in date.

Bone and Shell Objects Jeffrey S. Soles, Ann Nicgorski, Mary Ellen Soles, and David S. Reese

Bone Few bone objects were found. They include two small discs, a pin, and three tools.55 One disc (IC.216; B 7) is pierced and probably served as part of a larger necklace; the other (IC.215; B 2) is unpierced and either unfinished or designed to serve as a gaming piece. The pin (IC.217; B 18) may have been a hair pin. Two of the tools might have been used in textile production, one (IC.219;

B 26) as a comb for combing wool, the other (IC.218; B 20) as a shuttle for a loom. A third (IC.220; B 31) appears to have been an awl. IC.215 (B 2; A.5; 714; Fig. 18). Disc. Intact. D. 0.022–0.023, th. 0.003. Circular disk with squared edges, flat on both sides. IC.216 (B 7; A.9; 1912.1; Fig. 18, Pl. 12). Bead. Intact. D. 0.026, th. 0.006. Circular disc with partially

CERAMIC, STONE, BONE, AND SHELL OBJECTS

rounded edges, flat on both sides, and pierced with hole in center (d. 0.004). Cf. Deshayes and Dessenne 1959, p. 73, pl. 21.2. IC.217 (B 18; B.5; 405.1; Fig. 18, Pl. 12). Pin. One piece broken at one end. Pres. length 0.034, d. 0.005– 0.007. Roughly cylindrical bone, flat at finished end, tapering toward broken end and probably designed to be pointed. Trimmed lengthwise with a knife, creating eight planes along the length of the tool. It is not yet polished and may be unfinished. Cf. Muhly 1992, p. 101, fig. 28, pl. 34, no. 308. IC.218 (B 20; Ch.2; 21/2206.2; Fig. 18). Tool. Three non-joining pieces, preserving upper and lower surfaces, each mended from two or more fragments; plus five additional non-joining fragments. Pres. length of largest piece 0.08, th. 0.01. Flat, oblong tool with rounded edges

41

probably tapering towards both ends. Horncore, probably cow. All preserved edges show smoothing from wear. May have been used as a shuttle or spool for weaving. IC.219 (B 26; Ch.2; 21/2206.2; Fig. 18, Pl. 12). Tool. Three non-joining pieces, broken on ends and bottom edge. Pres. length of largest piece 0.035, pres. w. 0.016, th. 0.005. Notches of various depths cut along edge. Sheep/goat in origin. May have been used as a comb. IC.220 (B 31; B.3; 609.5; Fig. 18, Pl. 12). Tool. Mended from two pieces, broken on both ends. Pres. length 0.039, max. w. 0.017. Long bone with tapered end spreading into a broader area, natural concave-convex configuration preserved. May have had several uses, as an awl for fabric working, or as a scoop or spoon. Cf. Krzyszkowska 1984, p. 44, pl. 32, Type IV; Huxley 1972, p. 207, pl. 59, fig. 59, l 19.

Shell A large number of fragmentary triton shells were found in the Artisans’ Quarter and at Chalinomouri. They were found either in the collapse or on the floor of almost every room and in several outdoor spaces. Only one, which had its columella removed, shows clear signs of having been worked. Most examples were collected to be eaten, although only one shows signs of having been burned, and at least one was collected dead. Five specimens were inventoried separately because they were complete or nearly so. They had probably been collected a short time before the destruction of the site. After the animal was eaten, the shell may have been used as a scoop for everyday tasks.56 No case could be made for their ritual use, although one (IC.222; Sh 13) was found in a room at Chalinomouri that might have contained a small house shrine.57

IC.221 (Sh 3; B.2; 303.1; Fig. 18, Pl. 12). Charonia sequenzae. Unmodified, small, complete, tip of apex slightly broken, fresh. Length 0.142, w. 0.056. IC.222 (Sh 13; Ch.1; 2210; Fig. 18, Pl. 12). Charonia sequenzae. One piece broken opposite mouth, preserving two-thirds of shell. Length 0.217, w. 0.085. Collected while still alive; unworked. IC.223 (Sh 27; B.2; 20/2418W; Fig. 18, Pl. 12). Charonia sequenzae. Nearly complete except for recently broken apex, fresh. Pres. length 0.17, w. 0.084. IC.224 (Sh 29; A.2; 212 part 1). Charonia sequenzae. Distal/complete lip (internal length 0.073), lower columella, broken body, medium sized. IC.225 (Sh 40; B.Road; 25/2602; Fig. 18). Charonia sequenzae. Nearly complete, except for slightly worn apex, fresh. Length 0.18, w. 0.089.

Chapter 2 Notes 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

For the clay fabrics see Barnard, Mochlos vol. IB, Chap. 1. See Evely 2000, pp. 271, 274, 283. Cf. Evely 1988, p. 85, figs. 3, 10. Hawes et al. 1908, p. 27, fig. 11. Cf. those at Thera, Palyvou 1999, pp. 216–218, fig. 114. Dawkins 1904–1905, pp. 289–290, fig. 16c, pl. 18.

7. See discussion in Shaw 1973, pp. 201–204; Betancourt and Davaras, eds., 1995, p. 97, fig. 46, and 1998, pp. 128, 130, fig. 46. 8. Hawes et al. 1908, p. 28, pl. 1.5. 9. Soles 1991, p. 37, figs. 24, 27, 28. 10. In Rooms 46 and 30. 11. For the first suggestion, see Branigan 1970; for the latter see Soles in the conclusions to this book.

42

MOCHLOS NEOPALATIAL SETTLEMENT ON THE COAST

12. Hawes et al. 1908, p. 32, pl. 3.11. 13. Chapouthier and Demargne 1962, pp. 9–13, 50–54, fig. 3; all three feet are 0.09 m high and 0.11–0.12 m long. 14. See the feet from Anemospelia, which are thought to have supported a cult statue (J. and E. Sakellarakis 1997, p. 368, pl. 180b); for other examples and bibliography, see Tsipopoulou 1992, p. 147; and for further discussion of the symbolism of the divine foot, see Soles in the conclusions. 15. For shrines associated with workshops in Cyprus, see Karageorghis 1973, pp. 105–109, Karageorghis 1976, pp. 72– 76, Stech 1982, pp. 108–109, and Knapp 1986. 16. Evershed, Vaughan, Dudd, and Soles 1997, pp. 979–985; 2000, pp. 37–54. 17. Mercando 1974–1975, pp. 82–96, nos. 1, 5, figs. 74–77, 134; Betancourt 1983, p. 20, no. 33, fig. 7, from Pachyammos. 18. Building B, Room 1; see Mochlos vol. IB, Chap. 3. 19. For a discussion of different types of molds used in the Aegean, see Branigan 1974, pp. 77–83. The earliest surviving clay mold in Crete, using the lost-wax method, comes from a MM II context at Phaistos (Laviosa 1967–1968, pp. 499–510), while an earlier example is known from the EB I–II phase at Poliochni (Bernabò-Brea 1964, p. 591, pl. 85 d). For LM III examples from Palaikastro, see Hemingway 1996, pp. 226–240. 20. Soles and Davaras 1994, 400, pl. 92.b; 1996, 193, pl. 54.a. 21. For recent descriptions of the process, with bibliography, see Hemingway 1996, pp. 237–239, and Catling 1997, pp. 55–56. 22. For examples of similarly notched handles, all rounded in section, see Matthaus 1980, nos. 105, 116, 126, 130, 132. In other cases, the ends of the handles might be hammered flat after casting before they were riveted to the sides of the bowl. 23. Cf. Hemingway 1996, p. 237, who reports the same color contrast in the clay molds at Palaikastro. 24. See the illustration in Mochlos vol. IA, fig. 50. 25. For the identification of the slabs as warp stands, I am indebted to Angus Smith who excavated IC.60 (C 482). For Egyptian and Mesopotamian parallels, see Barber 1991, pp. 90–91, figs. 3.9, 3.10. 26. See reconstruction in Mochlos vol. IA, fig. 32. 27. For a discussion of domestic stands, see Betancourt et al. 1983, and Betancourt and Silverman 1991, p. 77, no. 693. Not all have the same shape, and many function simply as pot stands. 28. Barber 1991, p. 70. 29. For tools used in textile production, see Evely 2000, pp. 488–498, figs. 193, 200. 30. For the location on roofs, see Evely 2000, p. 498. 31. A similar fabric variation is reported in the weights from the Plateia House at Pseira. See Betancourt in Betancourt and Davaras, eds., 1998, p. 101. 32. Barber 1991, p. 299.

33. The typology of the clay weights from the Artisans’ Quarter and Chalinomouri is based primarily on shape and weight range, and secondarily on the number of holes and whether the top is flattened and grooved or just rounded. For the first three types, see Evely 2000, p. 498, fig. 202. They are the oldest types and one of the most common still in the Neopalatial period. For the examples at Pseira, identified as “discoid weights,” see Betancourt in Betancourt and Davaras, eds., 1998, pp. 101–109. For examples from Nichoria on the mainland, see Smith 1992. 34. Cf. Type 1FT-I (e.g no. 422) from the Plateia House at Pseira. This type is described as having one hole, a flat top, and a large, oval shape with a mean diameter of over 0.08. See Betancourt in Betancourt and Davaras, eds., 1998, pp. 101, 107, fig. 41. 35. Cf. Type 1RT-I (e.g. no. 445) from the Plateia House at Pseira. This type is described as having one hole, a rounded top, and a large, oval shape with a mean diameter of over 0.08. See Betancourt in Betancourt and Davaras, eds., 1998, pp. 101, 109, fig. 43. 36. Cf. Type 1FT-H (e.g no. 419) from the Plateia House at Pseira. This type is described as having one hole, a flat top, and a medium, oval shape with a mean diameter of 0.07–0.08. See Betancourt in Betancourt and Davaras, eds., 1998, pp. 101, 106, fig. 41. 37. Cf. Type 1FT-D (e.g. no. 441) from the Plateia House at Pseira. This type is described as having one hole, a flat top, and a small, almost circular shape with a mean diameter under 0.07. See Betancourt in Betancourt and Davaras, eds., 1998, pp. 101, 108, fig. 42. 38. Cf. Type 1DT-F (e.g. no. 436) from the Plateia House at Pseira. This type is described as having one hole, a flat top, and a large, almost circular shape with a mean diameter over 0.08. See Betancourt in Betancourt and Davaras, eds., 1998, pp. 101, 108, fig. 42. 39. Cf. Type 2FT-A (e.g. nos. 425 and 444) from the Plateia House at Pseira. This type is described as having two holes, a flat top, and a large, circular shape with a mean diameter under 0.07. See Betancourt in Betancourt and Davaras, eds., 1998, pp. 101, 107–108, figs. 41 and 43. 40. For the type, see Evely 2000, p. 502, fig. 204. 41. For the type, see Evely 2000, pp. 499–502, fig. 203. 42. Barber 1991, p. 104; Betancourt in Betancourt and Davaras, eds., 1998, p. 105. 43. Barber 1991, p. 96. 44. Barber 1991, pp. 104–105. 45. Betancourt in Betancourt and Davaras, eds., 1998, p. 103. See also Carroll 1983, pp. 96–98. 46. See Evely 2000, pp. 269–286, Type 3c. 47. See discussion in Mochlos vol. IA, Chap. 1, fig. 22. 48. For a discussion of LM crucibles, see Hemingway 1996, pp. 221–226. 49. Warren 1969, P 628. 50. See discussion below in Chap. 4; and Betancourt 1996, pp. 53–62.

CERAMIC, STONE, BONE, AND SHELL OBJECTS

51. For the use of stone lenses to light fires in antiquity, see Henderson, ed. and trans., 1998, The Clouds by Aristophanes, lines 765–772. 52. Hood and Chadwick 1962, pp. 73–74, pl. 20; Godart and Olivier 1982, pp. xxxiv, 164; Petruso 1992, p. 38. 53. Petruso 1992, pp. 40–45; see the discussion below in Chap. 3 for IC.297 (Pb 6). 54. Karali 1999, p. 21, fig. 13 B.

43

55. For a typology of bone tools, see Krzyszkowska 1984, pp. 43–45, pl. 32. 56. See the example from Chalinomouri with its columella removed, discussed in Chap. 6. 57. For triton shells in other shrines, see Karali 1999, pp. 22– 24; Åström and Reese 1990.

3

The Metal Finds and their Geological Sources Jeffrey S. Soles and Zofia A. Stos-Gale

The Metal Finds Jeffrey S. Soles

Copper and Copper-based Metals The main evidence for bronze working in the Artisans’ Quarter survives mostly in the form of the raw material, which includes copper ingot fragments, scrap metal that was stored for recycling, and waste or spill consisting of small droplets of heavily oxidized copper or bronze that were spilled during casting or perhaps broken off newly cast objects that were also collected for recycling. There are also a number of finished objects that appear to be the products of the workshop. This evidence is especially strong in Building A where it is found in some abundance in Rooms 1, 2, 4, 6, and the

destroyed northern room of the building. Finished objects were much rarer in Building B where they were found only in Rooms 7, 9, and 13E, the rooms that lay closest to Building A. The ingot fragments from Building A weigh over 3.8 kg, while the one fragment from B weighs only 570 g. The scrap from A weighs 380 g, while that from B only 31 g. The waste from A weighs 339.6 g, while that from B only 19 g. There is no evidence at all for bronze working at Chalinomouri where bronze was scarce and only two bronze objects were found, both of which showed signs of use.

46

MOCHLOS NEOPALATIAL SETTLEMENT ON THE COAST

Ingots Nineteen ingot fragments were found, all but one of them in Building A of the Artisans’ Quarter. They are all small pieces that have been broken from larger ingots. The largest three (IC.226, IC.242, IC.243; CA 20.1, 95, 123) weigh from 539 to 797.9 g, while the smallest three (IC.244, IC.239, IC.240; CA 221, 20.14, 20.15) weigh from 0.29 to 0.31 g. Most are small pieces, however, with 84% weighing less than 231 g and the median weighing only 116.1 g. These smaller pieces appear to have been broken so that they could be weighed more easily on a balance pan with a counter balance consisting of a lead or stone weight. Most preserve the two upper and lower surfaces. These range in thickness from 0.016–0.043 m and indicate that the pieces were broken from a number of ingots of different shapes. Some pieces also preserve one edge of the original ingot, and enough survives, especially when the piece belongs to a corner, to suggest the original shape of the ingot. Number IC.226 (CA 20.1) belongs to the corner of an ingot and appears to have belonged to an oxhide ingot with small projecting horns (the Hagia Triada type); IC.232 (CA 20.7) shows a slight convex curvature to its edge and may be part of a bun shaped ingot; IC.242 (CA 95) shows a slight concave curvature to its edge and probably belonged to an oxhide ingot; IC.241 (CA 82) may be the tip of an oxhide ingot horn. Number IC.243 (CA 123) is unusual because it belonged to a semi-circular ingot, a shape not otherwise attested, and has one flat surface while the other is quite woolly. All the rest have been broken into such small irregular pieces that the original ingot shape is lost. Samples from 17 ingot fragments (IC.226– 238, IC.241–244; CA 20.1–13, 82, 95, 123, 221) were submitted for energy dispersive X-ray fluorescence (ED XRF) analysis, and all are pure copper. The same samples were submitted for lead isotope (LI) analysis and found to come from Cypriot copper mines.1 The largest number of ingots, 15 out of 19, lay in the stone lined cist in the destroyed northern room of Building A, just outside the doorway leading into Room 1. They belonged to a foundry hoard of metal, some new ore, some old scrap, which was stored here until it could be cast. Numbers IC.241 and IC.244 (CA 82, 221) were found

in adjacent workrooms, Rooms 1 and 4 in the same building, and were also about to be cast in molds. Numbers IC.242 and IC.243 (CA 95, 123) were found in different contexts, however, which suggest slightly different uses. Number IC.242 was found in Room 13E of Building B. This was a room that appears to have been used as a living and sleeping space in a building that was not apparently used for metalworking. Presumably it belonged to the occupants of Room 13 and was used as a token of some inherent value, which could be exchanged for other goods and services. Broken ingot pieces were stored in hoards in houses in the main community on the island (Houses C.3, C.7), some distance from any workshop area, and were used in the same way, i.e. as the private property of individual residents.2 Number IC.243 lay inside Room 6 in Building A, a room that also held a votive foot and may have served as a shrine within the building. In this case, it may have been placed here as an offering to some deity who watched over the metal workers and their craft.3 IC.226–IC.240 (CA 20.1–15; A north room; 203.1; Fig. 19; Pl. 13 from left to right). Fifteen ingot fragments. Total weight 2.33 kg. Found together inside bronze bowl IC.279 (CA 19). IC.226 (CA 20.1). 0.072 by 0.106 by 0.04; weight 797.9 g. Two surfaces, preserving whole thickness, with two edges, one with lip. Probably the corner of an Hagia Triada type oxhide ingot. Source: Cyprus, Apliki mine. IC.227 (CA 20.2). 0.032 by 0.055 by 0.02; weight 116.1 g. Two surfaces, preserving whole thickness, with one edge. Source: Cyprus, Skouriotissa mine. IC.228 (CA 20.3). 0.035 by 0.039 by 0.026; weight 89.2 g. One surface. Source: Cyprus, Apliki mine. IC.229 (CA 20.4). 0.039 by 0.06 by 0.02; weight 133.9 g. Two surfaces, preserving whole thickness, with one edge. Source: Cyprus, Skouriotissa mine. IC.230 (CA 20.5). 0.027 by 0.039 by 0.022; weight 61.4 g. One surface, with lip. Source: Cyprus, Apliki mine. IC.231 (CA 20.6). 0.028 by 0.049 by 0.023; weight 75.5 g. One surface. Source: Cyprus, Apliki mine. IC.232 (CA 20.7). 0.039 by 0.047 by 0.022; weight 136.9 g. Two surfaces, preserving whole thickness, with one edge. Perhaps part of a bun ingot. Source: Cyprus, Apliki mine. IC.233 (CA 20.8). 0.039 by 0.055 by 0.028; weight 139.6 g. Two surfaces, preserving whole thickness. Source: Cyprus, Mavrovouni mine.

THE METAL FINDS AND THEIR GEOLOGICAL SOURCES

IC.234 (CA 20.9). 0.032 by 0.037 by 0.021; weight 62.6 g. One surface. Source: Cyprus, unknown mine (slag from the same source found on the site of Enkomi). IC.235 (CA 20.10). 0.045 by 0.037 by 0.043; weight 174.2 g. Two surfaces, preserving whole thickness. Source: Cyprus, Apliki mine. IC.236 (CA 20.11). 0.047 by 0.053 by 0.037; weight 230.8 g. Two surfaces, preserving whole thickness, with one edge. Source: Cyprus, Apliki mine. IC.237 (CA. 20.12). 0.046 by 0.075 by 0.026; weight 214.8 g. Two surfaces, preserving whole thickness, with one edge. Perhaps part of a thin oxhide ingot. Source: Cyprus, Skouriotissa mine. IC.238 (CA 20.13). 0.027 by 0.037 by 0.016; weight 35.0 g. Two surfaces, preserving whole thickness, with one edge. Source: Cyprus, Skouriotissa mine. IC.239 (CA 20.14). 0.023 by 0.034 by 0.016; weight 31.0 g. One surface. IC.240 (CA 20.15). 0.024 by 0.026 by 0.015; weight 29.0 g. One surface.

47

IC.241 (CA 82; A.1; 113.4; Fig. 19, Pl. 13). Ingot fragment. 0.027 by 0.045 by 0.029; weight 98.9 g. Two surfaces, one curved, preserving whole thickness. Perhaps the tip of an oxhide ingot horn. Source: Cyprus, Apliki mine. IC.242 (CA 95; B.13E; 2503.1; Fig. 19, Pl. 13). Ingot fragment. 0.063 by 0.066 by 0.043; weight 539.0 g. Two surfaces, preserving whole thickness, with one slightly incurving edge. Source: Cyprus, unknown mine (slag from the same source found at the site of Hagios Dimitrios- Kalavassos). IC.243 (CA 123; A.6; 707.1; Fig. 19, Pl. 13). Ingot fragment. 0.084 by 0.092 by 0.041; weight 667.9 g. Two surfaces, preserving whole thickness, with two edges. Unusually smooth and flat upper surface which curls up at the edges with one vertical projection near edge. Source: Cyprus, unknown mine (slag from the same source found at Enkomi). IC.244 (CA 221; A.4; 116.3; Pl. 13). Ingot fragment. 0.02 by 0.032 by 0.018; weight 29.5 g. One surface. Source: Cyprus, Apliki mine.

Strips Four copper strips were also found, two in Building B, and one each in Building A and Chalinomouri. These are all less than 0.001 m in thickness, but vary in width and preserved length. All are broken at each end, and none has completely preserved its original length, but the best preserved (IC.245; CA 61) is ca. 0.30 m long. They vary from 0.004 to 0.008 m in width. One of the long edges is always straight and smooth, while the other is somewhat ragged, and they appear to have been cut from a wider piece of metal. Number IC.245 was submitted for ED XRF and LI analyses; it is made of nearly pure copper and originates from the mines in Lavrion. All four strips were also submitted for Laser-induced Breakdown Spectroscopy (LIBS) analysis, which identified the metal in three (IC.245, IC.246, IC.247; CA 61, 172A, 179) as pure copper, and the metal in one (IC.248; CA 191) as a copper-tin alloy. The strips are found in the large metal hoards in Houses C.3 and C.7 in the main settlement area, with different thicknesses and widths, as well as different lengths, often twisted into convoluted balls like some of those from Gournia.4 Number

IC.245 was bent at two points in a similar fashion as some of these. They had several uses. They served as raw material for the production of small objects such as pins, tweezers, or fishhooks, which did not require a great deal of metal. They were ready made for this purpose, and traders transported them along with copper ingots. They could be worked easily and without any waste. They were also used as finished products, however, and could be bent, twisted, and wrapped around other objects like rope. A good illustration of this use is seen in the large stone mold from Gournia, which cracked at some point in its use and was mended by wrapping strips around its circumference.5 Two of these strips (IC.245, IC.247; CA 61, 179) were found in Building B, including one room where pottery was being produced, and they may have been used here in mending pottery or stone objects like the Gournia mold which the artisans did not want to throw away. Another piece was found at Chalinomouri (IC.248; CA 191), which had been twisted like the strip around the Gournia mold and was probably being used in a similar fashion.

48

MOCHLOS NEOPALATIAL SETTLEMENT ON THE COAST

IC.245 (CA 61; B.4; 1809; Fig. 19, Pl. 14). Strip. One long piece broken at one end. Pres. length ca. 0.30, max. w. 0.008. Weight 4.5 g. Thin strip with one long side finished, the other jagged, one end intact. The strip is bent in two places. XRF and LIBS analyses identified the metal as copper. Source: Lavrion. IC.246 (CA 172A; A.2; 212.3 part 1; Fig. 19, Pl. 14). Flat strip, two non-joining pieces. Pres. length 0.015 and 0.013, w. 0.007. Weight 0.5 g. LIBS analysis identified the metal as copper.

IC.247 (CA 179; B.9; 1705; Fig. 19, Pl. 14). Flat strip, broken on both ends. Pres. length 0.042, w. 0.004. Weight 0.7 g. LIBS analysis identified the metal as copper. IC.248 (CA 191; Ch.2; 11/1214.2; Fig. 19). Flat strip. One piece twisted and broken on both ends. Pres. length 0.03, w. 0.008. Weight 1.6 g. LIBS analysis identified the metal as a copper-tin alloy.

Waste/Spill Ordinarily these pieces are small, irregular lumps, most weighing less than a gram and badly oxidized, which are the remains of metal that spilled on the earth floor during the casting process thereby acquiring its rough and irregular surfaces.6 Occasionally they may also have been left over in the crucible and later scraped out, or perhaps they still adhered to a finished object after casting and were broken off the object. Two pieces (IC.249, IC.250; CA 21.1, 21.2) are unusual because of their size, weighing 149.6 and 76.7 g. They are both smooth on the upper side and woolly on the bottom, and they look as if they spilled onto the ground during casting. One is slightly concave on its upper surface and must have spilled into a shallow hollow spot. Both were found with the foundry hoard in Building A and indicate that even waste was collected and saved for reuse. One smaller piece (IC.260; CA 181) is extremely smooth on one side and looks as if it had fallen onto a smooth, flat surface like a rock or work slab. Twelve samples were submitted for ED XRF analysis. Four of these (IC.253, IC.261, IC.265, IC.266; CA 169b, 184, 190b, 204.2) are tin bronze, while the others (IC.249, IC.250, IC.251, IC.253, IC.255, IC.258, IC.260, IC.263; CA 21.1, 21.2, 96b, 169a, 173, 177, 181,188) are copper. The LI analyses of these 12 samples show that the copper originated from three different sources, the Taurus mountains in southern Turkey (IC.249, IC.250, IC.253A; CA 21.1, 21.2, 169a), Lavrion (IC.251, IC.253B, IC.261, IC.265, IC.266; CA 96b, 169b, 184, 190b, 204.2) and Cyprus (IC.255, IC.258, IC.260, IC.263; CA 173, 177, 181, 188a). All of these samples were also submitted for LIBS elemental analysis, which agreed with the XRF results

in identifying the metals, except for one example (IC.261; CA 184), which was identified as pure copper. Six of the remaining samples were submitted for LIBS elemental analysis alone. Two of these (IC.252, IC.259; CA 166, 178) were identified as copper, one (IC.254; CA 172b) as copper and iron, and four (IC.256, IC.262, IC.263, IC.264; CA 174, 185, 188b, 189) as a copper-tin alloy. The identification of pure copper in so many samples that are thought to belong to casting waste, as well as the discrepancy between the XRF and LIBS results in one sample, may be due to poorly mixed alloys. On the other hand, the identification of both copper and bronze in the casting waste, but no tin, suggests that many objects were cast as copper, while others were cast as bronze. LIBS analysis of the objects themselves indicates that this was the case. Tin may also have been in short supply, and the artisans were probably dependent to some extent on the tin that already existed in bronze scrap. IC.249 (CA 21.1; A north room; 203.1; Fig. 19, Pl. 14). Casting waste. Flat, irregular piece, smooth on one side and slightly concave on upper surface. Dims. 0.071 by 0.085 by 0.011. Weight 149.6 g. XRF and LIBS analyses identified the metal as copper. Source: Taurus, Bolkardag. Found with ingot fragments, IC.226–240 (CA 20), inside bowl IC.280 (CA 18). IC.250 (CA 21.2; A north room; 203.1; Fig. 19, Pl. 14). Casting waste. Flat, irregular piece, smooth on one side. Dims. 0.049 by 0.057 by 0.012. Weight 76.7 g. XRF and LIBS analyses identified the metal as copper. Source: Taurus, Bolkardag. Found with ingot fragments, IC.226–240 (CA 20), inside bowl IC.280 (CA 18). IC.251 (CA 96b; A.2; 212.2 part 4; Pl. 14). Waste. Four irregular pieces. Dims. of largest piece 0.01 by 0.015 by 0.005. Total weight 1.3 g. XRF and LIBS analyses identified the metal as copper. Source: Lavrion.

THE METAL FINDS AND THEIR GEOLOGICAL SOURCES

IC.252 (CA 166; A.5; 714; Pl. 14). Waste. Irregular piece. Dims. 0.005 by 0.015 by 0.004. Weight 0.4 g. LIBS analysis identified the metal as copper. IC.253 (CA 169; A.4; 812.1; Pl. 14). Waste. Eighteen small irregular pieces. CA 169a measuring 0.019 by 0.02 by 0.013; CA 169b measuring 0.02 by 0.0204 by 0.01, smooth on one side. Total weight of all pieces 14 g. Two pieces analyzed: XRF identified 169a as copper with some iron; XRF and LIBS identified 169b as a coppertin alloy. Source of 169a: Taurus. Source of 169b: Lavrion. IC.254 (CA 172b; A.2; 212.3 part 1; Pl. 14). Waste. Small irregular piece. Dims. 0.011 by 0.014 by 0.006. Weight 0.9 g. LIBS analysis identified the metal as copper with iron. IC.255 (CA 173; A.2; 212.4; Pl. 14). Waste. Large irregular drop. Dims. 0.016 by 0.021 by 0.013. Weight 4.4 g. XRF and LIBS analyses identified the metal as copper and iron. Source: Cyprus, unknown mine (slag from the same source found at Enkomi). IC.256 (CA 174; A.2; 212.4 part 1; Pl. 14). Waste. Three small drops. Dims. 0.003 by 0.004, 0.006 by 0.009, 0.004 by 0.005. Total weight 0.4 g. LIBS analysis identified the metal as a copper-tin alloy. IC.257 (CA 175; A.4; 213.1). Waste. Small piece, as above. IC.258 (CA 177; A-B road; 1606.1; Pl. 14). Waste. Two irregularly shaped pieces with smaller fragment. Dims. of larger pieces 0.018 by 0.023 and 0.016 by 0.025 by 0.012. Total weight 12.2 g. XRF and LIBS analyses identified the metal as copper. Source: Cyprus, Skouriotissa mine. IC.259 (CA 178; B.7; 1711.1; Pl. 14). Waste. One irregularly shaped drop. Dims. 0.018 by 0.022 by 0.011. Weight 7.9 g. LIBS analysis identified the metal as copper.

49

IC.260 (CA 181; B.9; 1705; Pl. 14). Waste. One small drop and one larger splash with flat underside. Dims. 0.006 by 0.007 by 0.006 and 0.013 by 0.021 by 0.006. Total weight 4 g. XRF and LIBS analyses identified the metal as copper. Source: Cyprus, Apliki mine. IC.261 (CA 184; B.9; 1705; Pl. 14). Waste. Three small drops. Dims. of largest piece 0.008 by 0.015 by 0.005. Total weight 1.5 g. XRF analysis identified the metal as a copper-tin alloy; LIBS analysis identified the metal as copper. Source: Lavrion. IC.262 (CA 185; B.9; 2111.2; Pl. 14). Waste. One drop mended from two pieces. Dims. 0.014 by 0.02 by 0.008. Weight 3.5 g. LIBS analysis identified the metal as a copper-tin alloy. IC.263 (CA 188; A.9; 1909.1; Pl. 14). Waste. Two small drops. Dims. 0.07 by 0.014 by 0.003; 0.012 by 0.018 by 0.005. Total weight 1.9 g. XRF analysis identified the metal of one drop as copper. Source: Cyprus, Apliki mine. LIBS analysis identified the metal of the other drop as a copper-tin alloy. IC.264 (CA 189; A.9; 1912.1; Pl. 14). Waste. Three small drops. Dims. of largest 0.007 by 0.009 by 0.003. Total weight 0.8 g. LIBS analysis identified the metal as a copper-tin alloy. IC.265 (CA 190; A.9; 1912.1; Pl. 14). Waste. 13 small drops. Dims. of largest 0.009 by 0.02 by 0.006. Total weight 7.2 g. XRF analysis identified the metal of one drop as a copper-tin alloy. Source: Lavrion. LIBS analysis identified the metal of another drop as copper. IC.266 (CA 204; A.4; 116.3; Pl. 14). Waste. Over 30 drops. CA 204.1 measuring 0.026 by 0.035 by 0.013; CA 204.2 measuring 0.016 by 0.019 by 0.015. Total weight of all pieces 63.3 g. XRF analysis identified CA 204.2 as a copper-tin alloy. Source: Lavrion. LIBS analysis identified the metal of another drop as copper.

Objects Objects that are still intact or fairly complete can be identified with some certainty as products of the workshop that were in use or waiting to be traded at the time of the workshop’s destruction. Other items that are more fragmentary, but still recognizable, may also be products of the workshop that were damaged during the building’s destruction, but they may also belong to scrap that was collected for recycling. In the catalog the two are distinguished from each other: objects are still intact or complete or nearly so, while scrap includes objects that are too badly preserved to have been serviceable and

are usually less than half extant. They include a range of modest utilitarian objects: a hook, a chisel, four small knives, a fishhook, three earrings, a needle, two pins, tweezers, and a spatula. They are probably representative of the types of products that were made in the workshop. The two bowls (IC.280, IC.279; CA 18, 19) that lay with ingot fragments, waste, or spill and a scrap handle in the destroyed northern room of Building A are included among the scrap because they appear to have been saved as part of the foundry hoard and destined for recycling. They are the only

50

MOCHLOS NEOPALATIAL SETTLEMENT ON THE COAST

objects that were submitted for ED XRF and LI analyses. They are both tin bronze with a copper source originating in the Taurus mountains, possibly in the Aladag range. The remaining objects and pieces of scrap were submitted for LIBS analysis, which identified 9 samples as copper and 20 samples as a copper-tin alloy. IC.267 (CA 13; A.6; 722.2; Fig. 20, Pl. 15). Hook. Two non-joining pieces. Pres. length 0.052. Weight 5.3 g. U-shaped hook tapering to a point at one end, broken at other end. LIBS elemental analysis identified the metal as a copper-tin alloy. Hawes identifies similar hooks from Gournia as “weaving-hooks” and compares them to modern crochet hooks. Cf. Hawes et al. 1908, p. 34, pl. 4, no. 42. IC.268 (CA 17; B.1; 402.1; Fig. 20, Pl. 15). Chisel. One piece broken on shaft end, other surfaces well preserved. Pres. length 0.041, w. of blade 0.016, w. of shaft 0.006. Weight 12.1 g. Narrow wedge-shaped chisel with shaft square in section narrowing towards heel; sharp cutting edge with traces of use. LIBS analysis identified the metal as copper. IC.269 (CA 23; A.2; 212.4 part 4; Fig. 20, Pl. 15). Small knife. Intact. Length 0.052, w. 0.002. Weight 1.6 g. Small knife with sharpened point at one end and narrow tang for handle at opposite end. LIBS analysis identified the metal as copper. Cf. from Gournia, Hawes et al. 1908, p. 34, pl. 4, no. 21. IC.270 (CA 24; A.2; 212.2 part 3; Fig. 20, Pl. 15). Fish hook. Complete. Length 0.022. Weight 0.2 g. Bronze hook with triangular barb and flattened end.7 LIBS analysis identified the metal as a copper-tin alloy. Cf. from Gournia, Hawes et al. 1908, p. 34, pl. 4, no. 46. IC.271 (CA 27; A.2; 212.4 part 4; Fig. 20, Pl. 15). Earrings. Two joining pieces with some corrosion, and one non-joining. Ext. d. 0.013, int. d. 0.007. Weight 0.2 g. The best preserved forms a small oblong hoop, which probably had a horizontal post. LIBS analysis identified the metal as a copper-tin alloy. IC.272 (CA 62; B.4; 1806.1; Fig. 20, Pl. 15). Needle. Nearly complete except for broken top of head, which preserves lower edge of eye. Pres. length 0.11, w. at head

0.003. Weight 1.9 g. Slightly bent needle with circular section, tapering to sharply pointed end, eye in flattened head. LIBS analysis identified the metal as a copper-tin alloy. Cf. CA 15 and 16 from House C.2 in main settlement, Soles and Davaras 1994, 399, pl. 92a; from Gournia, Hawes et al. 1908, p. 34, pl. 4, nos. 38, 39. IC.273 (CA 84; Ch.6; 311.2; Fig. 20, Pl. 15). Awl. One piece broken at both ends. Pres. length 0.049, w. 0.008. Weight 11.9 g. Shaft square in section tapering at one end. Evidence of wear at tapered end where the point may have broken off in use. LIBS analysis identified the metal as a copper-tin alloy. IC.274 (CA 86; B.8; 1712.1; Fig. 20, Pl. 15). Earring. Intact except for missing wire attachment. D. 0.019, w. 0.01. Weight 1.8 g. Hoop earring with two small holes (d. 0.001–0.002) for wire attachment; profile with two rounded moldings on either side of a central convex strip decorated with a series of horizontal incisions. LIBS analysis identified the metal as copper. IC.275 (CA 97; A.2; 212.5 part 3; Fig. 20, Pl. 15). Pin. Three non-joining fragments, including tear drop shaped head and two cylindrical fragments. Pres. length of head 0.011, w. 0.006; pres. length of shaft 0.016 and 0.017, w. 0.004. Weight 1.4 g. These pieces do not necessarily belong to the same pin. LIBS analysis identified the metal as a copper-tin alloy. IC.276 (CA 105; B.4; 2002.1; Fig. 20, Pl. 15). Spatula or scraper. Mended from two pieces, complete. Length 0.055, w. of blade 0.022, of handle 0.007–0.01. Weight 12.5 g. Wedge-shaped blade, narrowing toward heel. Narrow end is turned up and over to form an Sshaped handle. LIBS analysis identified the metal as a copper-tin alloy. Cf. from Gournia, Hawes et al. 1908, p. 34, pl. 4, no. 27 IC.277 (CA 116; A.RY; 2309.2; Fig. 20, Pl. 15). Knife. Nearly intact, except for small area broken above rivet holes; excellent condition with green patina. Length 0.175, max. w. 0.026. Weight 42.6 g. Knife with oblong blade narrowing toward rounded end, with single cutting edge and tapered heel with the remains of two rivet holes for the attachment of a handle. No signs of wear. LIBS analysis identified the metal as a copper-tin alloy. Cf. from Gournia, Hawes et al. 1908, p. 34, pl. 4, no. 19, with its two rivets still in place.

Scrap IC.278 (CA 5; A.2; 208.1; Fig. 21, Pl. 16). Hinge. Flat rectangular piece preserving two edges of pierced terminal (d. of hole 0.003), missing loop. Pres. length 0.014, w. 0.016. Weight 0.5 g. LIBS analysis identified the metal as a copper-tin alloy. Cf. Catling 1984, p. 216, pl. 205, nos. 33–35.

IC.279 (CA 19; A north room; 203.1; Fig. 21, Pl. 16). Lekane. Mended from many pieces preserving base and most of one side, about two-thirds extant; plus numerous non-joining fragments. H. 0.095, est. rim d. 0.226, base d. 0.075. Weight 183.4 g. Bowl with rolled rim and flaring sides. Hammered. XRF and LIBS analyses identified

THE METAL FINDS AND THEIR GEOLOGICAL SOURCES

the metal as a copper-tin alloy. Copper source: Taurus. Cf. Evans 1928, pp. 631–632, figs. 395 N, 396; Seager 1912, p. 56, fig. 26 c.8 Both these lekanai, including one from a LM I context at Knossos, are very similar in size and shape to IC.279 (CA 19). Both have a horizontal handle riveted just below the rim, however, and it is likely that the horizontal handle (IC.285; CA 165) found with IC.279 (CA 19), which resembles the handles on the other two lekanai, belongs to IC.279 (CA 19). It is restored accordingly in Fig. 21.9 IC.280 (CA 18; A north room; 203.1; Fig. 21, Pl. 16). Bowl. Mended from many pieces preserving base, lower body, and small part of rim, about two-thirds extant; plus numerous non-joining fragments. H. 0.059, rim d. 0.16, base d. 0.065. Weight 181.6 g. Bowl with slightly everted rim and low base. Hammered. XRF analysis identified the metal as a copper-tin alloy. Copper source: Taurus. Found inside bowl IC.279 (CA 19). The nonjoining fragments belonging to IC.280 and IC.279 (CA 18, 19), which cannot be associated definitely with one bowl or the other, weigh a total of 144.9 g. Cf. Matthaus 1980, no. 443, from Chamber Tomb 53 at Ialysos. The shape of this bowl from Ialysos, without the handles, is similar to that of IC.280 (CA 18). It comes from an LM III context, however, and enough of IC.280 (CA 18) is preserved to demonstrate that it could not have had two handles. It may have had one, in which case it would belong to a smaller version of a common LM I type of large bowl with a single vertical handle that rises above the rim, several of which were found in a LM I burial in the Prepalatial cemetery at Mochlos.10 IC.281 (CA 38; A.2; 212.4 part 4; Fig. 21, Pl. 16). Tweezers. One piece preserving lower section of one side of a pair of tweezers. Pres. length 0.022, w. of blade 0.036. Weight 1.7 g. LIBS analysis identified the metal as pure copper. Cf. Hawes et al. 1908, p. 34, pl. 4, no. 32. IC.282 (CA 90; B.10; 2103.2; Fig. 21, Pl. 16). Scrap. Flat rectangular piece preserving two edges, pierced with hole. Pres. length 0.057, pres. w. 0.037. Weight 15.7 g. XRF and LIBS analyses identified the metal as copper. Source: Taurus. IC.283 (CA 96A; A.2; 212.2 part 4; Fig. 21). Hinge. Flat rectangular piece preserving pierced terminal, missing loop. Pres. length 0.017, w. 0.014. Weight 0.6 g. LIBS analysis identified the metal as a copper-tin alloy. Cf. Catling and Catling 1984, p. 216, pl. 205, nos. 33–35. IC.284 (CA 98; B.9; 2111.2; Fig. 22). Blade. One piece preserving pointed end of blade with single cutting edge. Pres. length 0.024, max. w. 0.007, max. th. 0.003. Weight 0.8 g. LIBS analysis identified the metal as copper. IC.285 (CA 165; A. north room; 203.1; Fig. 21). Handle. Broken on one end and splitting in center. Pres. length 0.053. Weight 27.5 g. Horizontal handle, rectangular in section, with one rivet head on outside of preserved end. Upper surface decorated with radial grooves.

51

LIBS analysis identified the metal as a copper-tin alloy. Cf. the handle on the lekane from Knossos, Matthaus 1980, pl. 44, no. 370. Found with ingot fragments IC.226–240 (CA 20) and lekane IC.279 (CA 19), and nearly identical to the handles on similar lekanai which Evans and Seager found at Knossos and Mochlos, it probably belongs to this lekane.11 Unlike the bowl which was hammered, the handle was cast in a mold using the process described above for IC.30 (C 94).12 After casting while the metal was still hot, the ends of the handle were bent and hammered so they were somewhat thinner than the rest of the handle; the handle was then attached by rivets just below the rim of the vase. IC.286 (CA 167; A.4 pit; 718.1; Fig. 22, Pl. 16). Hinge. Small fragment preserving top with two nonjoining bits. Pres. length 0.009, w. 0.011. Weight 0.6 g. Flat piece of bronze folded to form an open loop at top; broken at bottom. LIBS analysis identified the metal as a copper-tin alloy. Cf. Catling and Catling 1984, p. 216, pl. 205, nos. 33–35. IC.287 (CA 168; A.4; 116.3; Fig. 22). Scrap. Two small fragmentary pieces and numerous tiny bits. One of flat metal broken on all sides (dims. 0.036 by 0.044); the other of flat metal with up-turned edge (dims. 0.013 by 0.020). Weight 3.7 g. LIBS analysis identified the metal as copper. These pieces could belong to a vessel or scale pan. IC.288 (CA 170; A.4; 702.2). Scrap. Dims. O.013 by 0.010 by 0.008. Weight 2.2 g. Small piece of oxidized bronze broken on all sides. LIBS analysis identified the metal as copper. IC.289 (CA 171; B.alcove; 2110.3; Fig. 22, Pl. 16). Pin. One piece broken at both ends. Pres. length 0.033, w. 0.004. 3 g. Shaft square in section, probably belonging to a pin. LIBS analysis identified the metal as a copper-tin alloy. Cf. Muhly 1992, p. 96, fig. 25, pl. 30, no. 283. IC.290 (CA 176; A.4; 213.1). Scrap. Small unidentifiable piece. IC.291 (CA 180; B.9; 1705; Fig. 22). Scrap. Rounded piece of oxidized bronze, perhaps a rivet. Dims. 0.013 by 0.018 by 0.009. Weight 5.2 g. LIBS analysis identified the metal as pure copper. IC.292 (CA 182; B.9; 1705; Fig. 22). Scrap. Mended from two pieces, broken on both ends. Heavily oxidized shaft. Pres. length 0.034, w. 0.006. Weight 1.4 g. LIBS analysis identified the metal as a copper-tin alloy. IC.293 (CA 183; B.9; 1705; Fig. 22, Pl. 16). Scrap. Rounded piece of oxidized bronze, perhaps a rivet. Dims. 0.013 by 0.019 by 0.008. Weight 4.6 g. XRF and LIBS analyses identified the metal as a copper-tin alloy. IC.294 (CA 186; B.3; 307; Fig. 22, Pl. 16). Knife. One piece preserving part of upper and back edges of heel and part of one rivet hole plus one non-joining fragment. Pres. length of heel 0.039. Weight 2.5 g. LIBS analysis identified the metal as a copper-tin alloy.

52

MOCHLOS NEOPALATIAL SETTLEMENT ON THE COAST

IC.295 (CA 187; B.3; 601.3; Fig. 22, Pl. 16). Tang. One piece broken on one end preserving part of tapered tang and two rivets. Pres. length 0.026, max. w. 0.011, th. 0.003. Weight 4.4 g. LIBS analysis identified the metal as a copper-tin alloy.

IC.296 (CA 220; A.4; 116.3; Fig. 22). Scrap. Two rounded pieces, perhaps belonging to two rivet heads. Dims. 0.017 by 0.02 by 0.01 and 0.015 by 0.018 by 0.008. Weight 8.9 g. and 4.2 g. LIBS analysis identified the metal as a copper-tin alloy.

Lead Metals Two circular weights (IC.297, IC.298; Pb 6, 16), two small bits of scrap (IC.299, IC.300; Pb 31, 32), and a strip pierced with rivet holes (IC.301; Pb 34) constitute the total number of lead objects. All except IC.298 from Chalinomouri come from Building A in the Artisans’ Quarter. The two weights (IC.297, IC.298) were submitted for Lead Isotope analysis, and their ore source is Lavrion. Only IC.297 is in tact. Weighing 30.5 g, it closely parallels three lead weights found by Seager, including one that weighs 30.4 g, and it belongs to a well documented system of weight measurement constituting one-half of a standard Minoan unit weighing ca. 61 g, which corresponds to one-eighth of the mina.13 Lead weights were probably in great demand in the Artisans’ Quarter to weigh quantities of copper and bronze, but it is somewhat surprising to find one in a humble farm unless they were used more commonly to weigh measures of grain.

IC.297 (Pb 6; A.4; 717.1; Fig. 22, Pl. 16). Weight. Intact. D. 0.027, th. 0.005. Weight 30.5 g. Flat disc. Source: Lavrion. Cf. Petruso 1992, p. 40, no. 76. IC.298 (Pb 16; Ch.1; 2203.3; Fig. 22, Pl. 16). Weight. One piece, preserving three-quarters of original disc with straight-sided edge. The other fourth has been pulled away and broken off. D. 0.055, th. 0.008–0.009. Weight 136 g. Flat disc. Source: Lavrion. IC.299 (Pb 31; A.2; 212.4 part 4; Fig. 22). Scrap. Small, flat fragment preserving finished edge. Pres. h. 0.011, pres. length 0.031. Weight 8.1 g. IC.300 (Pb 32; A.2; 212.5 part 3; Fig. 22). Scrap. Small, flat fragment broken on all sides. Dims. 0.014 by 0.022 by 0.004. Weight 5.7 g. IC.301 (Pb 34; A.2; 208.2; Fig. 22, Pl. 16). Scrap. Small, flat strip, broken at one end; pierced with three rivet holes. Pres. length 0.057, w. 0.012, th. 0.0015– 0.003, diam. of rivet holes 0.004. Weight 5.9 g.

The Geological Sources Zofia Anna Stos-Gale

Introduction The metal finds from the Artisans’ Quarter and Chalinomouri Farmhouse provide a unique opportunity for a study of LM IB metallurgy away from a palatial context. Thirty-five metal finds excavated in Buildings A and B and one from Chalinomouri were sampled for metal analyses in August 1999. The aim of this analytical program was the identification of the type of copper metal (pure copper or

tin bronze) and lead isotope analyses of copper and lead samples leading to the identification of the geographical location of the ore sources. The metallurgical processes carried out in the Artisans’ Quarter were of the smithing-casting type. Copper metal and tin, or ready produced tin-copper alloy, were the raw materials melted in the workshops and cast into objects. Because the outcrops of copper and lead on

THE METAL FINDS AND THEIR GEOLOGICAL SOURCES

Crete are very poor and there is no evidence of their exploitation in antiquity, it is almost certain that, for the production of artifacts, the metals were imported to Crete from overseas. The only evidence for copper extraction on Crete comes from a very small LN–EM III copper smelting site at

53

Chrysokamino on the Mirabello Bay.14 There are no copper minerals anywhere near this site and the lead isotope analyses of slags from Chrysokamino indicate that the ores for smelting were brought there from copper ore outcrops on the Cycladic islands.15

Copper Sources in the Bronze Age Eastern Mediterranean Bronze Age copper and lead extraction is documented by modern archaeometallurgical surveys and geological records in many localities in the Mediterranean and the Near/Middle East. Traditionally Cyprus was always regarded as the most important source of copper metal used by the Minoans. There are, however, other important copper deposits exploited in the Bronze Age. Excavations in the Arabah Valley between Jordan and Israel are showing the importance of this mining region.16 The Bronze Age mining of copper, lead, and silver in Iran17 and southern Turkey18 is also documented, and there is growing evidence for the exploitation of copper, as well as lead and silver, from the mines in Lavrion in Attica.19 The historical records and modern geological surveys of Crete carried out by the Institute of Geological and Mineralogical Exploration of Greece (IGME) confirm that metal ore sources on Crete are very meager and mining of metals has never been an important activity on this island. Copper ores occur in very small quantities on the central-southern coast (directly south from Herakleion) between Kalo Limenes and Lenta, in an area called Chrysostomos.20 The indication of the mineralization is limited to green stains on the rocks, and there is no evidence anywhere in this area of copper extraction. Farther west, in the mountains south of Rethymnon near the village of Sklavopoulou, another similar small outcrop of copper mineralization is associated with iron and manganese minerals, but there is no evidence of metal smelting. In western Crete, in the mountains south of Kastelli, there was limited iron mining at the beginning of the 20th century. Small amounts of copper still can be found on the spoil heaps there, but also there is no evidence of copper smelting. Slags are usually a good indicator

of ancient metal extraction because the smelting of ores probably would be carried out in a relative proximity to their occurrences. Cyprus, for example, is well known for its numerous slag heaps,21 and slags are nearly always found in the other regions where copper was extracted in ancient times. Apart from Chrysokamino, which was active only for a relatively short period in the Early Bronze Age, there are no other smelting slags on Crete. It is nearly certain, therefore, that in the Late Minoan period the Minoans must have been importing copper, tin, lead, and silver from overseas. The most impressive proof of such imports has been found in the Hagia Triada villa where 19 large copper ingots, weighing between 27–32 kg, were stored in one of the rooms of the building. Ingots of a similar oxhide shape have also been excavated in Zakros and Tylissos, and fragments of ingots come from Gournia, Kato Syme, Knossos, and Palaikastro. In the Arkalochori cave five complete, round (bun shaped), copper ingots were found, and it is quite certain that copper ore, perhaps rather tinbronze, was also imported as tools and weapons that could be re-worked into Minoan style artifacts. For example, the excavations of the Cape Gelidonya shipwreck produced large numbers of unfinished high-tin bronze plough shares that might have been used as a source of bronze for making other objects.22 No silver or tin ingots have been found on Minoan sites. Comparatively large amounts of litharge (lead oxide) excavated in the Unexplored Mansion in Knossos prove that silver was extracted there, either from silver bearing ores or from silver rich lead metal. Lead isotope analysis of this material and also of lead from Akrotiri on Thera23 and Hagia Eirene on Kea24 show that the source of this silver was the mines of Lavrion in Attica.

54

MOCHLOS NEOPALATIAL SETTLEMENT ON THE COAST

Analyzed Metal from the Artisans’ Quarter and Chalinomouri The great majority of copper based metals sampled for analyses were found in Building A in the Artisans’ Quarter (27 pieces). One shapeless copper spill (IC.258; CA 177) was found on the road between Buildings A and B, and six fragments came from Building B. Two lead weights, one from Building A and another from Chalinomouri, were also sampled for lead isotope analysis. The lead weight from Chalinomouri was found in a room adjacent to a magazine with buried storage vessels. In the Artisans’ Quarter the weight was found inside the stone bin in a workshop complex (A.4) where stone tools, loom weights, storage vessels and clay molds were also found. On the floor of this room were several pieces of “spillage from bronze casting,”25 but no clearly identifiable crucible fragments were present anywhere in the excavated area. It seems quite probable that copper and bronze melting and casting were undertaken in Building A, but none of the rooms excavated provided evidence of crucibles and hearths used for this activity. The largest number of metal pieces was found stored in bronze bowls in the stone lined pit constructed at the base of the opposite side of the northern wall of A.2.26 This wall was practically all that remained of a room to the north of Rooms A.1–3, which was otherwise largely eroded by the sea. Perhaps this eroded area was the main metallurgical workshop area in Building A. It would be most practical to locate the area with hearths for melting metal on the seaward side of the building, where the wind from the sea would help to keep the fire going and also possibly blow the fumes away from the settlement. The prevailing winds on this coast are from the northwest, which might help to keep the smoke away from the living quarters, and occasionally the south, which would blow the fumes toward the sea. An ample supply of water near the metallurgical workshop would also be useful for cooling the metal and dousing the fires. Thirteen large pieces of metal (IC.226–238; CA 20) stored in two bronze bowls (IC.280, IC.279; CA 18, 19) in this area were sampled for analyses. Visual examination of each of the pieces confirmed that all of them were fragments of unrefined copper ingots with large gas holes. The largest fragment (IC.226; CA 20.1), weighing 797 g, is a corner of

an oxhide ingot with very short horns, similar in shape to ingots from Hagia Triada with straight tops and bottoms and incurving sides. This shape was regarded by Buchholz as the earliest, appearing in the LM IA period,27 but the excavation of the Uluburun shipwreck, dated to 1300 B.C., proved that the shapes of oxhide ingots are not related to chronology, and very similar copper ingots are also present among the cargo of this ship.28 All copper ingots from the Uluburun wreck, regardless of their shape (and the variety of shapes ranges from round discs of various diameter, through rectangular, to large oxhide with very pronounced horns) have a very uneven and “bubbly” upper surface (exposed to air during casting), somewhat resembling sheep’s fleece, while the sides and the bottom are smooth with small pits due to gas holes. Careful examination of the pieces of copper metal from the Artisans’ Quarter reveals that nearly all of them have at least one side showing the same outer appearance as that of the whole ingots: smooth bottom and sides, with varying degrees of “bubbles” on one of the surfaces. Some of the smaller pieces show shapes indicating that they were cut from an oxhide shaped ingot (IC.230, IC.235–238; CA 20.5, 20.10, 20.11, 20.12, 20.13). Number IC.243 (CA 123) is a quarter of a round ingot with a “nipple” in the middle and another one (IC.232; CA 20.7) could also be a fragment of a round ingot. The remaining small pieces were quite irregular and too small to reveal the shape of the original ingots. Two metal spills (IC.249, IC.250; CA 21.1, 21.2) from the bowls are also pure copper, but through melting they have lost the outer appearance of the ingots. The two bowls themselves (IC.280, IC.279; CA 18, 19) were also sampled for analysis of their metal. Other metal spills were found in Rooms A.2, A.4, A.9 and in Room 9 in Building B. Three more ingot fragments were found on the site: a tip of an oxhide horn in A.1 (IC.241; CA 82), a quarter of a bun ingot in A.6 (IC.243; CA 123) and an unidentified ingot fragment in B.13 (IC.242; CA 95). Other than the bowls, the only two artifacts sampled were a strip from B.4 (IC.245; CA 61) and a small piece of sheet metal with a hole from B.10 (IC.282; CA 90). It is quite clear that these metal finds represent only a small part of the material used in the

THE METAL FINDS AND THEIR GEOLOGICAL SOURCES

metallurgical workshop. The most common metal used for tools and weapons in LM IB was tin bronze, but no tin ingots were found. Tin metal was much more rare and valuable than copper, and therefore perhaps it is not surprising that finds of this metal in Late Bronze Age contexts are extremely rare. The confirmation that tin was traded in metallic form comes from the cargo of the Uluburun shipwreck, which included about 100 tin ingots weighing nearly one ton.29 The excavation of the workshops in Mochlos revealed very few items made of an alloy of tin and copper. Nearly all the copper pieces available for analysis were fragments of pure copper ingots. These ingot fragments represent the raw material brought to Mochlos for the production of artifacts (Table 1). Only the two bronze bowls, one lump of bronze (IC.293; CA 183), a copper strip (IC.245; CA 61), a piece of sheet metal with a hole (IC.282; CA 90), and small

55

copper and bronze spills found on the floor represent the products of a metal smith. The ingots are products of smelting copper ores and most probably were cast in the proximity of the mines by quite a different group of specialists (extractive metallurgists). For example, it is quite certain that production of copper ingots from local ores must have been conducted on Cyprus. Large quantities of slag, in particular near the mines of Skouriotissa, Apliki, and Mavrovouni, are visible proof of copper extraction carried out there over many centuries.30 Large quantities of copper slags in other metal producing regions like Wadi Arabah and Taurus also prove local copper extraction. It seems quite certain that these two activities, copper smelting and melting, were carried out in the Late Bronze Age quite separately by different specialists and in different geographical locations.

The Type and Origin of Metals from the Artisans’ Quarter and Chalinomouri All samples of metal from coastal Mochlos were analysed for their elemental composition using Energy Dispersive X-ray Fluorescence. ED XRF analysis is a semi-quantitative, non-destructive method of identification of major and minor components of metal. Elements present in copper below 0.2% cannot be detected, and the accuracy of measurement of metals present in higher quantity is on the order of 2–10% of the concentration of the element, improving with higher quantities (i.e., for 1% of metal the absolute error limits are ±0.1%, for 80% about ±1.6%). The analysed artifacts and their metal compositions are listed in Table 1. The origin of metal based on the results of lead isotope analysis is listed for each artifact in Table 1. Lead isotope analysis is a method relying on the comparison of three isotope ratios measured for the trace quantities of lead in samples of ores from known mineral deposits with the same ratios for the lead in the artifact of unknown origin.31 The lead isotope ratios measured for the Mochlos metals are listed in Table 2 and plotted on mirror-type

2D diagrams in Table 3. On the same figure, data points for ores and slags from Lavrion, Cyprus, and from the Taurus mountains are plotted. The origin of the metals from Mochlos was identified through point-by-point comparisons with published (and some unpublished) lead isotope ratios of ores from copper and lead deposits in the Mediterranean and Near/ Middle East.32 Two lead weights (IC.297, IC.298; PB 6, 16) are consistent with an origin of Lavrion in Attica. This result is not surprising because the great majority of lead in the Bronze Age Aegean is consistent also with this deposit.33 Out of 34 copper based metals, only seven pieces are of tin bronze. Five of them are small remains of bronze casting and include two small copper spills from A.4 (IC.253, IC.266; CA 169b, 204.4) and one from A.9 (IC.265; CA 190). Two tin bronzes come from B.9; one is a lump of metal (IC.293; CA 183), the other a small copper spill (IC.261; CA 184). All these bronzes have lead isotope compositions identical with copper ores from Lavrion in Attica. It should be noted

56

MOCHLOS NEOPALATIAL SETTLEMENT ON THE COAST

here perhaps that the lead content of these objects is below 0.2% and there is no evidence in Mochlos of lead melting, so there are no grounds for the assumption that these bronzes were “contaminated” with lead from Lavrion. Copper ores in at least one of the mines in Lavrion (Kamareza) are still quite prominent, and there is no reason to reject this mineral occurrence as copper bearing as well as lead and silver (and iron). It would be helpful if it were possible to locate a copper smelting site in this region, but so far only one single piece of copper slag has been found among the great heaps of lead slag in Thorikos.34 There are two other copper objects from the Artisans’ Quarter consistent with an origin of Lavrion: a copper strip from B.4 (IC.245; CA 61) and a spill from A.2 (IC.251; CA 96b). The lump of bronze IC.293 (CA 183) contains 10% tin, so it might be a fragment of a bronze ingot. One such bun ingot, also consistent with an origin from Lavrion copper ores and containing about 12% tin, was identified among the ingot fragments from the LH III Poros Wall Hoard excavated in Mycenae (no. 7663).35 This ingot proves that in the LBA raw material for bronze smithing was traded also in the form of tin-copper alloy ingots. It is impossible to know where such ingots were made. It seems that tin metal was most likely coming to the Aegean from the east and perhaps also from the northeast; Cypriot and Near Eastern bronzes contain a higher proportion of tin than contemporary Aegean metal.36 Tin could have been added to Lavrion copper either in Attica or on Crete by Minoan craftsmen. The lead isotope evidence indicates that the use of Lavrion copper was restricted largely to the Aegean. Apart from a few exceptions from Amarna and Ugarit,37 the great majority of copper used in the LBA eastern Mediterranean originated in Cyprus and, to a lesser degree, other copper deposits in this region. It seems therefore most likely that the tin-copper alloy ingots were made in the Aegean. The two bowls filled with copper ingot pieces (IC.280, IC.279; CA 18, 19) in the destroyed northern room of Building A are also made of tin bronze. Their lead isotope compositions are identical, but somewhat puzzling (see Tables 1 and 2). There are not many such lead isotope ratios among either eastern Mediterranean Bronze Age artifacts

or copper ores from this region. The two bowls are isotopically unique among the metals from Mochlos and among all LM metal artifacts. The closest parallels to their lead isotope ratios are found among the lead and copper ores from the Aladag range in the Taurus Mountains in southern Turkey. Large numbers of lead net sinkers from the Uluburun wreck seem to have originated from these ores,38 and there is one socketed spearhead from Panaztepe39 and a shaft-hole axe from Ugarit40 with identical lead isotope ratios. It seems that these metals originated from a lead/silver and copper deposit, which so far has not been included in the lead isotope program. Lead isotope ratios of three copper spills from Building A (IC.253, IC.249, IC.250; CA 169a, 21.1, 21.2) and the scrap metal with a hole from Building B (IC.282; CA 90) are consistent with the ores from the Bolkardag region of Taurus. Copper, lead, and silver from these mines, located to the northeast of Mersin, are quite prominent among LBA Aegean and Near Eastern artifacts. They form a considerable group of metals from LM sites, and, for example, the second largest LM I flat disc shaped ingot from the Arkalochori Cave (HM 2408) is of the same origin,41 indicating that metal from Bolkardag was traded in ingot form. It is known from textual evidence that there was a huge port somewhere near Silifke, near Mersin, called Ura that the Hittites used extensively for most of their import/export needs. This site, together with the presence of merchants from Ura in Ugarit, is mentioned even in Ugaritic texts. Some suspect the site was located on the mouth of the Göksu river, which flows through Silifke, and was probably covered over by river sediments, making its location much farther inland now than would have been the case during the Bronze Age. Others have suggested that the Classical site and port of Kalenderis may have been the original Ura, but excavations there have yet to uncover any major Bronze Age material. During the last ten years or so, new excavations at Kinnet Höyük in the Antakya province (just north of the Turkish-Syrian border) have uncovered Bronze Age material, including Cypriot pottery like that found on the Uluburun shipwreck. The site, which is close to Ugarit to the north and even closer to Bolkardag, may have been an important port during the Late Bronze Age.

THE METAL FINDS AND THEIR GEOLOGICAL SOURCES

Seventeen ingot fragments and four copper spills from the Artisans’ Quarter have lead isotope compositions identical with Cypriot ores and slags from the sites of Enkomi and Hagios Dimitrios-Kalavassos.42 Thirteen of these fragments of metal are isotopically identical with the ores from the Apliki mine in the Solea region in the northwest foothills of the Troodos. The majority of 13th and 12th century oxhide ingots from many sites in the Mediterranean and Anatolia originate from the same mines.43 These ingots from Mochlos and fragments of ingots from Gournia (also dated to LM IB) are the earliest ingots identified as made of copper from the Apliki mines. The complete oxhide ingots from the LM IB context at Hagia Triada are not from Cyprus, and we still do not have an answer as to their origin.44 But there is also a half ingot in Hagia Triada, of a different shape, that is consistent with origin from Apliki ores. On the basis of its shape and Cypriot origin, it has been disputed if this ingot is indeed LM IB.45 In view of the above, it seems now quite probable that indeed all ingots from Hagia Triada are of the same date. Another four ingot fragments are also consistent with ores from the Solea

57

region, but from different mines: Skouriotissa and Mavrovouni. These two mines are just a few kilometers north from Apliki and are regarded as the largest copper deposits on Cyprus. Two pieces of ingots of uncertain shape are consistent with ores from the main group of copper mines lying between Larnaca and Nicosia. Finally, an ingot fragment of unknown shape (IC.242; CA 95) has lead isotope composition that does not correspond to any of the Cypriot ores analysed so far, but is identical with one piece of slag from the site of Hagios DimitriosKalavassos. Another three objects, ingot fragment IC.234 (CA 20.9), copper spill IC.255 (CA 173), and a quarter of a bun ingot IC.243 (CA 123), also do not correspond isotopically directly to known Cypriot ores, but are identical with several pieces of slag from the site of Enkomi. Both these Cypriot sites are later than Mochlos (13th–12th century B.C.), but it is quite usual for outcrops of ore to be exploited for long periods of time, more often periodically than continuously. The same ore outcrop was used for the majority of 450 copper ingots carried on the Uluburun ship dated to 1300 B.C.

The Origin of Metal Finds from Other LM I Sites We have further analyzed 120 copper and 57 lead metal artifacts from LM I contexts across Crete. The sites include Hagia Triada, Palaikastro, Arkalochori Cave, Chania-Kastelli, Gournia, Kato Syme, Knossos, Kommos, Nirou Chani, Nerokourou, Phaistos, Psychro Cave, and Zakros. The lead isotope and elemental composition data for Minoan metals analysed in the Isotrace Laboratory is currently being prepared for publication. Table 4 shows lead isotope mirror-type plots for the LM I metals from the sites listed above, compared with the ores and artifacts from the Artisans’ Quarter and Chalinomouri. Of all 57 lead metal objects, only two small items (a votive axe and a bead) from the Psychro Cave are not made of lead from Lavrion. The copper based objects seem to originate from copper from at least four different sources. The weapons, vessels, and tools form 61% of the total number of these objects, the remaining 39% are pure copper ingots (including 6

bun and 36 oxhide, plus 4 fragments of unknown shape from Chania). The largest isotopic group is formed by bronzes consistent with ores from Lavrion (48 artifacts, 40% of the total). Twenty artifacts and one bun ingot from the Arkalochori Cave are fully consistent with Bolkardag ores (17.5% of the total). Of the metals, 23.2% are consistent with Cypriot ores, but they include only two bronze double axes (from Hagia Triada and Phaistos). The 26 remaining objects are copper ingots. Of the total analyzed LM I copper artifacts, 19% are of unknown origin, showing lead isotope ratios of very old mineralizations from unknown locality. Nearly all of them are oxhide ingots from Hagia Triada and Zakros.46 Metal with these lead isotope ratios has not been identified among the copper excavated in the Artisans’ Quarter. The top histogram on Table 5 shows a comparison of the total portions of metal imported to Crete

58

MOCHLOS NEOPALATIAL SETTLEMENT ON THE COAST

in LM I from the three sources identified by their lead isotope ratios (Bolkardag, Lavrion, and Cyprus) and the unknown source (or sources), which 208 206 is characterized by high Pb/ Pb ratios (on Table 4 all points above the value 2.09). The two histograms below this one show the numbers of artifacts and ingots from these sources. The contrast is staggering. It seems that while the copper ingots are chiefly from Cyprus and the unknown mines, the artifacts (made either of pure copper or tin bronze) are nearly all made of copper from two regions,

Lavrion and the Bolkardag mountains in coastal southeastern Turkey. The histogram on Table 6 presents a similar comparison for the metals from the Artisans’ Quarter. It is clear that all copper ingot material in the workshops originated from Cyprus, while the melted metal and bronzes are from Lavrion and Bolkardag. The metal from the unknown source represented by oxhide ingots from Hagia Triada, Tylissos, and Zakros, and the largest “bun” ingot from Arkalochori, was not found among the metals from Mochlos.

Conclusions on Scientific Analyses The results of lead isotope and elemental analyses of metals from the Artisans’ Quarter show that the main source of copper in the workshop was Cyprus, and in particular the mines in the Solea region. This copper was coming to Mochlos as ingots, or ingot fragments, and would have been alloyed with tin before casting into objects. The copper ingots possibly were brought together with ingots of tin. The concentration of tin in Late Minoan artifacts is quite varied and not at all related to the source of copper given by their lead isotope compositions. The amounts of tin are related, though, to the function of the artifact. For example, large vessels made of sheet metal are predominantly made of pure copper, while daggers and chisels contain varying amounts of tin. The workshop in Mochlos contains material that was not very valuable and therefore left behind; it is almost certainly not representative of the type of metal present when the workshop was operating. On the other hand, the sources of metals identified in this paper are quite in keeping with those used at the same time across the island. The strong contrast in sources of ingot metal and artifacts is perhaps worth further research. However, it is quite possible that the picture seen at present is determined rather by the sampling policy than the real situation in the 16th century B.C. The Greek authorities allowed sampling of ingots much more readily than, for example, prestigious objects from the exhibition in the Herakleion Museum. Many samples of artifacts come from damaged and shapeless objects stored in the Museum vaults. Perhaps

this sampling policy generated a bias toward artifacts of lesser quality. Maybe Cypriot copper was indeed used selectively for more prestigious objects? Lack of samples of such objects may have tilted the results toward the more “ordinary” (and perhaps also more frequently used) copper from Lavrion. A number of copper spills from the workshop in Mochlos proves without doubt that Cypriot ingots were melted down and used. Also the small size of numerous pieces of ingots found on Crete, not only in Mochlos, but also in Gournia, Knossos, and Chania, indicates that these pieces were intended for melting in crucibles. The crucibles used at that time in metallurgical workshops were quite small and the amount of metal melted at one time could not have been very large. For the same reason, it is quite possible that large amounts of scrap metal were not being melted together, but rather pieces were selected for re-melting according to the mass of the intended artifact. It seems very likely that pieces of metal from different sources would end up from time to time in the same crucible. The lead isotope composition of such alloy would depend very strongly on the lead content in each piece and the size of the pieces. It is possible to predict the lead isotope ratios of alloys if the initial ratios are known—they would have to be positioned on straight lines between the lead isotope ratios of the components.47 The pattern of distribution of the lead isotope data points on Table 4 does not show the scatter expected from widely applied mixing of metals of different origin. The groups of artifacts

THE METAL FINDS AND THEIR GEOLOGICAL SOURCES

consistent with Cypriot, Lavrion, and Bolkardag ores are very compact. In fact, the most “mixed” pattern is represented by the artifacts plotting on the RHS of the diagrams, above the 207Pb/206Pb value of

59

0.85. However, all these points represent pure copper ingots of “industrial” quality, that is showing features typical of raw, smelted, not melted copper.

Chapter 3 Notes 1. Dr. Zofia Stos-Gale reports on these analyses later in this chapter. 2. Soles and Davaras 1996, pp. 194–196, 201, fig. 13, pls. 56a, 58b. 3. On this subject, see Schallin 1997. 4. For a good parallel, cf. Hawes et al. 1908, p. 34, no. 65. 5. Hawes et al. 1908, p. 32, no. 67. “This stone was so precious a possession that when it cracked in a jagged line across the top, the owner used the utmost care in mending it. First he drew a narrow strip of bronze twice around the block binding this fast with turns of the strip, and then he drove in flat stones as wedges between the strip of metal and the block, two on one side, and one broken in two pieces on the other—a neat piece of work, that brings us in very close touch with the everyday life of the burghers.” 6. Cf. Catling and Catling 1984, p. 204. 7. Powell 1996, p. 150. 8. Catling 1964, p. 171, Form 6a. 9. With the discovery of this bowl and the one from Knossos, Seager’s lekane from Tomb 7 of the Prepalatial cemetery, which was found in an old Prepalatial tomb, but without any associated pottery, should probably now be redated to the LM I period and thought of as an offering placed in the tomb long after its original use. 10. Seager 1912, p. 89, fig. 26 A; Catling 1964, p. 179, Form 19. 11. The handle on Seager’s vase is also rectangular in section; it is incorrectly drawn, presumably from Seager’s photograph, in Matthaus 1980, pl. 44, no. 369. All three lekanai had the same type of handle, although only IC.285 (CA 165) had additional decoration. 12. Soles et al., Chap. 2. 13. Petruso 1992, pp. 39–42. 14. Betancourt et al. 1999. 15. Stos-Gale 1998. 16. Timna (Rothenberg 1990) and Feinan (Hauptmann et al. 1992). 17. Caldwell 1967. 18. Ryan 1960; Hirao, Enomoto and Tachikawa 1995; Yener 1986; Yener et al. 1989. 19. Stos-Gale, Kayafa, and Gale 1999.

20. The information published here comes from surveys of ore deposits on Crete conducted by Gale and Stos-Gale with collaboration of IGME geologists in the years 1980–1986. 21. Stos-Gale, Maliotis, and Gale 1998. 22. Bass 1967. 23. Stos-Gale and Gale 1990. 24. Gale, Stos-Gale, and Davis 1984. 25. Soles and Davaras 1994, p. 415. 26. Soles and Davaras 1994, pp. 415–416. 27. Buchholz 1959, p. 27–35. 28. Pulak 1998, p. 195, fig. 8. 29. Pulak 1998. 30. Stos-Gale, Maliotis, and Gale 1998, p. 236, fig. 1. 31. For a comprehensive review of this method, see Gale and Stos-Gale 2000. 32. For Cypriot ores, see Gale et al. 1997; for Lavrion, StosGale, Gale, and Annetts 1996; for Taurus, Yener et al. 1991 and Hirao, Enomoto, and Tachikawa 1995. 33. Stos-Gale, Kayafa, and Gale 1999. 34. Professor U. Zwicker, Erlangen, private communication 1983. 35. Unpublished data in the Isotrace Laboratory, Oxford. 36. For discussion of possible tin sources, see Stos-Gale 2001. 37. Stos-Gale, Gale, and Houghton 1995. 38. Unpublished data from the Isotrace Laboratory, Oxford. 39. From the excavation of Professor Erkenal, analyzed in the Isotrace Laboratory, Oxford. 40. Sample from the Louvre, analyzed in Oxford. 41. Isotrace Laboratory data. 42. For lead isotope ratios of Cypriot ores, see Gale et al. 1997. 43. Stos-Gale et al. 1997. 44. Gale and Stos-Gale 1986. 45. Gale 1991, p. 202. 46. Data for Hagia Triada ingots in Gale and Stos-Gale 1986. 47. For further explanation, see either Stos-Gale, Kayafa, and Gale 1999 or Stos-Gale 2000.

4

The Stone Implements Tristan Carter

Two themes have arisen in recent discussions of Aegean stone tools: first, the importance of locating the study of lithic technology within broader socioeconomic issues,1 and second, a call for a more diachronic and holistic approach to the analysis of stone implements.2 This report thus adopts an analytical framework that includes not only tool production and use, but also considers the significance of these crafts in the context of Neopalatial Mochlos and later Minoan society, as well as their longterm history in Bronze Age Crete. This chapter includes many traditional approaches, such as elucidating the chronological and cultural correlates of specific implement types, but it eschews the primacy previously accorded “tools” sensu stricto.3 The study’s aim is to reconstruct the “big picture,” or chaîne(s) opératoire(s),4 encompassing those socio-economic issues of raw material procurement, the technological modes and mechanisms employed in artifact production,5 and the context of their consumption. With regard to this report’s terminology, it should be noted that many of the implements and

techniques represented in the Artisans’ Quarter and at Chalinomouri have been described in recent Kommos and Pseira volumes.6 While wishing to make this text as user-friendly as possible, it was not always beneficial to retain the form of these publications. Essentially, one has to be led by the material under consideration rather than impose a preconceived structure on it. One central feature of this report is the traditional separation of the lithic assemblage into “ground” and “chipped” stone. The term “ground stone” has been described as a “misnomer,”7 for it is used to describe a range of implements that were shaped not only by abrasive techniques, but they were also pecked, drilled, incised, and occasionally knapped. Within this chapter, the distinction between “ground” and “chipped” stone tools lies in the fact that the latter class of implements was manufactured entirely via the exploitation of their conchoidal fracture habit. Each artifact is described through reference to a range of attributes, both qualitative, including shape, raw material, and color, and quantitative,

62

MOCHLOS NEOPALATIAL SETTLEMENT ON THE COAST

including length, width, and thickness. In the case of ground stone tools, the range of dimensions given for each class relates only to complete pieces. The implements were also studied in natural and artificial light, with the regular use of a small hand lens (10–20x magnification), to note finer details and record use-wear. Within the classification framework developed for the Mochlos stone tools, each artifact was assigned to a single category. With regard to the

ground stone, this was based primarily on the tool’s perceived function, an interpretation based on its shape, size, plus the location, form, and intensity of use-wear. Subdivisions within these classes do, however, draw on morphology and raw material. Where implements were employed for more than one task, for example, as both a hammerstone and a grinder, they were categorized according to what was considered to be the tool’s major function, with all other details recorded in the text.

Ground Stone Tools Introduction The coastal excavations generated a total of 154 ground stone implements with 139 from the Artisans’ Quarter and 15 from Chalinomouri. Based on the attributes described in the preceding section, the following five major tool groups (and their subtypes) were defined within the two assemblages: A. Percussive and Abrasive Hand-held Implements Type 1. Implements with pecked or battered ends. Type 2. Implements with pecked circumference and one or two abraded faces. Type 3. Pestles. Type 4. Handstones. Type 5. Implements with heavy abrasive use-wear. Type 6a–b. Sub-cuboid cobbles with abraded surfaces. Type 7. Trapezoidal cobbles with abraded surfaces. Type 8. Irregularly shaped implements with light, abrasive use-wear. Type 9. Elongated cobbles and pebbles with areas of light abrasion. Type 10. Differentially weathered cobbles.

B. Drilling, Piercing, and Engraving Implements Type 11. Drill-guides. Type 12. Drill-caps. Type 13. Engravers and piercers. C. Working Surfaces and/or Receptacles Type 14. Saddle querns. Type 15. Palettes. Type 16. Whetstones. Type 17. Anvils. Type 18. Tables. Type 19a–b. Mortars. Type 20. Basins. D. Weights Type 21. Balance weights. Type 22. Biconically perforated weights. Type 23. Perforated weights. Type 24. Loomweights. Type 25. Naturally perforated weights. E. Miscellaneous Type 26. Bore-cores. Type 27. Pivot stones. Type 28. Miscellaneous.

THE STONE IMPLEMENTS

63

A. Percussive and Abrasive Hand-held Implements (Types 1–10) This group comprises those tools with use-wear indicative of their having been employed in a primarily percussive and/or abrasive mode. In the former instance the damage is usually in the form of “pitting” (small circular depressions), or flake-scars, on the working face or edge. With abrasive implements the use-wear is commonly seen as striae worn into the working face, or as an area ground smoother than the rest of the piece. A further distinction has been employed to distinguish those tools, such as grinders, where use has left areas of the tool in a rougher condition than the surrounding surfaces, and those implements, such as polishers, where the abrasive function has resulted in the smoothing of the working face. This is an

admittedly arbitrary distinction for experimental work has illustrated clearly that a continuum exists within the development of wear patterns.8 Thus, the intensity and extent of surface alteration depends on a number of variables that are not readily available to the archaeologist, namely, duration of tool use, hardness of the medium worked, angle and intensity of contact, presence/ absence of an abrasive, and post-depositional processes.9 In practice, these hand-held, mobiliary tools were usually employed in tandem with a fixed or stationary working surface on which the materials being worked were crushed and ground, for example, a handstone with a saddle quern (Types 4 and 14), or a pestle with a mortar (Types 3 and 19).

Type 1. Implements with Pecked or Battered Ends These implements have percussive damage on one or both ends and are often referred to as “hammerstones” or “pounders.” Fifteen examples come from the coastal excavations, all ovoid or sub-rectangular, limestone, beach cobbles of local origin, ranging from gray to blue-gray in color unless otherwise stated. They range between 0.048–0.1653 m in length, 0.0406–0.1065 m in width, 0.025–0.101 m in thickness, and 110–1965 g in weight. Numbers IC.311 and IC.314 (GS 1287, 1413) also display abrasive use-wear. A specific function cannot be assigned to these implements on the basis of use-wear alone, as percussive damage can occur through either working hard materials such as other stones or softer materials resting on a hard base, for example the processing of foodstuffs on a quern. In the Artisans’ Quarter they were widely distributed, coming from seven rooms, suggesting that they enjoyed numerous uses, including both domestic and craft activities. The same impression is gained from the plethora of hammerstones found throughout the Mochlos settlement. In turn, they are a common feature of Minoan ground stone assemblages throughout the Bronze Age, recorded from many sites in east Crete and beyond.10

IC.302 (GS 160; B.3; 600 surface). Hammerstone. Intact. Dims. 0.0926 by 0.0746 by 0.0413. Weight 424 g. Sub-ovoid limestone cobble with percussive damage on one end. IC.303 (GS 297; B.3; 307; Fig. 23, Pl. 17). Hammerstone. Intact. Dims. 0.165 by 0.068 by 0.050. Weight 1385 g. Ovoid limestone cobble with percussive damage on both ends. IC.304 (GS 310; A.3-6; 708.1; Fig. 23, Pl. 17). Hammerstone. Intact. Dims. 0.091 by 0.073 by 0.06. Weight 755 g. Ovoid limestone cobble with percussive damage on one end. IC.305 (GS 312; B.5; 501.2; Fig. 23, Pl. 17). Hammerstone. Intact. Dims. 0.125 by 0.075 by 0.066. Weight 1145 g. Ovoid limestone cobble with percussive damage on both ends and part of one margin. IC.306 (GS 326; A.4 pit; 718.1). Hammerstone. Intact. Dims. 0.069 by 0.06 by 0.043-0.054. Weight 398 g. Sub-conical limestone cobble with percussive damage on one end. IC.307 (GS 514; B.4W; 411.1). Hammerstone. Intact. Dims. 0.048 by 0.062 by 0.025. Weight 560 g. Oblong limestone cobble with slight percussive damage on both ends. IC.308 (GS 725; Ch.5; 1308.2). Hammerstone. Intact. Dims. 0.1191 by 0.1065 by 0.0731. Weight 1290 g. Subtriangular/rounded limestone cobble with percussive damage on one end.

64

MOCHLOS NEOPALATIAL SETTLEMENT ON THE COAST

IC.309 (GS 782; Ch.2; 11/1204; Fig. 23, Pl. 17). Hammerstone. Intact. Dims. 0.1099 by 0.0978 by 0.0727. Weight 1175 g. Sub-ovoid limestone cobble with percussive damage on both ends. IC.310 (GS 1259; B.2; 20/2418W; Pl. 17). Hammerstone. Intact. Dims. 0.127 by 0.098 by 0.101. Weight 1965 g. Heavy ovoid limestone cobble with percussive damage on both ends. IC.311 (GS 1287; A.10; 2310N.3). Hammerstone. Intact. Dims. 0.128 by 0.095 by 0.078. Weight 1480 g. Ovoid limestone cobble with percussive damage on both ends. One face is also smoothed from abrasive use. IC.312 (GS 1290; B.4W; 1801.1). ?Hammerstone. Intact. Dims. 0.0571 by 0.0406 by 0.0304. Weight 110 g. Fine-grained, black and white spotted, non-calcareous, limestone, beach pebble with possible percussive damage on one end.

IC.313 (GS 1353; Ch.kiln surface; Pl. 17). ?Hammerstone. Intact. Dims. 0.1653 by 0.0498 by 0.0367. Weight 480 g. Elongated limestone cobble with possible traces of percussive damage on one end. IC.314 (GS 1413; B.2; 20/2418W). Hammerstone. One-third missing. Dims. 0.093 by 0.07 by 0.049. Weight 416 g. Sub-rectangular limestone cobble with percussive damage on one end, plus abrasive wear on one face and opposite end. IC.315 (GS 1466; A.RY; 2315N.5). Hammerstone. Intact. Dims. 0.111 by 0.078 by 0.062. Weight 765 g. Sub-ovoid limestone cobble with percussive damage on both ends. IC.316 (GS 1467; A.RY; 2315N.4). Hammerstone. Intact. Dims. 0.059 by 0.046 by 0.039. Weight 166 g. Sub-ovoid limestone cobble with possible percussive damage on one end.

Type 2. Implements with Pecked Circumferences and One or Two Abraded Faces These tools are distinguished from the previous class of implements because the percussive usewear is distributed around most, if not all, of the circumference, rather than limited to the ends. Most also have one or both faces abraded smooth and a central depression pecked into one or both faces, probably to aid handling. They can thus resemble unfinished biconically perforated weights (Type 22), but the weights have no percussive damage around their margins. The combination of percussive and abrasive usewear indicates that these tools were a form of handstone, employed to reduce materials on hard surfaces such as querns or palettes (Types 14–15). Indeed, IC.324 and IC.326 (GS 1260, 1348) were found with a saddle quern in Room B.2, as were IC.318 and IC.319 (GS 329, 487) in Room A.2. Eleven examples came from the Artisans’ Quarter, all circular or sub-ovoid, local limestone beach cobbles ranging between 0.086–0.165 m long, 0.060– 0.173 m wide, 0.037–0.0784 m thick and 480–1915 g in weight and gray to blue-gray in color. These quite distinctive ground stone tools are known from as early as EM IIA Debla;11 they correspond to Kommos Type 2 tool and Type 5a at Pseira, with further comparanda from Petras, Palaikastro, Sklavokambos, Knossos, and Akrotiri among others.12

IC.317 (GS 237; B.3; 603; Pl. 17). Hammerstone/ grinder. Intact. Dims. 0.115 by 0.173 by 0.044. Weight 900 g. Near-circular, relatively flat, limestone cobble with percussive use-wear around its circumference and both faces abraded smooth. A central depression had been initiated on one face by percussion. IC.318 (GS 329; A.4 pit.718.1; Pl. 17). Hammerstone/ grinder. Intact. Dims. 0.117 by 0.085 by 0.060. Weight 1225 g. Flat ovoid limestone cobble with a shallow central depression pecked into both faces and one surface abraded smooth from use; percussive damage around its circumference. IC.319 (GS 487; A.4; 812.1; Fig. 23, Pl. 17). Hammerstone/ grinder. Intact. Dims. 0.116 by 0.10 by 0.055. Weight 1685 g. Flat, circular limestone cobble with a shallow depression pecked into both faces. One surface has been smoothed by abrasive use-wear, with percussive damage around most of its circumference. IC.320 (GS 575; A.3; 112.3). Hammerstone/grinder. Intact. Dims. 0.086 by 0.060 by 0.050. Weight 480 g. Ovoid limestone cobble with percussive damage on both ends and part of one margin (the other is obscured by soil accretion). It also has a small, shallow, central depression pecked into one of its faces. IC.321 (GS 790; B.7; 1902.2). Hammerstone/ grinder. Intact. Dims. 0.1503 by 0.0865 by 0.0697. Weight 1580 g. Sub-rectangular limestone cobble smoothed on main face by abrasive use-wear. IC.322 (GS 847; A.RY; 2309.3; Pl. 17). Hammerstone/ grinder. Intact. Dims. 0.108 by 0.095 by 0.061. Weight 1125 g. Near-circular, flat, limestone cobble with

THE STONE IMPLEMENTS

a shallow depression pecked into both faces, which had also been smoothed by abrasion. A depression has also been pecked into one margin. IC.323 (GS 925; A.1; 101.1). Hammerstone/grinder. Intact. Dims. 0.1228 by 0.1035 by 0.0784. Weight 1365 g. Domed limestone cobble with flat base into which a shallow depression has been pecked; this surface has also been abraded smooth. Percussive damage around its circumference. IC.324 (GS 1260; B.2; 20/2418W; Fig. 23). Hammerstone/ grinder. Intact. Dims. 0.097 by 0.092 by 0.037. Weight 570 g. Near flat, sub-circular, limestone cobble with percussive damage around most of its circumference and both faces flattened and polished from heavy abrasive use-wear. On one of the faces are a number of small pits from percussive damage, the initiation of a central depression.

65

IC.325 (GS 1347; B.10; 2011.3; Fig. 23, Pl. 17). Hammerstone/grinder. Intact. Dims. 0.0971 by 0.1014 by 0.0513. Weight 795 g. Circular, limestone cobble with percussive damage around its circumference and both faces ground smooth. A shallow depression is pecked into one face with another initiated on the other. IC.326 (GS 1348; B.2; 2407; Pl. 17). Hammerstone/ grinder. Intact. Dims. 0.165 by 0.107 by 0.062. Weight 1915 g. Ovoid, limestone cobble with percussive damage around its circumference and a shallow depression pecked into both faces. Both faces also have abrasive use-wear. IC.327 (GS 1468; A.RY; 2315N.5). Hammerstone/ grinder. One face part missing. Dims. 0.103 by 0.082 by 0.035. Weight 446 g. Ovoid limestone cobble with both faces abraded smoothed and percussive damage around its circumference.

Type 3. Pestles Pestles are tools employed for both percussive and abrasive purposes. Commonly elongated or cylindrical in form, the main part of the body acts as a handle, with the base functioning as the working face. The Artisans’ Quarter produced a single pestle of the highest quality, almost certainly of exotic origin. It was probably employed in conjunction with the fine limestone table (IC.413; GS 1390) that was found just on the other side of the short wall that subdivided Room B.4. Its use probably related to the potting activities focused in this part of the structure (particularly in Room 8 next door), used for preparing clay or temper. Although finely worked pestles are known from Neopalatial contexts, including Gournia, Palaikastro, and Knossos,13 the closest parallels come from the Prepalatial cemetery at Mochlos.14

IC.328 (GS 685; B.4; 2002; Fig. 24, Pl. 18). Pestle/ pounder. Complete apart from three areas of sheared damage, two on corner ridges and the lower part of one face. Dims. 0.186 tall, maximum width of body 0.071, width of handle at top 0.040, thickness of body 0.054, thickness of handle at top 0.037. Weight 1360 g. Finely worked pestle/pounder of a dense, fine grained, green metabasite, possibly dunite.15 The body is of elongated trapezoidal form with a clearly defined, faceted, rectangular cross-section. The handle is roughly tubular, emerging from the body with no sharp break in angle, its end being rougher than the sides possibly due to prehensile friction from prolonged use. The method of manufacture is unclear due to the surface polish that has obliterated any original traces of working, though its initial preparation probably involved pecking/flaking (the material has a limited conchoidal fracture habit). The base is battered and roughened from use as a percussive and abrasive tool.

Type 4. Handstones Using a percussive and abrasive mode, these hand-held implements were used to crush and grind materials on fixed working surfaces, with three of the nine examples from the Artisans’ Quarter (IC.330, IC.332, IC.337; GS 314, 388, 1349) coming from rooms with querns (Table 7). Each handstone was made from a locally available gray to blue-gray limestone beach cobble, circular to

oblong in shape, most having a large flake struck off one or both ends resulting from their percussive use. Number IC.333 (GS 488) has a flaked indentation on both margins, presumably to aid the grip of the tool. They range between 0.158–0.21 m in length, 0.084–0.15 m in width, 0.03–0.055 m in thickness, and 1305–2500 g in weight. These are a common type within Minoan ground stone assemblages, with

66

MOCHLOS NEOPALATIAL SETTLEMENT ON THE COAST

parallels from LM Pseira, Petras, Kommos, Knossos, and Akrotiri among others.16 IC.329 (GS 214; B.3; 602.2; Fig. 24, Pl. 18). Handstone. Intact. Dims. 0.21 by 0.11 by 0.055. Weight 2500 g. Large, oblong, limestone cobble with abrasive usewear on one surface and flakes detached from both ends due to percussion. IC.330 (GS 314; B.5; 501.2; Fig. 24, Pl. 18). Handstone. Intact. Dims. 0.196 by 0.095 by 0.040. Weight 1900 g. Sub-ovoid, limestone cobble with flaking from impact on one end and small-scale, percussive damage on the thicker, opposite end. In the center of one face are possible traces of pecking, with the opposing side flattened by abrasion. IC.331 (GS 330; A.4 pit; 718.1). Handstone. Intact. Dims. 0.17 by 0.15 by 0.03. Weight 1305 g. Flat, rounded, limestone cobble, with abrasive use-wear in the form of smoothing and striations on one face and large flakes detached from one of the ends. IC.332 (GS 388; B.5 pit; 502.4; Pl. 18). Handstone. Intact. Dims. 0.179 by 0.114 by 0.04. Weight 2040 g. Oblong, limestone cobble with flat surfaces (one due to abrasive use) and percussive damage on both ends and parts of the margins.

IC.333 (GS 488; A.6; 723.1; Pl. 18). Handstone. Intact. Dims. 0.185 by 0.11 by 0.05. Weight 1955 g. Oblong, limestone cobble with percussive damage on both ends and abrasive wear on one main face. It has also had flakes removed from the centers of two opposing margins to provide a grip for the hand. IC.334 (GS 540; B.8; 1712.1; Pl. 18). Handstone. Intact. Dims. 0.16 by 0.075 by 0.045. Weight 1370 g. Oblong, limestone cobble with both main surfaces polished flat from abrasive use and percussive damage on the ends. IC.335 (GS 647; B.8; 1712.1; Fig. 24). Handstone. Intact. Dims. 0.158 by 0.084 by 0.051. Weight 1550 g. Oblong, limestone cobble with percussive damage on both ends and the faces slightly polished from abrasive use-wear. IC.336 (GS 787; B.6; 1804.1). Handstone. Intact. Dims. 0.2004 by 0.116 by 0.0469. Weight 1955g. Worn and pitted, flat, sub-ovoid, limestone cobble with abrasive use-wear on one face. IC.337 (GS 1349; B.2; 2407). Handstone. Broken in half. Dims. 0.1397 by 0.1204 by 0.0623. Weight 1810g. Sub-rectangular, limestone cobble with one face abraded smooth from use-wear.

Type 5. Implements with Heavy Abrasive Wear While having the same degree of abrasive usewear as that seen on the handstones, these implements are classed separately because they lack the regularity in form. Twelve examples come from the coastal excavations ranging between 0.0486–0.11 m long, 0.04–0.0858 m wide, 0.02–0.0785 m thick, and 66–1380 g in weight. This group also encompasses a wider range of raw materials, albeit mostly from relatively close sources including local gray to blue-gray limestone beach cobbles, a light brown sandstone, plus a dark green amphibolite procured from Istron, or Mavro Seli. The most noteworthy piece is IC.344 (GS 763), made from a larger spheroid cobble of emery and probably imported from the Cyclades. It was the only example of this raw material from the coastal excavations and was, surprisingly, recovered from the small farmstead at Chalinomouri. Number IC.345 (GS 905), from Building A, Room 7 in the Artisans’ Quarter, is made of reddish gray arenite sandstone of possible Mesara origin; if it had a more rectilinear plan, it would have been tempting

to classify it as a whetstone, as the wear patterns are the same. IC.338 (GS 161; B.3 surface; 600). Grinder. Broken longitudinally. Dims. 0.065 by 0.055 by 0.045. Weight 294 g. Oblong, limestone cobble with abrasive use-wear on both main faces. IC.339 (GS 331; A.4 pit; 718.1). Grinder. Broken. Dims. 0.16 by 0.07 by 0.036. Weight 690g. Small slab of limestone, with polishing and striae from abrasion; a handstone or small working surface. IC.340 (GS 332; A.4 pit; 718.1; Pl. 18). Grinder. Broken at one end. Dims. 0.13 by 0.105 by 0.07. Weight 1680g. Sub-triangular, limestone cobble with many striae across its upper surface, a result of its abrasive function. IC.341 (GS 418; B.5; 502.6). Grinder. Intact. Dims. 0.09 by 0.08 by 0.075. Weight 1070 g. Domed, limestone cobble smoothed on one face by abrasive use-wear and percussive damage on one end. IC.342 (GS 522; Ch.NT; 13,401; Fig. 24, Pl. 18). Grinder. Intact. Dims. 0.0999 by 0.0858 by 0.0457. Weight 670 g. Domed, sub-ovoid, amphibolite cobble with abrasive use-wear on its flat base.

THE STONE IMPLEMENTS

IC.343 (GS 758; B.6; 1304.1). Grinder. Intact. Dims. 0.11 by 0.064 by 0.061. Weight 710 g. Unmodified, subrectangular/ovoid, sandstone cobble with abrasive usewear on one face and one end. IC.344 (GS 763; Ch.2; 21/2211; Fig. 24, Pl. 18). Grinder/sub-cuboid “grinder”? Intact. Dims. 0.0752 by 0.0792 by 0.0785. Weight 1380 g. Sub-spheroid cobble of dark gray emery, with one side flattened through abrasion and traces of percussive damage over much of its body. A gouge on one side may be a “knick” from a rotary drill. IC.345 (GS 905; A.4; 810.2; Fig. 24, Pl. 18). Grinder/ whetstone? Intact. Dims. 0.0959 by 0.0774 by 0.0497. Weight 530 g. Ovoid cobble of reddish gray arenite sandstone/argilaceous arkose, with a domed body and base abraded flat through use.

67

IC.346 (GS 950; A.1; 114.1; Pl. 18). Grinder. Intact. Dims. 0.063 by 0.06 by 0.038. Weight 162 g. Relatively flat, circular cobble of fine grained sandstone, with one face smoothed flat by abrasive use. IC.347 (GS 1066; B.7E; 1910.2). Grinder. Intact. Dims. 0.0486 by 0.0455 by 0.02. Weight 66 g. Limestone pebble with abrasive use-wear on one face. A natural depression in one end may have aided handling. IC.348 (GS 1139; B.4 pit; 1811.1). Grinder. Intact. Dims. 0.0647 by 0.0613 by 0.0279. Weight 194 g. Small, squarish, limestone cobble abraded on one face from use. IC.349 (GS 1268; B.2; 20/2418W). Grinder. Broken at flat end. Dims. 0.056 by 0.04 by 0.034. Weight 72 g. Amphibolite, hooked/triangular cobble with an area of heavy abrasion and wear along the thin, inner margin.

Type 6a–b. Sub-cuboid Cobbles with Abraded Surfaces The coastal excavations produced a group of eleven cobbles abraded into sub-cuboid or spherical forms. They are of similar scale, ranging between 0.046–0.0713 m long, 0.0471–0.0724 m wide, 0.0388–0.0681 m thick, and 148–620 g in weight. Notably, each tool was made from non-local stone, with seven of green amphibolite, three of green quartzite, and one of brown-gray quartzite. On the basis of the degree of abrasive wear on their surfaces, this group is subdivided into sub-cuboid “polishers” (Type 6a) and sub-cuboid “grinders” (Type 6b). Although these pieces may have functioned in much the same way as other abrasive tools, it seems significant that each of the sub-cuboid type was made from non-local resources. It may suggest that these polishers were considered to embody special properties (physical or metaphysical) and were chosen/manufactured for their use in specific tasks. Although these implements are not unknown from the Mochlos settlement, their concentration within the Artisans’ Quarters indicates a primary role in craft activities. One can also point to a strong correlation between these tools and stone vase manufacture. These tool types have parallels from many Minoan sites in a range of other raw materials, including limestone, chert, granite, dolomitic marble, and sandstone.17

Type 6a. Sub-cuboid Polishers: Cobbles with Polished and Faceted Surfaces The surface modification on the sub-cuboid polishers provided them with clearly defined, faceted forms. Eight examples come from the Artisans’ Quarter and one from Chalinomouri. It is not entirely clear, however, whether their polished shape was the result of deliberate modification, or an accentuation of these cobbles’ original shape through abrasive use-wear. From their contexts, at least three of the implements’ forms can be seen as partly, if not wholly, due to their use as abrading tools. Number IC.351 (GS 683) was recovered with a block of ocher (IC.586; M 608), suggesting its use for preparing pigments, and IC.355 and IC.358 (GS 1061, 1387) come from Room B.8, one or both of which were employed in conjunction with the tripod mortar IC.420 (GS 620). The use of these implements with colorants is paralleled at LC I Akrotiri on Thera.18 Conceivably, some of the more regular pieces may have been balance weights, though their distribution within the two buildings of the Artisans’ Quarter was dispersed. This issue is discussed further below (Type 21). IC.350 (GS 427; A.4.baulk; 810.1). Sub-cuboid polisher. Intact. Dims. 0.0713 by 0.0724 by 0.0681. Weight 620 g. Sub-cuboid cobble of amphibolite, with one face smoothed flat by abrasion. The piece is otherwise unmodified and is rougher in texture than the other examples.

68

MOCHLOS NEOPALATIAL SETTLEMENT ON THE COAST

IC.351 (GS 683; A-B road; 2601.3). Sub-cuboid polisher. Intact. Dims. 0.0713 by 0.0616 by 0.0527. Weight 380 g. Light green, quartzite cobble faceted by abrasion. Found with the block of red and yellow ocher (IC.586, M 608).19 IC.352 (GS 810; Ch.2 subfloor; 21/2214.3). Sub-cuboid polisher. Intact. Dims. 0.0678 by 0.0627 by 0.0636. Weight 530 g. Amphibolite cobble with 6 facets produced by polishing, the rounded edges retaining the original rougher surface. Found in pithos IC.445 (P 750). IC.353 (GS 885; A.RY; 2307.4; Fig. 25, Pl. 19). Subcuboid polisher. Intact. Dims. 0.052 by 0.049 by 0.038. Weight 201 g. Amphibolite cobble whose original form was accentuated by intensive polishing, producing two facets. IC.354 (GS 959; A.3; 112.1; Pl. 19). Sub-cuboid polisher. Intact. Dims. 0.046 by 0.048 by 0.044. Weight 157 g. Amphibolite cobble of sub-cuboid form, faceted by abrasion. IC.355 (GS 1061; B.8; 1712.1; Pl. 19). Sub-cuboid polisher. Intact. Dims. 0.0502 by 0.05 by 0.0484. Weight 204 g. Large, amphibolite pebble with 8 or 9 facets created by abrasion. IC.356 (GS 1186; B.11; 20/2403.1; Fig. 25, Pl. 19). Sub-cuboid polisher. Intact. Dims. 0.0469 by 0.0471 by 0.0466. Weight 148 g. Sub-cuboid, green, quartzite cobble polished flat in a number of places, resulting in a faceted appearance. IC.357 (GS 1195; B.2; 20/2407W; Fig. 25). ?Subcuboid/spheroid polisher. Intact. Dims. 0.0618 by 0.0618 by 0.0536. Weight 290 g. Sub-spherical cobble of browngray quartzite with abrasive and some percussive usewear. The faceting is less clear than the other examples. IC.358 (GS 1387; B.8; 1712.1). Sub-cuboid polisher. Intact. Dims. 0.0704 by 0.0606 by 0.0431. Weight 328 g. Sub-cuboid, green, quartzite cobble with 4 polished facets.

Type 6b. Sub-cuboid “Grinders:” Cobbles with Roughened Surfaces The sub-cuboid “grinders” are distinguished from the “polishers” on the basis that their use has left them with predominantly roughened surfaces. This sub-division is admittedly an arbitrary one, whereby IC.350 (GS 427) could have been included in this section as easily as the preceding one. Three of these implements come from the coastal excavations, but IC.344 (GS 763) from Chalinomouri is recorded above (Type 5), as its primary function is considered to have been as a raw material for abrasive powder.

These grinders are considered to be an integral component of the stone vase makers’ tool kit at Neopalatial Mochlos. The two amphibolite grinders come from Building A, Room 1, a context that produced clear evidence for vase manufacture, with drill-guides, abrasives, and a possible drill-bit. These hand-held, sub-cuboid/ spheroid tools would have been employed to grind out the body of the vase with their rotary action, in conjunction with an abrasive, producing concentric rings on the inside of the vessel. These rings are commonly interpreted as the product of drilling, but at Mochlos there are precious few bore-cores in relationship to the number of locally produced serpentinite vases. This indicates that the traditional reconstruction of LM stone vase production being based upon the use of the hollow-drill20 cannot be substantiated at Neopalatial Mochlos. Evidence for drilling does clearly exist, with a number of drill-guides and the aforementioned solid drill-bit (Type 26), but the grinders are considered to be the main tool used to reduce the interior of the vase. The process of hollowing the vessel may have been initiated by pecking a depression, the use of a chisel, or by drilling a hole. From this point until the fine polishing of the inside surfaces, the inside of the vase would have been removed by the grinder(s). One can note slight indentations on the surfaces of these tools (usually opposite each other), where the artisan would have held the piece while turning it. The remainder of the implement’s surface gained a roughened texture through contact with the abrasive and the stone being worked. On a number of vases one can see an undulation in the profile of the inner surface/concentric abrasive rings, accompanied by a slight “collar” where the diameter of the vessel subtly changes. Aside from representing good evidence against the use of drills, this may also suggest that rotary-grinders of different sizes may have been used during the process of hollowing the vase. In turn, a number of the sub-cuboid “polishers” (Type 6a) may relate to the final stages of vase manufacture, used with a finer grained abrasive to produce the vessel’s polished interior. This would help to explain the continuum of surface abrasion on this class of tools. Finally, it is considered significant that, as with the drill-guides, amphibolite cobbles were employed as rotary-grinders; these implements also share the same sub-spheroid form.

THE STONE IMPLEMENTS

Parallels for these sub-cuboid tools with abraded surfaces (polishers and grinders) come from a number of sites where drill-guides and stone vase manufacture are recorded, for example, the Unexplored Mansion at Knossos, Kommos, and Akrotiri on Thera.21

69

344 g. Sub-cuboid, amphibolite cobble with two small linear indents and an abraded surface; one face is slightly smoothed flat. IC.360 (GS 507; A.1; 111.2, Pl. 21). Sub-cuboid grinder. Intact. Dims. 0.065 by 0.064 by 0.06. Weight 515 g. Sub-spheroid, amphibolite cobble with a linear indent, abraded surfaces, and one area burnished flat.

IC.359 (GS 506; A.1; 111.2; Fig. 25). Sub-cuboid grinder. Intact. Dims. 0.066 by 0.052 by 0.05. Weight

Type 7. Trapezoidal Cobbles with Abraded Facets These implements are a variant on the former class, the difference being that the abrasion resulted in the cobble having a trapezoidal, rather than sub-cuboid form. The regularity of these implements’ form suggests that they had been deliberately shaped. Only two examples were recovered, both from the Artisans’ Quarter, of similar scale and weight and made of non-local stones, amphibolite and green quartzite. Although their main function was as an abrasive implement, both pieces had indications of other uses, one percussive, the other related to drilling. While parallels are known from the Mochlos settlement, plus Kommos and Palaikastro,22 these pieces remain quite rare and should be seen as special purpose implements. A use in metalworking is

conceivable, specifically for the flattening and shaping of sheet metal.23 IC.361 (GS 327; A.6; 713.2; Fig. 25, Pl. 19). Polisher and hammerstone. Intact. Dims. 0.0903 by 0.0712 by 0.0503. Weight 560 g. Dense, green, quartzite cobble worked by abrasion into a sub-trapezoidal form with smooth margins and faces (one not entirely polished); percussive use-wear on one end. IC.362 (GS 377; B.NT; 608.2; Fig. 25, Pl. 19). Polisher and drill-guide. Intact. Dims. 0.0815 by 0.0683 by 0.0483. Weight 520 g. Amphibolite cobble abraded into a trapezoidal form with smooth margins and faces. One corner of the tool has a wear mark caused by cursory contact with a drill and a little further along the same face is a small concave channel worn through full contact.

Type 8. Irregularly Shaped Implements with Light Abrasive Wear This group of 15 implements with light, abrasive use-wear is separated from the previous types of polisher on the basis of their irregular form. They comprise a variety of shapes and raw materials, including amphibolite (n=8), limestone (n=2), pumice (n=2), green quartzite, phyllite, and serpentinite, ranging between 0.0452–0.0988 m long, 0.033–0.0717 m wide, 0.0258–0.0433 m thick, and 15–354 g in weight. Number IC.364 (GS 676), a small pumice implement with worn V-shaped scars (Fig. 25, Pl. 19) has direct parallels from Kommos, Poros-Katsambas, and the Unexplored Mansion at Knossos, where such pieces were associated with metalworking.24 It seems reasonable to suggest that it, too, was used to

sharpen the edges of bronze tools. Another example is known from the Mochlos settlement.25 IC.363 (GS 564; B.8; 1712.1; Fig. 25, Pl. 19). Polisher. Broken along two edges, length is preserved. Dims. 0.058 by 0.041 by 0.020. Weight 116 g. Large, fine grained, amphibolite pebble with one face and a single margin highly polished. IC.364 (GS 676; A.4 pit; 718.1; Fig. 25, Pl. 19). Polisher. Intact. Dims. 0.071 by 0.045 by 0.027. Weight 15 g. Ovoid, flat-based, and domed pumice implement, with two V-shaped scars worn into and across the upper body (having been initiated from one margin). The surface wear appears to be from an abrasive action on relatively acute-angled hard surfaces, probably from polishing the edges of bronze implements.

70

MOCHLOS NEOPALATIAL SETTLEMENT ON THE COAST

IC.365 (GS 713; B.10; 2103.2). Polisher. Intact. Dims. 0.0579 by 0.053 by 0.0305. Weight 144 g. Sub-circular, blackish, amphibolite cobble with one surface polished by abrasive use-wear. IC.366 (GS 902; B.NT; 602.7). Polisher. Intact. Dims. 0.0681 by 0.0636 by 0.0341. Weight 226 g. Rounded cobble of amphibolite with parts of the upper surface smoothed, possibly as a result of abrasive use-wear. IC.367 (GS 907; A-B road; 1602.1). Polisher. Intact. Dims. 0.0988 by 0.0717 by 0.0433. Weight 354 g. Irregular, dark green, serpentinite cobble with parts of its surface burnished from abrasive use-wear. IC.368 (GS 945; A.1; 111.2). Polisher. Intact. Dims. 0.055 by 0.046 by 0.032. Weight 132 g. Irregular/subrectangular, amphibolite cobble with most of its surface polished by abrasive use-wear. From inside pithos IB.434 (P 132). IC.369 (GS 952; B.5; 401.1; Pl. 19). Polisher. Intact. Dims. 0.0672 by 0.0463 by 0.0325. Weight 154 g. Small, sub-ovoid, limestone cobble with one face polished by abrasive use-wear. IC.370 (GS 954; A.4; 116.3). Polisher. Intact. Dims. 0.064 by 0.033 by 0.026. Weight 98 g. Small amphibolite cobble with highly lustrous polish over most of its surface from abrasive use-wear. IC.371 (GS 1062; B.8; 1712.1; Pl. 19). Polisher. Intact. Dims. 0.0804 by 0.0638 by 0.0343. Weight 244 g.

Fine grained, amphibolite cobble smoothed on both faces and one margin by abrasive use-wear. IC.372 (GS 1291; B.4W; 1801.1; Pl. 19). Polisher. Broken in half. Dims. 0.078 by 0.0459 by 0.0327. Weight 180 g. Small, sub-rectangular, amphibolite cobble with possible traces of smoothing on part of its surface. IC.373 (GS 1345; Ch.6; 311.3; Pl. 19). ?Polisher/ applicator. Intact. Dims. 0.0452 by 0.0388 by 0.0258. Weight 66 g. Small, flat, white, limestone, ovoid cobble with possible traces of red pigment adhering to surface. IC.374 (GS 1346; Kiln.A; 2907.1; Pl. 19). Polisher. Intact. Dims. 0.0645 by 0.036 by 0.0259. Weight 80 g. Small, elongated, limestone cobble with abrasive usewear on one end. IC.375 (GS 1412; B.2; 20/2418W). Polisher. Intact. Dims. 0.074 by 0.056 by 0.053. Weight 322 g. Sub-triangular, green quartzite cobble highly polished on three surfaces. Margins and ends have percussive damage. IC.376 (GS 1416; A.RY; 2315N.4; Fig. 25). Polisher. Complete (2 pieces). Dims. 0.0583 by 0.0589 by 0.0382. Weight 32 g. Sub-cuboid piece of pumice with two smoothed facets on base from abrasive use-wear. IC.377 (GS 1476; A.RY; 2315N.5). Polisher. Intact. Dims. 0.055 by 0.0436 by 0.0299. Weight 97.5 g. Subcuboid/irregular, reddish gray, compacted, phyllite cobble smoothed on all surfaces.

Type 9. Elongated Cobbles and Pebbles with Areas of Light Abrasion This group of artifacts is comprised of unmodified pebbles with areas of light abrasion on one end, separated from Type 8 on the basis of their relatively fine and elongated form. Most were probably employed for polishing relatively small surfaces, for instance the burnishing of leather hard pots. They could also have been used for applying pastes, pigments, or adhesives. Numbers IC.379 and IC.381 (GS 502, 504) have partly heat altered surfaces, while IC.383 (GS 927) has use-wear more suggestive of a scraping action. Given their context, the two examples from Building A, Room 1, may have been employed in the final stages of polishing stone vases. Numbers IC.379 and IC.380 (GS 502, 503) have no obvious traces of wear, but were cataloged because of their form and context. Seven examples of this tool type come from the Artisans’ Quarter, all except one from Building A. Each was made from a locally available stone, four of limestone, two of green schist and one of green

phyllite, and ranged between 0.0693–0.092 m long, 0.013–0.026 m wide, 0.0066–0.0162 m high, and 18–50 g in weight. Such finger-like implements are also known from Gournia.26 IC.378 (GS 501; A.4; 116.2; Fig. 25, Pl. 20). Polisher/applicator. Intact. Dims. 0.092 by 0.008 by 0.02. Weight 22 g. Finger-like pebble of green schist, with traces of polishing on one end. IC.379 (GS 502; A.2; 212.3; Fig. 25, Pl. 20). Polisher/applicator. Intact. Dims. 0.08 by 0.02 by 0.0099. Weight 22 g. Oblong, fine-grained, green schist pebble with traces of burning on one end, plus a pot-lid fracture on one surface. IC.380 (GS 503; A.2; 212.4; Pl. 20). Polisher/applicator. Intact. Dims. 0.079 by 0.026 by 0.0071. Weight 20 g. Flat, elongated, triangular pebble of limestone; no obvious traces of use-wear. IC.381 (GS 504; A.1; 114.1; Fig. 25, Pl. 20). Polisher/ applicator. Intact. Dims. 0.091 by 0.013 by 0.0066. Weight 18 g. Thin, finger-like pebble of limestone with traces of burning on one end.

THE STONE IMPLEMENTS

IC.382 (GS 911; B.3; 601.3). Polisher/applicator. Intact. Dims. 0.0693 by 0.0258 by 0.0162. Weight 50 g. Small, finger-like, limestone cobble with one face smoothed by abrasive use-wear. IC.383 (GS 927; A.2; 208.2; Pl. 20). Scraper. Intact. Dims. 0.0721 by 0.0253 by 0.0164. Weight 38 g. Elongated, triangular pebble of green phyllite modified by

71

polishing into a chisel-like form, with use-wear along its widest end suggestive of a scraping motion. IC.384 (GS 1417; A.RY; 2315N.5; Fig. 25). Polisher. Intact. Dims. 0.0478 by 0.0171 by 0.0109. Weight 20 g. Trapezoidal, limestone pebble smoothed on both margins by abrasive use-wear.

Type 10. Differentially Weathered Cobbles These limestone cobbles and pebbles have a grooved or waisted form due to the differential weathering of their surfaces, the softer part eroded by water. They therefore almost certainly came from the sites’ nearby beaches. They ranged between 0.042–0.0921 m in length, 0.036–0.1124 m in width, 0.0259–0.1007 m thick, and 90–1270 g in weight. Of the four examples recovered, including two from the Artisans’ Quarter and two from Chalinomouri, three have traces of abrasive use-wear on their bases suggesting their use as polishers and grinders. Their distribution did not, however, correlate strongly with other tools employed in an abrasive manner (Table 7). Where a cobble has no obvious trace of utilization (e.g., IC.385; GS 480), Blitzer has suggested that such pieces may have been used as suspension weights.27 Their recovery from a number of other Minoan settlements, including Kommos, Gournia,

and Pseira,28 indicates that despite their natural form, these stones were collected as a recognized blank for tool use. IC.385 (GS 480; B.7W; 1301.3; Pl. 20). Grinder/?suspension weight. Intact. Dims. 0.042 by 0.07 by 0.037. Weight 108 g. Differentially weathered, limestone cobble with no apparent use-wear. IC.386 (GS 724; Ch.SE porch; Fig. 25, Pl. 20). Grinder. Intact. Dims. 0.0788 by 0.0529 by 0.0470. Weight 272 g. Small, differentially weathered cobble of sandy limestone with its flat underside heavily ground by abrasive use-wear. IC.387 (GS 732; Ch.6; 311.2; Pl. 20). Grinder. Intact. Dims. 0.0613 by 0.0618 by 0.0607. Weight 210 g. Small, differentially weathered, limestone cobble with clear abrasive use-wear covering its base. IC.388 (GS 913; A.3-6; 708.1; Fig. 25, Pl. 20). Grinder. Intact. Dims. 0.0921 by 0.1124 by 0.1007. Weight 1190 g. Differentially weathered, limestone cobble with heavy abrasive use-wear on the base.

B. Drilling, Piercing, and Engraving Implements (Types 11–13) This section details those tools related to drilling, piercing, and engraving. Drilling is an abrasive and cutting action, generated by the rotation of the tool, while it receives a downward application of pressure. Minoan drills were manufactured from a variety of raw materials including bronze,29 stone, reeds, and bone.30 The cutting process itself was almost entirely reliant on the use of abrasives, such as sand, pumice, or emery, irrespective of the drill’s composition.31 The Artisans’ Quarter produced a number of drill-guides (Type 11), a capstone (Type 12), and a possible drill-bit, which is further discussed below

(Type 26). From their context it is clear that the use of drills was largely, if not wholly, related to the production of stone vases. Piercing and engraving are related to drilling in that they both involve pressing a tool’s tip into the surface of the material being worked. With piercing, pressure is exerted until the tip of the tool passes through the object’s surface, whereas engraving involves a downward application of pressure in conjunction with linear movement, thus scarring the media being worked.

72

MOCHLOS NEOPALATIAL SETTLEMENT ON THE COAST

Type 11. Drill-guides Drill-guides are cobbles with a straight-edged channel of semi-circular profile worn into their surfaces, the result of the stone’s contact with a turning drill-shaft. Some of these implements also display traces of percussive and abrasive wear, for reasons discussed below. All seven examples from the Artisans’ Quarter and Chalinoumouri are made of amphibolite,32 usually fist sized cobbles, ranging between 0.0578–0.118 m in length, 0.052–0.0954 m in width, 0.032–0.0728 m in thickness, and 248– 1445 g in weight. In terms of their predominant sub-cuboid form, these implements have parallels from a number of Minoan sites, both in east Crete at Palaikastro, Petras, Pseira, Chrysokamino, and Gournia, and further afield, at Knossos, Mallia, and Kommos.33 Regarding the raw material, it is noteworthy that the drill-guides from Chrysokamino, Petras, and Mallia appear to be the same as those from the Artisans’ Quarter. Those from Pseira are recorded as serpentine,34 whereas the Gournia examples are described as limestone.35 IC.389 (GS 272; A.1; 114.1; Fig. 26, Pl. 21). Drillguide. Intact. Dims. 0.072 by 0.0698 by 0.0568. Weight 462 g. Almost spherical amphibolite cobble with a slight gouge removed from one face and a long straight-edged channel of semi-circular profile worn into another (0.019 wide), the latter wear from guiding the drill, the former from a more cursory form of contact. IC.390 (GS 346; Surface; 901.1; Fig. 26, Pl. 21). Drill-guide. Intact. Dims. 0.0871 by 0.0743 by 0.0696. Weight 700 g. Sub-spheroid, amphibolite cobble with a

straight-edged channel of semi-circular profile worn into one face by a rotary abrasive action (0.0259 wide). IC.391 (GS 636; Ch.2; 11/1204; Fig. 26, Pl. 21). Drillguide. Intact. Dims. 0.118 by 0.0954 by 0.0728. Weight 1445 g. Large, flat-based, sub-ovoid, amphibolite cobble with a straight-edged channel of semi-circular profile worn into one face by a rotary abrasive action (0.0273 wide), its base possibly smoothed. IC.392 (GS 668; B.2; 303.1; Fig. 26, Pl. 21). Drillguide. Intact. Dims. 0.097 by 0.052 by 0.032. Weight 248 g. Sub-rectangular, amphibolite cobble with a straightedged channel of semi-circular profile worn into one margin (0.0322 wide). The drill channel is wider than any of the others and has a far smoother interior, suggesting either a slightly different drilling mechanism or subsequent alteration of the worn area. IC.393 (GS 679; B.10; 2103.2; Pl. 21). Drill-guide. Intact. Dims. 0.0578 by 0.0526 by 0.0492. Weight 254 g. Sub-cuboid, amphibolite pebble with straight-edged channel of semi-circular profile worn into one face from top to bottom (0.0217 wide). The piece also displays some percussive damage. IC.394 (GS 723; Ch.3; 1202.1; Fig. 26, Pl. 21). Drillguide. Intact. Dims. 0.0684 by 0.0635 by 0.0621. Weight 462 g. Amphibolite cobble worked by abrasive techniques into a relatively regular sub-spheroid form. On one face a straight-edged channel of semi-circular profile is worn into one face from top to bottom (0.0163 wide). IC.395 (GS 1051; B.2; 303.1; Fig. 26, Pl. 21). Drillguide. Intact. Dims. 0.0669 by 0.0567 by 0.042. Weight 268 g. Irregular/sub-rectangular, amphibolite cobble with a straight-edged channel of semi-circular profile worn into the length of one face by a rotary abrasive action (0.0273 wide). Another face has been smoothed from abrasive use-wear indicating a role as both drillguide and polisher.

Type 12. Drill-caps In the process of drilling, it is necessary to have a downward application of pressure accompanying the implement’s rotary motion. This may be achieved by attaching weights to the top of the drill-shaft (aiding the rotary movement),36 or by pressing down on the drill’s top, which also has the benefit of keeping the tool upright. In the latter instance it is necessary to employ a sleeve, or cap, within which the shaft turns, to stop the user’s hand from being damaged by friction. One possible drill-cap comes from the Artisans’ Quarter, a

small, trapezoidal, sandstone cobble with a shallow hollow worn by rotary abrasive action into one face. It was not, however, recovered from a locus associated with other drilling implements. IC.396 (GS 897; B.NW of Room 7; 1501.6; Fig. 26). ?Drill-cap. Intact. Dims. 0.068 by 0.051 by 0.031. Weight 108 g. Small, trapezoidal cobble of coarsegrained, reddish sandstone with a central depression ground into its upper surface (0.02 wide, 0.005 deep). The opposing face has a natural ovoid depression (0.05 by 0.03).

THE STONE IMPLEMENTS

73

Type 13. Engravers and Piercers These implements are classified together as they both involve the constant exertion of downward pressure and thus share similar physical attributes, namely a sharp and strong point. Two possible piercers were found in the Artisans’ Quarter, both made of amphibolite, along with three engravers of quartz. There is also an obsidian core (IC.460; CS 243) with use-wear on one end concordant with having been employed as an engraver (cataloged below, CS Type 2). As two of the engravers come from Building A, Room 1, it is tempting to relate their use to stone vase manufacture, for marking out and/or producing decorative incisions.37 It is also possible that they were used as small handheld implements for pressure-flaking obsidian blades, though neither was recovered from a room containing a blade-core.38 Parallels for the elongated pieces are published from Gournia.39

IC.397 (GS 802; A.1; 114.1; Fig. 26, Pl. 20). Piercer/engraver/?flaking tool. Intact. Dims. 0.066 by 0.037 by 0.02. Weight 58 g. Amphibolite pebble with naturally pointed tip, but no obvious signs of wear. IC.398 (GS 832; A.1; 113.3; Fig. 26, Pl. 20). Piercer/ engraver/?flaking tool. Intact. Dims. 0.059 by 0.016 by 0.009. Weight 12 g. Finger-like, amphibolite pebble with no obvious traces of use-wear. IC.399 (GS 1281; A.2; 212.1 part 1). Engraver. Intact. Dims. 0.017 by 0.014 by 0.012. Weight 5 g. A small piece of naturally faceted quartzite with traces of crushing on one point. IC.400 (GS 1282; A.1-4 doorway; 115.1). Engraver. Fragments. Dims. 0.033 by 0.02 by 0.01, and 0.019 by 0.012 by 0.004. Weight 4 and 5 g. Two small pieces of quartz, both with possible signs of crushing from use on the tip and margin respectively.

C. Working Surfaces and/or Receptacles (Types 14–20) These tools provided stationary surfaces or hollows on or within which materials were reduced by one of the mobiliary implements described above. The most common forms are saddle querns (Type 14), plus mortars and basins (Types 19 and 20), to

which can be added palettes, anvils, and tables. Whetstones are also discussed here, despite the fact that their much smaller scale suggests that they were hand-held, rather than fixed, implements.

Type 14. Saddle Querns Saddle querns are the lower half of an abrasive tool kit employed in conjunction with a hand-held implement (Types 1–5) to crush and powder materials on its surface. They are rectangular with rounded ends, and they have a curved base and slightly concave longitudinal profile. This profile is accentuated as the central part of the quern is worn, which has the benefit of helping to stop the handstone from slipping off the ends. Four examples come from the Artisans’ Quarter, each made from naturally abrasive raw materials,40 two of which were probably imported. Perhaps a little surprising is the fact that none were found at the Chalinomouri farmstead.

The querns range between 0.37–0.43 m long, 0.16–0.19 m wide, 0.04–0.055 m thick, and 2160– 5950 g in weight. They were shaped by direct percussion from above, with the underside and margins receiving only limited modification by abrasion. Number IC.402 (GS 597) also had a flake removed from one end, an indentation produced to provide a handgrip.41 Saddle querns are a generic Bronze Age tool type, with numerous parallels not only from Crete,42 but also from the mainland,43 Cyclades,44 and Cyprus.45 While it is assumed that these implements were used for processing foodstuffs, the ethnographic and archaeological records provide many instances

74

MOCHLOS NEOPALATIAL SETTLEMENT ON THE COAST

where such tools were employed for a wide variety of other tasks, including the preparation of pigments, crushing temper for pottery, and the sharpening of other tools.46 These are all apposite considerations for the pieces from the Artisans’ Quarter, particularly as three of the rooms where querns were recorded appear to have been dedicated to craft working rather than domestic activities (Rooms A.4, B.2, B.4). Conversely, IC.401 (GS 485) comes from Building B, Room 5, a small storage and cooking space, suggesting that the quern was used for food preparation. The querns themselves provide no visible indication of their function through adherent surface material.47 IC.401 (GS 485; B.5 pit; 507.2; Fig. 27, Pl. 22). Saddle quern. Intact. Dims. 0.370 by 0.160 by 0.055. Weight 5950 g. Oblong slab of andesite48 with sub-parallel margins and the rounded thicker ends producing a slightly concave longitudinal profile. The edges were worked by percussion as was the underside and working

face, the latter being subsequently abraded smooth, both before and as a result of the tool’s use. IC.402 (GS 597; B.4 backfill; Fig. 27, Pl. 22). Saddle quern. Intact. Dims. 0.43 by 0.19 by 0.04. Weight 2160 g. Oblong boulder of non-local schist49 worked by pecking across the upper face and around the margins; the underside is unmodified. It has a longitudinal curvature, rising at the thicker rounded ends, with the working face smoothed during manufacture and subsequent use. A flake has been removed from one end. IC.403 (GS 1270; B.2; 20/2418W; Fig. 27, Pl. 22). Saddle quern. Broken, missing one end. Dims. 0.264 by 0.163 by 0.045. Weight 3590 g. Coarse sandstone slab modified by percussion into an oblong form with a rounded end and a longitudinal curvature, with a thicker end to the central section. The whole upper face is smoothed from abrasive use-wear. IC.404 (GS 1314; A.4; 213.2). Saddle quern. Broken, missing one end. Dims. 0.3 by 0.18. Slab of sandstone worked by pecking and abrasion into a sub-rectangular saddle quern. Remains in situ.

Type 15. Palettes Palettes are stone slabs that have been worked by percussion and abrasion into flat working surfaces of trapezoidal/rectangular shape. They are often provided with a beveled rim and have a central depression worn into it from use. The single palette from the Artisans’ Quarter has close parallels from Neopalatial Gournia, Phaistos, and the LM IB villa of Slavokambos; slightly similar is an example from LC I Akrotiri.50 The apparent rarity of such pieces no doubt reflects these objects’ specialized role, though their restricted distribution may be indicative of social differentiation rather than a functional distinction between “craft” and “domestic” areas.

Indeed, there are a number of palettes from ritual or funerary contexts in the Mesara tholoi, though some may be of an earlier date.51 IC.405 (GS 884; B.10; 2507; Fig. 26, Pl. 22). Palette. Missing one corner, otherwise intact. Dims. 0.3275 by 0.219 by 0.352. Weight 5025 g. Slab of light green calcschist with quartz inclusions, carefully worked into a flat trapezoidal form. Primarily manufactured by abrasion, though this may have obscured traces of earlier stages of reduction. All surfaces were smoothed (though less attention was paid to the base of the object), with an internal lip some 0.0024 wide defining the palette’s edge. The center is worn from use, a depression extending three-quarters of the palette’s length.

Type 16. Whetstones Whetstones are small mobiliary implements, usually made from dense, fine grained, raw materials employed as surfaces for sharpening the working edges of metal or stone tools. Four examples come from the Artisans’ Quarter, two made from the locally available, gray, limestone beach cobbles, the others of non-local origin and of more regular

form. All are sub-triangular/trapezoidal in shape and range between 0.096–0.1314 m long, 0.039– 0.0616 m wide, 0.022–0.04 m thick, and 96–550 g in weight. Whetstones are relatively common in Minoan ground stone tool assemblages, usually present in a modest range of forms and raw materials.52 Number

THE STONE IMPLEMENTS

IC.408 (GS 691) is quite distinctive and has close comparanda with examples from Kommos, where this stone was locally available;53 it is probably a Mesara import.54 On the basis of raw material, IC.406 (GS 646) may have come from the area of Petras (Siteia).55 IC.406 (GS 646; B.8; 1712.1; Fig. 28, Pl. 22). Whetstone. Intact. Dims. 0.096 by 0.057 by 0.04. Weight 550 g. A flattened, sub-triangular cobble of fine, brown-gray quartzite with rounded ends, worked initially by pecking, then smoothed by abrasion. The upper surface is smoother still with a darker sheen from intensive abrasion related to its function. A small, shallow depression has been pecked into one end as an aid to handling.

75

IC.407 (GS 684; B.13; 2505.2; Fig. 28, Pl. 22). Whetstone. Intact. Dims. 0.1176 by 0.0551 by 0.0311. Weight 302 g. Elongated, triangular, limestone cobble with one of the main faces worn smooth by abrasive use-wear. IC.408 (GS 691; B.10; 2011.1; Fig. 28, Pl. 22). Whetstone. Intact. Dims. 0.1314 by 0.0616 by 0.0339. Weight 476 g. Flat, elongated, trapezoidal cobble of reddish gray arenite sandstone/argilaceous arkose, worked by pecking and then ground smooth all over, leaving a flat upper face, slightly curved base, and straight but rounded margins. The upper face was further smoothed by abrasive use-wear. IC.409 (GS 944; A.1; 111.1; Pl. 22). Whetstone. Broken medially. Dims. 0.069 by 0.039 by 0.022. Weight 96 g. Sub-rectangular, limestone cobble smoothed along both faces.

Type 17. Anvils Anvils are flat, static, working surfaces for working materials, most commonly by percussion, though they may also have provided a base for engraving and piercing. Two anvils came from the Artisans’ Quarters, both from Building A. One, a plate anvil from Room A.10 (IC.410; GS 1272), was made from a slab of fine grained, black limestone whose surface wear included both percussive damage and striae that were probably produced by engraving, suggesting that the working of sheet metal may have been one of the anvil’s major uses. The same room produced a small square block of amphibolite (IC.172; S 257), which has been recorded as a stone vase preform, but may have also been used as a work surface. The second example was far more rudimentary, a large, flat, ovoid, limestone, beach cobble found in the potter’s pit (IC.411; GS 1469), with one surface covered with traces of percussive damage.

A parallel for the fine plate anvil comes from the Sanoudakis plot of the Poros-Katsambas LM IA workshop complex, described as “a black, smooth, close-ground stone block.”56 An anvil of LM IB date comes from the West Wing at Zakros, an area of the palace that included the working of sheet bronze.57 IC.410 (GS 1272; A.10; 2310N.2; Pl. 23). Plate anvil. Broken. Dims. 0.484 by 0.387 by 0.026. Weight 9100 g. Fine grained slab of black crystalline limestone, originally rectangular and provided with a polished, flat upper surface (and one margin?). Use-wear is extensive on the surface, with many small pits from percussive action and striae from abrasion or engraving. IC.411 (GS 1469; A.RY; 2315N.5). Anvil. Intact. Dims. 0.023 by 0.018 by 0.049. Weight 3790 g. Flat, ovoid, limestone cobble with percussive use-wear on one surface.

Type 18. Tables Tables are blocks of stone finely worked into a regular form, the upper part and surface raised through the provision of legs. Two examples come from the Artisans’ Quarter, both conforming to Warren’s Type 38 B2,58 though they lack the inscribed line to define the edge/rim. Number IC.412

(GS 1389) from Building A, Room 4, is a relatively small example made from local bluish gray limestone, whereas the second table, IC.413 (GS 1390), from Building B, Room 4, is a much larger and a far finer piece, made from a high quality, gray-black, veined limestone.

76

MOCHLOS NEOPALATIAL SETTLEMENT ON THE COAST

Apart from two examples from the Mochlos Prepalatial Tombs II and V, these pieces tend to be associated with high status, domestic contexts. Five come from Quartier Mu, with further examples from Houses Da and Zb at Mallia, Block N, Palaikastro, the east Cretan villa of Makrygialos, plus Gournia, Phaistos, and Sklavokambos.59 Large fine tables such as IC.412 are, therefore, quite rare, restricted to the more high ranking Minoan settlements, with associations that suggest that whatever their role, be it food preparation or craft activities, they were quite special items. Levi goes so far as to call the example from Phaistos an “offering table.”60 Number IC.413’s context suggests a role in potting activities, coming from a room where clay was stored and prepared prior to being worked next door in Room 8. The nearby recovery of the fine green pestle, IC.328 (GS 685), suggests that the table served as a surface upon which either temper was crushed or the clay was prepared prior to being thrown. The second table, IC.412, comes from the main workroom of Building A, which contained a number of working surfaces as well as the stone table, including benches and stone plaques. A relatively small piece, it bears traces of scoring which

may be related to the working of sheet metals, or from cutting organic materials, such as cloth or hides. IC.412 (GS 1389; A.4; 812.1; Fig. 28, Pl. 23). Stone table. Broken, two-thirds extant. Dims. 0.191 by 0.151 by 0.06. Weight 2560 g. Block of local limestone worked into a rectangular four-legged table (3 remain), with curved corners. The circular feet are slightly set in from the edge and their bases are between 0.0591–0.0635 in diameter and 0.0163 high. The table minus the legs is up to 0.036 thick. Parts of the margin and underside retain traces of manufacture by percussion, but much of this was subsequently obscured by the abrasion that produced the table’s finely smoothed margins and upper surface. The table also displays traces of percussive damage (post-abrasion) and scoring, possibly from engraving. Its center is also worn, providing its surface with a subtle longitudinal curvature. IC.413 (GS 1390; B.4; 2002; Fig. 28, Pl. 23). Stone table. Intact. Dims. 0.37 by 0.275 by 0.067. Block of black limestone with white veins worked into a rectangular, four-legged table with curved corners, a flat top, and four roughly circular feet on the underside. Manufacture initially involved shaping by percussion, traces of which are still visible on the table’s underside and the sides of the feet, largely obscured elsewhere by subsequent fine polishing. The table’s center is slightly depressed due to abrasive use-wear.

Type 19a–b. Mortars Mortars are open vessels within which a variety of materials were reduced by a hand-held, percussive/abrasive implement, often a pestle. Seven examples come from the Artisans’ Quarter and Chalinomouri, among which it is possible to distinguish one specific sub-type, the “tripod mortar” (Type 19b).

Type 19a. Mortars The basic type of mortar is rectangular to circular in form, with a central hollow created by pecking and grinding its interior smoothed further by abrasive use-wear. The Artisans’ Quarter produced six examples, two from Building A and four from Building B, while none were found at Chalinomouri. They range between 0.06–0.32 m long, 0.05–0.3 m wide, 0.04–0.1 m thick, and 140– >10,000 g in weight and were made from local limestone and sandstone. Mortars are common

finds from Minoan domestic and workshop contexts alike, and retain a similar form throughout the Bronze Age.61 IC.414 (GS 560; B.4 surface; 1801.1). ?Mortar. Broken, approximately one-third missing. Dims. 0.067 by 0.041 by 0.018. Weight 72 g. Small sandstone cobble with a pecked central depression, accentuated through abrasive wear (max. width 0.0371). While classified as a mortar, this piece would have a limited function as a container, perhaps serving to either work small quantities of materials, or possibly to sharpen the end of an implement; an indented whetstone? IC.415 (GS 718; B.7W; 1309.2 part 2). Mortar. Intact. Limestone boulder with central depression worn in stone from repeated grinding; reused as building block in north wall. Left in situ. IC.416 (GS 900; A.6; 713.2; Fig. 29). Mortar. Broken, approximately one-third missing. Dims. 0.236 by 0.162 by 0.062. Weight 2650 g. Sandstone slab worked by percussion into a circular form, with a shallow depression

THE STONE IMPLEMENTS

pecked into the center of the upper face, its interior smoothed by abrasive use-wear. IC.417 (GS 1131; A.10; 2310N.2; Fig. 29). Mortar. Intact. Dims. 0.061 by 0.055 by 0.044. Weight 140 g. Small, reddish, fine grained, sandstone block with a conical central depression ground into its upper surface (dims. 0.0337 by 0.0276). As with IC.414 (GS 560), although this piece is classified as a mortar, it would have a limited function as a container, perhaps serving to either work small quantities of materials or to sharpen the end of an implement an indented whetstone? IC.418 (GS 1271; B.11; 20/2406W). Mortar. Intact. Dims. 0.3008 by 0.3008 by 0.1008. Weight >10,000 g. Boulder of reddish gray limestone with an ovoid depression worn into center of upper face (0.1656 by 0.1487). IC.419 (GS 1352; B.10; 24/2511). Mortar. Broken, approximately two-thirds missing. Dims. 0.3275 by 0.2526 by 0.1134. Weight 8650 g. Limestone boulder with central depression worn into upper surface by percussive and abrasive wear (max. width 0.141).

Type 19b. Tripod Mortars Tripod mortars are separated from the previous group of implements because the open vessel is provided with three legs; they are also circular and carefully worked. Made of a volcanic raw material, the single example from Building B of the Artisans’ Quarter is a non-Cretan import and one of the site’s finest pieces of ground stone. Following the study by Buchholz, they have commonly been referred to as “Syro-Palestinian tripod mortars,”62 their recovery in Greece located in the context of LBA Aegean-Near Eastern connections.63 Subsequent work has recognized production centers in Cyprus, the Cyclades, and possibly the mainland, with differences in these mortars’ style, date, and distribution. In the LM IA period, Akrotiri on Thera was a center of dacite mortar production, with tripod-, spouted- and other variants.64 It is only during LB III that Syro-Palestinian or Cypriot imports allegedly enter Greece,65 found predominantly in LH IIIB:2 mainland contexts,66 including the major Mycenaean centers of Mycenae, Midea, the Athenian Acropolis, plus Spata.67 Current opinion, however, sees most of these tripod mortars as of Aegean origin.68 On the basis of its raw material, the Mochlos example is probably Cycladic, possibly Theran, though the

77

Akrotiri mortars are usually made of a dark gray dacite.69 At present only one other tripod mortar has been recovered from Mochlos,70 and fewer than 25 examples have been reported from Crete, concentrated in the north central and eastern parts of the island. The findspots include Gournia (n=6), Knossos (n=3), Mallia (n=3), Nirou Chani, Palaikastro (n=3), Poros-Katsambas (n=2), and Hagia Triada, the majority of Neopalatial date.71 Most are thought to be imports (probably Theran), though a few were made from raw materials local to Crete, including a serpentine mortar from Hagia Triada and one of limestone from Palaikastro.72 The nearest Cretan parallel for the example from the Artisans’ Quarter comes from Poros-Katsambas, albeit made of dark gray “trachyte” and dating to LM IA.73 As with the finely worked stone tables (Type 18), it appears that very few of these mortars were ever in circulation. With their concentration among the more important communities of LM society, they should probably be considered relatively prestigious items. One of the three Mallian examples came from the palace magazines in Quartier XII, where it was used to reduce and mix the commodities stored in the pithoi.74 Similarly, the mortar from the LM IB house in Block N, Palaikastro, came from a small closet in the structure’s main storage area, where “the more valuable household belongings” were kept.75 The context of the Mochlos example in Room 8 suggests that it probably related to ceramic production, used in conjunction with one of the room’s amphibolite or green quartzite polishers76 to crush reddish gray phyllite for temper or pigments employed for painted decoration. IC.420 (GS 620; B.8; 1712.1; Fig. 29, Pl. 24). Tripod mortar. Partially broken around half of the rim but height and diameter are preserved. Ext. dia. 0.20, int. dia. 0.17; h. 0.185; th. from base to int. surface 0.055, th. at rim 0.015. Block of pinkish gray dacite with black crystals (probably hornblende and pyroxene),77 pecked into shape with a limited amount of exterior smoothing and provided with three rudimentary legs. The interior has a finely polished surface from abrasive use-wear.

78

MOCHLOS NEOPALATIAL SETTLEMENT ON THE COAST

Type 20. Basins Also referred to as “gournas,” and sometimes as “mortars,” basins are large open stone vessels for processing and containing a variety of resources, more often than not foodstuffs. The buildings in the Artisans’ Quarter contained seven examples, six still in situ in the corners of the rooms where they were used. All are made from local sandstone boulders that were roughly pecked into circular or rectangular forms and then hollowed by percussion and abrasion. They range between 0.195–0.53 m long, 0.178–0.44 m wide, 0.164–0.5 m thick, and 4400–>10,000 g in weight. They have direct parallels from nearby Gournia and Pseira plus many other LM sites.78 Numbers IC.421, IC.423, and IC.425 (GS 446, 581, 1300) had a channel pecked into their rims, suggesting that they contained liquids. Moreover, IC.421 from Building A, Room 2, was found in association with a quantity of olive pits, a number of which had been crushed. Undoubtedly this basin was used in olive oil production, not necessarily for domestic consumption, but as a lubricant for the drilling and/or polishing of stone vases. IC.421 (GS 446; A.2; 212.3). Basin. Intact. Dims. 0.405 by 0.44 by 0.2. Weight >10,000 g. Sandstone boulder pecked into a roughly circular form with the interior hollowed to a depth of ca. 0.12 and a shallow spout pecked through one rim.

IC.422 (GS 548; B.6; 1304.1). Basin. Broken diagonally in half. Dims. 0.195 by 0.178 by 0.164. Weight 4400 g. Sandstone boulder worked by pecking into a rectangular form with a central depression ca. 0.155 wide and 0.170 deep. The exterior is relatively smooth, but the interior is more so due to the abrasive use-wear undertaken within it. IC.423 (GS 581; B.3; 604.1; Fig. 29). Basin. Intact. Dims. 0.4 by 0.4 by 0.5. Sandstone boulder roughly pecked into circular form with a central depression and a channel pecked through the rim. IC.424 (GS 707; B.9; 1705.2; Fig. 30, Pl. 25). Basin. Intact. Dims. 0.53 by 0.24 by 0.19. Sandstone boulder with its upper surface hollowed out to form a bowl ca. 0.18 by 0.32 and 0.12 deep. IC.425 (GS 1300; A.9; 1912.1; Fig. 29, Pl. 30). Basin. Intact. Dims. dia. ca. 0.36 by 0.2 h. Int. w. ca. 0.20 by h. 0.11. Weight >10,000 g. Sandstone boulder pecked into a roughly circular form with a central hollow and a channel pecked through the rim. Interior of hollow has been smoothed by abrasive and percussive use-wear. IC.426 (GS 1341; A.10; 2310N.3). Basin. Two of the four sides have broken rims. Dims. 0.44 by 0.4 by 0.32. Weight >10,000 g. Sandstone boulder pecked into a square form and hollowed to a depth of 0.13. The internal surface shows significant traces of percussive usewear. IC.426A (GS 271; B.13W; 2502.2). Basin. Intact. Dims. 0.34 by 0.4 by 0.24. Weight > 10,000 g. Sandstone boulder packed into a rectangular form with the interior hollowed to a depth of ca. 12.

D. Weights (Types 21–25) Through their form, scale, and context, the following objects are interpreted as weights. They have been subdivided into intentionally modified

pieces (Types 21–24), and those with natural perforations (Type 25).

Type 21. Balance Weights From the threshold at the entrance to Building B in the Artisans’ Quarter come two flat-based and domed hematite cobbles, intentionally shaped by abrasion. Significantly, the smaller example is almost exactly half the weight of the larger, 552.7 g

versus 1092.2 g. It is, therefore, claimed that they are a pair of balance weights. Whether they formed part of a larger set is uncertain, though a small cuboid hematite weight of 42 g (IC.429; GS 935) came from the doorway between Building A, Rooms 1–4.

THE STONE IMPLEMENTS

Studies of Minoan measuring systems and those of other eastern Mediterranean cultures have elucidated a number of metrical standards and the means by which they were represented.79 In Crete and the Cyclades during the Neopalatial period, weights were primarily in the form of lead discs,80 of which the Artisans’ Quarter produced one example and Chalinomouri another.81 Stone weights are also known, including discs that essentially mimic the lead versions, plus a range of cylinders and cubes.82 Michailidou has also suggested that some of Akrotiri’s more regular stone tools were re-used as weights.83 If the pair of hematite cobbles from the Artisans’ Quarter were employed as balance weights, it should be noted that neither their form nor material are paralleled in Petruso or Michailidou’s monographs on Aegean metrology.84 These pieces certainly do not fit the proposed Minoan metrological system, for neither mass (552.7 g and 1092.2 g) is closely divisible by either of the claimed units, 60 g85 or 65.5 g,86 because they produce values of 9.21 or 8.43 and 18.2 or 16.67, respectively. Number IC.429 (GS 935), the smaller hematite cube of 42 g does, however, seem to conform to two-thirds of the Aegean standard, with a number of lead discs approximating this weight from Akrotiri, Hagia Eirene, Knossos, Tylissos, and Mochlos.87 It could also be a 5-unit denomination based on a standard where the unit mass was 8.4 g; a set of sphendonoid weights (possibly two) from the Uluburun shipwreck corresponded to a norm of 8.4 g.88 This standard is also attested at Ugarit and may relate ultimately to Mesopotamian unit standard mass of 8.2 g.89 It seems that if the larger cobbles are to be considered weights, they cannot, at present, be seen as pertaining to the Minoan metrology as defined by Petruso et al., suggesting that more than one metrical system was employed at Mochlos. The raw materials may be of some relevance here because hematite was the main stone used for balance weights in the ancient Near East.90 It was employed primarily in the form of a sphendonoid (or “slingbullet”), whose use spanned the fourth millennium to the eighth century B.C., possibly originating in Syria but ultimately finding favor in Egypt, Cyprus, and Anatolia.91 The Aegean has also produced a few examples, but from LH/LM III contexts92 when Cretan and Mainland mensuration may have

79

operated within a far more international regime than during the Neopalatial period. These weights were often quite small, as the metrical system was based on a unit of ca. 9.5 g, the Egyptian qedet.93 Thus, the interpretation of the two domed hematite cobbles from late LM IB Mochlos remains problematic. It is tempting to see them as standards drawing on some form of Near Eastern or Anatolian influence, though their mass is also unusual in these contexts.94 Arguably, these pieces represent an appropriation of a “foreign” mode of expressing a unit of weight (hematite), but were employed to express a different system. As such, these weights may be located within the contact that existed between Crete and Anatolia/the Near East during the Neopalatial period. Within this interpretation it is important to stress the raw material’s rarity, as fewer than ten pieces of hematite are currently known from the new Mochlos excavations (10 kg. Rhomboid boulder of sandy reddish gray limestone, pecked flat on margins and upper surface. Dims. of depression 0.131 by 0.047. Depression worn into center by rotary abrasive motion with concentric striations clearly visible.

Type 28. Miscellaneous IC.453 (GS 304; A.6; 707.2; Fig. 31). Suspension weight? Intact. Dims. 0.043 by 0.026 by 0.02. Weight 50 g. Unmodified sandstone pebble with the form of an uneven figure of eight. Conceivably used as a small weight. IC.454 (GS 1178; Ch.3; 1201.1; Fig. 31). Schist strip. Broken at both ends. Dims. 0.059 by 1.17 by 0.37. Weight 2 g. Thin, planar strip of dark gray schist with trapezoidal cross-section. No obvious traces of utilization, but similar pieces from Mallia are claimed to have been used as polishers.111 A parallel is known from an LM IB context in the Mochlos settlement.112

IC.455 (GS 1279; A.2; 212.3 part 4; Fig. 31, Pl. 26). Pumice tool. Intact. Dims. 0.049 by 0.032 by 0.027. Weight ca. 10 g. Small piece of pumice carefully worked into a sub-rectangular flat form with a circular protrusion at one end. A small conical depression has been worn into both faces. The end of the piece has been chamfered through burnishing though it is impossible to tell whether this was a result of use, or part of its production. The function of this piece is unknown; conceivably it could be a float or a sharpener of some form,113 but in neither instance would one expect such a high level of shaping as is witnessed on this piece.

84

MOCHLOS NEOPALATIAL SETTLEMENT ON THE COAST

Discussion The coastal excavations produced 154 ground stone implements, 139 from the Artisans’ Quarter and 15 from Chalinomouri. The two assemblages are quite different, not only in size but also with regard to the forms, raw materials, and activities represented (Tables 10 and 11). Most striking is the quantity of finely worked and non-local pieces in the Artisans’ Quarter compared not only to the Chalinomouri assemblage, but also to most contemporary

deposits in the main settlement. Undoubtedly this is a reflection of the activities undertaken in the two structures, involving the consumption of a far wider range of technologies and materials than commonly seen in more “domestic” spaces. Arguably, however, it also indicates the different socio-political context occupied by those who wielded their crafts within the Artisans’ Quarter, a point of discussion that will be returned to below.

The Artisans’ Quarter Assemblage The site’s 139 ground stone tools were distributed fairly evenly between the two structures, with 54 from Building A, 66 in Building B, and 19 from the exterior spaces. The distribution of tool types (and by extension activities) and raw materials is not so even (Tables 7 and 8). For example, six of the seven polisher/applicators (Type 9) and all of the engravers/piercers (Type 13) come from Building A, while three of the four querns (Type 14) and three of the four whetstones (Type 16) come from Building B. Perhaps of greater significance is the fact that Building B generated the majority of “exotica” and fine quality implements, including the tripod mortar (IC.420; GS 620), the green pestle (IC.328; GS 685), the large limestone table (IC.413; GS 1390), the two hematite (Anatolian?) balance weights (IC.427, IC.428; GS 875, 876), the Mesara whetstone (IC.408; GS 691), the green schist palette (IC.405; GS 884), and the andesite saddle-quern (IC.401; GS 485). The Artisans’ Quarter assemblage includes the full domestic repertoire of querns, handstones, hammerstones, grinders, mortars, and basins; however, its importance lies in the quantity of non-local and specialized implements. With regard to the high number of tools sensu stricto, a variety of explanations may be forwarded. From a functional perspective, it could be argued that the repetitiveness of the craft activities resulted in the artisans according extra time and effort in the procurement, manufacture, and management of their tool kits. Thus, the most appropriate raw materials would be acquired for the chosen task, from afar if necessary, and the

implement carefully shaped to the individual’s hand. As such, the craftsperson’s tool kit stands in stark contrast to the majority of the implements from the Mochlos settlement, which were commonly the products of a much more ad hoc technology. Functional concerns (the tool’s density, abrasiveness, ability to withstand impact damage, and durability) cannot, however, be seen as the sole driving force behind the material and technical choices represented in the assemblage. For example, food preparation is undertaken on a daily basis, yet the tools employed in this activity embodied minimal effort with reference to raw material procurement and manufacture. Instead, one must consider the implements and associated activities within a broader context, namely the position of the craftworkers in the Artisans’ Quarter within the community and Minoan society in general. These issues are largely dealt with elsewhere,114 but it is worth reiterating the nature of production located within the Artisans’ Quarter. Though many of the goods manufactured at the site were undoubtedly for consumption at Mochlos, arguably the primary significance of the heightened level of production in the Artisans’ Quarter lay in its generation of material culture to be diverted into the political economy. The ability to control the manufacture and consumption of goods such as bronze bowls, and certain types of stone vases, textiles, and pottery, would have represented a potent form of social currency. The “expenditure” of such products would have enabled certain members of the Mochlos community to initiate, maintain, and renegotiate

THE STONE IMPLEMENTS

a series of social relations, be they in the form of kinship, patron/client, peer polity interaction, tribute payer, or dedicant.115 In such instances, the meaning attributed craft, the technical knowledge, the craftsperson, and by extension, the implements they employed would have been integrally located within a larger set of social dynamics and political mores. The tool kit of the metalworker, stonecutter, weaver, and potter must therefore be seen as not only fulfilling a functional role (to which they were eminently suited), but also ultimately embodying a whole series of events, identities, and social relations.116 Ultimately, one can point to the cross-cultural phenomenon of a close connection between elites and craft production. Power is often seen to be partly constructed through an individual or corporate group’s privileged enactment of transformative processes, involving the consumption of specialized knowledge, exotic raw materials, or other politically significant resources. This could take the form of an elite’s direct involvement in production or through his/her pre-eminent influence over a set of craftspeople.117 By employing this interpretative framework, one can explain the concentration of “exotica” within the ground stone assemblage in the Artisans’ Quarter. Undoubtedly many of the non-local stones were wholly appropriate with regard to the types of tools and tasks they were chosen to form and fulfil, but the choices involved in raw material selection are believed, in certain instances, to transcend purely functional considerations. Arguably, a craftsperson’s ability to access “foreign” and/or restricted raw materials, implements, and techniques would have helped to both create and express social distinction. The consumption of exotic resources would have signified the craftworkers’ (or their patrons’) first-hand experience of distant lands, or their participation in exclusive long distance exchange networks, either of which would have materially and metaphysically benefited the individual.118 Thus, one might establish a distinction (within the assemblage) between the more ad hoc tools and the “special purpose implements,” the former represented by the rudimentary limestone percussive and abrasive tools, the hammerstones, grinders, and handstones. Their widespread distribution throughout Mochlos hints at their non-specific functions and by extension a low potential for

85

encoding social meaning. In contrast, the Artisans’ Quarter generated a select group of well made tools that employed non-local raw materials and were used in a far more restricted manner, whose ownership and consumption may have articulated specific social statements. In interpreting the accumulation and consumption of “exotica” in the craft activities of the Artisans’ Quarter, it may be beneficial to consider further concepts of raw material “appropriateness.” The first pertains to the fact that certain tool forms in the Artisans’ Quarter employed a highly restricted range of raw materials. One notable example of this is the group of eight drill-guides (Type 11),119 all of which were made of amphibolite. Once more, one acknowledges the fact that the raw material was a highly suitable one, as it was far harder (5–6 on the Moh Scale) than the serpentinite being worked in the manufacture of stone vases. However, the fact that drill-guides of similar form and apparently the same stone have been recovered from other sites in Crete (Chrysokamino, Palaikastro, Petras, Pseira, Mallia, and Knossos) may indicate that something above and beyond raw material density played a role in the craftworker’s technical choices. This correlation between a particular tool type and stone might imply the existence of peripatetic craftspeople, sharing a common origin and moving around Crete with their home made tool kits. Alternatively, the distribution of amphibolite implements may reflect the existence of discrete manufacturing traditions, i.e. recurring combinations of technical choices, modes, and mechanisms. One can refer to realms of shared knowledge, incorporating not only technical expertise, but also notions of “how things are done” with regard to the kind of tools the craftspeople wielded. Defining these traditions’ spatial and temporal boundaries should provide an important avenue of research into reconstructing community and regional interaction, and by extension an insight into the creation and expression of political identity in the Minoan world. Finally, the craftsperson’s “concept of appropriateness” may have also included the raw material’s more esoteric qualities, including color, texture, origin, and its perceived metaphysical properties. Archaeologists invariably classify lithic resources with reference to their mechanical properties (density, sharpness, conchoidal fracture habit, etc.), but

86

MOCHLOS NEOPALATIAL SETTLEMENT ON THE COAST

ethnographic and historical sources provide clear evidence that such an approach to lithic technology is reductionist. From hunter-gatherer to state

societies, those who exploited these resources seldom perceived them as “natural” or mundane phenomena.120

Raw Materials In discussing the raw materials represented in the assemblages from the Artisans’ Quarter and Chalinomouri, it has to be noted that no petrographic analysis has been undertaken, with all classification based on visual examination alone. Based on the lithic resources’ alleged origin in relationship to Mochlos, five categories have been defined with reasonable certainty (six including “unknown”): 1. Resources from the immediate vicinity 2. Resources from the coastal plain 3. Resources from east Crete 4. Resources from Crete 5. Off-island resources 6. Resources of currently unknown origins.

1. Resources from the Immediate Vicinity Despite the significant quantity of “exotica” in the Artisans’ Quarter, it remains that the two assemblages were comprised predominantly of implements made from immediately available raw materials (Tables 8 and 10). In the Artisans’ Quarter this includes limestone, sandstone, schist, phyllite, and quartz, all of which can be procured from the beach sections no farther than 100 m from the two structures. At Chalinomouri a broadly similar range of resources are available, along with deposits of serpentinite and a little amphibolite. 1A. LIMESTONE Limestone beach cobbles make up the primary raw material exploited at Mochlos for ground stone tools, constituting some 48.9% and 46.7% of the Artisans’ Quarter and Chalinomouri assemblages respectively (Table 8). Limestone is represented in 13 of the 27 types of ground stone tools defined at the beginning of this chapter (Table 12), being the sole lithic resource employed in seven classes (Types 1, 2, 4, 10, 17, 18, 22). This dense, fine grained stone ranges in color from gray to blue-gray (unless otherwise stated in the catalog), and it is approximately 5 on the Moh Scale. It is currently unknown whether the finer black crystalline limestone

slab used to manufacture the anvil from Room A.10 (IC.410; GS 1272; Type 17) came from a separate source or represents a finer variant of the local material. Ground stone tool classes employing this raw material: Type 1 (15/15), Type 2 (11/11), Type 4 (9/9), Type 5 (6/12), Type 8 (2/13), Type 9 (4/7), Type 10 (4/4), Type 16 (2/4), Type 17 (2/2), Type 18 (2/2), Type 19a (3/6), Type 22 (5/5), Type 25 (8/9), Type 27 (2/6). 1B. SANDSTONE A coarse to relatively fine grained yellow to light brown sandstone (4–5 on the Moh Scale) was employed for manufacturing large abrasive implements, specifically mortars and basins; the coarser variant is also referred to as “beachstone.” Sandstone was the third most common raw material exploited for the production of ground stone tools in the Artisans’ Quarter, forming 12.2% of the assemblage, and it was represented in eight of the 28 classes (Table 12). Once more, the material came from the immediate locality, forming as it does a large part of the beach outcrops near the Artisans’ Quarters. The finer grained sandstone probably came from the nearby quarry that was exploited for the production of ashlar masonry.121 Ground stone tool classes employing this raw material: Type 5 (2/12), Type 12 (1/1), Type 14 (2/4), Type 19a (3/6), Type 20 (6/6), Type 23 (1/1), Type 27 (2/6), Type 28 (1/3). 1C. SCHIST AND PHYLLITE These are metamorphic rocks with a plate-like structure, the finer grained versions referred to as phyllite. The colors include gray, reddish gray, and green, and the stone ranges between 3–4 on the Moh Scale. Although this material is readily available, it was employed rarely for making ground stone tools, presumably due to its friable nature. Instead, reddish gray phyllite enjoyed an intensive exploitation as temper in local pottery production.122 Two of the six pivot-stones from the coastal excavations were, however, made of schist (IC.450, IC.451; GS 1421, 1422). The fine light green calc-schist palette from Room B.10 (IC.405; GS 884) is probably exotic because no other tools from these excavations were made from this material. Ground stone tool classes employing this raw material: Type 9 (3/7), Type 24 (1/1), Type 27 (2/6), Type 28 (1/3). 1D. QUARTZ Quartz is a silica based mineral, 7 on the Moh Scale, which occurs naturally in the area of the Artisans’

THE STONE IMPLEMENTS

Quarter where small pieces are often present as “background noise” in the soil. Only two pieces were cataloged at the site, both from Building A, unmodified apart from traces of use-wear interpreted as pertaining to their use as engravers (IC.400; GS 1282). Ground stone tool classes employing this raw material: Type 13 (2/5).

2. Resources from the Coastal Plain 2A. AMPHIBOLITE Amphibolite is a dense metamorphic rock with a sparkly appearance in sunlight due to the amphiboles. In color the Mochlos material is usually a dark green and is 5–6 on the Moh Scale.123 It was the second most common raw material, constituting 17.3% and 26.7% of the assemblages from the Artisans’ Quarter and Chalinomouri (Table 8), respectively. This relative quantity is a little surprising given that this resource was not immediately available to the inhabitants of the Artisans’ Quarters, the closest sources being situated at Mavro Selli ca. 2 km to the east of Mochlos,124 the village of Chamezi a little farther east,125 or Istron ca. 20 km to the west.126 This stone was mainly exploited to produce tools for manufacturing stone vessels, with all the drill-guides and sub-cuboid “grinders” fashioned from amphibolite (Types 11, 6b). A few abrasive implements were also made from this raw material, in particular the sub-cuboid “polishers” (Type 6a), which may also have been closely linked to stone vase production. Ground stone tool classes employing this raw material: Type 5 (2/12), Type 6a (5/9), Type 6b (2/2), Type 8 (7/15), Type 11 (7/7), Type 13 (2/4), Type 26 (1/1). 2B. SERPENTINITE. Serpentinite is a light green, relatively fine grained, metamorphic rock, 3–4 on the Moh Scale. Only one serpentinite implement comes from the Artisans’ Quarter, an irregular polisher (IC.367; GS 907; Type 8). Instead, this stone was the main raw material used for stone vase manufacture at the site, probably coming from the nearby sources at Mavro Seli and Chalinomouri.127 Ground stone tool classes employing this raw material: Type 8 (1/15).

3. Resources from East Crete 3A. GRAY QUARTZITE This is a fine to medium grained metamorphic rock, light to dark gray in color, and 7 on the Moh Scale. Two objects made of this stone were found in the Artisans’ Quarter, a whetstone and a sub-cuboid polisher. With regard to raw material and form, these pieces find numerous parallels from MM Hagia Photia and Neopalatial Petras,128 suggesting that they were probably imported from the Siteia region. Ground stone tool classes employing this raw material: Type 6a (1/9); Type 16 (1/4).

87

3B. GREEN QUARTZITE This is a fine to medium grained metamorphic rock, light to medium green in color, and 7 on the Moh Scale. Four objects made of this stone were found in the Artisans’ Quarter, all polishers, three of the sub-cuboid type and one of the trapezoidal examples. As with the browngray quartzite, this raw material and the tools fashioned from it are well known at MM Hagia Photia and Neopalatial Petras,129 suggesting that they probably came from the Siteia area. Ground stone tool classes employing this raw material: Type 6a (3/9), Type 7 (1/2), Type 8 (1/15).

4. Resources from Crete 4A. ARENITE SANDSTONE/ARGILACEOUS ARKOSE This is a relatively fine grained sedimentary resource of reddish gray color, 5 on the Moh Scale, used to fashion a grinder from Room A.4 (IC.345; GS 905) and a whetstone from Room B.10 (IC.408; GS 691). The latter has direct typological parallels from LM Kommos, and that site’s local source of the raw material, it seems that the whetstone was probably procured ready-made from the western part of the Mesara.130 Ground stone tool classes employing this raw material: Type 5 (1/12), Type 16 (1/4). 4B. “NON-LOCAL” SCHIST A variety of schist, which is a relatively coarse, gray variant of the metamorphic rock, is apparently not derived from any of the other schist sources in the Mochlos vicinity.131 It may be significant that the only tool made of this material was a saddle quern, given the known widespread movement of these implements across the Aegean during the Bronze Age.132 Schist is common in Crete, so it need not necessarily be an offisland import. Ground stone tool classes employing this raw material: Type 14 (1/4). 4C. CALC-SCHIST Calc-schist is a relatively fine, light green, metamorphic rock with quartz inclusions, represented by only a single implement from the coastal excavations, a fine rectangular palette (IC.405; GS 884). The piece is exotic to Mochlos, but from the prevalence of soft stones such as calc-schists, chlorite-schists, steatite, and serpentine in Crete,133 it seems unnecessary to look beyond the island for this raw material’s origin. Ground stone tool classes employing this raw material: Type 15 (1/1).

5. Off-island Resources 5A. ANDESITE Andesite is a semi-coarse volcanic material of brown to gray color, high in feldspars (6 on the Moh Scale), and it is represented by a single object from the Artisans’

88

MOCHLOS NEOPALATIAL SETTLEMENT ON THE COAST

Quarter, IC.401 (GS 485), a saddle quern from the pit in Room B.5. Although deposits of andesite are known to the east of the Mochlos Bay (4 km northwest of Exo Mouliana),134 it remains possible that this object is nonCretan. Major sources of andesite are located in the Hellenic Arc, with Aigina exploited for the manufacture of querns from the later Neolithic onward, the products being exchanged over quite large distances.135 Ground stone tool classes employing this raw material: Type 14 (1/4). 5B. DACITE Dacite is a pink to gray volcanic rock with black hornblende crystals (5–6 on the Moh Scale), providing a hard, abrasive, natural surface. The Artisans’ Quarter produced only one object made from this material, a tripod mortar from Room B.8 (IC.420; GS 620; Type 19b). Pinkish dacite is recorded from Thera, but the mortars made at LC I Akrotiri were usually of the dark gray variety.136 Ground stone tool classes employing this raw material: Type 19b (1/1). 5C. EMERY Emery is an extremely hard, dense, and abrasive mineral (9 on the Moh Scale), which in the case of the single piece from the coastal excavations (a large spheroid cobble from Chalinomouri), is dark gray in color, slightly ferrous, consisting of corundum crystals and magnetite. The Cyclades are a major source of emery, in particular the Moutsouna district of northeast Naxos;137 it is also known from Sikinos, Imbros, and further afield in Egypt, Ethiopia, and India.138 The piece from Chalinomouri (IC.344; GS 763; Type 5) had been abraded in certain areas, either from its use as an abrasive implement or in the process of gaining crystals for an abrasive powder. Emery’s use in LBA Crete is commonly associated with workshop activity and stone vase manufacture in particular.139 It is recorded from Kommos, Pseira, and Knossos in the form of blocks, rods, splinters, or lumps, albeit none as large as the Chalinomouri piece.140 Interestingly, no emery was attested directly in the Artisan’s Quarter, though its presence may perhaps be inferred by the recovery of the amphibolite bore-core (IC.446; GS 526; Type 26), whose cutting would have required an abrasive of 6+ on the Moh Scale. Emery is extremely rare at Mochlos; a smaller cobble weighing 128 g is recorded from an LM IB floor deposit in House C.2 on the island.141 Ground stone tool classes employing this raw material: GS.5 (1/12).

5D. PUMICE The Artisans’ Quarter produced a considerable quantity of small, unmodified pebbles of light gray pumice, especially from Room A.2.142 At 5.5 on the Moh Scale, pumice is a good abrasive when powdered. This is considered to be the resource’s main use at the site. There are three instances where larger pieces had been worked to produce specific artifacts: a polisher for bronze implements, a lamp, and a tool of unknown function (IC.364, IC.177, IC.455; GS 676, S 256, GS 1279). The use of pumice in Crete is documented from the later Neolithic onward, with Thera, Melos, and Nissyros all potential sources of the raw material.143 Samples from a contemporary deposit in the main settlement at Mochlos have been analyzed and shown to belong to the Minoan eruption of the volcano on Thera.144 As such, the pumice would have been collected from where it had fallen or washed up on the beaches, rather than directly procured from the Cyclades. Ground stone tool classes employing this raw material: Type 8 (2/15), Type 28 (1/3).

6. Resources of Currently Unknown Derivation 6A. HEMATITE Hematite is a dense (6 on Moh Scale, 5.2 specific gravity), heavy, fine grained rock, black in color and magnetic due to varying degrees of iron content. As only three hematite implements were recovered from the site (IC.427, IC.428, IC.429; GS 875, 876, 935), it suggests that they are non-local. Hematite, albeit of relatively poor quality, is recorded on Crete,145 but from the rarity and form of those hematite objects from Minoan contexts, it seems that it was probably imported, possibly from Anatolia.146 Ground stone tool classes employing this raw material: Type 21 (3/3). 6B. DUNITE? This is a dense, heavy, pale green, fine grained material with green quartzite inclusions and a limited conchoidal fracture habit.147 Only one tool had been fashioned from this stone, an extremely fine pestle (IC.328; Fig. 24, Pl. 18). The piece is unique within the coastal assemblages, both in terms of its raw material and form. The piece is almost certainly imported, but its origin is currently unknown. Ground stone tool classes employing this raw material: Type 3 (1/1).

Tool Kits and Tool Function: a Contextual Analysis The quality of preservation and recording in the Artisans’ Quarter and at Chalinomouri provides us with a detailed insight to stone tool use and discard.

In plotting the distribution of the ground stone within the coastal structures, distinct patterns emerge in the archaeological record. Perhaps unsurprisingly,

THE STONE IMPLEMENTS

there is a strong correlation between the hand-held percussive and abrasive tools with querns, mortars, and basins. In turn, the implements associated with drilling and stone vase manufacture were found together. Interestingly, there is a mutual exclusivity between these tools and the aforementioned percussive/abrasive implements, suggesting a clear spatial definition in the organization of craft activities. With regard to discerning specific areas of craft activity through the recognition of ground stone tool kits, one can indicate Room B.8 as a locus of pottery production and Rooms A.1 and B.2 as loci of stone vase manufacture. The first kit in B.8 was comprised of a tripod mortar and four polishers, as well as two handstones and a whetstone (Pl. 24). The second in A.1 contained a drill-guide, two “rotary-grinders,” abrasives, polishers, engravers, and what seems to be an amphibolite drill-bit (Pl. 26 top). The third tool kit in B.2 contained a similar, albeit slightly smaller, range of implements and both Rooms A.1 and B.2 produced a number of complete and fragmentary stone vessels. When studied on their own the various types of stone weights show no particular clustering, but when considered beside terracotta loomweights one may posit rooms such as Room A.4 as foci of weaving. The grouping of percussive/abrasive tools with working surfaces and containers has been mentioned above. In the case of Room B.5, a small storage and cooking space, the handstones, hammerstone, grinder, and saddle quern were no doubt used together for food preparation. The group of handheld implements and large sandstone basin from nearby Room 3 were probably employed in much the same role. In three instances a similar combination of ground stone tools were recovered from contexts which generated little faunal or other evidence for domestic activities, but were instead quite clearly craft working spaces (Rooms A.4, B.2, B.4). Contextually one can argue that in these cases the tool kits related to a range of tasks including metal working in Room A.4 (annealing, for example) and

89

the preparation of clay and temper for pottery manufacture in Room B.4West. To recover such tool groups is extremely fortunate, in no small measure due to how the site’s life ended and its subsequent good preservation. In turn, many implements were found in isolation, whereby functional interpretations had to be based on use-wear, form, and raw material. It may be unwise to rely on either set of interpretations as a final statement on the use of the tool and the space from which it was recovered. Indeed, it is important to appreciate that many stone implements were multi-functional, taken from task to task and room to room, their recovery merely reflecting where they were discarded, not necessarily where they spent their entire working lives. In turn, a degree of fluidity probably existed with regard to how the artisans used the various rooms within the two buildings. Taking into consideration context, plus form and raw material, it is tempting to make a distinction between the more ad hoc technologies and the “special purpose implements” within the Artisans’ Quarter’s ground stone assemblage. The former “class” is represented by the somewhat rudimentary limestone percussive and abrasive tools, the hammerstones, grinders, and handstones. Their long history of use and widespread distribution throughout the Artisans’ Quarter and the settlement suggests that they had non-specific uses and low potential for encoding social meaning and value. In contrast, there are a select group of well made tools, often employing non-local raw materials that may have been wielded in a far more restricted manner, their manufacture and perception occupying a quite different social niche to the aforementioned tools. Finally, regarding the tools’ manufacture, barring the obvious imports, most of the ground stone implements were probably shaped locally, most likely by those intending to use them such as the stone workers, metalsmiths, potters, and weavers.

Tool Types and Technology through Time The most generic, or basic, tool types tend to have a long history of manufacture and are chronologically undiagnostic. In particular one thinks of

those implements made from freely available local resources (in this instance limestone beach cobbles) that were used without modification to strike,

90

MOCHLOS NEOPALATIAL SETTLEMENT ON THE COAST

pound, rub, grind, engrave, or pierce (Types 1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 9, 10, 13). In the course of studying the ground stone tool assemblages from the Mochlos settlement, it may be possible to offer some refinements, but for the most part it appears that only a few ground stone tool types are reliable indicators of a more precise date other than “Bronze Age” or “prehistoric.” Even when turning to some of the more carefully worked pieces, we are confronted by the same problem. For instance, the saddle quern is recorded in the Aegean throughout the Bronze Age with little apparent difference in scale or form.148 Similarly, the distinctive biconically perforated weight (Type 22) was employed throughout the third and second millennia in Crete, from as early as EM IIA at Myrtos Phournou Koriphi.149 It remains that the assemblages from the Artisans’ Quarter and Chalinomouri contain very few

special objects that are chronologically diagnostic. The type of drill-guide found at both locations (Type 11) is known from both Protopalatial and Neopalatial contexts, the former represented by examples from Quartier Mu, a center of stone vase manufacture in MM II.150 The finely worked limestone tables (Type 18) seem to be mainly Neopalatial, as do the plate anvils (Type 17). Similarly, the tripod mortar (Type 19b) is not only restricted numerically but also temporally in Crete, almost all coming from LM I horizons,151 in contrast to the mainland where it tends to be an LH III phenomenon. Furthermore, as Akrotiri may have been a primary center of production, many of the tripod mortars in Minoan contexts would have been produced in LM IA at the latest. Their recovery in LM IB contexts at Mochlos and Palaikastro152 may indicate their preservation and continued use over a number of generations.

The Chalinomouri Assemblage The farmstead at Chalinomouri produced 15 ground stone tools, one of which could be assigned to the LM III reoccupation (IC.442; GS 1179). The assemblage relates to daily domestic activities such as food preparation, with limited evidence for craft activities. Compared to the assemblage from the Artisans’ Quarter, there are far fewer carefully worked implements and a greater reliance on local resources, particularly limestone, which comprises over half of the tools (Tables 7, 8, and 13). The three pieces of amphibolite may have come from nearby Mavro Seli, but IC.344 (GS 763), a spheroid cobble of emery, was imported from Naxos, if not farther afield. The implements were quite evenly distributed within the farmstead, perhaps reflecting a non-specialized use of space. Rooms 1 and 4 produced no stone tools, and no room produced more than three examples. All tool types recorded at the farmstead are also known from the Artisans’ Quarter, with seven hammerstones and grinders, two perforated weights (one natural), and two polishing tools, including an

amphibolite “sub-cuboid” polisher. As a farmstead, it is surprising that Chalinomouri contained no querns, mortars, or basins. Finally, the site also produced two drill-guides (Fig. 26, Pl. 21). Their recovery is interesting given that such tools are commonly associated with stone vase manufacture, which is usually perceived as a relatively high status activity. However, these “isolated farmhouse installations”153 are so poorly documented that it is currently impossible to gauge whether these Chalinomouri finds should be considered exceptional.154 With the farmstead located atop an outcrop of serpentinite there may have been a limited amount of vase manufacture here, but one has to note that neither a single vase fragment nor a preform was found at the site. In truth, the significance of the Chalinomouri drill-guides is not entirely clear. The exploitation of local serpentinite has yet to be established, and with the recovery of drillguides at the LM I/III farmstead at nearby Chrysokamino,155 it suggests that we have yet to fully appreciate the complexity of stone vase production and consumption within later Minoan society.

THE STONE IMPLEMENTS

91

The Chipped Stone The past twenty-five years have seen numerous studies discussing the consumption of obsidian in the Neolithic and EBA Aegean,156 but our knowledge of its use in the Middle and Late Bronze Age remains poor. Therefore, although the assemblages from the Artisans’ Quarter and Chalinomouri are

limited in terms of quantity (n=63 and n=4)157 and the range of knapping activities represented, their analysis can make an important contribution to our understanding of chipped stone technology in LM Crete.

The Nature of the Assemblages and the Method of Analysis The chipped stone assemblages from the Artisans’ Quarter and Chalinomouri are comprised entirely of obsidian. Sixty-six of the 67 pieces are pearl gray to black in color, occasionally banded and/or translucent and almost certainly from Melos.158 Number IC.493 (CS 774), a primary series blade from Room B.10, is translucent with light gray stripes. Although a Melian origin for this piece cannot be ruled out, it may be Anatolian. While Neopalatial Mochlos has produced some white spotted (vesicular) obsidian from the Dodecanesian source of Giali,159 no such material was recognized from the structures on the coast. From the recovery of prismatic blade-cores along with a number of the products themselves, it is apparent that most, if not all, of the Mochlos assemblage relates to the manufacture of pressure-flaked blades. It is, thus, technologically and typologically typical of what one finds at a Minoan settlement160 and southern Aegean Bronze Age sites in general.161 At the same time, new work is now recognizing subtle differences within this technological mode162 (pressure-flaking) during the third and second

millennia B.C., with some of the variant technological mechanisms having quite specific temporal, spatial, and cultural contexts.163 Therefore, the analysis and description of the coastal assemblages is not based on an existing classificatory framework. Instead, it was first necessary to reconstruct the knapping sequence(s) represented through studying the material at first hand, with reference to existing publications,164 personal observations on related assemblages, and experimental analogy (Fig. 33). It is only at the point of recognizing those technological processes and events responsible for the material’s production that a descriptive framework can be created to present the data and to illustrate those stages of reduction represented in the assemblage. Thus, it is a subsequent part of this report, the technological reconstruction, which is largely responsible for how the following presentation of the data is organized. The relationship between the analysis and classification of the chipped stone assemblage can, as noted previously, be seen as essentially dialectical.

The Presentation of the Material Beyond the methodology outlined above, the descriptive and graphic presentation of the chipped stone owes much to Perlès’ pioneering work on Greek Neolithic blade industries.165 Each piece of obsidian has been assigned exclusively to one of eight categories (CS Types 1–8), which represent

component parts of the various stages of raw material reduction from nodule to end product (Table 11). These are: raw nodules (Type 1); cores (Type 2); primary, secondary, and tertiary flakes (Types 3–5); preparation pieces (Type 6); blade blanks (Type 7); and rejuvenation pieces (Type 8). Within

92

MOCHLOS NEOPALATIAL SETTLEMENT ON THE COAST

this scheme, any typological tool (tool sensu stricto) or modified piece (tool sensu lato) is initially recorded according to its original blank form. These

pieces do, however, receive their own (secondary) discussion in a later section of the report (Types 9–13).

Type 1. Raw Nodules A raw nodule is a piece of obsidian that retains all, or virtually all, of its outer natural surface. Only one nodule comes from the coastal excavations, IC.456 (CS 285), a surface find from Chalinomouri, found 4 m southwest of the main farmhouse. Its recovery was surprising as there is no evidence that obsidian was worked at the farmstead, and at

393 g it is the largest piece of obsidian known from the new Mochlos excavations. IC.456 (CS 285; Ch.surface; Pl. 26). Unworked nodule. Dims. 0.1482 by 0.0729 by 0.0433. Weight 393 g. Triangular, unworked cobble of quarried obsidian with natural flat base and margins.

Type 2. Cores Eight obsidian cores come from the Artisans’ Quarter, four associated with Building B, three with Building A, and one from Trench 2700 between the two structures. Five had been reduced in the production of pressure-flaked prismatic blades, initially knapped from a single prepared platform and worked around a half to two-thirds of their circumference. The remaining three nuclei comprise a cortical pebble from which a single blade had been removed (IC.463; CS 272) and two small flake and bladelet cores (IC.458, IC.464; CS 191, 1541), both of which were worked by percussion. IC.457 (CS 55; B.2; 309.1; Fig. 34). Complete, bipolar, pressure-flaked, prismatic, blade core. Dims. 0.0441 by 0.0185 by 0.0131. Worked around two-thirds of its circumference, with 10 blade scars visible, all initiated from a single platform. At least one stage of core rejuvenation is indicated, with only the four central blade scars having both proximal and distal ends. After these blanks’ production from a “cursorily” faceted platform (dims. 0.0157 by 0.0085), the nucleus was reversed, with another platform prepared on the original distal end (dims. 0.0167 by 0.0072). This episode was largely unsuccessful, with the platform exhibiting crushing and two failed attempts at blade removal. The ventral surface of the nucleus had been decorticated and has traces of cresting flakes along the left margin. IC.458 (CS 191; B.RY; 2806.1; Fig. 34). Complete blade and blade-like, bipolar, flake core. Dims. 0.0195 by 0.0239 by 0.0157. Small blades, blade-like flakes, and flakes were removed from around the core’s

circumference, mainly from one of the platforms; only one small flake was produced from the other. IC.459 (CS 241; A.north room; 203.1; Fig. 34). Distal section of a unipolar, pressure-flaked, prismatic bladecore. Dims. 0.022 by 0.0109 by 0.0067. Worked around three-quarters of its circumference, with the remaining area partly decorticated. The core is exhausted, for after the removal of an earlier platform the attempted re-initiation blade production failed due to the blank hinging. Only 3 scars remain from the earlier episode of blade manufacture. IC.460 (CS 243; A.2; 212.3 part 1; Fig. 34). Distal section of a unipolar, pressure-flaked, prismatic bladecore. Dims. 0.0331 by 0.0119 by 0.0084. The core is exhausted, as the platform is almost completely removed, due to a blade plunging along one margin, leaving only a linear ridge from which a single blade-like flake had been initiated. Ten blade scars remain from the original run of production, which occurred around the entire circumference of the nucleus. The distal tip has slight crushing and flake initiation suggesting a subsequent function, possibly engraving. IC.461 (CS 253; B.5 pit; 507.2; Fig. 34). Complete, mini, pressure-flaked, unipolar, prismatic blade-core. Dims. 0.0218 by 0.0086 by 0.0079. Worked around its entire circumference with 10 blade scars visible. More than one blade producing episode is attested, as only 3 blade scars retain both proximal and distal sections. The remainder lacks their proximal ends, indicating that they came from an earlier platform, which had subsequently been removed. The last blade in this series removed a large part of the core’s faceted platform (dims. 0.0057 by 0.0051), suggesting that the nucleus is exhausted.

THE STONE IMPLEMENTS

IC.462 (CS 262.2; B.9; 1705.1; Fig. 34). Complete, unipolar, pressure-flaked, prismatic blade-core. Dims. 0.0322 by 0.0097 by 0.0075. Worked around its entire circumference, with 8 blade scars. More than one blade producing episode is recognized, as only 3 blade scars retain their proximal sections, all the other blades having been produced from an earlier (removed) platform. The rejuvenation also involved turning the core 180° before faceting the new platform (dims. 0.0099 by 0.0047). IC.463 (CS 272; Clay bed surface; 2700; Fig. 34). Complete unipolar blade-core. Dims. 0.0381 by 0.0172

93

by 0.0121. Cortical pebble with a plain platform (dims. 0.0168 by 0.0127), from which a single blade was removed. The platform’s lack of preparation and the blade negative’s width, accentuated ripples, and longitudinal curvature, indicate that the blank was probably produced by indirect percussion. IC.464 (CS 1541; A.RY; 2315N.5). Complete blade and blade-like, bipolar, flake core. Dims. 0.0166 by 0.0158 by 0.0096. Small core from which were removed blade-like flakes from opposing platforms; the distal end is cortical.

Types 3–5. Flakes Within this classificatory scheme flakes have been subdivided arbitrarily into primary, secondary, and tertiary flakes (Types 3–5), dependent on the amount of cortex on their dorsal surface (80–100%, 5–80%, and kw'n oijkw'n eij" Prasa' JHrakleivou,” PAE, pp. 246–257. ———. 1971. Zakro: the Discovery of a Lost Palace of Ancient Crete, New York.

Perlès, C. 1988. “New Ways with an Old Problem. Chipped Stone Assemblages as an Index of Cultural Discontinuity in Early Greek Prehistory,” in French and Wardle, eds., 1988, pp. 477–488.

Popham, M.R., et al. 1984. The Minoan Unexplored Mansion at Knossos, BSA Supplementary Volume 17, Athens and London.

———. 1989. “From Stone Procurement to Neolithic Society in Greece,” David Skomp Distinguished Lectures in Anthropology, February 1989.

Poursat, J.-C. 1996. Artisans minoens: Les MaisonsAteliers du Quartier Mu. Fouilles exécutées à Mallia. Le Quartier Mu III, Études crétoises 32, Paris and Athens.

168

MOCHLOS NEOPALATIAL SETTLEMENT ON THE COAST

Powell, J. 1996. Fishing in the Prehistoric Aegean, SIMA–PB 137, Jonsered.

Renfrew, C., and J.F. Cherry. 1985. “The Finds,” in Renfrew, 1985, pp. 299–359.

Powell, M.A. 1971. Sumerian Numeration and Metrology. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Minnesota.

Roland Jones, C.E. 1989. “Archaeochemistry: Fact or Fancy?” in Close, ed., 1989, pp. 260–266.

Pulak, C.M. 1996. Analysis of the Weight Assemblages from the Late Bronze Age Shipwrecks at Uluburun and Cape Gelidonya, Turkey, Ph.D. diss., Texas A&M University.

Rothenberg, B., ed. 1990. The Ancient Metallurgy of Copper. Researches into Arabah 1959–1984, vol. 2, London.

———. 1998. “The Uluburun Shipwreck: an Overview,” IJNA 27, pp. 188–224.

Rose, M.J. 1994. With Line and Glittering Bronze Hook: Fishing in the Aegean Bronze Age, Ph.D. Dissertation, Indiana University.

Rackham, O. 1972. “Charcoal and Plaster Impressions,” in Warren, 1972, pp. 299–304.

———. 1995a. “Fish Remains, Building AD Center,” in Betancourt and Davaras, eds., 1995, pp. 130–132.

Rackham, O., and J.A. Moody. 1996. The Making of the Cretan Landscape, Manchester.

———. 1995b. “The Fish Remains,” in Shaw and Shaw, eds., 1995, pp. 204–239.

Reese, D.S. 1985. “The Late Bronze Age to Geometric Shells from Kition. Appendix VIII(A),” in Karageorghis, 1985, pp. 340–37l.

———. 1996. “Fishing at Minoan Pseira: Formation of a Bronze Age Fish Assemblage from Crete,” Archaeofauna 5, pp. 385–393.

———. 1995a. “Introduction and Methodology (Chapter 5.1); The Larger Mammals (5.2); The Bird Remains (5.3); The Marine Invertebrates (5.5); Land Snails and Insects (5.6),” in Shaw and Shaw, eds., 1995, pp. 163–204, 240–278.

———. 1998a. “The Fish Remains, Building AC,” in Betancourt and Davaras, eds., 1998, pp. 37–38.

———. 1995b. “The Faunal Remains,” in Betancourt and Davaras, eds., 1995, pp. 11, 42, 45–46, 56–57, 83, 129–30.

———. 1999. “The Fish Remains, Area BR,” in Betancourt and Davaras, eds., 1999, p.164.

———. 1998a. “The Faunal Remains, Building AC and The Faunal Remains, Building AJ,” in Betancourt and Davaras, eds., 1998, pp. 35–36, 92. ———. 1998b. “The Faunal Remains,” in Floyd, 1998, pp. 131–144. ———. 1999. “The Faunal Remains: Area BB, Building BC, Area BH, Area BL, Building BN East, Area BR, Building BT, Building BW, Building BY, Building DA,” in Betancourt and Davaras, eds., 1999, pp. 16, 36–37, 80, 99, 110, 162–64, 184, 197, 223, 282–83.

———. 1998b. “The Fish Bones,” in Betancourt and Davaras, eds., 1998, pp. 145–148.

Runnels, C.N. 1985a. “Lithic Studies: Some Theoretical Considerations,” Lithic Technology 14, pp. 100–106. ———. 1985b. “Trade and Demand for Millstones in Southern Greece in the Neolithic and Early Bronze Age,” in Knapp and Stech, eds., 1985, pp. 30–43. Runnels, C.N., and P.M. Murray. 1983. “Milling in Ancient Greece,” Archaeology 36, pp. 62–63, 75. Runnels, C.N., D.J. Pullen, and S. Langdon, eds. 1995. Artifact and Assemblage: The Finds from a Regional Survey of the Southern Argolid, Greece, Stanford.

Reese, D.S., ed. 1996. The Pleistocene and Holocene Fauna of Crete and Its First Settlers, Madison.

Russmann, E.R. 2000. “The Egyptian Character of the Egyptian Painting Techniques,” in Sherratt, ed., 2000, pp. 71–76.

Rehren, T., A. Hauptmann, and J.D. Muhly, eds. 1998. Metallurgica Antiqua: In Honour of Hans-Gert Bachmann and Robert Maddin, Bochum.

Rutkowski, B. 1981. Frühgriechische Kultdarstellungen, Berlin.

Renfrew, C., 1971. “Obsidian and Pumice: the Use of Recent Igneous Rocks in Aegean Prehistory,” in Kaloyeropoulou, ed., 1971, pp. 430–436. Renfrew, C., 1985. The Archaeology of Cult: the Sanctuary at Phylakopi, BSA Supplementary Volume 18, London. Renfrew, C., J.R. Cann, and J.E. Dixon. 1965. “Obsidian in the Aegean,” BSA 60, pp. 225–247.

Ryan, C.W. 1960. A Guide to the Known Minerals of Turkey, Ankara. Sackett, L.H., and R.M. Popham. 1965. “Excavations at Palaikastro, VI,” BSA 60, pp. 248–315. Sagona, A., ed. 1994. Bruising the Red Earth: Ocher Mining and Ritual in Aboriginal Tasmania, Melbourne.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

169

Sagona, A., and J.A. Webb. 1994. “Toolumbunner in perspective,” in Sagona, ed., 1994, pp. 137–142.

Séfériadès, M. 1975. “Obsidiennes taillées,” in Chevallier et al., eds., 1975, pp. 23–32, 109–116.

Sakellarakis, Y.A. 1982. “Athen Nationalmuseum,” CMS I, Supplement, Berlin.

Sfikas, G. 1978. Trees and Shrubs of Greece, Athens.

Sakellarakis, Y.A., and E. Sakellarakis. 1974. “ jAnaskafhv jArcanw'n,” PAE, pp. 207–212. ———. 1997. Archanes: Minoan Crete in a New Light, vols. I and II, Athens. Sarpaki, A. 1992. “A Palaeoethnobotanical Approach. The Mediterranean Triad or Is It a Quartet?” in Wells, ed., 1992, pp. 61–76. ———. 1998. “Preliminary Environmental Report,” in MacGillivray et al., “Excavations at Palaikastro, 1994 and 1996,” BSA 84, pp. 435–436. ———. 1999. “The Olive Tree/the Olive Oil; the Archaeobotanical Study of Tzambakas House, Rethymnon, Crete,” in Tzedakis and Martlew, eds., 1999, pp. 37, 40–41. Saunders, N. 2001. “A Dark Light: Reflections on Obsidian in Mesoamerica,” World Archaeology 33, pp. 220–236. Schäfer, J., ed. 1992. Amnisos nach den archäologischen, historischen und epigraphischen Zeugnissen des Altertums und der Neuzeit, Berlin. Schallin, A.-L. 1997. “Metallurgy, a Divine Affair? Indications of Metal Working in the Late Bronze Age Cyclades and the Significance of Metallurgial Indications outside Metal Workshop Contexts,” in Gillis et al., eds., 1997, pp. 139–171. Schiffer, M. 1986. “Radiocarbon Dating and the ‘Old Wood’ Problem: the Case of the Hohokam Chronology,” JAS 13, pp. 13–30. Schliemann, H. 1886. Tiryns. The Prehistoric Palace of the King of Tiryns, London.

Shaw, J.W. 1973. “Minoan Architecture: Materials and Techniques,” ASAtene 49, pp. 1–256. ———. 1982. “Excavations at Kommos (Crete) during 1981,” Hesperia 51, pp. 164–195. Shaw, J.W., and M.C. Shaw, eds. 1995. Kommos I. The Kommos Region and the Houses of the Minoan Town. Part I. The Kommos Region, Ecology, and Minoan Industries, Princeton. Shaw, M.C. 1980. “Painted ‘Ikria’ at Mycenae?” AJA 84, pp.167–179. Shay, C.T., and J.M. Shay, with K.A. Frego and J. Zwiazek. 1995. “The Charcoal and Seeds from Bronze Age Deposits at Kommos,” in Shaw and Shaw, eds., 1995, pp. 91–162. Sheets, P. D., and G. Muto. 1972. “Pressure Blades and Total Cutting Edge: An Experiment in Lithic Technology,” Science 175, pp. 632–634. Sherratt, S., ed. 2000. The Wall Paintings of Thera, Proceedings of the First International Conference, vol. I, Athens. Shortland, A.J., ed. 2001. The Social Context of Technological Change: Egypt and the Near East, 1650–1550 B.C., Oxford. Sines, G., and Y.A. Sakellarakis. 1987. “Lenses in Antiquity,” AJA 91, pp. 191–196. Smith, J. 1992. “Spinning and Weaving Equipment,” in McDonald and Wilkie, eds., 1992, pp. 674–711. Smith, H., and G. Jones. 1990. “Experiments on the Effects of Charring on Cultivated Grape Seeds,” JAS 17, pp. 317–327.

Schoch, W. 1995. “The Charcoal Remains, Building AD Center,” in Betancourt and Davaras, eds., 1995, pp. 133–134.

Snyder, L.M., and W.E. Klippel. 1994. “The Vertebrate Faunal Material,” in W.D.E. Coulson and M. Tsipopoulou, “Preliminary Investigations at Halasmenos, Crete,” Aegean Archaeology 1, pp. 91–92.

Schofield, E. 1990. “Evidence for Household Industries on Thera and Kea,” in Hardy and Renfrew, eds., 1990, pp. 89–95.

Soles, J.S. 1983. “A Bronze Age Quarry in Eastern Crete,” JFA 10, pp. 33–46.

Schweingruber, F.H. 1990. Anatomy of European Woods: an Atlas for the Identification of European Trees, Shrubs, and Dwarf Shrubs, Bern. Seager, R. 1909. “Excavations on the Island of Mochlos, Crete, in 1908,” AJA 13, pp. 273–303. ———. 1912. Explorations in the Island of Mochlos, Boston and New York.

———. 1991. “The Gournia Palace,” AJA 95, pp. 17–78. ———. 1992. The Prepalatial Cemeteries at Mochlos and Gournia and the House Tombs of Bronze Age Crete, Hesperia Supplement 24, Princeton. ———. 1995. “The Functions of a Cosmological Center: Knossos in Palatial Crete,” in Laffineur and Niemeier, eds., 1995, pp. 405–414.

170

MOCHLOS NEOPALATIAL SETTLEMENT ON THE COAST

———. 1997. “A Community of Craft-specialists at Mochlos,” in Laffineur and Betancourt, eds., 1997, pp. 425–431. ———. 2001. “Reverence for Dead Ancestors in Prehistoric Crete,” in Laffineur and Hägg, eds., 2001, pp. 229–238. ———. 2002. “A Central Court at Gournia?” in Driessen et al., eds., 2002, pp. 123–132. Soles, J.S., and C. Davaras. 1994. “Excavations at Mochlos, 1990–1991,” Hesperia 63, pp. 391–436. ———. 1996. “Excavations at Mochlos, 1992–1993,” Hesperia 65, pp. 175–230. Soles, J.S., S.R. Taylor, and C.J. Vitaliano. 1995. “Tephra Samples from Mochlos and their Chronological Implications for Neopalatial Crete,” Archaeometry 37, pp. 385–393.

Stos-Gale, Z.A., G. Maliotis, and N.H. Gale. 1998. “A Preliminary Survey of the Cypriot Slag Heaps and their Contribution to the Reconstruction of Copper Production on Cyprus,” in Rehren et al., eds., 1998, pp. 235–262. Stos-Gale, Z.A., G. Maliotis, N.H. Gale, and N. Annetts. 1997. “Lead Isotope Characteristics of the Cyprus Copper Ore Deposits Applied to Provenance Studies of Copper Oxhide Ingots,” Archaeometry 39, pp. 83–124. Stuiver, M., P.J. Reimer, E. Bard, J.W. Beck, G.S. Burr, K.A. Hughen, B. Kromer, G. McCormac, J. van der Plicht, and M. Spurk. 1998. “INTCAL98 Radiocarbon Age Calibration, 24,000–0 Cal BP,” Radiocarbon 40, pp. 1041–1083. Swanson, E.H., ed. 1975. Lithic Technology: Making and Using Stone Tools, The Hague.

Sourvinou-Inwood, C. 1973. “On the Lost ‘Boat’ Ring from Mochlos,” Kadmos 12, pp. 149–158.

Swiny, S. 1986. The Kent State Expedition to Episkopi Phaneromeni, Part 2, SIMA 74, Jonsered.

Stampolidis, N., A. Karetsou, and A. Kanta, eds. 1998. Eastern Mediterranean: Cyprus, Dodecanese, Crete, 16th–6th Cent. B.C., Herakleion.

Taçon, P.S.C. 1991. “The Power of Stone: Symbolic Aspects of Stone Use and Tool Development in Western Arnhem Land, Australia,” Antiquity 65, pp. 192–207.

Stech, T. 1982. “Urban Metallurgy in Late Bronze Age Cyprus,” in Muhly et al., eds., 1982, pp. 105–115.

Tarling, D.H. 1983. Palaeomagnetism, London, pp. 379.

Stos-Fertner, Z., R. Hedges, and R.D.G. Evely. 1979. “The Application of the XRF-XRD Method to the Analysis of the Pigments of Minoan Painted Pottery,” Archaeometry 21, pp. 187–194. Stos-Gale, Z.A. 1998. “The Role of Kythnos and other Cycladic Islands in the Origins of Early Minoan Metallurgy,” in Mendoni, ed., 1998, pp. 717–736. ———. 2000. “Trade in Metals in the Bronze Age Mediterranean: an Overview of Lead Isotope Data for Provenance Studies,” in Pare, ed., 2000, pp. 56–69. ———. 2001. “Minoan Foreign Relations and Copper Metallurgy in Protopalatial and Neopalatial Crete,” in Shortland, ed., 2001, pp. 195–210. Stos-Gale, Z.A., and N.H. Gale. 1990. “The Role of Thera in the Bronze Age Metal Trade,” in Hardy et al., eds., 1990, pp. 72–92. Stos-Gale, Z.A., N.H. Gale, and N. Annetts. 1996. “Lead Isotope Analyses of Ores from the Aegean,” Archaeometry 38, 1996, pp. 381–390. Stos-Gale, Z.A., N.H. Gale, and J. Houghton. 1995. “The Origin of Copper Metal Excavated in El Amarna,” in Davies and Schofield, eds., 1995, pp. 127–135. Stos-Gale, Z.A., M. Kayafa, and N.H. Gale. 1999. “The Origin of Metals from the Bronze Age Site of Nichoria,” OpAth 24, pp. 99–120.

———. 1988. “Geomagnetic Secular Variation in Britain during the last 2000 Years,” in Lowes et al., eds., 1988, pp. 55–62. ———. 1989. “The Eruption of Santorini and the End of the Minoan Civilization in Crete,” PACT 25, pp. 107–115. Tarling, D.H., and W.S. Downey. 1990. “Archaeomagnetic Results from Late Minoan Destruction Levels on Crete and the Minoan Tephra on Thera,” in Hardy and Renfrew, eds., 1990, pp. 146–159. Taube, K. 1996. “The Olmec Maize God: the Face of Corn in Formative Mesoamerica,” Res 29/30, pp. 39–81. Thellier, E., and O. Thellier. 1959. “Sur l’intensité du champ magnetique terrestre dans le passé historique et géologique,” Annales Géophysique 15, pp. 285–376. Tixier, J., ed. 1988. Technologie Préhistorique. Notes et Monographies Techniques No. 25, Paris. Tixier, J., M.-L. Inizan, and H. Roche., eds. 1984. Préhistoire de la Pierre Taillée 2: Économie du Débitage Laminaire: Technologie et Éxpérimentation. Cercle de Recherches et d’ Études Préhistoriques, Paris. Torrence, R. 1979. “A Technological Approach to Cycladic Blade Industries,” in Davis and Cherry, eds., 1979, pp. 66–85.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

———. 1985. “Appendix C: the Chipped Stone,” in Renfrew, 1985, pp. 469–78. ———. 1986a. Production and Exchange of Stone Tools, Cambridge.

171

Vitaliano, C.J. 1995. “Pumice Studies, Building AD Center,” in Betancourt and Davaras, eds., 1995, pp. 135–136.

———. 1986b. “Ground and Polished Stone,” in Davis, ed., 1986, pp. 96–97.

Vaughan, S.J., and W.D.E. Coulson, eds. 2000. Palaeodiet in the Aegean: Papers from a Colloquium Held at the 1993 Meeting of the Archaeological Institute of America in Washington D.C., Oxford.

Tsipopoulou, M. 1986. “ jEreuna ston Petrav kai ton kovlpo Shteiva",” Deltion 41:A, pp. 340–400.

Von Brandt, A. 1972. Fish Catching Methods of the World, London.

———. 1992. “Clay Figurines,” in Marangou, ed., 1992, pp. 143–147.

Von Salis, A. 1930. Theseus und Ariadne, BerlinLeipzig.

Tsipopoulou, M., and A. Papacostopoulou. 1997. “‘Villas’ and Villages in the Hinterland of Petras, Siteia,” in Hägg, ed., 1997, pp. 203–214.

Walker, C. 1996a. “Bones from Palaikastro Building I: a Preliminary Report,” in Reese, ed., 1996, pp. 277–282.

Tsipopoulou, M., and L. Vagnetti. 1995. Achladia. Scavi e Richerche della Missione Greco-Italiana in Creta Orientale (1991–1993), Rome.

———. 1996b. “Fauna from Two Bronze Age Wells at Palaikastro,” AJA 100, p. 366.

Tsoukala, E. 1996. “The Animal Bones from Smari: A Preliminary Report,” in Reese, ed., 1996, pp. 273–276. Tsoukala, E. 2000. “Faunal Finds and Food Samples at Vori (Nomos Herakleion),” in Pepragmevna tou HV Dieqnouv" Krhtologikouv Sunedrivou, Herakleion, pp. 379–396. Turland, N.J. 1993. Flora of the Cretan Area: Annotated Checklist and Atlas, London. Tzedakis, Y., and H. Martlew, eds. 1999. Minoans and Mycenaeans: Flavours of Their Time, Athens. Vagnetti, L. 1973. “Tracce di due insediamenti neolitici nel territorio dell’antica Gortina,” Antichità Cretesi: Studi in Onore di Doro Levi, vol. I, Catavia, pp. 1–9. Vallois, R. 1926. “Autels et culte de l’arbre sacré en Crète,” REA 28, pp. 121–132. van Effenterre, H. 1980. Le palais de Mallia et la cité minoenne: Étude de synthèse, vol. II, Rome. van Effenterre, H., and M. van Effenterre. 1969. Fouilles exécutées à Mallia: le centre politique I, l’agora (1960–1966), Études crétoises 17–18, Paris. van Effenterre, M. 1978. “Cretan Ships on Seal Stones. Some Observations,” in Doumas, ed., 1978, pp. 593–604. Van Horn, D.M. 1980. “Observations relating to Bronze Age Blade Core Production in the Argolid of Greece,” JFA 7, pp. 487–492. van Zeist, W., and W.A. Casparie, eds. 1984. Plants and Ancient Man: Studies in Palaeoethnobotany, Rotterdam.

Warren, P.M. 1965. “Objects of Stone,” in Sackett and Popham, “Excavations at Palaikastro, VI,” BSA 60, pp. 305–314. ———. 1969. Minoan Stone Vases, Cambridge. ———. 1972. Myrtos. An Early Bronze Age Settlement in Crete, London. ———. 1979. “The Stone Vessels from the Bronze Age Settlement at Akrotiri, Thera,” ArchEph, pp. 82–113. ———. 1995. “Realism and Naturalism in Minoan Art—partes pro toto,” in Pepragmevna tou ZV Dieqnouv" Krhtologikouv Sunedrivou, Rethymnon, 1995, pp. 973–980. ———. 2000. “From Naturalism to Essentialism in Theran and Minoan Art,” in Sherratt, ed., 2000, pp. 364–386. Warren, P.M., and V. Hankey. 1989. Aegean Bronze Age Chronology, Bristol. Warren, P.M., and J. Tzedhakis. 1974. “Debla. An Early Minoan Settlement in Western Crete,” BSA 69, pp. 299–342. Watrous, L.V. 1992. Kommos III: The Late Bronze Age Pottery, Princeton. Wedde, M. 2000. Towards a Hermeneutics of Aegean Bronze Age Ship Imagery, Mannheim. Wells, B., ed. 1992. Agriculture in Ancient Greece, Stockholm. Westerdahl, C. 1995. “Stone Maze Symbols and Navigation. A Hypothesis on the Origin of Coastal Stone Mazes in the North,” IJNA 24, pp. 267–277.

172

MOCHLOS NEOPALATIAL SETTLEMENT ON THE COAST

Wheeler, A., and K.G.A. Jones. 1989. Fishes, Cambridge Manuals in Archaeology, Cambridge. White, J.P. 1969. “Typologies for Some Flaked Stone Artifacts in the Australian New Guinea Highlands,” Archaeology and Anthropology in Oceania 4, pp. 18–46. Whitley, D.S., ed. 1998. Reader in Archaeological Theory: Post-Processual and Cognitive Approaches, London. Wilkens, B. 1996a. “The Fauna from Italian Excavations on Crete,” in Reese, ed., 1996, pp. 241–262.

Yener, K.A. 1986. “The Archaeometry of Silver in Anatolia: the Bolkardag Mining District,” AJA 90, pp. 469–472. Yener, K.A., H. Ozbal, E. Kaptan, A.N. Pehlivan, and M. Goodway. 1989. “Kestel: an Early Bronze Age Source of Tin Ore in the Taurus Mountains, Turkey,” Science 244, pp. 177–264. Yener, K.A, E.V. Sayre, H. Ozbal, E.C. Joel, I.L. Barnes, and R.H. Brill. 1991. “Stable Lead Isotope Studies of Central Taurus Ore Sources and Related Artefacts from Eastern Mediterranean Chalcolithic and Bronze Age Sites,” JAS 18, pp. 541–577.

———. 1996b. “I resti faunistici di Haghia Triada (Creta) in età neo e postpalaziale. Nota preliminare,” in De Miro et al., 1996, pp. 1511–1520.

Yon, M., ed. 1991. Arts et Industries de la Pierre. Ras Shamra-Ougarit VI, Paris.

Wohlfeil, J.B. 1997. Die Bildersprache minoischer und mykenischer Siegel, London.

Zaccagnini, C. 1983. “Patterns of Mobility among Ancient Near Eastern Craftsmen,” JNES 42, pp. 245–264.

Wright, K. 1992. “A Classification System for Ground Stone Tools from the Prehistoric Levant,” Paléorient 18, pp. 53–81.

Zohary, D., and M. Hopf. 1993. Domestication of Plants in the Old World, Oxford.

Xanthoudides, St. 1924. The Vaulted Tombs of Mesara, London.

Concordances

Concordance A

Field Numbers and Catalog Numbers for Mochlos vols. IA, IB, IC B2 B7 B 18 B 20 B 26 B 31 C7 C 20 C 25 C 26 C 27 C 28 C 34 C 36 C 37 C 61 C 62 C 63 C 66 C 73 C 75 C 77 C 85 C 94 C 95 C 97

IC.215 IC.216 IC.217 IC.218 IC.219 IC.220 IC.129 IC.27 IC.151 IC.130 IC.88 IC.89 IC.90 IC.156 IC.91 IC.92 IC.93 IC.152 IC.131 IC.132 IC.53 IC.1 IC.133 IC.30 IC.31 IC.14

C 99 C 101 C 102 C 108 C 110 C 111 C 115 C 116 C 120 C 122 C 129 C 130 C 134 C 137 C 141 C 145 C 147 C 152 C 161 C 162 C 177 C 182 C 183 C 184 C 190 C 198

IC.54 IC.134 IC.94 IC.2 IC.135 IC.136 IC.164 IC.95 IC.96 IC.36 IC.28 IC.137 IC.55 IC.147 IC.15 IC.97 IC.98 IC.138 IC.32 IC.148 IC.99 IC.100 IC.101 IC.83 IC.157 IC.149

C 206 C 207 C 213 C 216 C 227 C 230 C 231 C 233 C 237 C 243 C 286 C 289 C 298 C 304 C 305 C 306 C 307 C 310 C 315 C 317 C 318 C 321 C 323 C 324 C 325 C 326

IC.37 IC.38 IC.102 IC.16 IC.158 IC.155 IC.153 IC.103 IC.154 IC.104 IC.139 IC.39 IC.140 IC.105 IC.159 IC.106 IC.160 IC.107 IC.17 IC.29 IC.108 IC.109 IC.141 IC.110 IC.111 IC.142

176

MOCHLOS NEOPALATIAL SETTLEMENT ON THE COAST

C 327 C 328 C 338 C 340 C 341 C 342 C 343 C 344 C 345 C 346 C 347 C 348 C 349 C 352 C 356 C 358 C 359 C 365 C 376 C 380 C 381 C 405 C 407 C 427 C 480 C 482 C 485 C 488 C 490 C 493 C 495 C 496 C 497 C 498 C 502 C 503 C 504 C 505 C 507

IC.112 IC.3 IC.113 IC.114 IC.115 IC.40 IC.116 IC.4 IC.18 IC.161 IC.41 IC.165 IC.42 IC.19 IC.117 IC.20 IC.118 IC.43 IC.5 IC.56 IC.119 IC.162 IC.143 IC.144 IC.21 IC.60 IC.120 IC.166 IC.57 IC.86 IC.121 IC.22 IC.44 IC.145 IC.33 IC.34 IC.122 IC.87 IC.6

C 508 C 509 C 510 C 511 C 512 C 514 C 515 C 516 C 517 C 519 C 520 C 521 C 522 C 523 C 524 C 525 C 526 C 527 C 528 C 529 C 532 C 533 C 534 C 535 C 536 C 537 C 538 C 539 C 540 C 541 C 542 C 543 C 544 C 545 C 546 C 547 C 548 C 549 C 550

IC.84 IC.45 IC.58 IC.46 IC.47 IC.48 IC.123 IC.23 IC.24 IC.25 IC.124 IC.125 IC.49 IC.59 IC.50 IC.51 IC.146 IC.126 IC.7 IC.8 IC.61 IC.62 IC.63 IC.64 IC.65 IC.66 IC.67 IC.68 IC.69 IC.70 IC.71 IC.72 IC.73 IC.74 IC.75 IC.76 IC.77 IC.78 IC.79

C 551 C 552 C 553 C 554 C 559 C 560 C 569 C 572 C 573 C 574 C 585 C 595 C 599 C 600 C 601 C 621 C 622 C 623 CA 5 CA 13 CA 17 CA 18 CA 19 CA 20.1 CA 20.2 CA 20.3 CA 20.4 CA 20.5 CA 20.6 CA 20.7 CA 20.8 CA 20.9 CA 20.10 CA 20.11 CA 20.12 CA 20.13 CA 20.14 CA 20.15 CA 21.1

IC.80 IC.81 IC.82 IC.150 IC.127 IC.9 IC.85 IC.9 IC.11 IC.12 IC.163 IC.26 IC.35 IC.52 IC.128 IC.167 IC.13 IA.16 IC.278 IC.267 IC.268 IC.280 IC.279 IC.226 IC.227 IC.228 IC.229 IC.230 IC.231 IC.232 IC.233 IC.234 IC.235 IC.236 IC.237 IC.238 IC.239 IC.240 IC.249

CONCORDANCE A

CA 21.2 CA 23 CA 24 CA 27 CA 38 CA 61 CA 62 CA 82 CA 84 CA 86 CA 90 CA 95 CA 96A CA 96B CA 97 CA 98 CA 105 CA 116 CA 123 CA 165 CA 166 CA 167 CA 168 CA 169 CA 170 CA 171 CA 172A CA 172B CA 173 CA 174 CA 175 CA 176 CA 177 CA 178 CA 179 CA 180 CA 181 CA 182 CA 183

IC.250 IC.269 IC.270 IC.271 IC.281 IC.245 IC.272 IC.241 IC.273 IC.274 IC.282 IC.242 IC.283 IC.251 IC.275 IC.284 IC.276 IC.277 IC.243 IC.285 IC.252 IC.286 IC.287 IC.253 IC.288 IC.289 IC.246 IC.254 IC.255 IC.256 IC.257 IC.290 IC.258 IC.259 IC.247 IC.291 IC.260 IC.292 IC.293

CA 184 CA 185 CA 186 CA 187 CA 188 CA 189 CA 190 CA 191 CA 204 CA 220 CA 221 CS 55 CS 191 CS 238 CS 239 CS 240 CS 241 CS 242 CS 243 CS 244 CS 245 CS 246 CS 247 CS 248 CS 249 CS 250 CS 251 CS 252 CS 253 CS 254 CS 255 CS 256 CS 257 CS 258.1 CS 258.2 CS 259 CS 260 CS 261 CS 262.1

IC.261 IC.262 IC.294 IC.295 IC.263 IC.264 IC.265 IC.248 IC.266 IC.296 IC.244 IC.457 IC.458 IC.495 IC.496 IC.497 IC.459 IC.472 IC.460 IC.498 IC.465 IC.473 IC.499 IC.500 IC.467 IC.474 IC.487 IC.501 IC.461 IC.502 IC.503 IC.519 IC.504 IC.505 IC.506 IC.468 IC.507 IC.488 IC.475

177

CS 262.2 CS 263 CS 264 CS 265 CS 266 CS 267 CS 268 CS 269 CS 270 CS 271 CS 272 CS 273.1 CS 273.2 CS 274 CS 282 CS 283 CS 284 CS 285 CS 286 CS 287 CS 288 CS 290 CS 291 CS 292 CS 309 CS 310 CS 311 CS 312.1 CS 312.2 CS 313 CS 318 CS 319 CS 321 CS 322 CS 774 CS 1119 CS 1120 CS 1121 CS 1541

IC.462 IC.466 IC.469 IC.508 IC.509 IC.510 IC.486 IC.470 IC.489 IC.511 IC.463 IC.520 IC.476 IC.471 IC.477 IC.512 IC.490 IC.456 IC.513 IC.521 IC.478 IC.479 IC.480 IC.514 IC.491 IC.481 IC.515 IC.492 IC.482 IC.516 IC.483 IC.484 IC.522 IC.517 IC.493 IC.494 IC.518 IC.485 IC.464

178

MOCHLOS NEOPALATIAL SETTLEMENT ON THE COAST

GS 160 GS 161 GS 214 GS 237 GS 271 GS 272 GS 297 GS 304 GS 310 GS 311 GS 312 GS 314 GS 326 GS 327 GS 329 GS 330 GS 331 GS 332 GS 346 GS 377 GS 385 GS 388 GS 418 GS 427 GS 446 GS 480 GS 485 GS 487 GS 488 GS 501 GS 502 GS 503 GS 504 GS 506 GS 507 GS 514 GS 522 GS 526 GS 540

IC.302 IC.338 IC.329 IC.317 IC.426A IC.389 IC.303 IC.453 IC.304 IC.430 IC.305 IC.330 IC.306 IC.361 IC.318 IC.331 IC.339 IC.340 IC.390 IC.362 IC.437 IC.332 IC.341 IC.350 IC.421 IC.385 IC.401 IC.319 IC.333 IC.378 IC.379 IC.380 IC.381 IC.359 IC.360 IC.307 IC.342 IC.446 IC.334

GS 548 GS 560 GS 562 GS 564 GS 575 GS 581 GS 596 GS 597 GS 620 GS 636 GS 646 GS 647 GS 648 GS 668 GS 676 GS 679 GS 683 GS 684 GS 685 GS 691 GS 707 GS 713 GS 718 GS 723 GS 724 GS 725 GS 732 GS 758 GS 763 GS 782 GS 787 GS 790 GS 802 GS 810 GS 832 GS 843 GS 847 GS 875 GS 876

IC.422 IC.414 IC.431 IC.363 IC.320 IC.423 IC.432 IC.402 IC.420 IC.391 IC.406 IC.335 IC.433 IC.392 IC.364 IC.393 IC.351 IC.407 IC.328 IC.408 IC.424 IC.365 IC.415 IC.394 IC.386 IC.308 IC.387 IC.343 IC.344 IC.309 IC.336 IC.321 IC.397 IC.352 IC.398 IC.435 IC.322 IC.427 IC.428

GS 884 GS 885 GS 896 GS 897 GS 900 GS 901 GS 902 GS 905 GS 907 GS 911 GS 913 GS 925 GS 927 GS 935 GS 944 GS 945 GS 950 GS 952 GS 954 GS 959 GS 965 GS 1051 GS 1061 GS 1062 GS 1066 GS 1131 GS 1139 GS 1148 GS 1150 GS 1159 GS 1172 GS 1178 GS 1179 GS 1179 GS 1186 GS 1195 GS 1201 GS 1259 GS 1260

IC.405 IC.353 IC.438 IC.396 IC.416 IC.439 IC.366 IC.345 IC.367 IC.382 IC.388 IC.323 IC.383 IC.429 IC.409 IC.368 IC.346 IC.369 IC.370 IC.354 IC.596 IC.395 IC.355 IC.371 IC.347 IC.417 IC.348 IC.440 IC.434 IC.441 IC.436 IC.454 IA.11 IC.442 IC.356 IC.357 IC.443 IC.310 IC.324

CONCORDANCE A

GS 1261 GS 1264 GS 1268 GS 1270 GS 1271 GS 1272 GS 1279 GS 1281 GS 1282 GS 1287 GS 1290 GS 1291 GS 1300 GS 1314 GS 1318 GS 1341 GS 1345 GS 1346 GS 1347 GS 1348 GS 1349 GS 1352 GS 1353 GS 1386 GS 1387 GS 1389 GS 1390 GS 1412 GS 1413 GS 1416 GS 1417 GS 1418 GS 1419 GS 1420 GS 1421 GS 1422 GS 1423 GS 1466 GS 1467

IC.444 IC.598 IC.349 IC.403 IC.418 IC.410 IC.455 IC.399 IC.400 IC.311 IC.312 IC.372 IC.425 IC.404 IC.445 IC.426 IC.373 IC.374 IC.325 IC.326 IC.337 IC.419 IC.313 IC.597 IC.358 IC.412 IC.413 IC.375 IC.314 IC.376 IC.384 IC.447 IC.448 IC.449 IC.450 IC.451 IC.452 IC.315 IC.316

GS 1468 GS 1469 GS 1476 M 400 M 401 M 402 M 403 M 404 M 405 M 406 M 407 M 408 M 409 M 410 M 411 M 412 M 413 M 414 M 415 M 417 M 418 M 419 M 420 M 421 M 422 M 423 M 424 M 425 M 426 M 427 M 428 M 500 M 501 M 502 M 503 M 504 M 505 M 506 M 507

IC.327 IC.411 IC.377 IC.523 IC.524 IC.525 IC.526 IC.527 IC.528 IC.529 IC.530 IC.531 IC.532 IC.533 IC.534 IC.535 IC.536 IC.537 IC.538 IC.539 IC.540 IC.541 IC.542 IC.543 IC.544 IC.545 IC.546 IC.547 IC.548 IC.549 IC.550 IC.551 IC.552 IC.553 IC.554 IC.555 IC.556 IC.557 IC.558

179

M 508 M 509 M 510 M 511 M 512 M 513 M 514 M 515 M 516 M 517 M 518 M 519 M 520 M 521 M 522 M 523 M 524 M 525 M 526 M 527 M 600 M 601 M 602 M 603 M 604 M 605 M 607 M 608 M 609 M 610 M 611 M 612 M 700 M 701 M 702 M 750 M 751 P 44 P 45

IC.559 IC.560 IC.561 IC.562 IC.563 IC.564 IC.565 IC.566 IC.567 IC.568 IC.569 IC.570 IC.571 IC.572 IC.573 IC.574 IC.575 IC.576 IC.577 IC.578 IC.579 IC.580 IC.581 IC.582 IC.583 IC.584 IC.585 IC.586 IC.587 IC.588 IC.589 IC.590 IC.591 IC.592 IC.593 IC.594 IC.595 IB.1 IB.327

180

MOCHLOS NEOPALATIAL SETTLEMENT ON THE COAST

P 57 P 58 P 59 P 60 P 61 P 62 P 63 P 68 P 69 P 73 P 74 P 75 P 76 P 77 P 78 P 79 P 88 P 93 P 94 P 95 P 96 P 97 P 98 P 100 P 101 P 102 P 104 P 106 P 108 P 109 P 110 P 111 P 113 P 116 P 117 P 118 P 131 P 132 P 136

IB.2 IB.307 IB.263 IB.2A IB.3 IB.390 IB.295 IB.361 IB.4 IB.5 IB.609 IB.6 IB.411 IB.317 IB.329 IB.391 IB.7 IB.392 IB.338 IB.490 IB.603 IB.380 IA.2 IB.393 IB.427 IB.432B IB.368 IA.25 IB.484 IB.308 IB.474 IB.8 IB.488 IB.9 IB.10 IB.309 IB.433 IB.434 IB.339

P 140 P 142 P 143 P 145 P 146 P 154 P 156 P 164 P 167 P 168 P 171 P 173 P 174 P 177 P 180 P 181 P 187 P 190 P 192 P 197 P 198 P 199 P 201 P 205 P 206 P 215 P 220 P 221 P 224 P 225 P 226 P 227 P 228 P 229 P 230 P 231 P 232 P 235 P 236

IB.199 IB.255 IB.269 IB.355 IB.158 IB.618 IB.15 IB.160 IB.161 IB.162 IB.163 IB.164 IB.165 IB.11 IB.200 IB.12 IB.581 IB.13 IB.394 IB.166 IB.223 IB.242 IB.14 IB.619 IB.15 IB.16 IB.17 IB.18 IB.19 IB.20 IB.21 IB.22 IB.23 IB.24 IB.25 IB.26 IB.27 IB.28 IB.29

P 237 P 238 P 239 P 240 P 241 P 242 P 243 P 244 P 245 P 247 P 248 P 250 P 251 P 252 P 253 P 254 P 255 P 256 P 257 P 258 P 270 P 271 P 272 P 280 P 288 P 355 P 376 P 377 P 390 P 391 P 401 P 405 P 408 P 409 P 416 P 417 P 418 P 435 P 436

IB.30 IB.31 IB.32 IB.33 IB.34 IB.35 IB.36 IB.37 IB.38 IB.39 IB.40 IB.610 IB.356 IB.296 IB.330 IB.265 IB.604 IB.605 IB.606 IB.41 IB.336 IB.297 IB.357 IB.455 IB.42 IB.43 IB.412 IB.224 IB.250 IB.44 IB.264 IB.45 IB.46 IB.428 IB.310 IB.464 IB.41 IA.2 IA.22

CONCORDANCE A

P 440 P 443 P 461 P 463 P 464 P 465 P 466 P 467 P 468 P 469 P 470 P 471 P 472 P 474 P 475 P 476 P 479 P 482 P 483 P 484 P 491 P 492 P 494 P 496 P 497 P 498 P 500 P 501 P 504 P 505 P 508 P 509 P 510 P 511 P 522 P 527 P 531 P 533 P 534

IB.197 IB.167 IB.395 IB.298 IB.47 IB.48 IB.49 IB.358 IB.50 IB.51 IB.201 IB.243 IB.202 IB.582 IB.414 IB.415 IB.168 IB.52 IB.53 IB.146 IB.416 IB.54 IB.55 IB.251 IB.252 IB.424 IB.203 IB.348 IB.147 IB.56 IB.57 IB.465 IB.456 IB.41 IA.27 IB.381 IB.253 IB.58 IB.471

P 536 P 542 P 545 P 546 P 548 P 550 P 553 P 555 P 562 P 568 P 570 P 572 P 573 P 574 P 576 P 577 P 584 P 587 P 591 P 594 P 598 P 603 P 611 P 644 P 645 P 650 P 651 P 652 P 658 P 659 P 660 P 661 P 684 P 691 P 705 P 709 P 713 P 726 P 730

IB.254 IB.466 IB.169 IB.170 IB.59 IB.171 IB.60 IB.61 IB.172 IB.62 IB.583 IB.204 IB.63 IB.457 IB.64 IB.350 IB.331 IB.491 IB.318 IB.340 IB.511 IB.33 IA.5 IB.333 IB.173 IB.304 IB.467 IB.65 IA.21 IB.225 IB.306 IB.489 IB.256 IB.620 IB.66 IB.67 IB.68 IB.143 IB.365

181

P 750 P 751 P 757 P 758 P 760 P 765 P 766 P 767 P 768 P 770 P 776 P 777 P 791 P 795 P 796 P 801 P 806 P 828 P 843 P 853 P 961 P 963 P 973 P 992 P 1010 P 1042 P 1043 P 1053 P 1059 P 1061 P 1062 P 1121 P 1122 P 1167 P 1168 P 1169 P 1170 P 1171 P 1172

IB.445 IB.435 IB.446 IB.34 IA.18 IB.436 IB.447 IB.270 IB.437 IB.438 IB.439 IB.425 IB.440 IB.33 IA.32 IB.611 IB.349 IB.366 IB.396 IB.49 IA.23 IB.69 IA.28 IB.468 IB.397 IB.257 IB.493 IB.418 IB.174 IB.70 IB.71 IB.175 IB.205 IB.299 IB.206 IB.72 IB.73 IB.148 IB.176

182

MOCHLOS NEOPALATIAL SETTLEMENT ON THE COAST

P 1173 P 1174 P 1175 P 1176 P 1182 P 1183 P 1187 P 1189 P 1191 P 1192 P 1193 P 1195 P 1196 P 1203 P 1205 P 1210 P 1233 P 1234 P 1235 P 1236 P 1237 P 1243 P 1244 P 1249 P 1251 P 1270 P 1273 P 1274 P 1286 P 1288 P 1289 P 1290 P 1292 P 1293 P 1294 P 1302 P 1305 P 1307 P 1308

IB.429 IB.74 IB.75 IB.149 IB.177 IB.76 IB.77 IB.494 IB.178 IB.78 IB.79 IB.448 IB.398 IB.80 IB.305 IB.179 IB.81 IB.82 IB.83 IB.84 IB.85 IB.419 IB.31 IB.512 IB.538 IB.86 IB.621 IB.378 IB.87 IB.622 IB.475 IB.476 IB.607 IB.88 IB.449 IB.89 IB.90 IB.91 IB.92

P 1309 P 1335 P 1339 P 1341 P 1344 P 1346 P 1360 P 1365 P 1370 P 1372 P 1373 P 1394 P 1395 P 1399 P 1402 P 1403 P 1407 P 1410 P 1412 P 1413 P 1416 P 1552 P 1561 P 1579 P 1627 P 1630 P 1631 P 1632 P 1683 P 1686 P 1726 P 1739 P 1764 P 1765 P 1805 P 1816 P 1829 P 1857 P 1876

IB.472 IB.539 IB.93 IB.584 IB.540 IB.328 IB.513 IB.514 IB.515 IB.585 IB.586 IB.94 IB.36 IA.30 IB.95 IB.96 IB.541 IB.97 IB.98 IB.99 IB.399 IB.400 IB.207 IB.100 IB.420 IB.101 IB.180 IB.10 IA.19 IB.573 IB.542 IB.103 IB.104 IB.105 IB.106 IB.543 IB.107 IB.458 IB.18

P 1877 P 1885 P 1889 P 1906 P 1907 P 1908 P 1911 P 1929 P 1935 P 1937 P 1941 P 1948 P 1965 P 1968 P 1974 P 1982 P 1984 P 1985 P 2022 P 2024 P 2030 P 2031 P 2067 P 2094 P 2118 P 2156 P 2157 P 2158 P 2159 P 2160 P 2162 P 2163 P 2185 P 2186 P 2187 P 2189 P 2191 P 2192 P 2193

IA.31 IB.587 IB.182 IB.588 IB.589 IB.544 IB.577 IB.108 IB.574 IB.109 IB.369 IB.545 IB.590 IB.591 IB.592 IB.578 IB.503 IB.546 IB.516 IB.547 IB.459 IB.477 IB.110 IB.51 IA.33 IB.150 IB.151 IB.111 IB.112 IB.113 IB.183 IB.184 IB.231 IB.208 IB.209 IB.244 IB.210 IB.211 IB.212

CONCORDANCE A

P 2194 P 2195 P 2196 P 2198 P 2199 P 2206 P 2210 P 2214 P 2218 P 2221 P 2222 P 2224 P 2226 P 2229 P 2230 P 2231 P 2232 P 2233 P 2234 P 2235 P 2236 P 2237 P 2238 P 2239 P 2240 P 2241 P 2242 P 2243 P 2244 P 2247 P 2248 P 2249 P 2267 P 2269 P 2272 P 2274 P 2279 P 2281 P 2289

IB.232 IB.233 IB.152 IB.362 IB.363 IB.579 IB.478 IB.593 IB.575 IB.548 IB.518 IB.519 IB.319 IB.320 IB.213 IB.185 IB.186 IB.214 IB.227 IB.228 IB.187 IB.520 IB.623 IB.506 IB.507 IB.624 IB.521 IB.114 IB.450 IB.188 IB.451 IB.625 IB.522 IB.549 IB.535 IB.550 IB.551 IB.552 IB.553

P 2291 P 2298 P 2303 P 2304 P 2308 P 2309 P 2310 P 2311 P 2314 P 2318 P 2320 P 2322 P 2326 P 2327 P 2328 P 2329 P 2330 P 2331 P 2332 P 2333 P 2334 P 2335 P 2338 P 2353 P 2356 P 2381 P 2391 P 2422 P 2440 P 2447 P 2448 P 2463 P 2464 P 2472 P 2473 P 2474 P 2475 P 2479 P 2480

IB.554 IB.555 IB.198 IB.215 IB.612 IB.246 IB.247 IB.426 IB.189 IB.556 IB.401 IB.495 IB.496 IB.271 IB.334 IB.300 IB.626 IB.115 IB.116 IB.238 IB.627 IB.628 IB.479 IB.523 IB.557 IB.558 IB.272 IB.559 IB.524 IB.594 IB.312 IB.273 IB.258 IB.470 IB.525 IB.259 IB.266 IB.260 IB.261

183

P 2493 P 2494 P 2495 P 2496 P 2507 P 2516 P 2519 P 2520 P 2524 P 2525 P 2526 P 2527 P 2528 P 2529 P 2530 P 2531 P 2539 P 2564 P 2565 P 2577 P 2578 P 2579 P 2580 P 2581 P 2582 P 2583 P 2584 P 2585 P 2586 P 2588 P 2589 P 2590 P 2591 P 2594 P 2596 P 2611 P 2612 P 2613 P 2614

IB.117 IB.144 IB.118 IB.629 IB.560 IB.613 IB.119 IB.630 IB.216 IB.497 IB.498 IB.274 IB.441 IB.631 IB.262 IB.632 IB.561 IB.370 IB.267 IB.120 IB.19 IA.8 IA.6 IA.7 IA.4 IA.3 IB.504 IB.402 IB.421 IB.382 IB.460 IB.321 IB.371 IB.562 IB.121 IB.239 IB.217 IB.633 IB.372

184

MOCHLOS NEOPALATIAL SETTLEMENT ON THE COAST

P 2616 P 2617 P 2619 P 2620 P 2621 P 2622 P 2668 P 2669 P 2670 P 2677 P 2684 P 2685 P 2686 P 2687 P 2689 P 2690 P 2699 P 2700 P 2701 P 2702 P 2704 P 2705 P 2706 P 2711 P 2712 P 2715 P 2720 P 2759 P 2760 P 2761 P 2762 P 2763 P 2764 P 2765 P 2766 P 2767 P 2768 P 2770 P 2771

IB.322 IB.268 IB.634 IB.383 IB.461 IB.373 IB.229 IB.563 IB.351 IB.526 IB.352 IB.379 IB.384 IB.403 IB.275 IB.564 IB.276 IB.374 IB.404 IB.342 IB.565 IB.566 IB.430 IB.608 IB.288 IB.527 IB.567 IB.595 IB.122 IB.240 IB.635 IB.56 IA.24 IB.35 IA.1 IA.1 IA.12 IB.123 IB.313

P 2772 P 2774 P 2775 P 2777 P 2778 P 2779 P 2784 P 2796 P 2801 P 2802 P 2803 P 2805 P 2810 P 2816 P 2824 P 2826 P 2827 P 2828 P 2829 P 2843 P 2857 P 2858 P 2859 P 2861 P 2862 P 2863 P 2864 P 2866 P 2867 P 2868 P 2869 P 2870 P 2871 P 2875 P 2877 P 2890 P 2892 P 2894 P 2895

IB.636 IB.191 IB.30 IA.14 IB.637 IB.218 IB.569 IB.124 IB.596 IB.323 IB.192 IB.153 IB.528 IB.570 IB.571 IB.597 IB.480 IB.277 IB.485 IB.529 IB.442 IB.125 IB.126 IB.127 IB.375 IB.364 IB.530 IB.128 IB.508 IB.129 IB.2 IA.34 IB.443 IB.248 IB.59 IB.638 IB.343 IB.219 IB.531

P 2903 P 2904 P 2905 P 2906 P 2908 P 2910 P 2918 P 2923 P 2924 P 2927 P 2929 P 2930 P 2931 P 2932 P 2933 P 2934 P 2935 P 2936 P 2937 P 2938 P 2940 P 2941 P 2943 P 2944 P 2945 P 2946 P 2948 P 2953 P 2957 P 2961 P 2962 P 2966 P 2967 P 2969 P 2970 P 2971 P 2973 P 2974 P 2976

IB.130 IB.324 IB.599 IB.509 IB.600 IB.353 IB.278 IB.510 IB.452 IB.289 IB.385 IB.499 IB.500 IB.431 IB.422 IB.314 IB.63 IA.1 IB.532 IB.601 IB.533 IB.481 IB.376 IB.405 IB.640 IB.315 IB.360 IB.572 IB.534 IA.9 IB.279 IB.386 IB.387 IB.432 IB.346 IB.131 IB.345 IB.354 IB.302

CONCORDANCE A

P 2977 P 2981 P 2982 P 2983 P 2986 P 2988 P 2989 P 2991 P 2992 P 2993 P 2994 P 3000 P 3001 P 3002 P 3003 P 3004 P 3005 P 3007 P 3008 P 3009 P 3010 P 3011 P 3012 P 3013 P 3014 P 3015 P 3016 P 3017 P 3018 P 3028 P 3030 P 3033 P 3034 P 3035 P 3036 P 3037 P 3038 P 3039 P 3040

IB.280 IB.154 IB.406 IB.344 IB.602 IB.462 IB.641 IB.642 IB.325 IB.643 IB.347 IB.469 IB.281 IB.234 IB.463 IB.282 IB.644 IB.501 IB.193 IB.226 IB.645 IB.220 IB.221 IB.646 IB.335 IB.283 IB.235 IB.194 IB.453 IB.284 IB.285 IB.536 IB.580 IB.407 IB.454 IB.132 IB.133 IB.134 IB.486

P 3041 P 3042 P 3045 P 3047 P 3048 P 3084 P 3085 P 3117 P 3118 P 3130 P 3131 P 3132 P 3133 P 3134 P 3135 P 3136 P 3137 P 3139 P 3141 P 3142 P 3160 P 3161 P 3163 P 3164 P 3165 P 3170 P 3171 P 3193 P 3196 P 3197 P 3199 P 3203 P 3208 P 3209 P 3227 P 3233 P 3234 P 3235 P 3243

IB.135 IB.195 IB.647 IB.648 IB.473 IB.245 IB.502 IB.614 IB.196 IB.482 IB.136 IB.388 IB.236 IB.649 IB.650 IB.290 IB.291 IB.222 IB.615 IB.292 IB.389 IB.155 IB.423 IB.316 IB.432A IB.249 IB.505 IB.483 IB.576 IB.53 IA.35 IB.145 IB.303 IB.286 IB.326 IB.616 IB.156 IB.237 IB.287

185

P 3369 P 3370 P 3411 P 3412 P 3413 P 3538 P 3696 P 3884 P 4042 P 4043 P 4044 P 4088 P 4089 P 4090 P 4091 P 4221 P 4668 Pb 6 Pb 16 Pb 31 Pb 32 Pb 34 S3 S 11 S 16 S 21 S 22 S 25 S 31 S 32 S 36 S 37 S 40 S 44 S 46 S 48 S 49 S 57 S 59

IB.293 IB.137 IB.377 IB.408 IB.409 IB.617 IB.157 IB.241 IB.410 IB.444 IB.487 IB.138 IB.139 IB.140 IB.141 IB.142 IB.230 IC.297 IC.298 IC.299 IC.300 IC.301 IC.178 IC.179 IC.20 IA.10 IC.180 IC.211 IC.210 IC.185 IC.186 IC.212 IC.174 IC.168 IC.207 IC.181 IC.213 IC.187 IC.188

Concordance B

Contexts and Catalog Numbers in Mochlos vols. IA, IB, IC A north room; IC.203, IC.226, IC.227, IC.228, IC.229, IC.230, IC.231, IC.232, IC.233, IC.234, IC.235, IC.236, IC.237, IC.238, IC.239, IC.240, IC.249, IC.250, IC.279, IC.280, IC.285, IC.459 A.1; 100 surface, IB.23 A.1; 101, IB.411 A.1; 101.1, IC.323, IC.495, IC.496 A.1; 111 and 114, IC.523 A.1; 111.1, IB.317, IB.356, IB.357, IC.178, IC.409 A.1; 111.2, IB.434, IB.638, IC.166, IC.168, IC.186, IC.359, IC.360, IC.368 A.1; 113, IB.292 A.1; 113.3 and A.2.212 part 3, IB.327 A.1; 113.3, IB.222, IB.316, IB.336, IB.391, IB.402, IB.464, IB.588, IB.589, IB.631, IC.398 A.1; 113.4, IB.155, IB.269, IB.309, IB.310, IB.390, IB.395, IB.413, IB.417, IB.433, IB.484, IB.544, IB.6, IB.609, IB.611, IC.241, IC.30, IC.31, IC.446 A.1; 113.4; Siteia Museum 10024, IB.329 A.1; 113.4; Siteia Museum 9934, IB.297 A.1; 114.1, IB.615, IC.346, IC.381, IC.389, IC.397 A.1; 115, IC.524 A.10; 2310N.1, IC.581

A.10; 2310N.1-3, IB.326 A.10; 2310N.2, IB.109, IB.451, IC.410, IC.417, IC.556 A.10; 2310N.3, IB.114, IB.156, IB.237, IB.526, IB.616, IC.172, IC.311, IC.426 A.1-4 doorway; 115.1, IC.400, IC.429 A.2; 201.1, IC.445 A.2; 205.3, IB.290 A.2; 208.1, IB.20, IB.48, IC.278 A.2; 208.2 part 1, IB.238, IC.301, IC.33, IC.383 A.2; 208.3, IB.532 A.2; 212 part 1, IB.550, IC.224 A.2; 212 part 3, IB.518, IB.519, IB.522, IB.535, IB.548 A.2; 212 part 4, IB.549, IB.551, IB.552, IB.553, IB.554, IB.555, IB.556 A.2; 212.1, IB.16, IB.215, IC.153, IC.399 A.2; 212.1-5, IC.525 A.2; 212.2 and 212.3 parts 3, IB.351 A.2; 212.2 part 1, IB.619 A.2; 212.2 part 3, IB.394, IB.495, IC.270, IC.472, IC.518 A.2; 212.2 part 4, IB.19, IB.163, IB.348, IC.251, IC.283, IB.14 A.2; 212.3 part 1, IB.151, IB.159, IB.160, IB.165, IB.201, IB.208, IB.223, IB.232, IB.300, IB.355, IB.426, IB.626, IC.246, IC.254, IC.460

188

MOCHLOS NEOPALATIAL SETTLEMENT ON THE COAST

A.2; 212.3 part 2, IB.12, IB.35, IB.162, IB.200, IB.496, IC.24, IC.34 A.2; 212.3 part 3, IB.13, IB.17, IB.150, IB.161, IB.164, IB.185, IB.211, IB.212, IB.319, IB.362, IB.501, IB.505, IB.627, IB.628, IC.154 A.2; 212.3 part 3, IB.368 A.2; 212.3 part 4, IB.18, IB.244, IB.271, IB.401, IC.455 A.2; 212.3, IB.47, IB.51, IB.242, IC.379, IC.421 A.2; 212.4 part 1 and 2601.3, IC.155 A.2; 212.4 part 1, 212.5, IB.202 A.2; 212.4 part 1, IB.21, IB.32, IB.33, IB.34, IB.49, IB.166, IB.610, IB.612, IC.103, IC.256 A.2; 212.4 part 2, IB.113, IB.189, IB.198, IB.209, IB.582 A.2; 212.4 part 3, IB.4, IB.5, IB.11, IB.24, IB.29, IB.31, IB.210, IB.243, IB.358, IB.581 A.2; 212.4 part 4 and 212.3 part 1, IB.296 A.2; 212.4 part 4 and 212.5 part 3, IB.334 A.2; 212.4 part 4, IB.26, IB.30, IB.37, IB.40, IB.116, IB.137, IB.158, IB.199, IB.246, IC.87, IC.269, IC.271, IC.281, IC.299 A.2; 212.4, IC.255, IC.380 A.2; 212.5 part 2, IB.15, IB.25, IB.154, IB.187, IB.233, IB.575, IB.618 A.2; 212.5 part 3, IB.22, IB.36, IB.38, IB.111, IB.112, IB.115, IB.183, IB.228, IB.247, IC.27, IC.275, IC.300, IC.465, IC.473, IC.498 A.2; 212.5 part 4, IB.1, IB.27, IB.152, IB.186, IB.203, IB.213, IB.214, IB.227, IB.231, IB.479, IC.499, IC.500 A.2; 212.5 parts 2 and 4, 212.3 part 4, 212.4 part 2, IB.184 A.2; 212.5 parts 2 and 3, IB.320 A.2; varia, IB.644 A.3; 112.1, IB.577, IC.354 A.3; 112.3, IB.2, IB.389, IB.432A, IC.320, IC.497 A.3-6; 708.1, IC.304, IC.388 A.4 baulk; 80.1, IC.350 A.4 pit; 718 and 719, IC.527

A.4 pit; 718.1, IC.54, IC.185, IC.286, IC.306, IC.318, IC.331, IC.339, IC.340, IC.364 A.4 pit; 719, IC.552 A.4 pit; 719.1, IB.304 A.4,7,8 surface; 801.1, IC.430 A.4; 116.2, IC.212, IC.378 A.4; 116.3, IC.244, IC.266, IC.287, IC.296, IC.370 A.4; 213.1 part 1, IB.8, IB.9 A.4; 213.1 part 3, IB.28, IB.39 A.4; 213.1 part 4, IB.3 A.4; 213.1, IC.57, IC.257, IC.290 A.4; 213.2, IB.50, IC.404, IC.596 A.4; 702.2, IC.288 A.4; 710 and 805, IC.551 A.4; 710, 715 and 810, IC.526 A.4; 710.1, IB.438, IC.55, IC.151, IC.579 A.4; 710.2, IB.424 A.4; 712.1, IC.88, IC.130, IC.169 A.4; 712.1/715.1 and A.7.807.4, IB.308 A.4; 712.2, IC.92 A.4; 715.1, IB.2A, IB.263 A.4; 717.1, IC.297, IC.503 A.4; 718.1, IB.286, IC.86 A.4; 719.1, IC.211 A.4; 801.3, IC.213 A.4; 805.1, IB.331, IB.425, IC.127, IC.152, IC.515, IB.307, IB.439, IC.437 A.4; 805.3, IB.437 A.4; 810.2, IC.345 A.4; 810.2.baulk, IB.303 A.4; 810.3, IC.208 A.4; 812.1, IB.490, IC.253, IC.319, IC.412, IC.441 A.5; 708, IC.528 A.5; 708.3, IB.471 A.5; 714, IC.215, IC.252, IC.438, IC.439, IC.529, IC.553 A.6; 2306N, IB.367 A.6; 707.1, IC.243

CONCORDANCE B

A.6; 707.2, IC.453 A.6; 713.2 and 3, IB.365 A.6; 713.2, IC.361, IC.416 A.6; 713.3, IC.28 A.6; 722.2, IB.428, IB.587, IC.14, IC.267 A.6; 723.1, IC.333 A.7; 1910.1, IC.484, IC.485 A.7; 801.2, IB.287, IB.293, IB.486, IC.12 A.7; 801.3, IC.180 A.7; 807, IC.554 A.7; 807.1, IB.338 A.7; 807.3, IB.295 A.7; 807.4, IB.10, IB.253, IB.350, IB.361, IB.457, IB.465, IC.181 A.8; 808.2, IB.436 A.8; 808.3, IC.53, IC.134, IC.555 A.9; 1909.1, IB.65, IB.66, IB.620, IC.138, IC.32, IC.263, IC.530 A.9; 1912, IC.29 A.9; 1912.1, IB.467, IB.478, IC.216, IC.264, IC.265, IC.425 A.9; 1912.2, IB.593 A.RY pit; 2315N.4, IB.138, IB.139, IB.140, IB.141, IB.142 A.RY; 2301.1, IC.486 A.RY; 2301.2, IB.468, IB.600, IB.617, IC.58 A.RY; 2301.3, IB.86, IB.87, IB.117, IB.144, IB.257, IB.621, IC.202 A.RY; 2301.4, IB.524 A.RY; 2307, IB.572 A.RY; 2307.2, IB.360, IC.116, IC.45, IC.49, IC.56, IC.59, IC.510 A.RY; 2307.3, IC.19 A.RY; 2307.4, IB.110, IC.214, IC.353 A.RY; 2309.2, IB.523, IC.277, IC.470 A.RY; 2309.3, IC.322 A.RY; 2315N.4, IC.128, IC.316, IC.376 A.RY; 2315N.5, IC.13, IC.315, IC.327, IC.377, IC.384, IC.411, IC.447, IC.464 A.surface; 801.1, IC.580

189

A-B road; 1601.1, IB.45, IC.94 A-B road; 1602.1, IC.15, IC.191, IC.367, IC.434, IC.443 A-B road; 1606, IC.574 A-B road; 1606.1, IB.55, IB.579, IC.258 A-B road; 1606.2, IB.41, IB.46, IC.137, IC.188, IC.189, IC.190, IC.440, IC.505, IC.506, IC.548 A-B road; 1904.1, IB.492, IB.511, IC.97, IC.98, IC.147, IC.469, IC.508, IC.549 A-B road; 2110.3, IB.517, IB.541 A-B road; 25/2600, IC.115 A-B road; 25/2601, IC.84, IC.489 A-B road; 2601.3, IC.351 A-B surface.1600, IC.468 B surface; 2900, IC.483 B.1; 308.1, IB.262, IB.632 B.1; 308.2, IB.255, IB.259, IB.266, IB.604, IB.605, IB.606 B.1; 310.1, IB.470, IB.525 B.1; 401.1, IC.531 B.1; 402.1 part 2, IB.330 B.1; 402.1, IB.258, IB.260, IB.261, IC.268, IC.595 B.1; 402.2, IB.273, IC.557 B.1; 408.1, IC.582 B.10 bin; 2507.1, IC.541 B.10; 1501.6, IC.540 B.10; 2009, IC.173 B.10; 2011.1, IC.4, IC.408 B.10; 2011.2, IB.83, IC.141 B.10; 2011.3, IB.387, IC.17, IC.325 B.10; 2012, IC.9, IC.44, IC.467 B.10; 2102.1, IC.139 B.10; 2103.2, IB.188, IB.282, IB.302, IB.305, IB.345, IB.354, IB.432, IB.473, IB.506, IB.520, IB.623, IB.624, IC.7, IC.8, IC.40, IC.51, IC.140, IC.193, IC.195, IC.282, IC.365, IC.393, IC.435, IC.449, IC.509 B.10; 2301.1, IC.39 B.10; 24/1510.2, IB.454, IC.41, IC.50

190

MOCHLOS NEOPALATIAL SETTLEMENT ON THE COAST

B.10; 24/2510.1, IC.46 B.10; 24/2510.2 and alcove.2110.2, IC.192 B.10; 24/2510.2, IB.245, IB.407, IB.453, IB.580, IC.162 B.10; 24/2510.3, IC.493, IC.598 B.10; 24/2511, IC.61, IC.419 B.10; 24/2511.1, IB.291 B.10; 24/2519.1, IC.47 B.10; 2507, IC.405, IC.479 B.10; 2507.1, IC.567 B.10-11; 2401.1, IC.583 B.10-13 surface; 2500.1, IC.165 B.10-13; 2500.1, IB.93, IC.118, IC.584 B.11,12; 2003.1/2005.1, IB.459 B.11; 20/2403.1, IC.356 B.11; 20/2404W.1, IC.477 B.11; 20/2406W, IC.418 B.11; 20/2406W.1-3, IB.369 B.11; 20/2406W.2, IC.197 B.11; 20/2409, IC.516 B.11; 20/2409W, IB.344, IB.386, IB.406, IC.543, IC.568 B.11; 2005.2, IB.131, IB.346 B.11; 2005.3, IB.272 B.11; 2403 and 20/2406W, IC.542 B.11; 2404, IC.194 B.11; 2404.1, IB.592 B.11; 2407.1, IB.312, IC.117 B.11; 2407.2, IC.591 B.11-12; 20/2404W, IC.585 B.12; 20/2408, IC.146 B.12; 20/2408W.3, IC.199 B.12; 20/2409.2, IC.597 B.12; 20/2412W.1, IB.104, IB.105, IC.170, IC.183, IC.203 B.13 surface; 2502.2, IB.558 B.13; 2500.1 surface, IB.234, IB.539, IB.540, IB.584 B.13; 2500.1, IC.119 B.13; 2505.2, IC.407, IC.511, IC.522

B.13E; 2503.1, IB.559, IC.242, IC.544 B.13E; 2503.2, IB.73, IB.76, IB.77, IB.88, IB.89, IB.90, IB.91, IB.148, IB.149, IB.176, IC.42 B.13W and B.4W surface; 2505.2 and1801.1, IB.476 B.13W; 2502.2, IC.426A B.13W; 2505.1, IB.463, IB.536, IC.111, IC.545 B.13W; 2505.2, IB.70, IB.71, IB.72, IB.74, IB.75, IB.80, IB.82, IB.135, IB.174, IB.177, IB.195, IB.206, IB.281, IB.285, IB.299, IB.325, IB.347, IB.378, IB.429, IB.462, IB.469, IB.494, IB.507, IB.529, IB.602, IB.641, IB.642, IB.643, IB.648, IC.106, IC.196, IC.569, IC.592 B.13W; 2505.3, IB.284 B.2; 20/2407W, IC.357 B.2; 20/2415W.1, IB.560 B.2; 20/2415W.2 and 3, IC.198 B.2; 20/2415W.2, IB.441 B.2; 20/2415W.3, IB.444, IB.487, IB.613, IB.625, IB.629 B.2; 20/2418W, IB.121, IB.181, IB.216, IB.241, IB.274, IB.410, IB.458, IB.497, IB.498, IB.510, IB.521, IB.545, IC.35, IC.60, IC.120, IC.171, IC.184, IC.200, IC.223, IC.310, IC.314, IC.324, IC.349, IC.375, IC.403, IC.444 B.2; 20/2418W.1, IC.558 B.2; 2407, IC.326, IC.337 B.2; 303.1, IB.119, IB.224, IB.630, IC.221, IC.392, IC.395 B.2; 303.1; Siteia Museum 11031, IB.412 B.2; 303.2, IC.104 B.2; 309.1, IC.457 B.3 surface; 301, IC.129 B.3 surface; 600, IC.302, IC.338 B.3; 307, 603 and 609, IC.533 B.3; 307, IB.120, IB.190, IB.230, IB.265, IC.145, IC.179, IC.294, IC.303, IB.250, IB.100, IB.147, IB.267, IB.332, IB.370, IB.43, IC.295, IC.382, IC.532 B.3; 602.2, IC.329 B.3; 603 and 609, IC.559

CONCORDANCE B

B.3; 603, IB.7, IB.44, IB.170, IB.217, IB.239, IB.252, IB.264, IB.268, IB.322, IB.372, IB.373, IB.383, IB.455, IB.461, IB.633, IB.634, IC.317, IC.481, IC.90 B.3; 604.1, IC.423 B.3; 609.4, IB.69, IC.3 B.3; 609.5, IB.56, IC.220 B.3; 609.7, B.443 B.3; 610.2, IB.563 B.3; 610.3, IB.229 B.4 backfill, IC.402 B.4 pit; 1811.1, IC.348 B.4 surface; 1801.1, IC.414 B.4.W pits; 1810.1, IC.482 B.4.W; 1807.1, IC.513 B.4.W; 1809.1, IC.491 B.4.W; 1810.1, IC.492 B.4; 1806.1, IC.99, IC.148, IC.272, IC.432 B.4; 1809, IC.245 B.4; 1812.1, IC.478, IC.514 B.4; 2002, IC.328, IC.413 B.4; 2002.1, IC.113, IC.160, IC.276 B.4; 2010.1, IC.159 B.4E; 2002.1, IB.418 B.4E; 2002.2, IB.288, IB.472, IB.527, IB.607, IB.608 B.4E; 2002.3, IB.449 B.4W pit; 1808, IC.561 B.4W pit; 1810, IC.560 B.4W pit; 1811, IC.562 B.4W; 1801.1, IC.312, IC.372 B.4W; 1806.2, IB.430, IB.440 B.4W; 1807, IB.256 B.4W; 1808, IB.567 B.4W; 1809.1, IC.521 B.4W; 1811.1, IB.225 B.4W; 1812, IB.145 B.4W; 406.1, IB.276, IB.342, IB.374, IB.404, IB.565, IB.566 B.4W; 411.1, IC.307, IC.451

191

B.5 fill; 502.8, IB.143 B.5 pit; 502.4, IC.332 B.5 pit; 502.9, IC.487 B.5 pit; 507, IB.569 B.5 pit; 507.1 and 2, IB.123, IB.204, IB.218, IB.301, IB.637 B.5 pit; 507.1, IB.122, IB.167, IB.191, IB.240, IB.313, IB.339, IB.359, IB.537, IB.636 B.5 pit; 507.2, IB.146, IB.168, IB.197, IB.254, IB.42, IB.59, IC.401, IC.461, IC.501, IC.502 B.5; 401.1, IC.369 B.5; 405.1, IC.217, IC.534 B.5; 501.2, IC.305, IC.330 B.5; 501.3, IB.124, IB.491, IC.209 B.5; 501.4, IC.95 B.5; 502.1, IC.89 B.5; 502.5, IC.474 B.5; 502.6, IC.341 B.5; 507, IB.568 B.6; 1310.1, IB.53, IB.57, IB.128, IB.530, IC.210, IC.343, IC.422 B.6; 1310.2, IB.364, IB.508, IC.133 B.6; 1804.1, IB.423, IC.336, IC.431 B.6; 407.1, IB.125, IB.126 B.7 surface, IC.452 B.7; 1501.7, IC.25 B.7; 1503, IC.96, IC.164 B.7; 1710.1, IC.427, IC.428 B.7; 1711.1, IC.259 B.7; 1901.2, IC.16 B.7; 1902.1, IC.37 B.7; 1902.2, IC.321 B.7; 1910.2, IC.38, IC.124 B.7E; 1503.1, IB.324, IB.509, IB.599 B.7E; 1902.1, IB.130, IB.337 B.7E; 1910.2, IB.353, IB.396, IB.399, IC.347, IC.535 B.7W; 1301.1, IB.375 B.7W; 1301.2, IB.127 B.7W; 1301.3, IC.91, IC.161, IC.385

192

MOCHLOS NEOPALATIAL SETTLEMENT ON THE COAST

B.7W; 1309.2 part 2, IC.415 B.8; 1701.2, IB.129, IB.294 B.8; 1707, IB.432B B.8; 1707.1 and 1712, IB.393 B.8; 1707.1, IB.108, IB.182, IB.270, IB.278, IB.392, IB.427, IB.447, IC.466, IC.488, IC.536, IC.563 B.8; 1710.1, IC.480, IC.507 B.8; 1712, IC.564 B.8; 1712.1, IB.7, IB.54, IB.63, IB.78, IB.79, IB.172, IB.178, IB.179, IB.219, IB.248, IB.306, IB.333, IB.343, IB.474, IB.531, IB.598, IC.100, IC.101, IC.102, IC.108, IC.158, IC.274, IC.334, IC.335, IC.355, IC.358, IC.363, IC.371, IC.406, IC.420, IC.537 B.9 niche; 1706, IC.539 B.9; 1603.1, IC.187 B.9; 1607 and 1705, IC.538, IC.566 B.9; 1607.1, IB.62, IB.456 B.9; 1607.2, IB.483 B.9; 1702, IC.565 B.9; 1702.2, IB.283, IB.318, IB.335, IB.646, IC.36 B.9; 1705, IB.52, IB.193, IB.226, IB.561, IB.576, IC.105, IC.247, IC.260, IC.261, IC.291, IC.292, IC.293 B.9; 1705.1, IB.58, IB.60, IB.61, IC.462, IC.475, IC.517 B.9; 1705.2, IB.64, IB.220, IB.221, IB.381, IB.583, IB.645, IC.6, IC.424 B.9; 1706.1, IB.171, IB.647 B.9; 2111.2, IB.175, IB.205, IC.262, IC.284 B.9; 2111.3, IB.84, IB.132, IB.133, IB.134, IB.194, IB.235, IB.249 B.alcove;.2110.1, IB.450 B.alcove; 2110.2, IB.574, IC.114, IC.150, IC.206 B.alcove; 2110.3, IB.97, IB.99, IC.5, IC.110, IC.121, IC.289 B.alcove; 2120.3, IB.98 B.NT.1501.8, IC.143 B.NT; 1302, IC.174, IC.570

B.NT; 1501.8, IC.450 B.NT; 602.5, IB.493 B.NT; 602.7, IC.177, IC.366 B.NT; 608, IC.571 B.NT; 608.2, IC.362, IC.546 B.NT; 608.3, IB.340 B.NT; 609.7, IC.93 B.NW of Room 7; 1501.6, IC.396 B.NW of Room 7; 1501.8, IC.436 B.road; 1601, IC.1 B.road; 25/2601.1, IC.586 B.road; 25/2601.2, IC.587 B.road; 25/2602, IC.26, IC.225 B.RY; 2315N.3, IC.167 B.RY; 2404, IC.122 B.RY; 2404.3, IB.475, IB.622 B.RY; 2801.1 part 2, IB.595 B.RY; 2803, IC.176, IC.572 B.RY; 2803.1 part 1, IB.196 B.RY; 2803.1, IB.107 B.RY; 2803.2, IB.236, IB.594 B.RY; 2806 wall, IC.163 B.RY; 2806, IC.52 B.RY; 2806.1, IB.101, IB.102, IB.103, IB.136, IB.180, IB.377, IB.388, IB.409, IB.420, IB.542, IC.175, IC.458 B.RY; 2807.1, IB.118, IC.2 B.RY; 2809, IC.573 B.RY; 2809.1, IB.649, IB.650, IC.21, IC.547 B.RY; 2902.1, IB.95, IB.96, IC.142 B.RY; 2904.1, IC.78, IC.79, IC.80 C.unexcavated, IB.157 Cemetery; 1701.2, IA.34 Cemetery; 1909.1, IA.32, IA.33, IA.35 Ch 4; 1207.3, IB.578 Ch 6; 311.3, IC.373 Ch.1 and 4; 2203 and 1207.1, IA.3 Ch.1 and 4; 2300 and 1207.1, IA.9 Ch.1.2203.3, IC.289

CONCORDANCE B

Ch.1; 2200.1, IA.5 Ch.1; 2201.2, IA.11 Ch.1; 2203, IA.2, IA.4, IA.6, IA.7, IA.8, IA.10 Ch.1; 2210, IB.251, IB.398, IB.448, IB.504, IB.562, IB.603, IC.83, IC.85, IC.222 Ch.1; 2210.1, IB.382, IC.448 Ch.2 subfloor; 21/2213, IB.173, IB.349, IB.366, IB.415, IB.416, IB.435, IB.488, IB.489 Ch.2 subfloor; 21/2213.2, IB.380 Ch.2 subfloor; 21/2213; Siteia Museum 9941, IB.414 Ch.2 subfloor; 21/2214, IB.397, IB.445, IB.446 Ch.2 subfloor; 21/2214.3, IC.352 Ch.2, 4 and 5; 21/2206.2, 21/2211, 1308.2, IB.421 Ch.2; 11/1204, IC.309, IC.391 Ch.2; 11/1204.1, IC.576 Ch.2; 11/1204.2, IB.466, IC.248 Ch.2; 1204.2, 2211, IB.371 Ch.2; 21/2206, IB.460, IC.207 Ch.2; 21/2206.1, IC.490 Ch.2; 21/2206.2, IC.157, IC.218, IC.219 Ch.2; 21/2206.4, IB.341 Ch.2; 21/2211 and 21/2213, IB.321 Ch.2; 21/2211, IB.169, IC.182, IC.344, IC.577 Ch.2; 21/2211.1, IB.442 Ch.2; 21/2213.1, IC.512 Ch.2; 21/2218.1, IC.575 Ch.2; 2213, IB.405 Ch.3; 1201, IC.454 Ch.3; 1201.1, IB.275 Ch.3; 1201.2, IB.352, IB.379, IB.403, IB.533, IB.547, IB.564 Ch.3; 1202.1, IC.394 Ch.3; 1203.1, IB.400 Ch.3; 901.2, IC.494 Ch.3; 902, IB.384 Ch.4; 1207.1, IA.12, IA.13, IA.14, IA.15, IA.16 Ch.4; 1207.2, IA.17, IB.635 Ch.4; 1207.3, IB.503, IB.546, IC.149 Ch.4; 1308.2, IC.23

193

Ch.5; 1308.2, IB.153, IB.192, IB.323, IB.419, IC.308, IC.433 Ch.6; 311.1, IB.477, IB.499, IB.639 Ch.6; 311.2, IB.279, IB.311, IB.314, IB.315, IB.363, IB.376, IB.422, IC.125, IC.273, IC.387 Ch.6; 311.3 part 2, IB.328 Ch.6; 311.3, IB.452, IC.20, IC.123 Ch.6; 311.3 and 6, IB.431 Ch.6; 311.4, IA.1, IB.408 Ch.6; 311.6 part 2, IB.385 Ch.6; 311.6, IB.207, IB.481, IB.500, IB.516 Ch.6; 311.7, IB.640 Ch.B; 1, IC.550 Ch.entrance; 1310.1.1, IB.601 Ch.kiln surface, IC.313 Ch.kiln, IC.578 Ch.NT; 13,401, IC.342 Ch.NT; 13,403, IC.132 Ch.oven, IB.534, IB.614 Ch.oven; ash layer, IB.502 Ch.SE porch, IC.386 Ch.yard, IC.144 Ch.yard; 2100, IB.590, IB.591 Clay bed.surface; 2700, IC.463 Clay bed; 2701, IC.476, IC.520 Clay bed; 3101.4, IC.590 Clay bed; 3101.5, IC.593 Clay bed; 3101.7, IC.107 D.surface; 1000.1, IC.136 D.surface; 1100, IC.205 D.surface; 1400, IC.135 D.surface; 1400.1, IC.594 D.surface; 900, IC.131 D.Surface; 900.1, IC.519 D.Surface; 901, IC.504 D.Surface; 901.1, IC.390 D; 1101.3, IC.204 D; 1103.1, IC.156 Grave 1; 1606, IA.18

194

MOCHLOS NEOPALATIAL SETTLEMENT ON THE COAST

Grave 2; 2310N.3, IA.19, IA.20 Grave 3; 506.2, IA.21, IA.22, IA.23 Grave 3; 507.1, IA.24 Grave 4; 1308.1, IA.26, IA.27 Grave 4; 1501.6, IA.25, IA.28, IA.29 Grave 5; 2306N, IA.30 Grave 7; 20/2418W, IA.31 Kiln A; 2901.2, IC.18 Kiln A; 2901.3, IB.92, IB.513, IB.514, IB.515, IB.585, IB.586, IC.43, IC.112, IC.471 Kiln A; 2901.4, IB.81, IB.85, IB.289, IB.512, IB.538, IC.109 Kiln A; 2901.5, IB.277, IB.480, IB.485, IB.528, IB.570, IB.571, IB.597, IC.10

Kiln A; 2907, IC.81, IC.82 Kiln A; 2907.1, IB.280, IC.62, IC.63, IC.65, IC.66, IC.67, IC.68, IC.69, IC.71, IC.72, IC.73, IC.74, IC.75, IC.77, IC.374 Kiln A; 2907.3, IC.126 Kiln A; 2910.2, IC.48 Kiln B; 2801.2, IB.482, IB.573, IB.94, IC.201 Kiln B; 2804.2, IB.543 Kiln B; 2804.3, IB.106 Kiln B; 2808.1, IB.557, IB.596, IC.22

IC.64, IC.70, IC.76,

IC.11,

Index Aïdonia Korinthias, 8 Aigina, 88 Akrotiri. See Thera Alexiou, St., 4 Amenhotep III, 148 Amnissos, 110 amphibolite, 35–36, 67–69, 72–73, 82, 85, 87 amulet. See ceramic objects, feet ancestors, 141–142 anchors, 80–81 andesite, 74, 87 Anemospilia, 42 Apliki. See Cyprus Arabah Valley, 53 archaeobotany, 126–131 archaeomagnetic dating, 151–157 arenite sandstone, 66, 87 Arkalochori Cave, 53, 56–57, 110 Barber, E., 29 Basch, L., 6 beeswax, 21, 37 Betancourt, P., 29 birds. See fauna Blitzer, H., 71 bone objects, 40–41 botanical remains. See archaeobotany British Museum, 10 bronze. See copper and metal working Buchholz, H.-G., 54, 77 Burkert, W., 13 calcite, 35–36, 114 calc-schist, 74, 87 Cape Gelidonya, 53 cattle. See fauna

ceramic objects, 17–35 ball, 35 bats, 17–19, 24 crucibles, 35, 58 drains/gutters, 19–20 feet, 20–21, 141–142 flux, 35 gaming disc, 35 lamps, 21 loomweights, 28–33, 81 molds, 22–23 slabs, 24–27 stands, 27–28 tools, 28 wheels, 18, 33–34 Chalinomouri, Building A, 19, 21, 24, 27–28, 35–36, 39, 41, 45, 47, 54, 57, 61–62, 66–68, 71–73, 76, 79, 83–84, 86, 88, 90–92, 95, 99, 103, 117, 120–121, 124, 128, 132, 141–142, 151, 154 Chania-Kastelli, 57, 121, 147–148 chert, 35, 114 Chrysokamino, 53, 85, 90 Chrysostomos, 53 copper and copper-based metals, 45–59 geological sources, 52–59, 140 ingots, 45–47, 54–55 objects, 49–50, 54, 57–58 scrap, 50–52 slag 53 strips, 47–48, 54 waste/spill, 48–49, 55, 58 Cyclades, 53, 73, 77, 79, 88, 102–103, 115, 140 Cyprus, 46–49, 53, 55–59, 73, 77, 79–80, 140 dacite, 77, 88 Debla, 64

196

MOCHLOS NEOPALATIAL SETTLEMENT ON THE COAST

deer. See fauna Delos, 7, 11 dog. See fauna Downey, W., 156–157 Driessen, J., 148 dunite 88

Ialysos, 51 insect infestation, 130 Istron, 66

Eileithyia, 7 emery, 66, 71, 88 Energy Dispersive X-ray Fluorescence Analysis (ED XRF), 46–51, 55 Enkomi. See Cyprus Episkopi Phaneromeni. See Cyprus Evans, A., 5, 7, 10–11 Evely, R.D.G., 2, 101 exogamy, 29

Kastelli, 53 Kastri, Kythera, 103 Kato Syme, 53, 57 Kenna, V., 8 Kinnet Höyük, 56 Knossos, 13, 51, 53, 57, 65, 69, 72, 77, 79, 82, 85, 88, 103, 111, 121, 141–142, 148, 156–157 Kommos, 57, 61, 64, 69, 71–72, 88, 110, 121, 125, 148 Kotsakis, K., 130–131

fauna, 118–121. See also fish fish, 80, 119, 121–125 flora. See archaeobotany and wood charcoal fossils, 40 Franchthi Cave, 117 fresh water shells. See fauna Fuller, M., 153

Laser-Induced Breakdown Spectroscopy (LIBS), 47–52 Late Helladic III, 77, 90 Late Minoan IA, 54, 77, 90, 110, 156–157 Late Minoan IB, 4, 52, 55, 57, 66, 77, 90, 101–103, 110, 118, 120, 132, 139, 146–148, 153, 156–157 Late Minoan II, 148, 157 Late Minoan III, 81, 90, 118, 121, 146 Lavrion, 47–49, 52–53, 55–59, 140 Lead Isotope Analysis (LI), 46–48, 50, 52–53, 55–56, 140 lead metals, 52, 55 Lerna, 99 Leto, 7 Levi, D., 76 limestone, 35–36, 63, 65–66, 69–72, 74–77, 83, 86, 89, 141 Linear A, 8, 10 Linear B, 10, 14 lipid analyses, 21 looms. See textile working Lowrie, F., 153

Giali, 91 Gombrich, E., 10, 12 Gortyn, 134 Göttlicher, A., 6 Gournas. See stone implements, working surfaces and receptacles, basins Gournia, 19–20, 29, 32, 47, 50, 53, 57–58, 65, 70–73, 76–78, 82, 114, 140, 142 graphite, 114 Gray, D., 5 Grumach, E., 12 Hagia Eirene, Kea, 53, 79, 82 Hagia Photia, 87 Hagia Triada, 53–54, 57, 59, 77 Hagios Dimitrios-Kalavassos. See Cyprus Hansen, J., 133 hare. See fauna helms, M., 141–142 hematite, 78–79, 88 Herakleion Museum, 9, 11, 58 Herodotos, 7 hieroglyphic script. See Mochlos, Ship Cup Hiller, S., 12 Hittites, 56, 140 Homer. See Odyssey

Jones, G., 131 Jones, K., 121

Macdonald, C., 148 Mainland Greece, 140 Makrygialos, 76 Seal, 4, 10, 12–13 Mallia, 9, 21, 72, 76–77, 82, 85, 90, 99, 102, 110, 121 Mangafa, M., 130–131Z Manning, S., 148 Marinatos, N., 6–8, 12–13 Marinatos, Sp., 5, 13 marine invertebrates. See fauna Marketou, T., 148 Mavro Seli, 36, 66

INDEX

Mavrovouni. See Cyprus Melos, 91 Mesara, 66, 74, 80, 87, 140 metal working, 17, 22–24, 45–52, 54–55, 69, 75–76, 110, 140–142 metrology, 79 Michailidou, A., 79 Middle Minoan, 142 Minoan art, 4, 12 Minoan goddess, 4, 8, 13, 142 Minoan religion, 4–5, 141–142 Mitsotakis Collection, 6, 9 Mochlos Artisans’ Quarter, 19, 21, 24, 28, 35, 39, 41, 57, 61–63, 65, 67, 69, 71–73, 80, 84–86, 91–93, 95, 98– 103, 109, 111, 114–115, 118, 121–123, 134–135, 139–142 Building A, 3, 17–24, 35–36, 45–49, 54–56, 64, 66, 68–69, 73, 75–76, 78–79, 81–83, 92, 101, 110, 112–113, 118, 122–123, 126–127, 132–133, 145–146 foundry hoard, 46, 48–49 Grave 6, 146 potter’s pit, 18, 34, 75 shrine, 21, 46, 141 workrooms, 89 Building B, 17–19, 21, 24–25, 27, 33–35, 45, 47, 54–56, 64–65, 74–79, 81, 83, 92, 100–101, 112– 114, 117–118, 124, 127–128, 132, 135, 145–146 kilns, 18, 24–25, 151–154 workrooms, 89 gold ring, 4, 6, 8, 13 main settlement, 36, 63, 66, 69, 79, 81, 84, 88, 99, 101, 114, 125, 142 prepalatial cemetery, 51, 59, 65, 76, 141 Ship Cup, 3–15, 142 akrostolion, 3–6, 11 altar, 7–9 hieroglyphic script, 5, 10–12 ikrion, 4, 7–9 palm tree, 4, 6–7, 10–12 talismanic spray, 9–10 Morgan, L., 8–9 Morris, S., 12 mustelid. See fauna Mycenae, 11, 56 Mylona, D., 80 Myrtos, Phournou Koriphi, 90, 135 Myrtos, Pyrgos, 147–148 Naxos, 88, 90 Nemi, 5 Nerokourou, 57

197

Nilsson, M., 7–9 Nirou Chani, 57, 77, 110 obsidian, 73, 91–103 ocher, 67, 113 Odyssey 11, 139, 141 olive oil production, 19, 78, 127, 130 Onassoglou, A., 5, 8–10 Palaikastro, 19, 53, 57, 64–65, 69, 72, 77, 85, 90, 121, 125, 129, 156–157 Palmer, L., 14 Papadopoulos, J., 12 Papakonstantinou, C., 121 Petras, 64, 72, 85, 87 Petruso, C., 79 Phaistos, 57, 74, 76 Phanourakis, T., 11 Phillips, E., 134 Phylakopi, 102 phyllite, 18–20, 24, 28, 69–70, 77, 81, 86, 109 pig. See fauna Pini, I., 8 Platanos, 80 Plowistos, 14 Poros-Katsambas, 69, 75, 77, 102–103, 110 pottery basins and vats, 19 conical cup lamps, 21 pottery production, 17, 24, 33–34, 70, 76–77, 83, 113 Pseira, 61, 64, 71–72, 78, 82, 85, 88, 102–103, 110–111, 114, 125, 132–134 Psychro Cave, 57 pumice, 69, 71, 83, 110–111, 115 Pylos, 8 quartz, 86, 111–112 quartzite, 67, 69, 87 radiocarbon dates, 145–148 reptiles. See fauna rodent. See fauna Rose, M., 80, 121, 125 Russmann, E., 12 Rutkowski, B., 9 sandstone, 35, 72, 74, 76, 78, 83, 86 Santorini. See Thera Scandinavia, 14 schist. See phyllite Schweingruber, F., 134 Seager, R., 52 seeds. See archaeobotany

198

MOCHLOS NEOPALATIAL SETTLEMENT ON THE COAST

Séfériadès, M., 102 serpentine, 72 serpentinite, 35–36, 69, 82, 85, 87, 90, 114, 141 Shaw, M., 9 sheep/goat. See fauna shell. See fauna shell objects, 41 sieving, 119 siltstone, 35 silver, 53 Siteia, 87, 140 Sklavokambos, 64, 74, 76 Sklavopoulou, 53 Skouriotissa. See Cyprus Smith, H., 131 socio-economic conditions, 2, 84–85 spinning bowl. See ceramic objects, stands Stais, V., 7 Stathatos Collection, 5, 8 stone implements, 61–62 chipped stone, 91–103 blade blanks, 94–97 cores, 92–93 flakes, 93–94 manufacturing sequence, 99–100 modified pieces, 97–99 preparation pieces, 94 raw nodules, 92 rejuvenation flakes, 97 typological tools, 97–98 ground stone tools, 62–90 drilling, piercing, and engraving implements, 62, 71–73 drill-caps, 72 drill-guides, 72, 90 engravers and piercers, 73 miscellaneous 62, 82–83 bore-cores, 82 miscellaneous, 83 pivot stones, 83 percussive and abrasive hand-held implements, 62–71 differentially weathered cobbles, 71 elongated cobbles and pebbles, 70–71 handstones, 65–66, 90 implements with heavy abrasive wear, 66–67 implements with pecked or battered ends, 63–64 implements with pecked circumference, 64–65 irregularly shaped implements, 69–70 pestles, 65, 84 sub-cuboid cobbles with abraded surfaces, 67–69, 90 trapezoidal cobbles with abraded surfaces, 69

raw materials, 86–88. See also under individual stones technology, 89–90 tool kits, 68, 84, 88–89 weights, 62, 78–81 balance weights, 78–79, 84 biconically perforated weights, 80 loomweights, 81 naturally perforated weights, 81, 90 perforated weights, 80, 90 working surfaces and receptacles, 62, 73–78 anvils, 75 basins, 78 mortars, 76–77, 84 palettes, 74, 84 saddle querns, 73–74, 84 tables, 75–76, 84 whetstones, 74–75, 84 stone objects, 35–40. See also obsidian and fossils beads, 36, 39 finished vases alabastron, 35, 37 basins, 35, bowls, 35, 37 lamp, 35, 37 lids, 35, 37 palette, 35 tables, 35 tripod mortar, 35 fragmentary vases, 38–39 lens, 39 miscellaneous objects, 39–40 unfinished objects, 36–37, 40 stone vase making, 17, 35–40, 68–72, 82, 110–112, 114, 140–142 Taurus Mountains, 48–51, 55–59, 140 tephra, 110 textile working, 17, 25, 27–33, 40 Thales, 7 Thellier, E. and O., 152 Theophrastus, 134 Thera, 11, 40, 64, 67, 69, 74, 77, 79, 81–82, 88, 90, 99, 102–103, 129, 151, 156–157 Fleet Fresco, 5–6, 8, 13 tin, 48, 53, 55, 58, 141 Torrence, R., 102 trachyte, 35 trade, 140 Trianda, Rhodes, 147–148 Turkey. See Taurus Mountains Tylissos, 53, 79, 121

INDEX

Ugarit, 56, 79–80, 140–141 Uluburun, 54–57, 79, 140 Ura, 56, 140–141 Vallois, R., 8 van Effenterre, M., 6 Vathypetro, 33 Vitruvius, 133

Wedde, M., 15 weights, 29. See also ceramic objects, loomweights; lead metals; and stone implements, ground stone tools Wheeler, A., 121 wine production, 19 Wohlfeil, J., 12 wood charcoal, 131–135 Zakros, 53, 57, 75, 103, 156–157

Warren, P., 10, 36–39, 75 water flotation, 117

199

Tables

TABLE 1 Excav. No. CA 82

Description Tip of oxhide horn?

Room %As %Sn %Zn %Fe %Cu %Pb Consistent with A.1