Vases of Mycenaean morphology

This group is listed in Table 3. Concerning the choice of raw materials, Mycenaean craftsmen used mainly bioclastic limestone, brecciated limestone, conglomerate, serpentine, and lapis lacedaemonius. Even if petrographic analyses are necessary in order to identify the precise sources, the principal ones were certainly situated in southern mainland Greece, and Laconia can be identified as the place of origin of the lapis lacedaemonius (Bevan Reference Bevan2007, 164). The majority of the Mycenaean stone vases studied here were worked either from a fine and homogeneous serpentine (black or olive green) or from limestone. Other vessels appeared in more heterogeneous rocks like breccia or coarser limestone, such as the cup no. 54–352.

Table 3.

Vases of Mycenaean morphology.

Egyptian or Egyptianising stone vases

This group (Table 4) consists mostly of travertine vases. Concerning their chronological attribution, the jar fragment no. 55–51 belongs to a shape produced during the Predynastic – Old Kingdom period and the jar no. 53–162 to one produced during the Eighteenth Dynasty (Fig. 3). The two other pieces are too fragmentary to be clearly identified and dated.

Fig. 3.

Egyptian jar in travertine, XVIIIth dynasty, no. 53–162.

Table 4.

Egyptian or Egyptianising stone vases.

Cutting process of the external shape

During this early phase of the manufacturing process, the external form was definitively fixed: the surface was shaped and refined. The limestone vase no. 54–352 conserves the marks of this stage of work. The traces of the roughing-out process are still visible, undertaken by a combination of percussion, with a stone pounder, and abrasion processes (Fig. 7). A final smoothing and polishing operation was then generally carried out to erase the traces of this phase of shaping. The use of a rough abrasive, first carried out with blocks of a coarse-grained stone, was followed by a finer smoothing process. In this stage, stone polishers (Procopiou Reference Procopiou and Poursat2013a) or abrasive powders of decreasing grain-size and hardness (e.g. emery, crushed quartz or obsidian) were used with water.

Fig. 7.

Cup in limestone showing picking traces on the base, no. 54–352.

Hollowing process

The vases studied feature an inner space opened out generally into a globular or pear-shaped form. If opened and conical forms existed, they are uncommon. The majority of the Mycenaean products have a morpho-technological homogeneity. The same processes and techniques, based on the use of the tubular drill alone, were employed to create enlarged internal profiles (Tournavitou Reference Tournavitou1995, 218). A series of juxtaposed perforations were drilled to create the inner space. This technique is attested as early as the Old Kingdom (third millennium) in Egypt for the manufacture of granite sarcophagi (Stocks Reference Stocks2003, 172–3). The use of the ‘honeycombing’ technique for the stone vessel industry first appeared in Neopalatial Crete.Footnote ¹⁶ The different centres developed the practice in distinctive ways: the Minoan and Egyptian workshops employed it for making open vessels (like shallow and conical-wall bowls, cylindrical shapes); the Mycenaeans for closed shapes. Distinctive approaches were adopted also with respect to the organisation of the drilling sequences. In the Mycenaean system, the operator began by boring a first central shaft (Fig. 8b and 9b ). Then, he proceeded by successive drillings around this preliminary perforation, enlarging the cavity in a more or less systematic manner. When the area under the shoulder was reached, the craftsman carried out a series of drillings at an angle to the vertical axis of the vase. The operator could tip his tube for boring through or change the position of the draft (Fig. 8c ). Generally, the craftsmen employed drills of roughly the same diameters (ranging from 2 to 3 cm). But in certain cases, the use of two different sizes is visible on the same object (e.g. 53–114 and 54–410 jars, Fig. 9b ).Footnote ¹⁷ For example, on the jar no. 54–351 two tubes of 2.2 cm and 1.5 cm could be identified. The fine walls of these drills (between 1 and 2 mm, on average) suggest the use of copper or bronze tubes more than a reed with its thicker walls, as visible in traces left in the jar no. 54–352 (Fig. 10).

Fig. 8.

(a) Mycenaean jar, no. 54–406; (b) organisation of the series of tubular drillings around a first central bore; (c) series of tubular drilling below the shoulder of the vessel.

Fig. 9.

(a) Mycenaean Jar, no. 54–410; (b) traces in the cavity indicating the use of two tubes of different sizes.

Fig. 10.

Cup in limestone showing a trace of tubular drilling, indicating the use of metallic tubes with very thick wall, no. 54–352.

The bow drill was certainly employed to agitate the tube, as indicated by the drilling traces concordant with a back-and-forth rotating motion. Field experiments showed that the ideal size for the copper tube, manipulated by a single operator, with a bow drill, is a diameter of 2–3 cm. Traces of these dimensions were also identified on the Mycenaean vessels studied, corroborating this identification. Finally, the use of a small mobile drill like the vertical bow drill, allowing a relatively large flexibility of movement, seems likely. This feature is essential for the Mycenaean procedure in the eventuality of the use of an almost horizontal position of the tool for drilling some parts. Moreover, the abrasion patterns on the surfaces of these bored holes (and the cores removed) indicate a wear process achieved by free movement of abrasive particles against the stone. This excludes the use of any system for maintaining a fixed and stable contact between the tube, the abrasives and the stone, like the Minoan technology that involved the use of wax (Morero Reference Morero and Poursat2013). Here, the tubular drill was employed alone, with abrasives and water (Vargiolu et al. Reference Vargiolu, Morero, Boleti, Procopiou, Pailler-Mattei and Zahouani2007). Without further analysis and experimentation it is difficult to identify the abrasives employed. Potentially, they included sand, crushed emery, obsidian, quartz and pumice (Warren Reference Warren1969, 160; Evely Reference Evely1993, 192); for secure identification, the study of micro-traces must be carried out in the LTDS.

Once the drilling was completed, the craftsmen had recourse to a particular technique to extract the bore core. According to the experimental reconstructions, when the drill reaches a certain depth in the stone, a sharp blow applied to the tube itself will break off the bore core. This phenomenon certainly explains the absence of chisel cut-marks, unlike those observed on some of the Minoan bore cores (Morero Reference Morero2009).

Finally, some adjustments were carried out on the interior, accomplished with varying levels of skill. In some rare cases the craftsman has carefully removed almost all the drilling traces by polishing (cup no. 54–352 or the jar no. 54–403). The work marks that remained discernible in those jars suggest the following sequence: once the bore core was removed, the entire surface was pecked, rendering it roughly flattened. Traces of deeper impacts are visible in the bottom of the limestone cup no. 54–352 (Fig. 11b ). Then, the surface was rubbed down with one or more calibres of grinding and polishing stones to smooth the surface, as indicated by the overlapping of striation marks on the jar no. 54–403 (Fig. 12b–c ). But this technique seems rare and is only attested on these two pieces. Instead, on the majority of the vessels studied, in spite of the resulting roughness the annular grooves from the deeper cuts of the tube's end were left visible. This is particularly evident in areas inaccessible to the eye, such as under the shoulder.

Fig. 11.

(a) Cup in limestone, no. 54–352; (b) traces of picking and abrasion in the bottom.

Fig. 12.

(a) Mycenaean jar, no. 54–403; (b) scraping traces; (c) trace of a deeper tubular drilling operation remaining after the polishing of the surface.

Decorating and finishing processes

Some pieces reveal a decorative treatment that derives from the external shaping process itself: it is not simply an incised or worked linear ornamentation, but a group of elements cut so as to stand in relief, arranged and highlighted by incisions. In the same way, the deeply cut motifs on the surface of the limestone vase nos. 53–65, meant to receive inlays of stone, were an integral part of the external shaping procedure (Fig. 13a ). These strategies involve forward planning and anticipation. Thus, creating the decoration before the hollowing-out stage could be interpreted as a safeguard: the solid body will withstand the stresses of working the exterior better than a hollow one. Various systems of such decoration are identified: (a) inlay, (b) linear incisions, (c) relief decoration associated with linear incisions.

Fig. 13.

(a) Jar in limestone with trefoil or quatrefoil patterns made by series of tubular drillings, no. 53–65; (b) detail of the tubular drilling marks.

Inlay decoration appears on the limestone vase fragment no. 53–65. This technique was used to create the trefoil or quatrefoil patterns (Fig. 13b ). Each lobe was produced by tubular drills of 1.1 to 2.0 cm in diameter. Then, a paste or a piece of stone were fitted inside and stuck with an adhesive that has today disappeared.

The vases nos. 53–491, 54–352 and 54–404, and several fragments of the group 53–785, show an incised linear decoration. In general, the lines were made by the repeated passage of a cutting tool on the same line, excising a V-shaped groove. The presence in these grooves of isolated lines with deviated trajectories suggests the use of a free hand tool (Fig. 14a –c) like a thin metal or stone blade. However, isolated lines observed on the limestone vase indicate the use of a different tool for the engraving process, more likely a pointed instrument. One more type of tool can be suggested: the width of some incised grooves, together with the regularity of the incisions present inside them, indicates the use of an abrading stone (a polishing tool of fine sandstone or schist, working with an abrasive powder and water). Even if the use of the bow lathe is extremely doubtful, it cannot be totally excluded in theory for some deep cuts, characterised by extremely straight and constant proportions.Footnote ¹⁸

Fig. 14.

Mycenaean jars with incised linear decoration: (a) jar no. 54–352; (b) jar no. 53–491; (c) jar no. 54–404.

Linear enhancement is often associated with a relief-carved decoration and generally is meant to highlight the outlines of the relief element itself. It emphasises the different levels of the relief. The technique, previously described for the two-part jar decorated with an octopus, was certainly inherited from the Minoan workshops. Maintaining the difference in the coloration of the incised areas reinforces the contrast. Indeed, where the entire vessel was polished and sometimes coated with substances that promote uniformity and darkness to the colour of the rock, the incised grooves do not demonstrate the effects of this treatment and remain a colour-tone lighter. This type of decoration appears on the vase no. 53–781 (Fig. 15a–b ), on many fragments of the group 53–785, and on the handle no. 54–487 (Fig. 16). The decoration in relief was unquestionably the result of well-planned work. As mentioned previously, it had to be carried out at the same time as the preliminary stages of exterior shaping (see above). The linear cut-work, lighter in colour, was performed at the end of the process, once the surfaces were perfectly polished.

Fig. 15.

(a) Mycenaean jar with incised linear decoration, no. 53–781; (b) detail of the incised linear decoration.

Fig. 16.

Isolated handle with incised linear decoration, no. 54–487.

The final stage is that of the finishing process, aimed at making the vase's surface uniform by removing and/or hiding the remaining traces of the previous stage of work. This may be accomplished to various levels of excellence, up to the total disappearance of working traces and a perfectly polished surface. The fact that this final polishing operation was performed using abrasive powders of gradually reduced coarseness is attested by the decreasing thickness of the striations on the surface of some vessels (Fig. 17). The abrasive particles were manipulated against the wall of the vases by a piece of cloth or leather. Then, oil or wax could have been applied on the surface to further the impression of uniformity by darkening the stone (Fig. 18).

Fig. 17.

Jar fragment with a matte surface and polishing striations, fragment of the group no. 53–785.

Fig. 18.

Jar fragment with a glossy surface and grooves of extremely fine polishing, fragment of the group no. 53–785.

For this stage of work, it was not possible, using the interferometer, to obtain an accurate picture of the traces on the surfaces of the vessels with darkened walls. However, the use of a polishing technique, with the aim of giving a visual impression of smoothing, was observed on other earlier productions from the eastern Mediterranean. The Egyptian fragment no. 55–51 (see Table 4), also from the Ivory Houses, is a comparable example. Thus, the observation with the naked eye of the Mycenaean piece no. 53–785 reveals a matte surface, covered with deep grooves, while an initial examination of the Egyptian piece gives the impression of a homogeneous surface, smooth and shiny. However, the microscopic observation of both surfaces reveals completely different patterns. Indeed, compared with the Mycenaean artefact's wall (Fig. 19b ), the striations on the Egyptian vase are much more pronounced and the surface is rougher (Fig. 20b ). This illusion was created by the brightness of the surface, which was certainly obtained by covering the wall with wax.Footnote ¹⁹

Fig. 19.

(a) Fragment of a Mycenaean jar showing traces of polishing, fragment of the group no. 53–785; (b) view of the micro-striations from the polishing process, analysed on the fragment, by interferometer, at the LTDS.

Fig. 20.

(a) Fragment of the Egyptian vase, no. 55–51; (b) view of the micro-striations from the polishing process analysed on the piece by interferometer, at the LTDS.

Pieces manufactured apart from the body

Collars, handles and feet are always made separately and then joined to the body. The collars of the sample studied (vases no. 54–403 and 54–407) were made in the same stone, and probably from the same block of raw material, as the body itself (Fig. 21).

Fig. 21.

Mycenaean jar, no. 54–407.

We can therefore assume that they were carved in the same workshop at much the same time. The same techniques were used for the manufacture of both the separate parts and the bodies proper. The presence of facets on the handle no. 54–487 (Fig. 22a ) indicates the use of blades (of stone or metal), as well as a rough abrasive (Fig. 22b ), in its manufacture. The handle was also drilled from side to side with a tubular bit (Fig. 23). Finally, as for the body itself, the separate pieces were polished.

Fig. 22.

(a) Isolated handle, no. 54–487; (b) abrasion marks from the shaping process on the handle.

Fig. 23.

Isolated handle showing the traces related to a perforation made with tubular drill, no. 54–487.

The elements were then attached to the body by a system of rivets, pegs and wires. For example, three holes, still visible on the mouth of the vases nos. 54–403, 54–407, 53–162, were pierced for the attachment of a collar (Fig. 24–26). This system appears similar to the method developed, during the Second Palatial period in Crete, for the addition of a collar and handles on a Minoan rhyton and in the modification of Egyptian vases (Warren Reference Warren1969, 109). However, the Cretan origin of this technique is not necessarily certain as the method is attested also for the manufacture of Mycenaean metal vases. The handles were made separately from the bowl and then attached to the body by rivets (Laffineur Reference Laffineur1977, 75–6).

Fig. 24.

Mycenaean jar with perforations made for the adjunction of the collar, no. 54–403.

Fig. 25.

Mycenaean jar with perforations made for the adjunction of the collar, no. 54–407.

Fig. 26.

Mycenaean jar with perforations made for the adjunction of the collar, no. 53–162.

One vase seems to have been reworked. This is a piriform Egyptian jar (no. 53–162, Figs. 3 and 26). The drilling technique and the raw material undoubtedly indicate the Egyptian origin of the vessel (see below). This Egyptian vase had a collar, which was removed by Aegean craftsmen. The cutting marks resulting from this operation were then polished away and the perforations were made. Those holes were certainly intended for the addition of another collar or handles to make the whole conform more closely to local tastes, or for the attachment of something to close the mouth. Whether these changes were made by a Mycenaean workshop or by a Minoan craftsman is almost impossible to tell. However, as pointed out by Warren, transforming foreign vessels appeared to be rather a Cretan practice (Warren Reference Warren1969, 105–15; Warren Reference Warren, Laffineur and Betancourt1997); the vase could then be exported.