AEGAEUM 33Annales liégeoises et PASPiennes d’archéologie égéenne

KOSMOS

JEWELLERY, ADORNMENT AND TEXTILES IN THE AEGEAN BRONZE AGE

Proceedings of the 13th International Aegean Conference/ 13e Rencontre égéenne internationale, University of Copenhagen,

Danish National Research Foundation’s Centre for Textile Research, 21-26 April 2010

Edited by Marie-Louise NOSCH and Robert LAFFINEUR

PEETERSLEUVEN - LIEGE

2012

95274_Aegaeum 33 vwk I Sec11 25/04/12 09:54

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Preface viiAbbreviations ix

KEYNOTE ADDRESS

Robert LAFFINEUR For a Kosmology of the Aegean Bronze Age 3

I. ASPECTS OF KOSMOS

Elizabeth J.W. BARBERSome Evidence for Traditional Ritual Costume in the Bronze Age Aegean 25

Jean-Claude POURSATOf Looms and Pebbles: Weaving at Minoan Coastal Settlements 31

Andreas VLACHOPOULOS and Fragoula GEORMAJewellery and Adornment at Akrotiri, Thera: The Evidence from the Wall Paintings and the Finds 35

Marie-Louise NOSCHFrom Texts to Textiles in the Aegean Bronze Age 43

II. TEXTILES

Evanthia PAPADOPOULOUTextile Technology in Northern Greece: Evidence for a Domestic Craft Industry from

Early Bronze Age Archontiko 57

Malgorzata SIENNICKATextile Poduction in Early Helladic Tiryns 65

Vassilis P. PETRAKIS‘Minoan’ to ‘Mycenaean’: Thoughts on the Emergence of the Knossian Textile Industry 77

Maria Emanuela ALBERTI, Vassilis L. ARAVANTINOS, Maurizio DEL FREO, Ioannis FAPPAS, Athina PAPADAKI and Françoise ROUGEMONTTextile Production in Mycenaean Thebes. A First Overview 87

Marta GUZOWSKA, Ralf BECKS and Eva ANDERSSON STRAND“She was weaving a great Web”. Textiles in Troia 107

Margarita GLEBA and Joanne CUTLERTextile Production in Bronze Age Miletos: First Observations 113

Peter PAVÚKOf Spools and Discoid Loom-Weights: Aegean-type Weaving at Troy Revisited 121

Richard FIRTHThe Textile Tools of Demircihüyük 131

ii TABLE OF CONTENTS

Sascha MAUELSummarizing Results of a New Analysis of the Textile Tools from the Bronze Age Settlement

of Kastanas, Central Macedonia 139

Joanne CUTLERAriadne’s Thread: The Adoption of Cretan Weaving Technology in the Wider Southern Aegean

in the Mid-Second Millennium BC 145

Carlos VARIASThe Textile Industry in the Argolid in the Late Bronze Age from the Written Sources 155

Trevor VAN DAMMEReviewing the Evidence for a Bronze Age Silk Industry 163

Brendan BURKELooking for Sea-Silk in the Bronze Age Aegean 171

Vili APOSTOLAKOU, Thomas M. BROGAN and Philip P. BETANCOURTThe Minoan Settlement on Chryssi and its Murex Dye Industry 179

Philip P. BETANCOURT, Vili APOSTOLAKOU and Thomas M. BROGANThe Workshop for Making Dyes at Pefka, Crete 183

Thomas M. BROGAN, Philip P. BETANCOURT and Vili APOSTOLAKOUThe Purple Dye Industry of Eastern Crete 187

Helène WHITTAKERSome Reflections on the Use and Meaning of Colour in Dress and Adornment

in the Aegean Bronze Age 193

Pietro MILITELLOTextile Activity in Neolithic Crete: the Evidence from Phaistos 199

Eva ANDERSSON STRANDFrom Spindle Whorls and Loom Weights to Fabrics in the Bronze Age Aegean

and Eastern Mediterranean 207

Sophia VAKIRTZIAkr 8794: A Miniature Artifact from Akrotiri, Thera, and the “Whorl or Bead” Question

in Light of New Textile Evidence 215

Bernice JONESThe Construction and Significance of the Minoan Side-Pleated Skirt 221

Janice L. CROWLEYPrestige Clothing in the Bronze Age Aegean 231

Joanna S. SMITHTapestries in the Mediterranean Late Bronze Age 241

Abby LILLETHUNFinding the Flounced Skirt (Back Apron) 251

Valeria LENUZZADressing Priestly Shoulders: Suggestions from the Campstool Fresco 255

Eleni KONSTANTINIDI-SYVRIDIA Fashion Model of Mycenaean Times: The Ivory Lady from Prosymna 265

TABLE OF CONTENTS iii

Alessandro GRECOThe Background of Mycenaean Fashion: a Comparison between Near Eastern and Knossos

Documents on Sheep Husbandry 271

Joann GULIZIOTextiles for the Gods? Linear B Evidence for the Use of Textiles in Religious Ceremonies 279

Jörg WEILHARTNERGender Dimorphism in the Linear A and Linear B Tablets 287

Anne P. CHAPINDo Clothes Make the Man (or Woman?): Sex, Gender, Costume, and the Aegean

Color Convention 297

David A. WARBURTONEconomic Aspects of Textiles from the Egyptian Standpoint, in the Context of the Ancient Near East 305

Katherina ASLANIDOUSome Textile Patterns from the Aegean Wall-Paintings of Tell el-Dab‘a (‘Ezbet Helmi):

Preliminary Reconstructions and comparative Study 311

Emily Catherine EGANCut from the Same Cloth: The Textile Connection between Palace Style Jars and Knossian

Wall Paintings 317

Fritz BLAKOLMERBody Marks and Textile Ornaments in Aegean Iconography: Their Meaning and Symbolism 325

Elisabetta BORGNARemarks on Female Attire of Minoan and Mycenaean Clay Figures 335

III. JEWELLERY

Eleni SALAVOURAMycenaean “Ear pick”: A Rare Metal Burial Gift, Toilette or Medical Implement? 345

Birgitta P. HALLAGERPins and Buttons in Late Minoan III Dresses? 353

Ute GÜNKEL-MASCHEKReflections on the Symbolic Meaning of the Olive Branch as Head-Ornament in the Wall

Paintings of Building Xesté 3, Akrotiri 361

Cynthia COLBURN Bodily Adornment in the Early Bronze Age Aegean and Near East 369

Evangelos KYRIAKIDISHow to see the Minoan Signet Rings. Transformations in Minoan Miniature Iconography

379Julie HRUBY

Identity and the Visual Identification of Seals 389

Konstantinos KOPANIASRaw Material, Exotic Jewellery or Magic Objects? The Use of Imported Near Eastern

Seals in the Aegean 397

Salvatore VITALEDressing Up the Dead. The Significance of Late Helladic IIIB Adornments from Eleona

and Langada at Kos 407

iv TABLE OF CONTENTS

Petya HRISTOVA Overlaying Mycenae’s Masks in Funerary and Living Contexts of Symbolic Action: Jewellery for Body Adornment, Portraits, or Else? 417

Judit HAAS-LEBEGYEVConstructions of Gendered Identity through Jewellery in Early Mycenaean Greece 425

Maia POMADÈREDressing and Adorning Children in the Aegean Bronze Age: Material and Symbolic Protections

as well as Marks of an Age Group? 433

Robert Angus K. SMITH and Mary K. DABNEY Children and Adornment in Mycenaean Funerary Ritual at Ayia Sotira, Nemea 441

Lena PAPAZOGLOU-MANIOUDAKI Gold and Ivory Objects at Mycenae and Dendra Revealed. Private Luxury and/or Insignia Dignitatis 447

Jeffrey S. SOLES The Symbolism of Certain Minoan/Mycenaean Beads from Mochlos 457

Walter MÜLLER Concepts of Value in the Aegean Bronze Age: Some Remarks on the Use of Precious Materials for Seals and Finger Rings 463

Anastasia DAKOURI-HILD Making La Différence: The Production and Consumption of Ornaments in Late Bronze Age Boeotia 471

Jacke PHILLIPS On the Use and Re-Use of Jewellery Elements 483

Dora CONSTANTINIDIS and Lilian KARALI Floral or Faunal? Determining Forces on Minoan and Mycenaean Jewellery Motif Selection with a GIS 493

Magda PIENIĄŻEK Luxury and Prestige on the Edge of the Mediterranean World: Jewellery from Troia and the Northern Aegean in the 2nd Millennium B.C. and its Context 501

Ann-Louise SCHALLIN Mycenaean Jewellery and Adornment at Midea 509

Thanasis J. PAPADOPOULOS and Litsa KONTORLI-PAPADOPOULOU Specific Types of Jewellery from Late Bronze Age Tombs in Western Greece as Evidence for Social Differentiation 515

Jane HICKMAN Gold and Silver Jewelry Production in Prepalatial Crete 523

Elisabeth VÖLLING, Nicole REIFARTH and Jochen VOGL The Intercultural Context of Treasure A in Troy - Jewellery and Textiles 531

Naya SGOURITSA Remarks on Jewels from the Mycenaean Settlement and Cemetery at Lazarides on Eastern Aegina 539

Constantinos PASCHALIDIS Reflections of Eternal Beauty. The Unpublished Context of a Wealthy Female Burial from Koukaki, Athens and the Occurrence of Mirrors in Mycenaean Tombs 547

TABLE OF CONTENTS v

Elizabeth SHANK The Jewelry worn by the Procession of Mature Women from Xeste 3, Akrotiri 559

Helena TOMAS Alleged Aegean Jewellery from the Eastern Adriatic Coast 567

IV. ADORNMENT

Carole GILLIS Color for the Dead, Status for the Living 579

Marcia NUGENT Natural Adornment by Design: Beauty and/or Function? Botanic Motifs of the Bronze Age Cycladic Islands 589

Anna SIMANDIRAKI-GRIMSHAW and Fay STEVENS Adorning the Body: Animals as Ornaments in Bronze Age Crete 597

Vassiliki PLIATSIKA Simply Divine: the Jewellery, Dress and Body Adornment of the Mycenaean Clay Female Figures in Light of New Evidence from Mycenae 609

Eugenio R. LUJÁN and Alberto BERNABÉ Ivory and Horn Production in Mycenaean Texts 627

Josephine VERDUCI Wasp-waisted Minoans: Costume, Belts and Body Modification in the Late Bronze Age Aegean 639

Angelos PAPADOPOULOS Dressing a Late Bronze Age Warrior: The Role of ‘Uniforms’ and Weaponry according to the Iconographical Evidence 647

Mary Jane CUYLER Rose, Sage, Cyperus and e-ti: The Adornment of Olive Oil at the Palace of Nestor 655

Louise A. HITCHCOCK Dressed to Impress: Architectural Adornment as an Exotic Marker of Elite Identity in the Eastern Mediterranean 663

Karen Polinger FOSTER The Adornment of Aegean Boats 673

Cynthia W. SHELMERDINE Mycenaean Furniture and Vessels: Text and Image 685

Thomas G. PALAIMA Kosmos in the Mycenaean Tablets: the Response of Mycenaean ‘Scribes’ to the Mycenaean Culture of Kosmos 697

Annette Højen SØRENSEN A Toast to Diplomacy! Cups in Diplomacy and Trade: the Case of Minoica in Cyprus and the Levant, 2000-1500 BC 705

Iphiyenia TOURNAVITOUFresco Decoration and Politics in a Mycenaean Palatial Centre: The Case of the West House

at Mycenae 723

Maria C. SHAW Shields made of Cloth? Interpreting a Wall Painting in the Mycenaean Palace at Pylos 731

vi TABLE OF CONTENTS

Olga KRZYSZKOWSKA Worn to Impress? Symbol and Status in Aegean Glyptic 739

John G. YOUNGER Mycenaean Collections of Seals: The Role of Blue 749

Nancy R. THOMAS Adorning with the Brush and Burin: Cross-Craft in Aegean Ivory, Fresco, and Inlaid Metal 755

Anaya SARPAKI and Melpo SKOULA Case Studies of the Ethnobotany of Adornment and Dyeing in Crete: Insights for a Dialogue with Archaeological Models in Greece 765

Jason W. EARLE Cosmetics and Cult Practices in the Bronze Age Aegean? A Case Study of Women with Red Ears 771

Aikaterini PAPANTHIMOU and Ioannis FAPPAS Ceremonial Adornment and Purification Practices in Mycenaean Greece: Indigenous Developments and Near Eastern Influences 779

Caroline ZAITOUN The “Immanent” Process of Cosmetic Adornment. Similarities between Mycenaean and Egyptian Ritual Preparations 789

Katherine M. HARRELL The Weapon’s Beauty: A Reconsideration of the Ornamentation of the Shaft Grave Swords 799

“QU’IL EST PERMIS DE RIRE ...”

Thomas G. PALAIMAKO Ko 2010 Cloth Fragments of the Rapinewiad 807

THE SYMBOLISM OF CERTAIN MINOAN/MYCENAEAN BEADSFROM MOCHLOS

Minoan and Mycenaean beads, like many others,1 often contain some hidden message, but deciphering that message is the trick. Modern beads can be studied and understood in their contemporary setting, but ancient beads are more problematic, particularly when found in a prehistoric setting like the Aegean world, where there is no literature describing their use. Ancient beads have meaning, but, as Lankton and Bernbaum note, the meaning is “written in some lost symbolic language” and “beads can be very reluctant to give up their secrets; they have message and meaning with the message often hidden in their structure and the meaning far below the surface.”2 Archaeologists nevertheless have several different tools to unlock this “message and meaning.” The first involves simple classification of the physical characteristics of beads, including a bead’s material, shape, dimensions, color and design.3 Other tools involve analysis of its production, exchange, context and iconography (Pl. CXIIIa). In this paper I would like to apply these analytical methods to two beads from Mochlos, one Minoan, the other Mycenaean, to see what we can learn about their meaning and message.

The first is a copper bead in the shape of a dragonfly (CA 468; Pl. CXIIIb), and let there be no doubt that it is a dragonfly (Pl. CXIIIc). The Minoan artist who made it had obviously studied dragonflies and was acquainted with their anatomical details, in particular the position of the wings close to the head of the insect springing from the thorax. Because of the material and method of manufacture he was unable to produce four separate wings, but nevertheless distinguished between the forewings and hind wings with horizontal lines and incurved ends. He was also able to distinguish the three main parts of the dragonfly’s body, head, thorax and abdomen, and successfully noted that the thorax forms a hump on the back of the dragonfly just behind its head and the abdomen is segmented. He even succeeded in suggesting the large compound eyes and the protruding chin of the dragonfly’s head. 179 species of dragonflies are recognized in the Mediterranean and North Africa today, 34 of which are found in Crete.4 Two of these are endemic (Boyeria cretensis, Coenagrion intermedium).5 It may not be possible to identify the Minoan species from the bead alone, but if it belongs to one of the two endemic species, it is more likely to belong to the Boyeria cretensis than the Coenagrion intermedium because of its wider and shorter abdomen.

Measuring ca. 2.8 cm from head to toe, the bead was solid cast in a mold; portable XRF analysis identified it as primarily copper with small amounts of lead and arsenic, and even smaller quantities of tin and antimony. It was found in a final LM IB context in a room which has been identified as a dining room attached to the south side of Building C.7 in the Neopalatial town at Mochlos. This building was a manufacturing center and fragments of crucibles and pot bellows found in the building indicate that bronze working was one of the manufacturing activities that occurred here, particularly in the earlier part of the LM I period before metalworking was concentrated in the Artisans’ Quarter opposite the main settlement

1 L.S. DUBIN, The Worldwide History of Beads, Ancient, Ethnic, Contemporary (2009); L.D. SCIAMA and J.B. EICHER, Beads and Bead Makers: Gender, Material Culture, and Meaning (1998).

2 J.W. LANKTON and M. BERNBAUM, “An Archaeological Approach to Understanding the Meaning of Beads using the Example of Korean National Treasure 634, a Bead from a 5th/6th Century Royal Silla Tomb,” BEADS, Journal of the Society of Bead Researchers 19 (2007) 32-33.

3 H.C. BECK, “Classification and Nomenclature of Beads and Pendants,” Archaeologia 77 (1928) 1-43.4 J.-P. BOUDOT, V. KALKMAN, M. AMORÍN, T. BOGDANOVIČ, A. RIVERA, G. DEGABRIELE, J.-L.

DOMMANGET, S. FERREIRA, B. GARRIGÓS, M. JOVIČ, M. KOTARAC, W. LOPAU, M. MARINOV, N. MIHOKVIČ, E. RISERVATO, B. SAMRAOUI, W. SCHNEIDER, Atlas of the Odonata of the Mediterranean and North Africa, Libellula Supplement 9 (2009).

5 BOUDOT et al. (supra n. 4) 48, 106

458 Jeffrey S. SOLES

site.6 The bead could have been made and stored in this building, as several glass beads were. No other beads were found with it, and it may have been dropped in the dining room when the building was looted at the time of the site’s destruction.

Dragonflies have multiple meanings in different cultures; in some they are symbols of immortality, in others the souls of the dead; in Minoan Crete they are clearly associated with the Minoan goddess, and so the iconography of the bead is the most useful factor in its interpretation. The Theran fresco of the goddess from Xeste 3 depicts her wearing a necklace of just such dragonflies, three of gold and two of silver.7 They are all pierced through the head just like the Mochlos bead and strung on what appears to be a gold chain. The dragonfly necklace, another necklace of duck-shaped beads that she wears, and the coiled snake that appears on her head are sometimes said to symbolize the three zones of earth, sea and air over which she rules. The dragonfly, often misidentified as a butterfly, also appears in association with the goddess in gold signet rings. On a ring from Archanes depicting the epiphany of the goddess,8 two dragonflies flutter in the air in front of the goddess who has appeared miraculously out of thin air probably in response to the baetyl and tree worship depicted on either side of the scene. On a sealing from Hagia Triada, probably made with a gold signet ring, two more appear in the air together with a sacral knot and a floating snake, both also associated with the goddess, and also in response to the baetyl worship taking place to one side of the scene.9 The Mochlos bead is a marker of the goddess then; it is part of her costume like the sacral knot or the apron depicted in the faience plaques from the Temple Repositories. A woman who dresses in the costume of the goddess associates herself with the goddess, and may have served as her priestess.

While the iconography of a bead is often the most useful factor in its interpretation, its context and the manner of its exchange and the route it traveled are sometimes even more useful. A necklace of carnelian, limestone and hematite beads was found in Tomb 16 in the LM III Limenaria cemetery at Mochlos (Necklace No. 7; Pl. CXIVa).10 It belonged to a young woman who was buried in a pithos with modest graves goods, including a pyxis, a pulled rim bowl and two miniature jugs. She had a relatively large amount of jewelry, however. In addition to the carnelian necklace, faience and gold beads were still in situ around her neck and a number of bronze rings were still on her fingers when she was uncovered. She was particularly interesting because of the individual who was buried in the adjacent tomb immediately to the north, Tomb 15.11 This was a man in his 50s whom we have identified as the telestas and chief of the LM III community because of the numerous grave goods in his tomb, which included a large drinking set and a number of ritual vases three of which had been ritually killed, and a bronze dagger which was also killed. It is unclear which of the two died first; LM IIIA1 pottery lay in Tomb 15, but LM IIIA2 pottery was also located in both tombs. There is some indication in the positioning of the burials, however, that the female may have died shortly after the male. At some point in the history of the two tombs, probably when Tomb 16 was constructed, a narrow tunnel was cut to join the two, and the female was laid to rest in such a way that her face looked into this tunnel toward the head of the man who lay in the adjacent sarcophagus with his head to the south (Pl. CXIVb). In this way their two heads were juxtaposed even though each burial had its own tomb.

The beads of her necklaces were made of exotic materials. The gold, carnelian and hematite beads were imported from the Near East and had traveled a long distance before reaching their final destination. The materials, and probably the beads themselves, came from three different locations. Carnelian, which traveled the farthest, came from the Indus River valley and traveled

6 J.S. SOLES, Mochlos IA. Period III. Neopalatial Settlement on the Coast: The Artisans’ Quarter and the Farmhouse at Chalinomouri, The Sites (2003) 7-100; T.M. BROGAN, “Metalworking at Mochlos Before the Appearance of the Artisans’ Quarter,” in I. TZACHILI (ed.), Aegean Metallurgy in the Bronze Age (2008) 157-167.

7 WPT 162-163.8 Y. and E. SAKELLARAKIS, Archanes. Minoan Crete in a New Light (1997) II, 654-659, fig. 722; E. KYRIAKIDIS,

“Unidentified Floating Objects on Minoan Seals,” AJA 109 (2005) 147.9 CMS II.6 (N. PLATON et al. 1999) no. 4; KYRIAKIDIS (supra n. 8) 142, fig. 5.10 J.S. SOLES, Mochlos IIA. Period IV. The Mycenaean Settlement and Cemetery, The Sites (2008) 161-162.11 SOLES (supra n. 10) 157-161.

THE SYMBOLISM OF CERTAIN MINOAN/MYCENAEAN BEADS FROM MOCHLOS 459

west through Iran to Mesopotamia and the Levantine coast.12 It is mentioned in association with tin in Mesopotamian texts,13 and accompanied the traffic in tin which originated from a still more distant spot. The gold probably came from Egypt and the hematite from Saudi Arabia. All three were collected at an important entrepôt on the Levantine coast, Ugarit or Byblos, and were shipped from there like those on the Uluburun ship with metal cargos going to the Aegean. All three could have arrived at Mochlos on the same ship. The far-away origins of these beads made them especially rare and gave them a mysterious allure,14 but also testified to the long-distance exchange network over which they traveled.

The necklace in Pl. CXIVa is reconstructed, and it is quite possible that the different beads - one hematite, four a mottled grey and white limestone, and thirteen carnelian - hung in different combinations. Three of the limestone beads are each incised with a double axe which has now become the symbol of the Mycenaean religion as it was once of the Minoan religion (S 194.3-5; Pl. CXIVc); they are the only beads in the cemetery so decorated, and may be intended to indicate the wearer’s role in the local LM III community, in the same way as the dragonfly bead may have in the LM I period. The hematite bead is even more suggestive, however, because of its material and shape (S 194.2; Pl. CXIVd). A domed hematite bead with flat base, it replicates the shape and material of the domed weights from Egypt found on the Uluburun and Cape Gelydonia wrecks, also described as “truncated or flattened spheres,” which are larger but the same shape and material.15 They originate in Egypt and come in many different sizes that fit into the Egyptian decimal system of weight mensuration.16 The Mochlos bead measures 0.007-0.008 m. in diameter with a hole 0.0017 m wide and a weight of 0.7 g. It is probably too small to have been used as a weight. The smallest domed weight that Petri publishes, which resembles the Mochlos bead very closely, is ca 0.01 high with a base diameter of 0.014.17 On the other hand, Cemal Pulak, who has written extensively on these weights,18 has looked at the Mochlos bead and commented in a personal communication: “Your ‘weight-bead’ is indeed small. The smallest Uluburun weight is about twice that weight, and that from the Cape Gelidonya shipwreck is about 5 times as heavy. The shape of your ‘bead’ is indeed similar to some of the domed weights from Uluburun (e.g. W 54, W 88, W 116) and Cape Gelidonya (e.g. W 4n, W 26n, W 47n), none of which is pierced. It is rather difficult to attribute such small fractional weights to their respective mass standards correctly due to the overlap between different mass standards at such low weight values. However, if this ‘bead’ originally served as a weight (which is likely since its shape is impractical for a bead) based on a Near Eastern mass standard, then it may correspond to a 1/10-unit piece based on a mass standard of ca. 7.4-7.6 g or a 1/10-unit piece based on the common unit of ca. 9.3 g, but rendered a little underweight because it was later pierced for use as a bead.” It should also be pointed out that some of the sphendonoid hematite weights from Uluburun, although none of the domed weights, are also pierced to be worn as beads and two still retain their metal rings fastened through the holes.19

Whether or not it ever served as a weight, the Mochlos bead replicated one of the domed weights that were carried on ships like the Uluburun and Cape Gelidonya ships. These boats stopped in the Mochlos harbor carrying cargos of copper and tin, Canaanite jars and various exotic products. The remains of Canaanite jars found in House A in the LM III settlement, identified as the house of the telestas, and only in this one house in the whole LM III settlement, suggest that the telestas oversaw this traffic.20 One of his duties as representative of the wanax in Knossos was to secure the trade route bringing copper and tin into the Aegean, and Mochlos

12 J. ARUZ, Marks of Distinction, Seals and Cultural Exchange between the Aegean and the Orient (ca. 2600-1360 BC), CMS Beiheft 7 (2008) 50.

13 J.S. SOLES, “From Ugarit to Mochlos,” in EMPORIA 433. 14 M. HELMS, Craft and the Kingly Ideal: Art, Trade and Power (1993).15 C. PULAK, “The Balance Weights from the Late Bronze Age Shipwreck at Uluburun,” in C.F.E. PARE (ed.),

Metals Make the World Go Round, The Supply and Circulation of Metals in Bronze Age Europe (2000) 247-266.16 F. PETRIE, Ancient Weights and Measures (1926).17 PETRIE (supra n. 16) 6, pl. 5, no. 44418 PULAK (supra n. 15) 261-262, fig. 17.2.19 PULAK (supra n. 15) fig.17.2, W46, W91, W107.20 SOLES (supra n. 10) 187, 203.

460 Jeffrey S. SOLES

was an important stopping point on this route. If the imported beads of carnelian and hematite in Tomb 16 are thought of as his gifts to the woman buried there, they testify to his power to protect the trade route and maintain peaceful relations with the Levantine merchants who sought shelter in the Mochlos harbor. Another duty may have been to oversee the local distribution of copper and tin. This task involved the weighing of metal on balance pans. The “weight-bead” reproduced the shape and material of a weight for its symbolic value; it symbolized this weighing and the role of the telestas in the local economy. It may have been his bead originally, but whether or not it was it strengthened the connection between the telestas and the woman buried in Tomb 15, a connection that is also suggested by the tunnel between the two tombs and the juxtaposition of their heads in their final resting places. It may have been a gift to this woman from the telestas and so also symbolized the close bond between the two, who should probably be identified as husband and wife.

Jeffrey S. SOLES

THE SYMBOLISM OF CERTAIN MINOAN/MYCENAEAN BEADS FROM MOCHLOS 461

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

Pl. CXIIIa Methodologies to Interpret the Meaning of Beads (adapted from LANKTON and BERNBAUM [supra n. 2] Table 1).

Pl. CXIIIb LM IB Dragonfly Bead (CA 468) from Building C.7 (scale 2 cm).Pl. CXIIIc Dragonfly. Drawing by Gina Mikel (www.scientificillustrator.com).Pl. CXIVa LM III Necklace (Necklace No. 7; S 194) from Tomb 16, Limenaria Cemetery (scale 2 cm).Pl. CXIVb Tombs 15 and 16, Limenaria Cemetery, showing Location of the Two Burials (SOLES

[supra n. 10] fig. 100, pls. 28B, 30B).Pl. CXIVc Limestone Beads Incised with Double Axe (S 194.3-5) from Necklace No. 7 (scale 2 cm).Pl. CXIVd Hematite Bead in the Shape of a Domed Weight (S 194.2) from Necklace No. 7 (scale 2 cm).

CXIII

Physical Characteristics

Material, Shape, Dimensions, Color, Design

Production

Location and Method of Manufacture, Date

Exchange

Source and Means of Shipment

Context

Where was it found and what was its relationship to other objects on the site?

Iconography

Comparative Examples

a

c

b

95274_Aegeum Cartes b CXIII 6/04/12 09:05

CXIV

a

b

c d

95274_Aegeum Cartes b CXIV 6/04/12 09:05