Professional Documents
Culture Documents
R I V I STA DI FILOLOG IA
E AN TI CH IT E G E E
PA S I P H A E
RIVISTA DI FILOLOGIA
E ANTICHIT EGEE
III
(2009)
PISA ROMA
FA B R I Z I O S E RRA E D ITORE
MMX
Amministrazione e abbonamenti
Fabrizio Serra editore
Casella postale n. 1, succursale n. 8, i 56123 Pisa,
tel. +39 050 542332, fax +39 050 574888
I prezzi ufficiali di abbonamento cartaceo e/o Online sono consultabili
presso il sito Internet della casa editrice www.libraweb.net.
Print and/or Online official subscription rates are available
at Publishers website www.libraweb.net.
I pagamenti possono essere effettuati tramite versamento su c.c.p. n. 17154550
o tramite carta di credito (American Express, Visa, Eurocard, Mastercard)
*
Autorizzazione del Tribunale di Pisa n. 30 del 28 dicembre 2001
Direttore responsabile: Lucia Corsi
Sono rigorosamente vietati la riproduzione, la traduzione, ladattamento, anche parziale o per estratti,
per qualsiasi uso e con qualsiasi mezzo effettuati, compresi la copia fotostatica, il microfilm,
la memorizzazione elettronica, ecc., senza la preventiva autorizzazione scritta
della Fabrizio Serra editore, Pisa Roma.
Ogni abuso sar perseguito a norma di legge.
*
Propriet riservata All rights reserved
Copyright 2010 by Fabrizio Serra editore, Pisa Roma
*
www.libraweb.net
issn 1974-0565
SOMMARIO
Mario Benzi, Minoan Genius on a LH iii Pictorial Sherd from Phylakopi, Melos? Some Remarks
on Religious and Ceremonial Scenes on Mycenaean Pictorial Pottery
Alberto Cazzella, Giulia Recchia, The Mycenaeans in the Central Mediterranean: a
Comparison between the Adriatic and the Tyrrhenian Seaways
Maurizio Del Freo, The Geographical Names in the Linear B Texts from Thebes
Markus Egetmeyer, The Recent Debate on Eteocypriote People and Language
Valentina Gasbarra, I composti preposizionali negli archivi in lineare B
Louis Godart, I due scribi della tavoletta Tn 316
Nikolai N. Kazansky, The Description of Helios Herds (Od. 12, 127-136): A Mycenaean Commentary
Massimiliano Marazzi, Il corpus delle iscrizioni in lineare B oggi: organizzazione e provenienze
Sabina Mitrano, Societ e forme di potere a Creta tra TM iiia 2-b
Cecilia Nobili, LOdissea e le tradizioni peloponnesiache
Jean-Pierre Olivier, Rapport 1996-2000 sur les textes en criture hiroglyphique crtoise, en
linaire A et en linaire B
Anna Panayotou, Liens familiaux et tradition dans lonomastique personnelle chypriote: lexpression de la filiation Chypre durant le i er millnaire a.C.
Anna Sacconi, A proposito delle tavolette della serie Sh di Pilo
Serguey Sharypkin, Alcune riflessioni sulladeguatezza di una scrittura largamente disadeguata
Frederik M. J. Waanders, Que pouvons-nous souponner de laccentuation du mycnien?
9
27
41
69
91
99
117
121
155
171
187
199
209
215
225
he fragment discussed in this article was found in the earliest excavations at the Cycladic site
of Phylakopi and is now preserved in the National Archaeological Museum of Athens (NM
11418) (Fig. 1). It was given only a summary description by Edgar in his discussion of the pottery
from the site and was later discussed by Sakellarakis in his survey of the Mycenaean Pictorial Pottery in the National Museum,1 but until now it has attracted little or no attention by scholars.
Sakellarakis assigns the fragment to a large deep bowl krater of FS 282. He describes the partly
preserved figure as that of a monster preserving its breast and forelegs, implicitly suggesting
that the monster was a quadruped. The hatched and cross-hatched patterns behind the figure
are described by Sakellarakis as a thin curved wing and as part of the body respectively. In
Mycenaean Pictorial pottery, however, the wings of winged creatures, such as sphinxes and
griffins, are usually larger and raised and are rendered in very different fashions. The cross
hatched pattern being not attached to the monster and being rendered in a completely different way can hardly be regarded as part of his body.
The preserved height of the fragment (0.089) as compared to the average size of the decorative
zone of kraters suggests that about two thirds of the figure are likely to be actually preserved. The
monster is indeed an ugly, sturdy creature with short, clumsy legs and disproportionately large
feet or paws. He has a sort of dorsal appendage consisting of two discrete parts. Just behind and
very close to his back there is a thin appendage,
which runs down the length of the back and
ends in a train trailing on the ground. Behind
it, yet very close to it, a cross-hatched pattern
has the same curved outline as the former appendage. They are so close to one another and
to the back of the monster as to suggest they
are parts of one and the same figure.
The upright pose, the sturdy body, and the
far leg stepping forward in the characteristic
walking pose call to mind the Egyptian goddess Taweret and her Aegean derivative, the
so-called Minoan Genius.
The hypothesis that the figure of the Minoan Genius derived from the iconography of
Fig. 1. Pottery sherd from Phylakopi
Taweret was first put forward by Winter and
(after Sakellarakis 1992).
10
mario benzi
subsequently adopted and developed by Sir Arthur Evans and other scholars2 yet denied, among
others, by Persson and more recently by Baurain.3 Nilsson took at first a sceptical view but later
accepted Evans suggestion.4 Later on the arguments for and against an Egyptian origin have been
discussed in detail by Gill, who eventually came to rather cautious conclusions.5 The Egyptian origin of the Minoan Genius has been most strongly advocated by Weingarten in a valuable and much
influential study.6 According to Weingarten, the earliest representations of the Minoan Genius on
Protopalatial sealings from Phaistos (CMS ii.5 321, 322) and Knossos7 are copies of late 12th/13th Dynasty Egyptian images of Taweret, the pregnant hippopotamus goddess. Furthermore, the Minoans adopted both Egyptian versions of Taweret, the hippopotamus-headed and the lion-headed,
which perhaps developed slightly later. This argues in favour of direct adoption from Egypt,
though it cannot be ruled out that the Minoans went across Taweret in some Levantine harbour
where Egyptian influence was strong.8 What is still very difficult to explain is why Taweret, a minor
goddess in the large Egyptian pantheon, made such a strong impression on ancient Minoans as to
give birth to a mythical figure which had to last in Aegean art until the end of the palatial period.
In spite of her name, which means the Great One, Taweret had no official formal cult in Egypt,
but was much popular among common Egyptians for the help she gave them in everyday life, protecting people against snakes, assisting women in childbirth, and presiding over domestic purification rites. Therefore it seems likely that she was imported into Crete by common people, such as
sailors and merchants, rather than through high level contacts. An Egyptian or Egyptianizing
scarab depicting the hippopotamus goddess was found in Tholos B at Platanos (CMS ii.1 332).9 According to Weingarten, the earliest association of the Minoan Genius with the libation jug indicates that the Minoans were aware of Tawerets role in lustration.10 Once adopted the type remains
basically the same, but from the Neopalatial period onwards the Minoan Genii become more slender and are represented with the characteristically Minoan constriction of the waist. At the same
time the range of their activities increases and they are now associated with hunting, sacrifice, and
attending humans.11 Representations of the Minoan Genius are mostly found on seal and sealings,
but also on ivories, bronze vessels, glass paste beads12 and, quite exceptionally, on wall paintings
2 A. Evans, The Palace of Minos at Knossos IV:2, London 1935, p. 431-467; D. Isaac, Les demons Minoens, RHR 118
(1938), p. 55-91; C. Picard, Nouvelles archologiques et correspondance sur un rhyton mycnien de Rhodes, RA 1947,
p. 66-67; J. Aruz, Marks of Distinction. Seals and Cultural Exchange between the Aegean and the Orient (ca. 2600-1360 B.C.) (CMS
Beiheft 7), Mainz am Rhein 2008, p. 84-85.
3 A.W. Persson, The Religion of Greece in Prehistoric Times, Berkeley-Los Angeles 1942, p. 78; C. Baurain, Pour une
autre interprtation des gnies minoens, in Liconographie minoenne (BCH Supplement 11), P. Darcque, J-C. Poursat (ed.),
Paris 1985, p. 95-118.
4 M.P. Nilsson, The Minoan-Mycenaean Religion and Its Survival in Greek Religion2, Lund 1950, p. 380; Id., Geschichte der
griechischen Religion i 2, Mnchen 1955, p. 296.
5 M.A.V. Gill, The Minoan Genius, MDAI(A) 79 (1964), p. 5-7.
6 J. Weingarten, The Transformation of Egyptian Taweret into the Minoan Genius: A Study of Cultural Transmission in the
Middle Bronze Age (SIMA 88), Partille 1991; Ead., The Transformation of Egyptian Taweret into the Minoan Genius,
in K - A. T X, A. Karetsou (ed.), Athina 2000, p. 114-119. Cf. also C. Sambin, Gnie minoen et gnie egyptien, un emprunt raisonn, BCH 113 (1989), p. 77-96.
7 J. Weingarten, The Transformation of Egyptian Taweret, cit. (n. 6), figs. 1-3 and pls. 1-3.
8 Eight Middle Kingdom statuettes of Taweret were found in the Temple of the Obelisques at Byblos, M. Dunand,
Fouilles de Byblos ii , Paris 1937, p. 757, fig. 876, pl. cii.
9 I. Pini, Eleven Early Cretan Scarabs, in A. Karetsou (ed.), cit. (n. 6), p. 107-113; W.A. Ward, The Scarabs from
Tholos B at Platanos, AJA 85 (1981), 70-73; J. Aruz, Marks of Distinction, cit. (n. 2), p. 77-78; J. Phillips, Aegyptiaca on the
Island of Crete in Their Chronological Context i-ii (sterreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften. Denkschriften der
Gesamtakademie Band xlix. Contributions to the Chronology of the Eastern Mediterranean Vol. xviii), Wien 2008, i,
p. 122 ff., ii, p. 231-232, No. 476.
10 J. Aruz, Marks of Distinction, cit. (n. 2), p. 84 suggests the lustral function of the Minoan Genius may come from
Near Eastern sources.
11 F.T. Van Straten, The Minoan Genius in Mycenaean Art, BABesch 44 (1969), p. 110-121; P. Rehak, The Genius in
Late Bronze Age Glyptic: The Later Evolution of an Aegean Cult Figure, in Sceaux Minoens et Mycniens (CMS Beiheft
5), W. Mller (ed.), Berlin 1995, p. 215-231.
12 For lists of finds, cf. M.A.V. Gill, The Minoan Genius, cit. (n. 5), p. 15-21; Ead., A propos the Minoan Genius,
AJA 74 (1970), p. 404-406; P. Rehak, The Genius, cit. (n. 11), p. 230-231.
11
12
mario benzi
One the most outstanding and enigmatic examples of cultic/religious scenes appears on a fragmentary LH iiia:2 rhyton from Kalavarda/Kameiros, Rhodes21 (Fig. 3). Like some other rhyta, it
was painted upside down. The scene depicts a procession of three upright figures in silhouette
stretching their arms towards a stemmed kylix with high-swung handles and an undefined object,
which has been interpreted as a musical instrument (rattle?) or a mirror. The objects seem to be
floating in the air, rather than being held by the figures. Between them three birds with short
raised wings and a floral motif. The scene is
unparalleled in Mycenaean vase painting. The
figures have strange curled tails; the crests
running down their back from shoulder to
waist most likely hint to a mane or pelt. Their
mane, slim limbs and hips, and large breasts
recall a similar yet lacking the tail strange
figure of lion man walking towards two
detached limbs of bull and followed by a Minoan Genius on a sealing from the Demon
Seals Area at Knossos (CMS ii.8 200)22 (Fig. 4).
Fairly similar are also the erected goats or
Tierdmonen painted on a LH iiic Early
plastic vessel in the form of a bull from
Kultraum R 117 in Tiryns Unterburg.23 The
unusually lively figures on the Kameiros
rhyton have been interpreted by Laurenzi,
who found the vessel, and Demargne as wild
boars, by Picard as masked dancers performFig. 4. Sealing from the Demon Seals Area at Knossos
(after CMS ii.8 200).
ing some religious rite, by Majewski as hu21 L. Laurenzi, Nuove Scoperte di Vasi Micenei, Memorie Istituto FERT 2 (1938), p. 49-54; E. Vermeule, V. Karageorghis, Mycenaean Pictorial, cit. (n. 18), p. 154-155, xii.17; M. Benzi, Rodi e la Civilt Micenea (Incunabula Graeca xciv),
Roma 1992, p. 110, 417, pl. 130a; E. Karantzali, A New Mycenaean Pictorial Rhyton from Rhodes, in Eastern Mediterranean: Cyprus - Dodecanese - Crete, V. Karageorghis, N. Stampolidis (ed.), Athens 1998, p. 96, figs. 9-10; R.B. Koehl, Aegean
Bronze Age Rhyta (INSTAP Prehistory Monographs 19), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 2006, p. 174-175, 331, No. 718, figs. 3536, pl. 46.
22 M.A.V. Gill, Minoan Genius, cit. (n. 5), p. 12, 20, No. 45, pl. 4: 3.
23 K. Kilian, Ausgrabungen in Tiryns 1976, AA 1978, p. 465, fig. 22; E. Vermeule, V. Karageorghis, Mycenaean Pictorial,
cit. (n. 18), p. 143, 224, xi. 85.1.
13
man figures dressed in pelts of wild boar, by Nilsson as local or later versions of Minoan Genii in
procession.24 R. Koehl describes the figures as mixed creatures with leonine or porcine upper
body and human, perhaps male legs.25 Gill, though including them in her list of the Minoan Genii,
underlines that there is no evidence of Genii looking as wild boars.26 Furthermore, the curled tails
and the absence of the distinctive dorsal appendage make such identification unlikely. The presence of a musical instrument and a kylix does not rule out that the figures are animals, since in
Aegean art there are examples of animals performing human actions, such as the monkeys depicted on a wall of the Xeste 3 at Akrotiri.27
Some of the most elaborate ritual scenes known so far in Pictorial pottery are painted on
kraters found in Cyprus.
The well known Homage Krater from Aradhippo depicts men in processions to a female figure of authority either a goddess or a high rank priestess seated on high-backed throne28 (Fig.
5). The subject is common in Oriental art. In the Aegean the best parallels are the famous gold
ring from Tiryns (CMS i 179) and the largely fragmentary top register of the Painted Stele from
Mycenae, which preserves part of an enthroned female (?) figure and the red legs of an advancing
male figure.29 As pointed out by Vermeule and Karageorghis, the scene was inspired by a more
ambitious composition in another medium, most likely wall painting. The procession of offerings
bearers is one of the most frequent themes in Aegean wall painting, but in most cases the goal of
the procession is unspecified or missing. According to Immerwahr, the final goal was very likely
a seated representation of the goddess.30 If the juxtaposition of a standing and a seated figure on
two fresco fragments from the north-west plaster dump at Pylos is not fully certain,31 the existence of such scenes is confirmed by the fresco fragments from the Cult Centre at Mycenae preserving the foot of a seated female figure and a female hand holding up a small female figure.32
24 L. Laurenzi, Nuove Scoperte, cit. (n: 21), 50; P. Demargne, Bulletin archologique, REG 58 (1945), p. 248, fig. 1;
C. Picard, Nouvelles archologiques, cit. (n. 2), p. 66-67; K. Majewski, Rhyton mykenski z Rhodos/Le rhyton mycnien de Rhodes, Archeologia 3, 1949, p. 7-17, 409-11 (with summary in Russian and French).
25 R.B. Koehl, Aegean Rhyta, cit. (n. 21), p. 175, 337.
26 M.A.V. Gill, The Minoan Genius, cit. (n. 5), p. 18 and note 57.
27 C. Doumas, The Wall-Paintings from Thera, Athens 1992, p. 128, figs. 95-96.
28 E. Vermeule, V. Karageorghis, Mycenaean Pictorial, cit. (n. 18), p. 23-24, 197, iii.29; V. Karageorghis, Myth and Epic,
cit. (n. 19), p. 386, pl. 99: 3-4.
29 E. Vermeule, V. Karageorghis, Mycenaean Pictorial, cit. (n. 18), p. 132-134, 222, iii.43; S.A. Immerwahr, Aegean Painting, cit. (n. 13), p. 151, 194, pl. 84 My No. 21.
30 S.A. Immerwahr, Aegean Painting, cit. (n. 13), p. 114 ff.
31 M.L. Lang, The Palace of Nestor at Pylos in Western Messenia ii : The Frescoes, Princeton 1969, p. 83 ff; S.A. Immerwahr,
Aegean Painting, cit. (n. 13), p. 118, 197, pl. 58 Py No. 9.
32 I. Kritseli-Providi, T, cit. (n. 13), p. 41-43; S.A. Immerwahr, Aegean Painting, cit. (n. 13), p. 119, 166, 191,
fig. 33 My No. 4; K. Demakopoulou, The Mycenaean World, cit. (n. 13), p. 183, No. 152-153. For a recent reconstruction of
the scene, see B.R. Jones, New Reconstructions of the Mykenaia and a Seated Woman from Mycenae, AJA 111 (2009),
p. 309-337. For lost relief fragments of a seated female figure coming from Mycenae or Tiryns, S.A. Immerwahr, Aegean
Painting, cit. (n. 13), p. 194.
14
mario benzi
Other seated figures appear on the krater from Kalavasos-Ayios Dhimitrios, discussed below, and
on a LH iiic vessel from Tiryns, which apparently depicts a chariot race (Fig. 6). The figure interpreted by Kilian as a goddess is seated on a high-backed throne and is holding aloft a stemmed
kylix. Kilians suggestion that the scene represents funeral games is fascinating yet difficult to
demonstrate.33 Steel has argued for a more cautious interpretation of chariot scenes on pottery,
suggesting they reflect an aristocratic style of life rather than funerary processions or funerary
games.34 Remains of human figure seated on a backed throne/chair are also preserved on a LH
iiic krater sherd from Lef kandi; in front of the figure a large krater placed on the ground and
inside it a kylix.35
An empty high-backed throne is represented in a scene of prothesis painted on the lid of a Late
Minoan larnax from Pigi Rethymnou (Fig. 18).36 On funerary larnakes from Episkopi and Tanagra (Fig. 7) are represented figures holding kylikes as in a final toast to the deceased, a practice attested archaeologically by the shattered kylikes found on the threshold of LH iii chamber
tombs.37 In her discussion of a local krater in Mycenaean style from Troy, Mountjoy suggests that
a human figure with upraised arms was perhaps holding a kylix, which is however not preserved.38
33 K. Kilian, Zur Darstellung eines Wagenrennens aus sptmykenischer Zeit, MDAI(A) 95 (1980), p. 21-31; cf. M. Benzi, Riti di Passaggio sulla Larnax dalla Tomba 22 di Tanagra?, in E . Simposio Italiano di Studi Egei
dedicato a Luigi Bernab Brea e Giovanni Pugliese Carratelli, Roma, 18-20 Febbraio 1998, V. La Rosa, D. Palermo, L. Vagnetti
(ed.), Roma 1999, p. 215-233.
34 L. Steel, Wine, Kraters and Chariots: The Mycenaean Pictorial Pottery Reconsidered, in MELETEMATA. Studies
in Aegean Archaeology Presented to Malcolm H. Wiener as he enters his 65th Year iii (Aegaeum 20), P. Betancourt, V. Karageorghis, R. Laffineur, W.-D. Niemeier (ed.), Lige-Austin 1999, p. 806.
35 J. Crouwel, Late Mycenaean Pictorial Pottery, in Lef kandi iv . The Bronze Age. The Late Helladic iiic Settlement at
Xeropolis (ABSA Suppl. 39), D. Evely (ed.), Athens 2006, p. 240-241, 249, pls. 59, 71 B2b.
36 K. Baxevani, A Minoan Larnax from Pigi Rethymnou with Religious and Funerary Iconography, in Klados. Essays in Honour of J. N. Coldstream (BICS Suppl. 63), C.E. Morris (ed.), London 1995, p. 15-33.
37 L.V. Watrous, The Origin and Iconography of the Late Minoan Painted Larnax, Hesperia 60 (1991), p. 301, pl. 93a;
Spyropoulos PAAH 1973, pl. 10; W.G. Cavanagh, C. Mee, Mourning before and after the Dark Age, in Klados. Essays
in Honour of J. N. Coldstream (BICS Suppl. 63), C.E. Morris (ed.), London 1995, p. 50, fig. 9; S.A. Immerwahr, Death and
the Tanagra Larnakes, in The Ages of Homer, J.B. Carter, S.P. Morris (ed.), Austin 1995, p. 116, fig. 7.5a.
38 P.A. Mountjoy, Mycenaean Pictorial Pottery from Anatolia in the Transitional LH iiib2-LH iiic Early and the LH
iiic Phases, in Pictorial Pursuits. Figurative Painting on Mycenaean and Geometric Pottery. Papers from two Seminars at the
15
16
mario benzi
17
parasol reappears later on two chariot kraters from Tiryns and the Citadel House area at Mycenae.54 On the larnax from Episkopi which, according to Watrous depicts the departure of the deceased for the Underworld, the parasols are represented as solid painted circles on long thin
stems.55 Ten or so LH iiia and B terracotta chariot models with parasol have been found in tombs
at Prosymna, Myceanae, Argos, Methoni, and Pylona on Rhodes, but also in settlement contexts
such as the sanctuary area at Phylakopi, the south syrinx at Tiryns, and Hala Sultan Tekke.56 The
parasol is still conspicuously absent in wall painting. Neither the terracotta models or the Pictorial
fragments do offer conclusive evidence as to the status of the shaded figures and the role of parasol as a status symbol, but in contemporary Egyptian and Near Eastern art the parasol, though
rarely attested, is a feature of royal iconography.57 In recent studies much attention has been given
to the consumption of food and drink on special festive occasions as an important aspect of
Bronze Age elites lifestyle.58 In his extensive survey of evidence for Mycenaean feasting, Wright
has suggested that the scene on the Sunshade Krater depicts a festive procession, which might
have included a drinking ceremony.59
Scenes of men in long robe associated with animals and perhaps hinting at sacrifices appear on
other two kraters, both unfortunately in very fragmentary conditions. The scene on a group of
non-joining fragments allegedly coming from Enkomi is puzzling. One side preserves parts of
three standing robed figures, the other one robed person and an enigmatic design, which, according to Vermeule and Karageorghis, might be the head of an animal lowered to the ground.60
No less problematic is a fragment from Minet-el-Beida depicting two standing robed men moving
to the left and the rump of a bull moving to the opposite direction.61
A sacrificial procession was most likely represented on the well known jug/rhyton with attached hollow rings from Ayia Irini, on which a small bull is carried by one of the long-robed
participants.62 The vessel was found inside the temple and was perhaps part of the temples cult
paraphernalia. The figures are closely packed and overlap in a way that is usually avoided in Mycenaean painting. Immerwahr suggested a comparison with the Chariot and Palanquin frescoes
from Knossos, which depicts a horse-drawn chariot, crowded figures in long robes moving towards a shrine with a seated figure, and behind the chariot a bull, perhaps a sacrificial victim.63
A scene described by L. Vagnetti as evocative of a ritual or of a sacrifice is painted on a much
fragmentary LH iiib bowl from the south Italian site of Termitito (Fig. 9).64 It preserves part of
a human figure rendered in silhouette, apparently leading by the leash a bull, of which only the
front legs and part of the body are extant. Between them a solid painted stirrup jar or amphora
floating above a triangular scale pattern. A related, though stylistically different, scene appears
on a krater fragment from Berbati showing a male figure in a dotted garment leading by the leash
54 J. Crouwel, A Note on Two Mycenaean Parasol Kraters, ABSA 71 (1976), p. 55-56; E. Vermeule, V. Karageorghis,
Mycenaean Pictorial, cit. (n. 18), p. 108-109, 110, 215, 216 x.1,4. For a new addition to the krater from Mycenae, K. Shelton,
D. Wardle, Postscript: An Update from Mycenae, in E. Rystedt, B. Wells (ed.), cit. (n. 38), p. 49.
55 L.V. Watrous, The Origin and Iconography, cit. (n. 37), p. 301, pl. 93a.
56 For a list of finds, E. Karantzali, A New Mycenaean Pictorial, cit. (n. 21), p. 50-52.
57 J. Crouwel, A Note, cit. (n. 54); M.C. Miller, The Parasol: An Oriental Status-Symbol in Late Archaic and Classical Athens, JHS 112 (1992), p. 91-105.
58 Especially in Hesperia 73:2 (2004) (Special Issue: The Mycenaean Feast) and in DAIS. The Aegean Feast. Proceedings of
the 12th International Aegean Conference /12e Rencontre genne International University of Melbourne, Centre for Classics and
Archaeology, 25-29 March 2008 (Aegaeum 29), L.A. Hitchcock, R. Laffineur, J. Crowley (ed.), Lige Austin, 2008; for a
more cautious and critical approach, I. Pini, Are There Any Representations of Feasting in the Aegean Bronze Age?,
in Ibid., p. 249-255.
59 J.C. Wright, A Survey of Evidence for Feasting in Mycenaean Society, Hesperia 73 (2004), p. 168-169.
60 E. Vermeule, V. Karageorghis, Mycenaean Pictorial, cit. (n. 18), p. 21, 196, iii. 20.
61 E. Vermeule, V. Karageorghis, Mycenaean Pictorial, cit. (n. 18), p. 21, 196, iii. 19.
62 E. Vermeule, V. Karageorghis, Mycenaean Pictorial, cit. (n. 18), p. 212, ix.16; R.B. Koehl, Aegean Rhyta, cit. (n. 21), p.
215, 339, No. 1148, pl. 53.
63 S.A. Immerwahr, A Mycenaean Ritual Vase from the Temple at Ayia Irini, Keos, Hesperia 46 (1977), p. 32-39.
64 L. Vagnetti, Preliminary Remarks on Mycenaean Pictorial Pottery from the Central Mediterranean, OAth. 2526 (2000-2001), p. 108-109, fig. 3.
18
mario benzi
19
20
mario benzi
Fig. 11. Krater from Kalavasos-Ayios Dhimitrios, Side A and B (after Steel 1994).
Procession fresco at Akrotiri.81 On the roof the well known clay hut-urn from Archanes two human figures watch through a light well or chimney the goddess seated inside the shrine. The model
is considerably later than the krater. It has been dated from Subminoan to Proto-Geometric B
around 800 B.C., but it could be a deliberately archaizing piece.82 Its closest parallel and the only
one with a female figure inside is the Subminoan model from the Spring Chamber at Knossos.83
Beneath the roof of the prothyron on side B there are three reserved squares. Despite their squared
81 A.J. Evans, The Palace of Minos I, London 1921, p. 331 ff; J.W. Graham, The Palaces of Crete, Princeton 1987, p. 239240; C. Doumas, Wall-Paintings, cit. (n. 27), figs. 35-38, 44-48.
82 R. Hgg, N. Marinatos, The Giamalakis Model from Archanes: Between the Minoan and the Greek Worlds, in
La Transizione dal Miceneo allAlto Arcaismo, Atti del Convegno Internazionale Roma, 14-19 Marzo 1988, Roma 1991, p. 301-308.
For a recent discussion of the Archanes model, cf. V.P. Petrakis, Late Minoan III and Early Iron Age Cretan Cylindrical
Terracotta Models: A Reconsideration, ABSA 101 (2006), p. 183-216.
83 A. Evans, The Palace of Minos at Knossos, ii : 1, London 1928, p. 128 ff., fig. 63.
21
22
mario benzi
23
Fig. 16. Prothesis scene on Krater from Ayia Triadha, Elis (after Schoinas 1999).
gested a scene of welcoming.101 In any case, whatever the ultimate meaning of the scene, the
stately and dignified pose of the figures suggests they are performing a formal, ritual action.
The first unequivocal example of funerary iconography on Pictorial pottery makes its appearance on a fragmentary LH iiic krater from Ayia Triadha in Elis showing a prothesis scene. The
deceased is laid out on a bed under a shroud and surrounded by mourning figures. Below the bed
a couchant animal, recalling the two goats depicted below the sacrificial table on the Ayia Triadha
sarcophagus, most likely hints at a funerary sacrificial rite.102 So far only two representations of
this theme are known in Aegean art, both on funerary larnakes. On a larnax from Tanagra in
Boeotia the prothesis scene is displayed on one of the long sides (Fig. 17).103 The mourning figures
interact with the deceased in a way recalling the prothesis scene on a Late Geometric krater in the
Metropolitan Museum (14.130.15).104 The prothesis on the earlier coffin larnax from Pigi Rethymnou is much more austere and is confined on one of the short side of the lid (Fig. 18). The de101 R. Lorantou-Papandoniou, M A K E M, AEph 1974, p. 85-91.
102 C. Schoinas, E A T H, in
M K, A , 25-28 1994, Lamia 1999, p. 257-262;
J.Crouwel, Late Mycenaean Pictorial Pottery. A Brief Review, in E. Rystedt, B. Wells (ed.), cit. (n. 38), p. 19, fig. 6;
S.Hiller, The Prothesis Scene Bronze Age-Dark Age Relations, Ibid., p. 183-185, fig. 5.
103 T. Spyropoulos PAAH 1970, p. 34-35, pl. 48; W. Cavanagh, C. Mee, Mourning, cit. (n. 37), p. 48, fig. 7; S. Immerwahr, Death and the Tanagra, cit. (n. 37), p. 110, fig. 7.2b; M. Benzi, Riti di Passaggio, cit. (n. 33), fig. 2B; S. Hiller,
The Prothesis Scene, cit. (n. 102), fig. 3.
104 G. Ahlberg, Prothesis and Ekphora in Greek Geometric Art (SIMA xxxii), Gteborg 1971, fig. 22; Benzi, Riti di Passaggio, cit. (n. 33), p. 219.
24
mario benzi
25
26
mario benzi
two chariots on a krater from Pyla-Verghi is an attendant rather than a child.120 A boy or perhaps
a girl is represented among the mourning figures on the prothesis krater from Ayia Triadha, referred to above (Fig. 17). A couple of differently-sized figures is depicted on LM iiia2/b pyxis from
Mochlos, but the smaller figure seems to lead the larger one while we would expect just the opposite. Banou has tentatively interpreted the scene as Hermes psychopompos leading the deceased to
the afterworld.121
120 E. Vermeule, V. Karageorghis, Mycenaean Pictorial, cit. (n. 18), p. 19-20, 196, iii.13.
121 E. Banou, LM iii Mokhlos (East Crete) Versus LM iii Viannos (Central Eastern Crete): Differences and
Similarities, in Ariadnes Threads. Connections between Crete and the Greek Mainland in Late Minoan iii (LM iiia 2 to LM iiic ).
Proceedings of the International Workshop held at Athens Scuola Archeologica Italiana 5-6 April 2003 (Tripodes 3), A.L. DAgata,
J. Moody, E. Williams (ed.), Atene 2005, p. 163-164, figs. 25-26.
*
Aprile 2010
(cz 2 fg 21)