K ENTROThe Newsletter of the INSTAP Study Center for East Crete

Volume 10 (Winter 2007-2008)

T H E 2 0 0 7 A R C H E M S E A S O N

By Andrew Koh

he year 2007 marked a new chapter in the develop-ment of Archaeochemistry Research in the Eastern

Mediterranean (ARCHEM), a project devoted to theextraction, analysis and contextualization of organicresidues from archaeological artifacts. Thanks to the gen-erosity of INSTAP and the Hel lenic Studies Endowment Fund ofWayne State University’sDepartment of Classics,Greek and Lat in, wewere able to expand theARCHEM team fromone to three by bringingin two graduate studentsfrom WSU. Both Jen-nifer Meyer and ThomasHarwood are now pursu-ing their MA degrees.By helping with theorganic residue extrac-tions and meticulous cat-aloguing work, bothhave made themselvesinvaluable members of the ARCHEM team; furthermore,their involvement has brought about the significantexpansion and improvement of the overall project.Later, Julie Bergmann, from the University of California-Davis, also joined the team. She arrived in time to learnthe basic methodology of the project and to assist withthe Papadiokambos excavations.

The ARCHEM team a r r ived in Cre te on theevening of July 3 and started work the following dayat the Coulson Laboratory of INSTAP Study Center

for East Crete. After analyzing data from the previousyear, we learned that our previous incorporation ofthe Büchi polyvap into the conservation process wasan unqualified success. This approach resulted in ourseamless extraction of 895 samples.

From July 4 to July 25, the ARCHEM team contin-ued to re f ine theextraction methodol-ogy and to addressques t ions and con-cerns expressed overthe pas t year . Onedecision we made atthe onset of the sum-mer was to save fil-t r ands f rom ouranalysis of each sam-ple. While the smalls ize of our team inpast years had madethis method impracti-cal, this year’s expan-sion of the ARCHEM

project made such an undertaking possible. Duringthese first three weeks of the season, the bulk of theextractions focused on the objects from the new exca-vations in Pacheia Ammos at both the Industrial Areaand the Rock Shelter. Kathy Hall, INSTAP seniorconservator, and I instituted a pilot program for theseextractions by studying stone tools for organic residuesand phytoliths. With the help of Heidi Dierckx, weselected 23 stone objects from the Pacheia AmmosRock Shelter (plus a quern from Priniatikos Pyrgos) as

T

Thomas Harwood, Jennifer Meyer, and Andrew Koh

likely candidates for producing organic residues andphytoliths. Overall, we garnered four samples fromeach object: mechanical scrapings from the exterior, sol-vent extractions for organic residue analysis, filtrate by-products from the solvent extractions, and particulatesproduced by acid washing the stone objects. In addi-tion to the 23 organic residue samples extracted fromthe Rock Shelter for the pilot study, we extracted 344samples from the Industrial Area, bringing the totalnumber of samples in ARCHEM’s Pacheia Ammosarchive to 833.

With over 2500 samples in its collection, we were readyto develop the next step in the research protocol, theinstrumentation process. We purchased a centrifugal evap-orator with the express purpose of preparing 0.3ml sub-samples for chromatographic analysis. Up to 36 vials at atime are simultaneously evaporated using the centrifugalevaporator and transported to labs overseas, where theresidues are put back into solution upon arrival usingdichloromethane before injection into a Gas Chromatogra-phy/Mass Spectrometry instrument. Presently, thisresearch will take place at the Detroit Institute of ArtsDepartment of Conservation Science thanks to a generousMellon Foundation grant. We have made a tentative agree-ment with Dr. Christophe Vallianos, Director of theMuseum of Cretan Ethnology’s Research Center at Vori.In the near future, the ARCHEM director will help set uptheir GC/MS instrument, and for a modest price, havecontinued access to it.

This year, we also decided to branch out with additionalanalyt ical techniques. Demetrios Anglos, a seniorresearcher at the Foundation of Research and Technology,

Hellas (FORTH), obtained samples from ARCHEM thatwere analyzed by Nuclear Magnetic Resonance (NMR).We intend to continue collaboration of this nature in thenear future. Samples will also be analyzed this year at theDetroit Institute of Arts using Raman spectroscopy, anearly instantaneous method of qualitatively and quantita-tively identifying compounds through the use of a laser.Though it will never produce the detail of GC/MS analysis,it is a promising technique that immediately identifies thegeneral characteristics of organic residue samples in solu-tion, as the instrument has the ability to identify com-pounds through transparent materials—in this case, ourglass vials. Combined with our more detailed methodologyand new techniques, ARCHEM remains a promising pro-ject that will continue into the future. Accordingly, ourtwo major goals for next season are to continue refiningthe extraction procedure while also expanding the instru-mentation and interpretation processes. Ultimately, theseefforts promise to solidify ARCHEM’s continued contribu-tion to Aegean archaeology.

2 3

Total Tally of Samples for Summer 2007 by SiteAzoria 9

Mitrou 36Mochlos 56

Pacheia Ammos 367Palaikastro 8

Pyrniatikos Pyrgos 4Trypetos 7

487 Total

t is a pleasure to highlight the successful work ofthe staff and members of the Study Center and

our colleagues in the wider archaeological communityworking in east Crete in 2007. Several member pro-jects, Azoria, Mochlos, and Pseira, conducted success-ful study seasons. The team preparing the pottery fromthe LM I houses ofBlock C a t Mochlosidentified two potteryfragments incised withLinear A, including asign for olive oil. TheStudy Center a l sohosted or assisted sev-era l v i s i t ing teamsstudying pottery fromseveral sites in easternCrete—the MakrygiallosProject under the direc-tion of Prof. E. Mant-zourani f rom theUniversity of Athens,and the PapadiokambosPro jec t d i rec ted byChrysa Sofianou of the24th branch of theGreek Archaeological Service.

In July, the Study Center also hosted the new Irishteam under the direction of Dr. B. Malloy excavating atPriniatikos Pyrgos with the support of Dr. B. Hayden ofthe University of Pennsylvania Museum. The Study Cen-ter’s Chief Conservator, Dr. Stefi Chlouveraki, continuesto lead the team conserving the pottery from the MM IIshipwreck excavated near Pseira by Dr. E. Hadjidaki ofthe Underwater Antiquities Department of the Archaeo-logical Service. I also want to mention the small rescueexcavation of Minoan remains conducted by the 24thbranch of the Greek Archaeological Service in fields sev-eral hundred meters north of the Study Center. We lookforward to hearing more about these finds next year whenthe work is finished.

The summer lecture series included lectures by threeAegean Bronze Age Scholars. Prof. Jeffrey Soles presented alecture on the Minoan reverence for their ancestors, and Dr.Melissa Eaby gave a paper on East Cretan Iron Age burialpractices. Kostas Halikias also spoke about his Extra UrbanSurvey of Bronze Age Ierapetra.

During the year theStudy Center alsohosted three work-shops. Two were heldin May at the StudyCenter, the f irst byProf. S. O’Conner ofBradford Universitytaught our conservationstaff how to use thenew Faxitron X-rayunit. The second work-shop was by Prof. S.Manning, and focusedon the collection ofwood samples for anal-ysis at the Malcolm andCarolyn Wiener Labo-ratory for Den-drochronology at

Cornell University. The third workshop was held at theDanish School in Athens in July. It brought together 30scholars with unpublished LM IB pottery in an attempt toexamine two critical issues: regional ceramic productionand possible subphasing of the LM IB period. I want tothank my co-host, Erik Hallager, for making the eventsuch a success.

There have also been some exciting developments tothe physical plant in Pacheia Ammos. No change wasmore appreciated by our members than the appearance ofhigh-speed internet service in June 2007. This systemreplaced the dial-up system brought to the village by theStudy Center in fall of 1996; however, it is difficult to saywhich change was more dramatic—the high speed color

M E S S A G E F R O M T H E D I R E C T O R

I

Stephania Chlouveraki (right) and Matina Tzari (left) mend a unique EM pithos from Aprhoditi’s Kephali.

In April, thanks to the recently initiated Personnel Development allowance and the generosity of Gerry Gesell, I traveled to London to participate in a disaster planning and recovery seminar, and now I am writing a plan foruse in the event of a disaster in the building. The plan focuses on people first, then the antiquities storage,archives, and library. Everyone employed in the building will be involved at some level and the plan will be practiced with dry runs so people know what to do if necessary. As designated safety technician of the building,one of my goals is to avert disasters or accidents, but disasters such as those brought on by earthquakes or forcesof nature must be managed after the fact. Good preparation will ensure that the best choices can be made immediately, and damage may be mitigated.

D I S A S T E R P L A N N I N G A N D R E C O V E R Y

By Eleanor Huffman, Assistant to the Director

4 5

photos of Googleearth today or the black and white textreporting the news on PINE in 1996. The Photographyand Conservation Laboratories also received two impor-tant upgrades. The first is a crane, ordered by PublicationTeam Photographer Chronis Papanikolopoulos, that allowsus to lift a camera 9 meters above an excavated site. Thesecond was a Faxitron cabinet X-ray machine discoveredby Publication Team conservator Kathy Hall (see herreport in this issue of Kentro).

The construction of a proper archive in the base-ment of the Study Center promises to provide animportant stimulus for the preservation of our paperand electronic records. This work is described byEleanor Huffmann elsewhere, but we all owe a greatdebt of gratitude to our library intern, Dr. EletheriaDaleziou, who oversaw both the construction of thespace and organization and installation of the growingbody of excavation and administrative records. Thetransfer of these records also allowed for addition oftwo large oak tables in the library, increasing the spacefor readers from 6 to 10. Finally, I want to report onthe successful construction of the Kommos Apotheke

in Pitsidia. Several members of the StudyCenter helped the Director oversee itsconstruction, and I would especially liketo thank Publication Team ConservatorKathy Hall for overseeing the complicatedtransfer of antiquities to the new facility.

While the Study Center was busy with allof these activities, the highlight for many ofus was a pair of parties in early June. The firstwas the wedding reception of Dr. YiannisPapadatos and Dr. Eleni Nodarou, Directorof our MacDonald Petrography Laboratory.We all wish them many years of happinesstogether. Our second party celebrated the75th birthday of Prof. Gerry Gesell. Theparty for Gerry brought together her manyfriends and colleagues to see her receive aFestchrift devoted to Minoan religion.

- Thomas Brogan

The extended 9 metercrane for aerial

photography for the Photography Laboratory.

Sturt Manning shows Stephania Chlouveraki wood core sampling techniques.

Yuki Furuya, the 2007–2008 INSTAP Librarian Fellow, in our newly re-designed library.

Joe and Maria Shaw, Tommy Brogan, and Tom Brogan outside the Kommos Apotheke.

Gerry Gesell dances with some of her guests at her birthday party.

Richard and Janette Sias, Gerry Gesell, Jeff Soles, and Metaxia Tsipopoulou at Gerry’s 75th birthday party.

7

T H R O W I N G S M A L L V E S S E L S I N T H E

L M I B M O C H L O S P O T T E R ’ S P I T

By Jerolyn E. Morrison and Douglas P. Park

his summer we gave a spin at f igur ing outMinoan wheel technology by turning our ener-

gies to the potter’s pit in the Mochlos Artisan’s Quar-te r s . Be ing bothcur ious s tudents ofa n t h r o p o l o g i c a larchaeology and cre-at ive potters , we areinterested in develop-ing experimental pro-grams to recogn izeceramic technologiesand shifts in ceramicproduction in order todiscuss cultural changein the archaeologicalrecord. To begin ourstudy, we looked atthe two primary needs of the craftsperson, a suitableworkspace and a proper tool kit. To understand thesetwo primary needs, we posed the following two ques-t ions: was the exterior semicircular space behindBuilding A in the Artisan’s Quarters used as a potter’spit, and can the centrifugal force created by Evely’sType 3C ‘flywheel’ (1988, 83–126) maintain enoughenergy to produce the pottery characteristic of theBronze Age?

Archaeological Context of Minoan Craft Activity Soles has identified a LM IB Minoan stone lined pot-

ter’s pit located in the Mochlos Artisan’s Quarters (Soles2003: 37). The pot-ter’s pit is a semicir-cular exterior spacethat is roughly twometers wide by three-quarters of a meterdeep and attached tothe south s ide ofRoom 4 and along thewest side of Room 10of Bui lding A. Thepresence of a woodensupport beam ishypothesized. Twosizeable notches set

within the wall architecture of the potter’s pit wouldhave allowed a support beam to lie securely across theupper course of stone, thus supporting the wheel axle ina vertical position for potting (Figure 1). Other findsassociated with potting activity unearthed in the pit areone ceramic bat, two polishers used for shaping the ves-sel, one pivot stone to support the wheel axle, one obsid-ian blade and core used for cutting string, used by thepotter to remove the newly potted vessel from the bat orthe wheel (Soles 2003: 36-38).

The potters working in the Artisan’s Quarters used twodifferent types of large, heavy, flat-topped wheels, Evely’sTypes 3A and 3C (Evely 1988: 100–106). We believe thatthe existence of the two wheel types at a single-phase site,such as the Mochlos Artisan’s Quarters, indicates that thepotters used a variety of wheel technologies to perform dif-ferent tasks. We are currently developing experimental testsfor Mochlos wheel technology that will explore these tech-nologies in pottery production. The undersides of the wheeltypes are the distinguishing characteristic that indicates theMinoans had developed different wheel technologies. Theunderside of Type 3A is constructed so that the rim andwheel are an even thickness with a very shallow centralsocket. The underside of Type 3C is constructed with amore elaborate thickened ‘flywheel’ rim with an attacheddeep scored socket. Clearly these wheels required differentmechanism for installation and use.

Experimental Procedure and ResultsMany scholars have commented on the installation

and use of the Type 3C wheel and believe it can beturned to maintain a speed that would form a pot. Withtheories of the mechanical installation of the wheel inmind and a replica copy of a Type 3C wheel and Type 4collar (Evely 1988: 107), compliments of Don Evely, weheaded to the Artisan’s Quarters to rebuild the Mochlospotter’s pit and learn how to operate the wheel.

Based on architectural features found in the semi-cir-cular pit behind Building A (Soles 2003), we designed awooden support beam that could hold the weight andwithstand the turning force of the potter’s wheel (Fig-ure 1). Once we were confident of the design, weinstalled it in the pit and secured it with wet clay. Belowthe wooden support beam, we placed our replica of thepivot stone in the same location it was found in the pit.With our architectural support complete, we began theinstallation of the experimental wheel. We first insertedthe rounded tip of the wooden axle into the socket ofthe wheel. Then we secured the collar to the wheel byadding clay in and around the deep socket and thread-ing the collar though the axle until it made contact withthe underside of the wheel (See Evely 1988: 109, Figure10). Once the wheel apparatus was secure, we placed itthrough a padded hole in the support beam so that thepointed end of the axle rested in the shallow “V” grove

6

…man’s first wheels used in the early cultures of Egypt, Greece and Mesopotamia…consisted of a disk, mounted on a shaft or a stone in the ground and were turned by means

of a long stick or by hand. The potter could stand or stoop to the clay wobbling in the centre of the disk while he worked alternately at trueing up the mound revolving the wheel.

--Peterson describing Shoji Hamada’s hand wheel, 1974: 233

T

Figure 1

Figure 2

Figure 3

8 9

perfectly accommodate Minoan-sized people to makepottery, (2) we were able to make vessels that resem-bled conical and ogival cups within the first week ofoperating the wheel, and (3) it was easier to produce avessel on the wheel with one person operating it ratherthan two.

We discovered that the semicircular pit behind Build-ing A is perfectly designed to accommodate the produc-t ion of pottery using a hand wheel . The exter iorlocation of the potter’s pit offers plenty of natural lightso that one can see the forms being potted; the southwall of Room 4 and the west wall of Room 10 wouldhave provided ample protection from the sun and thestrong sea breezes. Ergonomically, the pit is only

designed for Minoan-sized people, asboth of us are no taller than the aver-age height of a Minoan individual. Thef lat top of the wheel hi ts us bothexactly at our center of gravity, whichis at our waist. It is essential to useone’s center of gravity to find andmaintain the proper rhythmic balancebetween the speed of the wheel andthe pressure one puts on the clay whenpotting. We made this discovery whenwe watched a taller, well-trained potterworking on the experimental wheel.He had trouble centering and produc-ing forms on the wheel since he wasbent over and could not maintain theproper balance.

We spent the shaded afternoons,from around 4:00 to 8:00 on the last 2weeks in July working in the potter’spit producing vessels. This is not aconcentrated amount of time, yet wewere still able to produce vessels thatresembled Minoan cups. During thefirst afternoon in the potter’s pit, weinstalled the wheel and began working.It did not take very long to realize thatone must f ind the correct balancebetween the positions of our bodies,spinning the wheel and forming thevessel. Finding this centered balance

was the most difficult task of the experiment. By theend of the first afternoon we had begun making crudeconical cups and shallow bowls. By the end of the firstweek we succeeded in making shapes that resembledogival cups (Figure 7).

We designed and installed our wheel to be turnedby spinning the rim of the wheel-head. We did notinstall a turning cross-bar, like the Thrapsano pithoswheel , s ince it is a well known technology. Also,another potter in Evely and Morrison’s experimentalprogram is learning how to make adjustments on thissort for potting small vessels. The wheel-head is largeenough that two people could operate the wheel. Themaster potter would stand on one side of the wheel to

of the pivot stone. We then leveled thewheel-head by aligning the wooden axleand pivot stone so that it could rotatefreely (Figure 2).

In an attempt to develop the skills tomake a pot on a hand-turned wheelwhile standing upright, we consulted avariety of video clips and photographstaken of potters using hand-turnedwheels. However, in the end we foundJapanese master potter Shoji Hamada’swritings the most useful. In his writingshe emphasizes the importance of find-ing the balance between your hands, theclay and the wheel. To find the balance,you must relearn how to position yourbody while sett ing the tempo andrhythm between releasing the clay andspinning the wheel (Figures 3 and 4).The process is both physically and men-tal ly frustrat ing, but in the endextremely satisfactory (Figure 7).

The bas ic procedure we used tothrow on the Minoan wheel is fairlysimple (see sequential steps in Figure6) . The potter f i rs t lubr icates thewooden axle with olive oil at the pointwhere it comes in contact with thewooden support beam and pivot stone.Other lubrication materials could havebeen used, such as other types of oil orcrushed graphite. We choose olive oil since it was themost available. Next, the potter wets the flat top sur-face of the wheel head and adds the wedged clay at itscenter. With feet a shoulder’s width apart and kneesslightly bent, the potter places his right hand acrosshis/her body to grasp the rim of the wheel-head to spinit as fast as it will turn. The potter then centers the clayon the wheel-head by firmly holding the clay wedgewith the left hand while spinning the wheel with theright hand. Once the clay is centered, the potter alter-nates between spinning the wheel with his/her righthand and throwing the vessel using both hands. Whenthe form of the pot is complete, the potter uses a thinpiece of string to separate the base of pot with the flat

top of the wheel head. The pot is then removed and setaside for decoration and drying before it is fired andbecomes a ceramic vessel.

ConclusionWe wanted to know how Mochlos potters produced

small vessels, such as cups and bowls, in the Artisan’sQuarters using a wheel that belonged to Evely’s Type3C class. To do this, we developed an experimental testthat would allow us to understand how the Mochlospotters could have designed their workspace and usedtheir tool kit. The following three discoveries weremade: (1) thesemicircular pit behind Building A could

Figure 4

Figure 5

1110

form the vessel while the other person would standopposite the potter and spin the wheel-head by turningthe rim (Figure 5). As noted above, we found thatoperating the wheel in this manner was very awkward.It was much easier for one person to keep the balancebetween spinning and potting. We concluded that ifthe Minoan potter operated the wheel by spinning therim, he or she could easily produce a pot without theaid of an assistant.

Experimental Archaeology and Anthropology inBronze Age Studies

The most practical way one can understand ancienttechnology is to build it, use it, experience the inherentsetbacks, and make informed adjustments. Throughexperimentation we reconstructed how a Minoan potterat Mochlos would have produced cups, bowls, small jars,and jugs. Understanding how potters organized them-selves to produce pottery is one insight into howMinoan craftsmen and craftswomen thought about theirenvironment and their trade. Experimental archaeologyand anthropological theory in Bronze Age studies arecentral to the reconstruction of all aspects of humanactivity. The study of the cultural process of humanactivity is a field of research that has the ability tobreathe life into the archaeological record, for it bringsthe dynamic to the static.

BibliographyEEvveellyy,, DD.. 11998888.. ‘The potters’ wheel in Minoan Crete,’ Annualof the British School at Athens 83: 83–126.

Peterson, Susan. 1981. Shoji Hamada: A Potter’s Way andWork, New York, Kodansha International.

SSoolleess,, JJ.. 22000033.. Mochlos IC: Period III. Neopalatial Settlementon the Coast: The Artisans’ Quarter and the Farmhouse atChalinomouri. INSTAP Academic Press.

Figure 6

Figure 7

T H E S T U D Y C E N T E R A R C H I V E

By Eleanor Huffman

new record’s managementera began for the INSTAP

Study Center with the comple-tion of the Archive, which nowhouses the paper and digitalrecords, site plans, and artifactdrawings of the excavation pro-jects served by the Center, theCenter’s business records, andsome library holdings. Theserecords are now housed in asafe, humidity-controlled andpest-free environment. TheArchive room was constructed inthe basement in an area for-merly occupied by three storagecages used by projects to storeequipment. After the physicalconstruction, the room was fur-nished with filing cabinets, mapdrawers, a dehumidifier, and awork table. Sturdy, freshlypainted blue shelves wereattached around the walls. Alocal metal artisan built a cus-tom-designed cart for use whenretrieving and replacing records.In conjunction with the con-struction of the archive, Elefthe-ria Daleziou, the 2006–2007Library Fellow, helped us reor-ganize our record storage sys-tem and work out a recordretention policy.

A

Eleftheria Daleziou in the Archive at the beginning of the project.

Eleanor Huffman at work in the completed Archive.

12 13

T H E N E W X - R A Y U N I T A T T H E S T U D Y C E N T E R

By Kathy Hall

his year we have been testing the new Faxitron X-rayunit in the Conservation Laboratory (Figure 1). The

unit offers exciting opportunities for technological studies ofmany different materials as well as helping conservators inthe preservation of artifacts.

X-radiography is commonly used for the study of manymaterial types including metals (excepting lead), ceramic,glass, textile, seeds/other archaeobotanical material, and ofcourse, human and animal bone. There are also geoarchaeo-logical applications with soils and sediments (for example,the identification of hammerscale from smithing). X-radiog-raphy has also been used in archaeology in the examinationof soil blocks and sealed vessels which may contain complexgroups of artifacts.

Among the most common uses of X-radiography ofcultural materials are:

• identification of an object and its condition. • identification of manufacturing method• identification of finishing methods and decoration• identification of faults, breaks, repairs and reuse

X-radiography is a non-destructive, photographic tech-nique in which high energy radiation is generated anddirected at an artifact placed on a piece of radiographicfilm. Since regions of different densities absorb differingamounts of X-rays, the developed plate gives an image ofthe internal structure of the artifact.

The INSTAP Study Center’s unit is an industrialmachine with a range of 20–110 kVp which produceslow intensity X-rays useful for the study of bone andceramic material as well as higher intensity X-rays suit-able for the study of metallic artifacts. Timing of expo-sure is also very flexible. The unit produces X-rays in atotal ly enclosed, radiat ion-proof cabinet which ischecked for radiation leaks annually by a qualified medi-cal physicist.

Examples of use at INSTAP

Michel Roggenbucke has been working with GerryGesell in her technological examination of the goddessfigurines from Vronda. X-radiography has proved to bea valuable help in understanding how the figurines wereput together (Figures 2 and 3). The radiograph shows asextra wedge of clay added to strengthen the thumb, aswel l as the method of a t tachment of the f ingersthrough insertion into the palm. The direction of thevoids in the ceramic fingers shows how the clay wasrolled. Dowels added by the conservator to strengthenjoints are also visible.

The unit has also been used for the study of a ceramicassemblage by Dr. Ina Berg at Knossos (forthcoming) and astudy of selected weapons from the Knossos North Ceme-

tery. An investigation of all metallic artifacts from the siteof Vronda is in progress.

X-radiography is available to all researchers at INSTAP.To schedule investigative X-radiography of archaeologicalmaterial please contact Dr. Tom Brogan. The process pro-duces pieces of X-ray film size 18 x 24 cm or 24 x 30 cm. Ifrequired for publication, images can be photographed on alight table by the INSTAP photographer, ChronisPapanikolopoulos.

After purchase of the unit, a short professional develop-ment course was organized at the INSTAP Study Center.“Cultural Material X-Radiography; Imaging Techniques,Interpretation and Digitisation” was taught on the 12th and13th of May by Sonia O'Connor of the Department ofArchaeological Sciences at the University of Bradford.Attendees included INSTAP conservators Michel Roggen-bucke, Steffi Chlouveraki, and myself, as well as KleioZervaki (Haghios Nikolaos Museum) and Karen Loven(Agora Excavations).

BibliographyBBeettaannccoouurrtt,, PP..PP.. 1984. East Cretan White-On-Dark Ware: Studies on a Handmade Pottery of the Early to Middle Minoan Periods. Philadelphia. University Museum, Universityof Philadelphia.

CCaannttii,, MM.. GG.. 22000033.. “X-Ray Studies of the Sediments,” TheSurvey and Excavation of a Bronze Age Timber Circle at Holmenext-the-Sea, Norfolk, 1998-9. Proceedings Prehistoric Society69, 42–3, Brennand, M. and Taylor, M. eds.

CCaarrrr,, CC.. 1990. “Advances in Ceramic Radiography and Analysis: Applications and Potentials,” Journal of Archaeological Science, 17, 13–34.

LLeeoonnaarrdd,, AA.. et al. 1993. “The Making of Aegean StirrupJars,” Annual of the British School at Athens 88, 105–123.

LLiivviinnggssttoonnee SSmmiitthh,, AA.., Bosquet, D. and R. Martineau, eds.2005. Pottery Manufacturing Processes: Reconstitution and Interpretation. BAR International Series 1349. Oxford:Archaeopress.

Faxitron unit/osteological examples:http://www.faxitron.com/43855a_gs.htm

Metal artifacts:http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/upload/pdf/X_Radiography.pdf

T

Figure 1: The Faxitron X-ray unit

Figure 2: The hand of a goddess fig-urine from Vronda seen in regularlight (photograph by Kathy Hall)

Figure 3: A radiograph by MichelRoggenbucke of the hand

(photograph of the radiograph byChronis Papanikolopoulos)

1514

was based on Late Minoan IB arti-facts from the Hagios NikolaosMuseum. The obvious method ofusage was to put lighted charcoalinto the cavity, but this turned outto be a total failure, as not enoughheat could be generated to vaporizeanything, even with the use of bel-lows! When the bowl was filled tothe rim with burning charcoal,however, the charcoal remained hotenough to vaporize B. frerana resinfor about two hours (Figure 3).Further air flow increased the tem-perature of the coals considerably,and as a result windy conditionsinstantly ignited the resin. Wefound that there was no need to usebellows, as the perforated innerdome appeared to amplify the air-flow to the charcoal. Even so, wedid notice that the base of theburner became too hot to hold, andmanaged, in windy conditions, toscorch the wooden surface onwhich it was resting. Accordingly,we decided that we needed a way tocarry the lit burner. We soon foundthat a small basket of willow provedto be the ideal solution. We filled aburner with hot charcoal andplaced it in the basket (Figure 4).We soon noticed that we couldhold the basket quite comfortably,and when indoors, the willow wasonly slightly scorched. Interestingly,this combination of basket andburner resembles the incenseburner held by the “Young Priest-ess” in a wall painting in the WestHouse at Akrotiri, Thera (Figure 5).

The Type B burner (Figure 6)bears a close resemblance to a modern burner, and as aresult, it was only natural for us to conclude that it was

an incense burner. Our replica isbased both on a Late Minoan III arti-fact from Sitia and on the illustrationsin Georgio’s 1979 article “LateMinoan Incense Burners.” In all, fivewere made, but they were left undec-orated in order to avoid unnecessarycontamination. To test the effective-ness of the burners, the replicas werefilled with ordinary lumpwood char-coal purchased at the supermarket.We then added an incense resin. Theresults were amazing, as the charcoalin the burners retained enough heatto burn for up to six hours unat-tended. Apparently, the perforated lidslows down the airflow to the char-coal. Although the base certainlybecame very hot, the unit was veryeasily moved around by the handle.This characteristic of the burner ledus to believe that it could have beenused for another purpose. Wehypothesized that, given the preciousand sacred nature of fire in theBronze Age, these receptacles couldhave been designed to retain firewhile it was carried from room toroom or from house to house. Ifused for this purpose, the lid wouldhave acted as a guard or "cur-few"(literally, ‘cover fire’), thus preventingmaterials from falling into the vesseland catching fire. This question couldbe answered by residue analysis ofdeposits on the inside of the lids.

We did our init ia l tests on asingle burner. In order to repli-ca te res idue depos i t s , weemployed the rema in ing fourburners . Each was f i l l ed wi thcharcoal, and over a period of two

hours, a different type of incense was burned ineach burner (Figure 7).

Figure 5: A detail of the “Young Priestess” fresco from the West House at Akrotiri, Thera

(from Christos Doumas’ The Wall Paintings of Thera, Athens, 1992).

E X P E R I M E N T S W I T H M I N O A N I N C E N S E B U R N E R S

By Pete and Gracia Travis

ike many interesting lines of research, it allhappened by accident. We visited Crete for

the first time in the spring of 2006, partly to seeour friends John Lewis and Rita Roberts, but alsoto track down and photograph the Rock Rose ofCrete in its natural habitat. While it may seemstrange that we would fly from our home in Eng-land to look at one fairly common flower, the RockRose produces Labdanum, an aromatic substancesometimes used in incense and perfume, and wetrade in incense resins. Naturally enough, we vis-ited the Hagios Nikolaos museum, and there weobserved more incense burners than we had everseen in a single exhibition. Some of them, how-ever, were very odd; Rita and John (who work asvolunteers at the INSTAP Study Center for EastCrete) they suggested that we should bring this tothe attention of Thomas Brogan, the Center’sDirector. We did this by scrawling rough designson a bit of scrap paper and presenting them tohim. In response to our drawings, he suggestedthat when we returned to the UK, we could havesome replica burners made, and then simply trythem out. He also recommended that we shouldliaise with archaeochemist, Andrew Koh, and puttogether an experimental archaeology project. Wehave a colleague, Jim Newboult, who specializes inmaking replicas of historic (and prehistoric) pot-tery, and he produced replicas of three designsusing both a hand turned slow wheel to shape aclay type matched to the original artifacts (Figure1). We returned to Crete a few weeks later to meetAndrew, bringing with us samples of some resinsthat we believed would have been available inBronze Age Crete. We then introduced Tom,Andrew, and several other team members to theamazing aromas of natural incense.

The BurnersFirstly, the Type A burner (Figure 2) is a rather curi-

ous shape, consisting of a saucer with a dome in themiddle. Sometimes this dome is perforated. Our replica

L

Figure 1: Jim Newboult makes a replica of a Minoan incense burner.

Figure 2: Our replica of the Type A incense burner.

Figure 3: Our replica of a Type A incense burner filled with burning charcoal.

Figure 4: The replica of a Type A incense burnerfilled with burning charcoal is placed in a basket.

16

The main two resins used for all theexperiments were types which wouldhave been readily available to theMinoans: Labdanum (Cistus species),which grows on Crete, and Mastic(Pistacia lenticus), a plant which nowcomes from Chios but is known tohave grown on Santorini (Friedrich1978, 109–128). Both vaporize at a rel-atively low temperature. Mastic is simi-lar, if not identical, to the “terebinth”found on the Uluburun ship wreck andidentified at Tel Armana in Egypt (Ser-pico and White 2000a and b). Further-more, Andrew Koh has alreadydiscovered traces of labdanum onsome Minoan artifacts.

The other two incenses we used for this experimentwere Black Storax and Coptic Frankincense. Black storaxis a mixture of the charcoaled bark and resin from Liq-uidamber orientalis which comes from the Levant (nowa-days mainly modern Turkey). The potential use of CopticFrankincense (Boswellia frerana) during the Bronze Age isdebatable. Although it comes from Somalia, we believethat the potential trade routes to the eastern coast ofAfrica would have been easier than those needed to obtainthe Arabian Frankincense (B.sacra)

Our replica Type C burner(Figure 8) was based on a LateMinoan IB artifact from theMakryialos Minoan villa (the sameprovenance as Type A). Thisburner was the item that had orig-inally caught our attention, and aswe initially predicted, burningcharcoal in the lower cavity failedto achieve anything more than amelted resin (Figure 9). Even so,one extraordinary result wasobtained. If one fills the top bowlwith burning charcoal, enoughheat radiates downwards torelease the aromas from resinsplaced in the lower cavity (Figure

10). However, once again, residue analysis would beneeded to give us a better understanding of how thisitem was employed.

ConclusionBringing these ancient artifacts back to life was a fasci-

nating challenge. Hopefully these experiments will help tobuild a working hypothesis on the functionality ofMinoan incense burners. At this point, all the replicashave now been given to the Study Center for further anal-

ysis and comparison. If we have used these replicas in thecorrect manner, then our own burners should possessresidue deposits which would correspond with those onthe original artifacts. But if this does not occur, then wewill just have to try something else!

AcknowledgementsWe would l ike to thank al l the staff at the

INSTAP Study Center for their hospitality andhelp. We would like to extend a special thanks toTom Brogan and Andrew Koh for their boundlessenthusiasm about what must have seemed at timesto be a very eccentric project. We very much hopethat we will have the pleasure of being able to con-tinue working with everyone in the future.

ReferencesDDoouummaass,, CChhrriissttooss.. 1992. The Wall Paintings of Thera, Athens.

FFrriieeddrriicchh,, WW..LL.. 1980. “Fossil plants from Santorini,” Theraand the Aegean World 2 (Doumas, C., ed.), London. 109-128.

GGeeoorrggiioo,, HH..SS.. 1979. “Late Minoan Incense Burners,”American Journal of Archaeology 83, 427–435.

SSeerrppiiccoo MM.. aanndd WWhhiittee,, RR.. 2000a. “The botanical identityand transport of incense during The Egyptian New King-dom,” Antiquity 74, 884–897.

_______. 2000b. “Resins, Amber, and Bitumen,” AncientEgyptian Materials and Technology, Nicholson, P. and I.Shaw, eds., Cambridge University Press, 430-474.

Figure 6: Our replica of the Type B incense burner.

Figure 7: Testing the Type B burners.

Figure 10: The top bowl of the Type C replica is filled with burning charcoal.

Figure 8: Our replica of a Type C incense burner.

Figure 9: Burning charcoal is placed in the lower cavity of the replica of a Type C incense burner.

Pete and GraciaTravis are freelanceincense specialists

who work with the UK Heritage

Industry.

Their website iswww.panspantry.co.uk

17

19

indicated that Priniatikos Pyr-gos was part of an overal lcoastal settlement extendingeast to include the Greek har-bor settlement of Istron, onthe large promontory of NisiPandeleimon (identif iedthrough survey). The well-pre-served Neopalatial (and FinalNeolithic/Early Minoan I)part of this settlement wasalso identified by Sarris in theKambos, located under amodern football field. Thechronology of the architecturerevealed through remote sens-ing was established fromsherds brought to the surfaceby trenching and coring,undertaken as part of a studyof the geology and geomor-phology of the coastal zoneundertaken by Dr. IannisBassiakos, KonstantinosAthanassas (Demokritos Uni-versity) , and Dr. KosmasPavlopoulos (Harokopio Uni-versity).

The rescue excavation con-tinued in 2006 in a series oftrenches excavated within the G area, along thewestern side of the promontory, and in the A area,in the central part of the headland (Figure 2). Nearthe surface in the G area, a Greek architecturalcomplex, contemporary with the Greek harbor set-tlement on Nisi Pandeleimon, was uncovered. Thedesign of the Greek settlement involved construc-tion of long, parallel walls, which in one case framea road through the settlement. Houses and roomsare built against these long walls (as in trenchesG3000, G4000, and G5000). The courtyards and

roads identified in this settlementwere paved, possibly in the EarlyHellenistic period. At least twoor three major phases of Greeksettlement have been identifiedthrough ceramic studies con-ducted by Dr. Brice Erickson,one dated to 475–450 B.C., andidentified by ceramics found in alarge ash deposit within trenchG2000 and along the north sideof trench G5000. An early Hel-lenistic phase is seen in potteryrecovered from the large Greekstructures revealed in trenchesG3000–G6000; this phase wasalso identified in a Greek middenfound directly north of the Greekroom identified in trench G6000,sealed beneath a paved court.These phases are also seen in apottery dump recovered from anopen area south of a Greekbuilding in the central part of thesite (trench A2000), and in thecorner of a Greek building foundin trench A5000. A Cretan high-necked drinking cup (Figure 3),unique for i ts large s ize , wasrecovered from the dump intrench A2000. Although theClassical and Early Hellenistic

periods represent major phases of occupation,ceramics from other periods, including the EarlyIron Age, Orientalizing-Archaic (Figure 4), and theLate Hellenistic period (seen in Megarian bowl frag-ments) are represented at the site. This Late Hel-lenistic phase is also seen in sherds from a Greekbuilding in trench A2000.

A deep and complex Bronze Age sequence wasalso excavated within area G in 2006. These phasesbegin on bedrock with a stratum of Final Neolithicand Early Minoan I pottery found with burned soil,

Large Greek drinking cup, cat. no. 07–0662.

Sherd from a large vessel found in trench H4000, show-

ing part of a male face in profile, 7th c. B.C.

T H E P R I N I A T I K O S P Y R G O S P R O J E C T , 2 0 0 6 – 2 0 0 7By Barbara Hayden, University of Pennsylvania Museum

ne of the goals of the Vrokastro Survey,which I conducted with Jennifer Moody (Bay-

lor University) was to select a site whose excavationwould develop and refine the conclusions estab-lished through this survey concerning the culturaldevelopment of the region. (These conclusions werepublished in The Vrokastro Reports 2, 3). The crite-ria involved a well-preserved settlement with sub-stantive prehistoric and historical phases, evidencefor industrial/economic activities, and trade net-works. The harbor settlement of Priniatikos Pyrgos,on a sandy limestone headland at the northern endof the Istron River Valley, was chosen for furtherinvestigation, including excavation. This selectionwas based on its extensive chronological range, size,evidence for ceramic production, and complexityand quality of artifacts recovered through survey.

A brief rescue excavation conducted in 2005 byDr. Metaxia Tsipopoulou (Senior Archaeologist,24th Ephorate) wi th Hayden uncovered twoceramic kilns along the western side of the head-land. The larger kiln is cross-draft channel type,and its form and associated pottery suggest itsdate as early Neopalatial (Figure 1); EM IIB-MMIA ceramics found within the smaller kiln on thenorthwest slopes, and on and below a nearby soiland pebble surface (in trench H3000), suggest thepossibility of an earlier date for this smaller kiln.

Remote sensing undertaken in the Istron coastalzone from 2002–2005 by Dr. Apostolos Sarris (Insti-tute for Mediterranean Studies, Rethymnon) also

18

O

Plan showing the trenches and walls revealed in Areas G and A, fromthe western edge of the promontory to its center.

Plan of cross-draft, three-channel kiln in trench G1000. The western half of the kiln has been eroded by the sea. Clay

and cobble surface preserved at the eastern back of the kiln preserves a surface extending above the channels.

large pieces of carbonized wood, bone, and largeobsidian blades. Within the western part of trenchG2000, for example, an Early Minoan wall (G2035)evidencing at least two construction phases is associ-ated with as many as four strata. These contain or aredefined by plaster surfaces, two of which occurbelow wall G2035, one in the southern balk of thetrench, and one directly below the wall (Figure 5a,b).Occupation of the site in Middle Minoan I-II is evi-denced above these deep Early Minoan stratathroughout the G area in strata; Middle Bronze Agesherds are sometimes associated with prepared plas-ter or pebble surfaces. The elevation of Late Minoanstrata indicate that in many places, Greek rebuildingmust have destroyed construction belonging to thisNeopalatial phase, but the abundant ceramics of thisperiod suggest that the settlement belonged primarilyto the early part of this period—although some Post-palatial ceramics have been found, especially intrenches G1000 and G4000.

Several rhyton fragments (Figure 6) found intrenches G4000 and A4000 suggest that special-func-tion areas occurred within the Neopalatial settlement.Trench G7000, however, may have been an open areawithin the Greek settlement, and a sequence of LateBronze Age surfaces have been identified within thistrench, located very close to the modern surface (Fig-ure 7). This trench can therefore furnish importantdata concerning the development of the Neopalatialsettlement, since Late Minoan surfaces and strata havenot been disturbed. This chronological sequence is alsoattested in the A area, with Early and possibly LateMinoan walls recovered in trenches A1000 and A2000,and Early Minoan pebble strata—perhaps surfaces—recovered in trench A5000 (Figure 8). Although theevidence for early Neopalatial occupation on Prini-atikos Pyrgos is extensive, this area must representonly a part of the overall settlement, which has alsobeen observed in the well-preserved walls and potteryrevealed through remote sensing and trenching in theKambos.

During a brief excavation season in 2007, a large,multi-phased building complex of probable Greek date

(Figure 9) was revealed in trench II, just north of theA area. Even though these walls are located near themodern surface, segments of related, intact plasterfloors are beginning to be found. One later burial(possibly Late Roman), in an area outlined by cobbles,has been found placed within this complex, and it isprobable more burials will be identified. Even thoughthis building complex is on the crest of the hill, overly-ing a higher bedrock profile, it is quite possible thatthe Greek walls are located over Bronze Age stratathat may include fragmentary walls and surfaces. Thisstratigraphic sequence has been observed nearby, inthe A area.

Because so many periods are repre-sented in this part of the overall harborsettlement, a more complete historicalsequence, involving both growth anddecline, can be achieved. This longperspective involves the chronologyand size of the initial settlement of thecoast, the relative strength of the EarlyMinoan per iods that fol low, theirdeveloping ceramic traditions, and,through imports, the degree to whichthis site was linked to Mirabello, east-ern Crete, and the Aegean. Initial studyof the ceramics has already indicated afoundation date during EM I (if notearlier), and that a large, thriving EMIIB community continues into EM IIIand MM IA, and encompasses laterperiods of the Middle Bronze Age, aswell as the early Neopalatial period.Analysis of Greek ceramics has refinedthe chronology of the earliest Greeksettlement of the coast as establishedthrough survey. Pottery suggests that the polis ofIstron may have been founded in the late 6th to themid-5th century, or witnessed a significant growthduring this period. The environmental framework

for

this diachronic settlement is also being recon-structed through the Istron Geoarchaeological Pro-ject, alongside bone and botanical studies. Forexample, the presence of cattle bone associatedwith the overall Greek settlement relates to use of

21

Section of south balk immediately east of wall G2035, showing deepEM plaster surface at 5.55 m. Surface 5 (6.00 m.): EM IIB; Surface 6

(5.75 m.): EM I-IIA; Surface 7 (5.55 m.): EM I-IIA (some FN).

LM IA rhyton from trenchG4000, cat. no. 07–0809.

Three high MM-LM IA pebble surfaces in the southeast corner of G7000which continue in the eastern and southern balks; flat slab in eastern balk

near the modern surface may indicate Greek surface.

Base of wall EM G2035 showing EM plaster surface 6.

20

22

thank you!

T h e F r i e n d s o f t h e I N S T A PS t u d y C e n t e r f o r E a s t C r e t e

By Elizabeth Shank

I would like to thank all of you who supported our Archive Fundraising Project so generously.

We are thrilled to have the Archive room completed, and have already found it

invaluable to the Study Center.

Our next project will be to increase our library’sholdings, either through cash or book donations.Checks can be made out to the Friends of the

INSTAP Study Center and mailed to:

Friends of the INSTAP Study Center3550 Market Street Suite 100

Philadelphia, PA 19104

Please feel free to call me with any questionsat (215) 387-4911, or to e-mail me at

elizabethshank@hotmail.com.

the river delta, and possibly to thenature and extent of cultivation inthe immediate environment of theGreek site.

This new data involves questionsconcerning the inception, duration,function, and economical developmentof settlement within the coastal zoneand throughout the region. Thesequestions, in turn, are derived from theresults of the Vrokastro Survey. In thismanner, new excavation completes thetwenty years of fieldwork previouslyundertaken within this portion ofMirabello and serves as a platform forfuture exploration of this large, multi-faceted coastal emporium.

Acknowledgments

This project was sponsored as a res-cue excavation during 2005–2006 by Dr.Metaxia Tsipopoulou, Senior Archaeolo-gist of the 24th Ephoreia, Agios Niko-laos, in collaboration with The Universityof Pennsylvania Museum. Sponsorshipof the excavation in 2007 was assumedby the Irish Institute of Hellenic Studies(Dr. Barry Molloy, Director), with thecontinued support of the 24th Ephorate(Stavroula Apostolakou, Director), incollaboration with Dr. Barbara Haydenof The University of PennsylvaniaMuseum. The excavation has been gener-ously supported by the Institute forAegean Prehistory (2005 to present), the Loeb ClassicalLibrary Foundation (2006, 2007), The University ofPennsylvania Museum (2005 to present), and the Ameri-can Philosophical Society (2005). In addition to numer-ous volunteers, the Brock Field School, under thedirection of Dr. Angus Smith (2006), and students from

Trinity College and University College Dublin (2007),under the direction of Dr. Barry Molloy, excavated at thesite and assisted with the laboratory work at the INSTAPStudy Center. Architectural drawings have been providedby Damon Cassiano (2005) and Joe Griffin (2006, 2007),who also assisted in the stratigraphic study.

EM I-IIA pebble surface (A5022)found in trench A5000, with a mud

brick located on this surface.

2007 excavation of a Greek building complex on the crest of the promontory, from the northwest. Shown are two large rectangular rooms, roughly oriented

east-west, with a large door leading into the southern room.

23

CreteThomas Brogan, DirectorINSTAP Study Center for East CretePacheia AmmosIerapetra 72200Crete, GREECEPhone: 30-28420-93027Fax: 30-28420-93017e-mail: instapec@ier.forthnet.grwww.instapstudycenter.net

At the CenterThomas M. Brogan, Director

Eleanor J. Huffman, Assistant to the DirectorStephania N. Chlouveraki, Chief ConservatorMichel Roggenbucke, Senior ConservatorKathy Hall, Senior ConservatorChronis Papanikolopoulos, Chief PhotographerDoug Faulmann, Chief ArtistEleni Nodarou, Ceramic PetrographerSophocles Orfanidis, Maintenance PersonnelMaria R. Koinakis, Custodian

T H E I N S T A P S T U D Y C E N T E R F O R E A S T C R E T E

Members of the Managing Committee

United StatesINSTAP Study Center for East CreteUniversity of Pennsylvania Museum33rd and Spruce StreetsPhiladelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6324Phone: 215-470-6970 or 215-387-4911Fax: 215-387-4950E-mail: aegeanprehistory@aol.com

At the U.S. Academic OfficePhilip P. Betancourt,

Executive Director of INSTAP–SCEC

Elizabeth Shank, Research and Administrative Coordinator

Kentro StaffElizabeth Shank, Editor

Nicholas Matlin, Assitant EditorTeresa Landis, Production

Kellee BarnardPhilip P. BetancourtThomas M. BroganJack Davis Leslie P. DaySherry Fox Geraldine C. GesellDonald C. HaggisBarbara J. Hayden

Jennifer MoodyMargaret S. MookJames D. MuhlyIrene Bald RomanoElizabeth ShankJeffery S. SolesCatherine VanderpoolL. Vance WatrousChronis Papanikolopoulos, Eleanor Huffman, and Evi Sikla

relax on the back porch of the Study Center.