Generation of isolated attosecond pulses

three

SHIPS AND BOATS OF THE AEGEAN BRONZE AGE

An essential baseline for understanding the coastal interface between sea and land in the Aegean Bronze Age is knowledge of the ships and boats active at that time: the range of their forms and functions, their operating limits and geographical ranges. A voluminous and constantly expanding scholarship exists on all aspects of Aegean Bronze Age seacraft (Basch1987; McGrail2001; Tzalas 1989,1995a,1999,2001,2002; Wachsmann1998; Wedde2000). Much of this discussion remains speculative because, as we have seen, there are few surviving physical remains, and many of the details shown on images and models of Bronze Age vessels are highly ambiguous as to identity and function. Moreover, certain classes of craft that must have existed are represented poorly or not at all. The objective of this chapter is to summarize the salient features that are known or can be inferred about Bronze Age, particularly Mycenaean, seagoing and coast-riding vessels. Here and in the chapters to follow, ship images are cited using the numbering system of Michael Wedde’s catalogue in Towards a Hermeneutics of Aegean Bronze Age Ship Imagery (Wedde2000). In an image citation, a reference such as W612 simply means Wedde, catalogue number 612 (one of the Flotilla Fresco vessels). The virtues of Wedde’s system are that it is rational and easy to use, each item is illustrated and discussed thoroughly, a handy concordance with other catalogues is included, and it is easily accessible in libraries.

General Characteristics of Mediterranean Bronze Age Ships and Boats

All evidence suggests that Mediterranean Bronze Age vessels were constructed hull first rather than frame first, and there is in fact no certain evidence of frames in the small amount of hull material recovered to date (Pulak2002: 616).

3.1 Mortise-and-tenon joinery. Drawing by Felice Ford after Wachsmann 1998: 216, fig. 10.2.

The earliest known frame-first ships date to the mid-first millennium AD, based on recent finds from Tantura Lagoon near Haifa (Kahanov2001,2009) and the Theodosian Harbor at Istanbul (Pulak 2009). There were two basic methods of joining the planks and other structural members of the ship: mortise-and-tenon joinery, and lacing or sewing (Fig. 3.1). The two Mediterranean Bronze Age shipwrecks from which pieces of the hull have been preserved, those at Uluburun and Cape Gelidonya, were both made with locked mortise-and-tenon joinery (Bass1989; Pulak2002). Mortise-and-tenon joinery is well known from earlier and contemporary Egyptian vessels (McGrail 2006: 60), but the tech-nique of locking or pegging the tenons into place with treenails was possibly an innovation of Canaanite shipbuilders in the mid-second millennium BC.¹The locked mortise-and-tenon joint was part of a wider repertoire of woodworking techniques, as illustrated by roughly contemporary tables excavated at MB II Jericho (circa 1750–1650 BC: Wachsmann1998: 240–41, fig. 10.28) and in Shaft Grave V at Mycenae (Muhly 1996). Despite the fact that the Uluburun and Gelidonya hulls were joined in this way, ships with sewn planking persisted well into historical times. The hulls of a number of Mediterranean wrecks from the period 600–100 BC are either fully sewn or partly sewn and partly joined by mortise and tenon (Mark 2005: 45–68; McGrail 2006: 61).² Most experts accept, however, that the Uluburun and Gelidonya ships were of Levantine or Cypriot, not Mycenaean, origin. There is no consensus on when shipwrights in the Aegean world began to employ mortise-and-tenon joints. Some inter-pret the boat that Odysseus fashioned to depart from Calypso’s island (Odyssey 5.234–57) as a mortise-and-tenon joined boat (e.g., Casson1995: 217–19), which would establish the Late Geometric period as the minimum age for this tech-nique’s appearance in the Aegean. Others, however, read into the same passage a sewn vessel (Mark2005: 94), and Samuel Mark (2005: 63–64) in fact places the transition from sewn to mortise-and-tenon joinery in the sixth century BC,

3.2 Painted keel on boat model, Asine LH IIIC. After Vichos and Lolos1997: 333, fig. 21.

as a specific modification to accommodate large, heavy amphora cargoes and burgeoning polis-supported navies. We cannot assume that the Mycenaeans used this technique, but even if they did, many hulls, particularly those of smaller ships and boats, undoubtedly continued to be partially or completely sewn.

The Uluburun ship had a keel that projected into the interior of the hull, rather than outward as was typical of most ancient Mediterranean hulls (Pulak 2002: 618–19). Boat models from the Mycenaean world of late palatial and postpalatial times show the keel as a painted longitudinal line on the inner bottom surface (e.g., Kynos LH IIIC models W332, W333;Fig. 3.2) or a protrusion on the external bottom surface (Mycenae LH IIIC model W312; Karaminou2002:

446).

A range of appendages and devices on the bow, stempost, and stern are portrayed on the ships of the Flotilla Fresco (Wedde 2000: 119–30, figs. 9–

11; see Fig. 2.7). The larger vessels have bowsprits, or spars, running from the stempost as decorative devices or to fasten the stays (Wedde2000: 215). Those on the ships participating in the procession are long and decorated with symbols of birds, dolphins, butterflies, and suns. These sprits were apparently detachable (Wedde 2000: 120). Elaborate bowsprits are not characteristic of Mycenaean vessels, but the stempost (the upright continuation of the keel at the bow) often terminates in the head of a bird or other animal, sometimes rendered realistically and in other cases abstractly (Fig. 3.3). These figured stemposts are diagnostic of late Mycenaean ship depictions of LH IIIB and LH IIIC (Wedde’s [2000: 123–

24] Skyros and Tragana clusters). The prevalence of bird heads as figureheads accords well chronologically with the depiction of birds (along with other motifs including fish, bulls, octopi, and chariot scenes) often rendered in a similar fashion on painted Aegean and Aegean-style pictorial pottery beginning in LH IIIA in the Argolid at Mycenae and Tiryns (G ¨unter 2000). Subsequently in LH IIIB, an industry centered in the Argolid produced pictorial vessels for export to Cyprus. In LH IIIC, this tradition continued with the “Close Style” at Mycenae and Tiryns, and with other local styles in Greece, the eastern Aegean Islands, coastal Asia Minor, and Cyprus. This tradition then influenced the Philistine

3.3 Bird-head stempost decoration on a straight-sided alabastron, LH IIIC Middle, Tragana.

Wedde2000: Catalogue 643, after Korres1989: 200. Courtesy of Michael Wedde.

Monochrome and Bichrome pictorial pottery as migrants from the Aegean and Cyprus contributed culturally to the formation of the historical Philistines in the twelfth and eleventh centuries (Bunimovitz1998; Dothan1998; Yasur-Landau 2005,2010). Thus the pattern of bird motifs on pottery and ship representations demonstrates continuity bridging the Aegean palatial and postpalatial worlds and involving broad maritime contacts (Meiberg2011).

Ships and boats were propelled by one or more of three instruments: paddle, oar, or sail (Wachsmann1998: 247–54).³Anyone who has paddled a canoe and rowed an oared boat will immediately understand the difference in these means of propulsion. Paddling was the earlier form and rowing an innovation in which the pivoting of an oar on a grommet or oarlock increased power and used energy more efficiently. Although paddling continued in use during the Bronze Age in small craft and for cultic use, oared vessels were well established by the later third millennium in Egypt. In the contemporary EBA Aegean, longboats of the Cycladic islands employed up to 25 or more paddlers (Broodbank2000:

99). It is possible that the shift from paddle to oar as the primary means of propulsion took place as part of an infusion of maritime technology that also brought the sail to the Aegean near the end of the Early Bronze Age. This transformation is evident in the changing depictions on pottery, seals, and models that characterize the developmental sequence from Wedde’s “Syros”

(EC/EM/EH II) to “Platanos” (EM III–MM III) types (Wedde2000: 45–52). These changes had other implications for hull design, including broadening the beam to accommodate the mast and rigging as well as the positioning of oars and oarsmen.

Another prominent feature related to propulsion was the steering oar (or quarter rudder, taking the name from its usual position projected over the starboard quarter near the stern), almost certainly attached to the side of the hull by some kind of strap.⁴The steering oar’s function is to redirect water past the hull to impart a turning motion to the vessel, and by 3000 BC in Egypt it was found to be a necessary aid to steering. The earliest clear depiction in the Aegean of a steering oar, in this case with a tiller attached, comes from an Early Cycladic III askos from Phylakopi (W416; Wedde2000: 314;Fig. 3.4). There is a general evolution of the steering oar during the Bronze Age, particularly in

3.4 Early steering oar on an Early Cycladic III sherd. Wedde 2000: Catalogue 416, after Atkinson et al. 1904: pl. V.8c. Courtesy of Michael Wedde.

the form of the blade (Wedde2000: 60–62, fig. 7). Earlier depictions from the Cyclades and Crete show a spindle- or leaf-shaped blade, while the Mycenaean blade of LH IIIC was larger and thicker, with a triangular shape. Normally, one steering oar is depicted on the starboard quarter, but rarely there are two (e.g., the ship under sail in the Akrotiri Flotilla Fresco; W617) or even three.

The earliest certain depiction of a sail in the Mediterranean occurs in Egypt on a Naqada II (Gerzean) pottery vessel dated between 3500 and 3100 BC (Fig. 3.5).⁵ The image depicts a ship bearing a single square sail positioned well forward toward the prow, in clear contrast to the conventional positioning of the sail amidships in Bronze Age iconography and models.⁶ The position of the sail forward of the center of the hull’s profile has been interpreted as part

3.5 Earliest Mediterranean depiction of a sailing vessel, on a Naqada II (Gerzean) jar, Egypt.

C Trustees of the British Museum.

3.6 Steatite seal with a ship and possible steering oar, Siteia district, EM III or MM I. Wedde 2000: Catalogue 707, after Xenaki-Sakellariou 1958: pl. 18.79a. Courtesy of Michael Wedde.

of an early evolutionary stage in ship configuration (Casson1995: 19), but to modern ship designers, the center of the sail area is properly shifted forward if the vessel is to sail into the wind or with the wind direction forward of the beam (Tilley1999).

The sail was probably introduced to Crete via Egypt just before 2000 BC (Broodbank 2000: 341–47; Yule 1980: 164–66). The earliest certain evidence for the sail in the Aegean comes from a series of Minoan seals from EM III and EM III–MM I contexts (Wedde 2000: 331–33; W701–713), showing ships with a single mast amidships, two or three fore- and backstays, and variable numbers of oars. At least one (W707) may show a steering oar (Fig. 3.6). The high, sweeping stern- and stemposts form the crescent shape characteristic of Cretan vessels through the MBA and into the early phases of the LBA, as is plainly shown in the Akrotiri fresco a half-millennium later.

Until the last phase of the LBA, the square or rectangular sail was stretched between a yard and a fixed boom, and furled by lowering the yard to the boom.

This boom-footed rig presented certain limitations (Wachsmann1998: 248–54).

With the fixed boom, the ship had limited ability to sail into the wind; when not traveling before the wind, the crew’s options narrowed to lying at anchor or taking up oars. Further, the sail could not be taken in, so to reduce sail the crew was forced to remove the sail and raise a smaller one, not a simple matter with an unwieldy cable system. The results of preliminary sailing experiments with a replicated boom-footed square rig do not contradict these assessments (Raban and Sterlitz2002).

A significant innovation of the Bronze Age was the brailed rig with a loose-footed sail, which replaced the boom-loose-footed rig after 1200 BC. In this new con-figuration, the boom disappeared altogether, replaced by lines (brails) attached to the foot of the sail and threaded up the sail through brailing rings sewn onto the sail. The sail could now be furled by simply pulling on the brails to raise it up to the yard, saving considerable time, effort, and manpower (Wachsmann1998:

251) and making the ship more responsive to changing conditions at sea. The transition from boom-footed to brailed rig is clearly illustrated in the Aegean.

When rigging is identifiable in images of LH/LM IIIB (thirteenth century BC) or earlier, it is almost invariably of the boom-footed type,⁷ but most LH IIIC examples of the post-1200 BC period employ the new brailed rig (Wachsmann 1998: 251; Wedde2000: 80–87). Elsewhere, shortly after 1200, the naval battle scene from the north wall of the mortuary temple of Ramesses III at Medinet Habu shows the ships of both Egyptians and Sea Peoples with brailed rigs (Casson1995: 36–38, fig. 61; Raban1995). The brailed, loose-footed sail seems not to be an Egyptian or Aegean innovation, however. Some interpret the Sea Peoples’ ships as Syro-Canaanite (Wachsmann1998: 163–98). Earlier depictions of Syro-Canaanite ships may or may not carry brailed rigs. An oft-cited example is a craft of Syro-Canaanite type painted in the tomb of Nebamun at Egyptian Thebes, dating to the reign of the Eighteenth Dynasty pharaoh Amenhotep II in the last quarter of the fifteenth century BC. The rigging has been interpreted as supporting a loose-footed sail (Raban1995: 355), but the part of the painting where the boom would be positioned is not preserved, and several scholars have reconstructed the ship with a standard boom (Wachsmann1998: 45–47, figs.

3.6–3.8).

Various features depicted on the decks and hulls were probably detachable furniture reserved for ceremonial occasions. On both larger and smaller ships in the Flotilla Fresco, a prominent framework composed of vertical stanchions and horizontal roofing beams forms an awning-like structure that occupies almost half the length of the hull (see Fig. 2.7). The framework creates several compart-ments in which numerous robed figures are seated. Because boar’s tusk helmets hang from some of the compartments’ roofs, along with what may be weapons stacked on top, these figures have been interpreted as representations of soldiers (Warren1979: 119), though they could be VIPs of another type (Morgan Brown 1978). This structure is limited mainly to the Akrotiri fresco of LM IA and the Miniature Wall Painting at Ayia Irini of slightly later date in LM IB/LH II (W672–

76; Wedde2000: 327–28). At that time, Ayia Irini in the northern Cyclades had strong ties to the southern Cycladic and Minoan worlds. A gold signet ring found near Tiryns and dated on stylistic grounds to LH II depicts a similar structure, with two passengers seated face to face under the awning (Fig. 3.7).⁸ Several salient points emerge from studies of the awnings. They occur on frescoes in the Cyclades and seals on Crete, in a relatively narrow time horizon in the middle of the second millennium BC, but with the exception of the (surely imported) Tiryns ring, they are not found on the Greek mainland at any time. They appear in pictorial contexts that are strongly ritual or ceremonial in nature – the elaborate ornamentation, fanfare, and deliberately archaizing propulsion at Akrotiri, and intimations of feasting at Ayia Irini. Since such large structures would have proved a hindrance both to sailing and rowing, as well as cargo capacity, it is safe to conclude that these were detachable structures assem-bled onboard for special events and disassemassem-bled afterward. Ships configured

3.7 LH II signet ring showing awning structure, Tiryns.^C Hellenic Ministry of Education and Religions, Culture and Athletics/Archaeological Receipts Fund. Courtesy of the National Archaeological Museum, Athens.

with this special furniture may not have been taken very far from shore, if the Akrotiri and Ayia Irini scenes are any indication.

Another kind of deck furniture has greater relevance for the Mycenaean world. An elaborately decorated ship cabin, or ikrion (pl. ikria), present on the sterns of all of the larger ships in the Flotilla Fresco procession, was in essence a screen of oxhide or woven fabric on a framework of poles and crossbars, which presumably housed a seat for the ship’s captain or some other important official (Shaw1980,1982; Wedde2000: 132–34;Fig. 3.8). The ikrion was unroofed – as clarified by the heads of occupants protruding over the top of the framework – and open on the side facing the bow. Like the awning structure, it was detach-able, but it may have been mounted on a permanent platform built onto the stern deck (Shaw1982: 56, fig. 5). Maria Shaw (1982: 55) characterizes the ikrion as a light, flexible tent-like structure that could easily be disassembled and stored.

Apart from the Flotilla Fresco, images of ships with ikria are relatively rare and date mainly to LM I/II. They include a seal (W910) of MM IIIB–LM I type possibly found near Thebes, a number of “talismanic” seals predominantly from Crete or of unknown provenience, and a few examples of Linear A sign∗86 that may incorporate ikria. The renderings of ship components in these last two categories, highly stylized in the talismanic seals and schematic in the Linear A script, make readings as ikria a matter of interpretation. A stone vase with relief decoration found near Epidauros contains a depiction of a ship with an ikrion in an anomalously late LH IIIB context (W642; Wedde2000: 324). Like awning structures, ikria appear in ceremonial scenes. They are not depicted on Late Mycenaean galleys shown engaged in naval battle, for example, or on any of the nonceremonial ships in the Akrotiri fresco.

3.8 Ikria from two of the Flotilla Fresco ships, Akrotiri. Wedde2000: Catalogue 614 (top), after Marinatos1974b: 140, fig. 26; and 615 (bottom). Courtesy of Michael Wedde.

Another class of ikrion representations forges a more direct link with the Mycenaean world. The main decoration on the walls of Room 4 of the West House at Akrotiri, adjacent to the room containing the Flotilla Fresco, was a continuous frieze of eight painted ikria (Wachsmann1998: 94; Warren 1979:

119; Fig. 3.9). M. Shaw (1980, 1982) has convincingly reconstructed painted stucco fragments excavated in 1886 in a small room just north of the Megaron of the palace at Mycenae as part of a comparable frieze of at least four ikria.

The room is interpreted as belonging to a domestic quarter within the palace complex, similar to the inferred function of West House Room 4. The Mycenae ikria, along with additional fresco fragments from the Mycenaean palace at Thebes that may illustrate an ikrion in association with a female wearing a flounced skirt, and the Epidauros relief vessel mentioned above, combine to make a strong case for the survival of this particular emblem through a half-millennium of changing relationships and ship forms. Found in highly elite contexts at Akrotiri, Mycenae, and Thebes, the ikrion can be understood as a symbol of nautical power transmitted among those elites whose power rested partially in the control of sea routes by which access to raw materials and privileged relationships was secured. The recent recognition that fragments of a wall painting from Hall 64 at the Mycenaean palace at Pylos constitute parts

3.9 Ikrion frieze from West House Room 4, Akrotiri. Shaw1980: 176, ill. 8. Courtesy of Maria C. Shaw and the Archaeological Insti-tute of America.

of a ship with a brailed rig (Shaw1980,2001) highlights the underappreciated role of the nautical realm in the visual language of Mycenaean power.

Types of Mycenaean Seacraft

It is possible to recognize certain distinct types of vessels plying the Aegean in the LBA, and to hypothesize the existence of other types for which we have little or no direct evidence. Two basic functional types that have been projected onto the Bronze Age data are the merchantman and the galley (Wedde2001: 609).⁹ The merchantman was a trading vessel designed to maximize cargo capacity.

To do so, the space available for rowers and other crew was reduced. With

To do so, the space available for rowers and other crew was reduced. With