Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-cfpbc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-18T03:35:10.763Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Mycenaean pottery from Qantir-Piramesse, Egypt1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 September 2013

P. A. Mountjoy  and
H. Mommsen
P. A. Mountjoy
Affiliation:
British School at Athens
H. Mommsen
Affiliation:
Institut für Strahlen und Kernphysik, Universität Bonn
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

LH IIIB pottery from Qantir-Piramesse is presented. Although fragmentary, the material is an important addition to the corpus, as pottery dating to this phase is not common in Egypt. NAA chemical analysis suggests that most of it is imported from the Argolid, but that there are some imports from Cyprus and Palestine. Some local production in Egypt is also indicated.

Type
Articles
Information
Annual of the British School at Athens , Volume 96 , November 2001 , pp. 123 - 155
Copyright
Copyright © The Council, British School at Athens 2001

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

2 See Pusch, E., ‘Pi-Ramesse-geliebt-von-Amun, Hauptquartier Deiner Streitwagentruppen’, in Eggebrecht, A. (ed.), Pelizaeus-Museum Hildesheim, Die Ägyptische Sammlung (Mainz, 1993), 126–44Google Scholar and Ägypten und Levante, 9 (1999)Google Scholar, passim.

3 For the metal workshops see Pusch, E., Ägypten und Levante, 1 (1990), 75–113Google Scholar.

4 Popham, M. in Karageorghis, V., (ed.), Acts of the International Archaeological Symposium ‘The Relations between Cyprus and Crete, ca. 2000–500 BC’, Nicosia 16th April–22nd April 1978 (Nicosia, 1979), 190Google Scholar.

5 Mommsen, H., Beier, T., Hein, A., Podzuweit, C., Pusch, E. and Eggebrecht, E., ‘Neutron activation analysis of Mycenaean sherds from the town of Ramesses II near Qantir and Greek-Egyptian trade relations’ in Demirci, S., Özer, A., and Summers, G. (eds), Archaeometry 1994: Proceedings of the 29th International Symposium on Archaeometry, Ankara 9–14 May 1994 (Ankara, 1996), 169–78Google Scholar.

6 Mommsen, H., Kreuser, A., Levendowski, E., and Weber, J., ‘Provenancing of pottery: status report and grouping’, in Hughes, M., Cowell, M., and Hook, D. (eds), Neutron Activation and Plasma Emission Spectrometric Analysis in Archaeology (BM Occ. Paper 82; London, 1991), 57–65Google Scholar.

7 Perlman, I. and Asaro, F., ‘Pottery analysis by neutron activation’, Archaeometry, 11 (1969), 21–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

8 Beier, T. and Mommsen, H., ‘Modified Mahalanobis filters for grouping pottery by chemical composition’, Archaeometry, 36 (1994), 287–306CrossRefGoogle Scholar; iid., ‘A method for classifying multidimensional data with respect to uncertainties of measurement and its application to archaeometry’, Naturwissenschaften, 91 (1994), 546–8Google Scholar.

9 Garrigos, J. Buxeda i, ‘Alteration and contamination of archaeological ceramics: the perturbation problem’, JAS 26 (1999), 295–313Google Scholar.

10 H. Mommsen, ‘Provenance determination by trace element analysis: problems, solutions and applications’, Workshop on Archaeometry in Archaeology: New Trends, Rhodes, 3–7 November 1999, Journal of Radioanalytical and Nuclear Chemistry (in press).

11 Cr is 11.4% down, Yb 5.7% up. Strange, J. F. et al. , ‘Excavations at Sepphoris: the location and identification of Shikhin, Part II’, IEJ 45 (1995), 171–87Google Scholar.

12 See Mommsen et al. (n. 5).

13 A group pattern of seven samples with nine elements: Perlmann and Asaro (n. 7), table 5; for the same pattern, now with twenty samples with fifteen elements, see Michel, H. V., Frierman, J. D., and Asaro, F., ‘Chemical composition patterns of ceramic wares from Fustat, Egypt’, Archaeometry, 18 (1976) 85–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar, table 2. Both patterns are multiplied by a best relative fit factor of 0.40 to adjust for the Ca dilution, see TABLE 1.

14 Compare the group of 32 samples with eighteen elements Perlmann and Asaro (n. 7), table 6; see also Michel et al. (n. 13), table 2, including Ca.

15 Index, 7–8.

16 AJA 86 (1982), 273Google Scholar.

17 Index, 190–1 Types J, K.

18 See e.g. RMDP Rhodes no. 78 FS 37. 8.

19 Ibid., Korinthia no. 122 FS 40. 2.

20 For these shapes see MDP figs. 122, 136 and 88 (LH III A2 variant).

21 Leonard (Index, 41) mentions only one sherd of the narrow necked type and none belonging to the other two types.

22 MDP Fig. 116.

23 I thank V Hankey for this information.

24 Index, 15–17, 20–1.

25 The first colour always refers to clay.

26 MDP fig. 119.

27 Index, 35.

28 MDP fig. 122.

29 RMDP Korinthia no. 129 FS 164. 5.

30 I thank V. Hankey for this information. Tel el Amarna: Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge; Deir el-Medina: Bell, M., ASAE 68 (1982), 143–63Google Scholar.

31 MDP fig. 127.

32 Mommsen et al. (n. 5), 169–78.

33 MP 611–12.

34 MDP fig. 128.

35 See RMDP Laconia no. 150 for an example.

36 For examples see ibid., Phocis no. 101 FS 179. 3 (rounded shoulder), Korinthia no. 130 FS 180. 5, Attica no. 228 FS 180. 10.

37 Ibid., Kalymnos no. 3 FS 182. 10.

38 See ibid., Argolid no. 195, Attica no. 159 for LH III A2 versions of the shape.

39 MP 619.

40 Index, 93.

41 For the shape see RMDP Attica no. 236 with fine line group and Argolid no. 258 without fine line group.

42 MP 621–2; Index, 97–102.

43 MDP fig. 141.

44 Blegen, C. W., Zygouries: A Prehistoric Settlement in the Valley of Cleonae (Cambridge, 1928), 143–7Google Scholar.

45 Index, 108.

46 I thank V. Hankey for this information.

47 See e.g. Vermeule, E. and Karageorghis, V., Mycenaean Pictorial Vase Painting (Cambridge, 1982), 35–68Google Scholar.

48 Index, 113–17.

49 Ibid. 12.

50 See RMDP Attica no. 209 for a LH III A2 example.

51 Furumark lists only four examples: two from Rhodes, one from Attica and one from Zygouries (MP 643); to these can be added one from Orchomenos, Mountjoy, P. A., Orchomenos, v (Munich, 1983)Google Scholar, pl. 4 b.

52 Furumark, A., The Chronology of Mycenaean Pottery (Stockholm, 1941), 116–18Google Scholar.

53 See Index, 7 for a synopsis.

54 MDP fig. 126.

55 Index, 44–5.

56 I thank V. Hankey for this information.

57 MDP fig. 132.

58 See Index, 80–3 for the division into subtypes.

59 MP 616.

60 See RMDP, amphoroid krater LH III B Kos no. 65, LH III C Early Rhodes no. 130 (possibly LH III B2), Astypalaia nos. 6, 7; kalathos LH III C Early Attica no. 382, LH III C Middle Kos no. 190.

61 The sherd would be too inturning for a ring-based krater, the other possible shape. See MDP fig. 188 for the shape.

62 RMDP Kos no. 65, Astypalaia no. 6.

63 Leonard lists only one example for Syria-Palestine and notes that it is rare in Cyprus (Index, 123).

64 Ibid. 22–33.

65 MDP fig. 152. 2.

66 Ibid. 124.

67 RMDP Rhodes nos. 135, 151.

68 See Dothan, T., The Philistines and their Material Culture (New Haven, 1982)Google Scholar, pl. 26 stirrup jar, pls. 55–6 strainer jugs.

69 Ibid. 139 fig. 31.

70 Index, 190–1 Types J, K, M.

71 MDP fig. 93. 3.

72 Index, 81–2.

73 Ibid. 190–1 Type M.

74 Ibid. 82–3.

75 MDP fig. 136. 3.

76 Index, 117–22.

77 I thank A. Caubet, V. Karageorghis and N. Hirschfeld for permission to look at the material from Ugarit in the Louvre.