Pyrgos I: EM II

It is hard to identify any architecture of the EM II Pyrgos I settlement because of subsequent building, destructions, abandonments and rebuildings at the site. But we see from scattered deposits that it was of about the size (c. 0.5 ha) of the later settlements and enjoyed a prosperous culture that was identical to that of nearby Fournou Koryfi, where daily life was well preserved (Warren Reference Warren1972). Pyrgos, however, was at least four times as large as Fournou Koryfi (Cadogan Reference Cadogan, Glowacki and Vogeikoff-Brogan2011b, 40 and n. 9; Cadogan and Knappett Reference Cadogan and Knappettin preparation) and, with the benefits of water and good farmland in the Myrtos river valley, was probably the more important of the two settlements. Both were destroyed by fire in EM IIB, presumably at (much) the same time, and abandoned. For Pyrgos this did not last long until it was reinhabited, possibly in EM III but more likely when the culture of MM IA overlapped that of EM III. The site's being reoccupied, which Fournou Koryfi was not, is a further sign of the likely superior status of Pyrgos in EM II.

Two conoid steatite seals 1 and 2 are surface finds without contexts, but we assign them with confidence to EM II, since they are closely similar to steatite examples from EM IIB Fournou Koryfi (CMS V, nos 16–17; Warren Reference Warren1970; Reference Warren1972, 226–7; Krzyszkowska Reference Krzyszkowska2005, 60–1, 385, cat. nos 94–5). The steatite of the seals from both sites is almost certainly local (cf. Warren Reference Warren1969, 140–1, fig. 4; Reference Warren1972, 226, 265; Wagstaff Reference Wagstaff and Warren1972, 275, fig. 110).

A small biconical steatite seal 3 (or cylinder-shaped with concave sides), that is pierced with three holes in the middle, is probably also of EM II date: one may compare a similarly shaped steatite seal found outside Koumasa Tomb B and dated to EM II (Panagiotopoulos Reference Panagiotopoulos2012, 213, pl. 144β; and pers. comm.). If 3 is not EM II, it is hard to see it as later than the Pyrgos IIa–b period of EM III / MM IA date. Its context is of little help. It was found in House A on the edge of the hilltop immediately east of the Country House (Fig. 1:3) in a level with LM I pottery and one or two sherds of Pyrgos III MM IIB date. In nearby trenches a few other likely EM or, more generally, Prepalatial finds have appeared in later levels, including a kernos-jug (MP/70/105; HM Λ3890) that is closely similar to one from Koumasa Tomb E (Xanthoudides Reference Xanthoudides1924, pl. 31, cat. no. 686; Warren Reference Warren1969, 48, 256, cat. no. D 167; Legarra Herrero Reference Legarra Herrero2014, 188, for the context). At Pyrgos these items are probably the chance remains of earlier occupation at this part of the hill.

Fig. 1. Myrtos–Pyrgos, with find spots of 3, 4, 8, 18, 19 and 22, and approximate find spots of 5–7, 10, 12–17, 20, 21, 23 and 24. I. Grundon after D. Smyth.

Another find, possibly of EM II date, is 4, which was found in a yet later context (Fig. 1:4) on the west side of Tower 3 on the top of the hill, dateable by two Ottoman coins, one of Mahmud II (1808–39), the other of Selim III (1789–1807) and struck in Cairo in 1793 (1171 AH). These were identified by the late George Miles. If 4 is not a bead, it seems to be an unfinished bottle-seal in steatite; there are no designs, although plenty of scratches. A seal from Krasi Tomb A (CMS II.1, no. 406; S. Marinatos Reference Marinatos1929, 114, 122–3, figs 15–16:51) looks similar: although found outside the tomb, it was probably contemporary with the contents of the lower burial layer, dated to EM I–IIA (Galli Reference Galli2014, 234).

Measurements are in centimetres in the catalogues in this paper. The # sign indicates either the number(s) of the excavation basket(s) – or zembili(a) – in use when the item was found or the sign number in the Corpus Hieroglyphicarum Inscriptionum Cretae (Olivier and Godart Reference Olivier and Godart1996; henceforth CHIC). Photographs (at scale 3:1) of seals and seal impressions are from the Corpus der minoischen und mykenischen Siegel (CMS) archives unless credited otherwise. Items 1–3, 6–8, 12, 18, 19 and 23 are in the Herakleion Archaeological Museum (HM), 4, 5, 9–11, 13–17, 21 and 24 in the Stratigraphical Museum at Knossos (SMK), and 20 and 22 in the Ayios Nikolaos Archaeological Museum (ANM). Items identified during excavation and given field numbers are 3, 4, 8, 18, 19 and 22: their find spots are shown in Fig. 1, together with the general locales of 5–7, 10, 12–17, 20, 21, 23 and 24. Fig. 1 does not show surface finds 1, 2, 9 and 11.

1–4 are seals in green steatite. Parallels cited from Fournou Koryfi are all of EM IIB date.

1. 1. MP/71/186; HM Σ2661. Surface find on the West Slope. Elongated conoid. Ht 2.3. Base 1.3 × 1.3 × 1.3 × 0.9. Light green steatite. Sides unequal in width and covered with scratches (unpolished / poorly polished). Base design: random lines and shallow marks, perhaps more the idea of a seal device than an actual sphragistic image. Cf. a similarly shaped steatite seal (deep grooves carved into the top below the string hole), also with irregular shallow lines on base CMS V, no. 16, from Fournou Koryfi, and a chlorite conoid with similar base CMS II.1, no. 197, from Lebena Tomb II (EM I: Sakellarakis Reference Sakellarakis1980, 3–6, fig. 1; part of EM II group, or possibly late EM I: Alexiou and Warren Reference Alexiou and Warren2004, 133–5, fig. 35:535, pl. 118D; EM II: Sbonias Reference Sbonias, Vasilakis and Branigan2010, 207). Fig. 2.

2. 2. MP/75/2; HM Σ2596. Surface find outside site to east. Irregular, narrow elongated conoid. Ht 2.4. W. flat base 0.6–0.9. Light green steatite, as 1. Unusually large string hole (D. 0.2); no sign of wear. Slightly more polished than 1. Base design: three short horizontal lines crossed by a vertical line. Cf. similar design on base of serpentine button seal with perforated flange CMS V, no. 14, from Fournou Koryfi. Fig. 3.

3. 3. MP/70/103; HM Σ2662. House A, Room 26: trench L5 level 2 #388 find 3 (Fig. 1:3). Biconical or cylindrical shape with incurving sides. Ht. 1.55. D. at top and bottom 0.95. D. waist 0.7, pierced by three (joining) string holes. Mid-green mottled steatite. Two flat seal surfaces, both with designs: ‘top’: simple coil spiral; ‘bottom’: off-centre X partly enclosed by deep semi-circular line; four small strokes connect semi-circle to edge of base. Cf. steatite seal CMS II.1, no. 169 from Koumasa, which is not illustrated in toto but is described as an ‘Oblonger Zylinder mit konkavem Mantel’ with somewhat similar engraved base motifs; also, the simple coil spiral on side c of chlorite three-sided prism CMS III, no. 224 (Giamalakis Collection), side a of steatite three-sided prism CMS II.1, no. 307, from Platanos Tomb B, and the base design of the tall conoid CMS II.1, no. 430, from the Trapeza Cave. Fig. 4.

4. 4. MP/71/16; SMK. Outside Tower 3: trench G4 level 2 #1018 find 4 (Fig. 1:4). Unfinished, its thicker base possibly intended as base of a bottle-seal. Ht 1.3. W. top 1.0 (max.). W. bottom 1.3; ‘waist’ 0.8. Light green steatite, as 1 and 2. Unpierced, shaped but unpolished stone; no designs on either end. Possibly the shape is related to the unfinished tufa (calcite?) conoid CMS V, no. 19, from Fournou Koryfi. Fig. 5.

Fig. 2. 1. HM 2661.

Fig. 3. 2. HM 2596.

Fig. 4. 3 HM 2662, (a) top, (b) bottom. Drawings: D. Evely.

Fig. 5. 4. MP/71/16. Photo: D. Walker.

In view of the strong cultural similarities between EM II Pyrgos and nearby Fournou Koryfi, it is hardly surprising that seals 1, 2 and 4 are similar in shape and devices – one might even remark, in their ‘provincial’ irregularity (Sbonias Reference Sbonias1995, 80) – to those from Fournou Koryfi. What might be surprising, however, is that more, and more varied, sealstones – as well as one of the earliest seal impressions on Crete (CMS V, no. 20) – come from the latter, a smaller and less important site: this is almost certainly a reflection of the chances of archaeological recovery. It should be kept in mind, however, that the Fournou Koryfi seals were distinctly worn around the string holes (while 1, 2, and 3 from Pyrgos showed no signs of wear), possibly indicating more intensive use or, more likely, their being fastened for personal display.

Fournou Koryfi was abandoned after the EM IIB destruction whereas Pyrgos was reoccupied, with episodes of construction and reconstruction over hundreds of years regularly preceded by the dumping of older material down the hillsides. It seems reasonable to assume that Pyrgos once boasted an array of seals at least equal to those of Fournou Koryfi (CMS V, nos 14–19, including two ‘blanks’ with unengraved bases [cf. Sbonias Reference Sbonias1995, 40–1, 80–1]).

Equally, there is no reason to think that seals would not have been used to close or mark objects at Pyrgos as at Fournou Koryfi.Footnote ¹ The clay sealing from Fournou Koryfi stamped by CMS V, no. 20, although found near the doorway of Room 29, is not a door sealing of any known type (Weingarten Reference Weingarten and Palaima1990b, 105, n. 1): what it actually sealed remains unknown. The clay was stamped thrice by a flat oval seal depicting an angle-filled cross (with added dots), a well-known Aegean motif, the origin of which can be traced back to Anatolia (Aruz Reference Aruz2008, 28–9, and n. 118); versions of angle-filled cross motifs appear at EH II Lerna and Geraki, Ayia Irini on Keos, and Prepalatial sites in the Mesara, and central and eastern Crete (Aruz Reference Aruz2008, 29, nn. 116, 117), with a simpler version in west Crete as well (Vlasaki and Hallager Reference Vlasaki, Hallager and Müller1995, 265, fig. 14). Clearly, Fournou Koryfi was somewhat in touch with the Prepalatial glyptic mainstream, whatever that might mean at this early date (cf. Sbonias Reference Sbonias, Vasilakis and Branigan2010, 221–2), and in all probability so was Pyrgos.

Since the seals from both Pyrgos and Fournou Koryfi are all made of soft stones, commonly steatite (NB: CMS V, no. 18, first reported as basalt, is in fact a soft stone, albeit unidentified), they were shaped and engraved entirely with hand tools, a task well within the competence of local craftspeople, as may also be suggested by the prevalence of local steatites. However, seal shapes – such as the signet with pierced handle from Fournou Koryfi (CMS V, no. 14) and elongated conoids at both sites – as well as the rare triple string-hole of seal 3, and its coil-spiral device, also found at more distant sites, might better be explained by itinerant craftspeople occasionally arriving at Pyrgos. These would not have been specialist seal-engravers, but were rather perhaps little more than peddlers who carried simple stone-carving tools (blades, burins and knives) in their packs; nonetheless they created social objects (cf. Anderson Reference Anderson2016, 118) that conveyed the idea of personal or estate identity, possibly even an identity shared with other rural settlements.

Pyrgos IIc(–IId[?]): MM IB(–IIA[?])

5 appears to be the earliest example by context at Pyrgos of a handle stamped with a seal before firing. It was found in Area 98 on the West Slope of the hill (Fig. 1:5) in the open space of a gravel yard of Pyrgos IIc / MM IB date that lay over the Pyrgos IIb / EM III–MM IA use level of Street VI, the processional way that led along a terrace to the Tomb at the south-west corner of the settlement. Although the context dates to MM IB, we cannot exclude the possibility that this jar with its seal impression is of Pyrgos III date, and that this handle fragment had somehow worked down into an earlier context. Alternatively, and a little more likely, the excavation level may have been, in places at least, an interface between Pyrgos II and Pyrgos III (that is, it is a level where Pyrgos III material fell onto Pyrgos II remains that were there already). Since, however, the pottery from the level seems homogeneous, and the level was below another gravel spread, assigned to Pyrgos IId / MM IIA, a Pyrgos III date for 5 remains improbable. If this interpretation is correct, 5 seems the earliest example of impressing a seal on a jar handle from Pyrgos, and perhaps from the Malia–Lasithi–Mirabello (MLM) cultural and, probably, political region (Cadogan Reference Cadogan2013a) or even Crete as a whole, with the possible exception of a stamped handle from Palaikastro reportedly from an EM III–MM I context (Sackett and Popham Reference Sackett and Popham1965, 301, 304, fig. 18:21), but not included in the list of handles in Müller (Reference Müller1999, 389, n. 110), due to uncertainty. Slightly later is the well-dated MM IIA stamped jar handle from Petras (CMS V Supp. IB, no. 329; Krzyszkowska Reference Krzyszkowska and Tsipopoulou2016).

Seal impressions 6 and 7 may offer supporting evidence for the practice of stamping seals on jar/amphora handles before the late Protopalatial period of MM IIB. They are also from Area 98, in levels that may have been interfaces between Pyrgos II and III: the pottery is predominantly of Pyrgos IIb–c date, possibly extending to Pyrgos IId; but there is also a little of clearly Pyrgos III date. The seal used for impression 6 could well be of late Prepalatial date.

We may also mention here 14, which was in the later MM IIB / LM I context of deposit 2 in Cistern 2 (as was 15) but is probably of Pyrgos IIb / EM III–MM IA date, as discussed below.

Handles 5–7, and 11–16 plus 17 (below), are vertical handles from coarse ware jars, many (or all) of which would have been oval-mouthed amphorae (Müller Reference Müller1999, 441, table 2 lists seal-impressed vessel handles; additions in Weingarten Reference Weingarten, Macdonald, Hatzaki and Andreou2015, 75, n. 1). Macroscopic inspection of the fabric of both groups of handles suggests at present that these vessels from Pyrgos were made locally, including 16, which is part of the Parading Lions Group: all the same, a programme of petrographic analysis of all the stamped handles of Minoan Crete would be a valuable contribution to understanding exchange and the movement of jars between the different sites and regions.

In the descriptions of 5–7, and 10–17, ‘round’, ‘oval’ and ‘thick oval’ indicate the section of a handle. The seal impressions are at the base of the handle and central/frontal, unless stated otherwise. The vessels are in semi-coarse or coarse ware, apart from 10, and – in so far as one can tell from such small remnants – appear to have dark-on-light decoration, apart from 14 and, probably, 10.

1. 5. MP/73/196; SMK. Area 98: trench A3 level 14 #3784 (Fig. 1:5). Round handle; dark brown stripe to left of handle, and solid large circle over and around impression. L. impression 2.7. W. impression 2.2. Impression of soft-stone (?) ovoid seal face at base of handle in centre. Traces of dark paint running over impression. Design effaced. Weingarten Reference Weingarten, Macdonald, Hatzaki and Andreou2015, 71–2, fig. 1 (upside-down), 74. Fig. 6.

2. 6. MP/73/114; HM Π20766; CMS II.6, no. 225. Area 98: trench Z4 level 15 #3237 (Fig. 1:6). Round handle; dark brown wash on handle, with probable traces of trickle below. D. impression 2.4–2.8. Impression from soft-stone seal with flat round base. Design: Parading Lions (see below): two contorted and crossed ‘lion’ protomes (pictorialised whorls?). Possibly to be assigned (JW) to the ‘Northern Rounded Figures subgroup’ (cf. the deep gouging characteristic of the subgroup, and truncated S figure in CMS V, no. 301: Anderson Reference Anderson2016, 235–42); if not, ‘the crossed and intertwined figures … are certainly related to a strikingly similar MM IA example (HM 2487)’ of the Interwoven sub-group (Anderson Reference Anderson2016, 275); in both cases a late Prepalatial or very slightly later date is favoured for its manufacture though not its use; cf. CMS II.5, no. 283. Cf. Malia, steatite three-sided prism CMS II.2, no. 235, MM II; Gournia House Tomb I, serpentinite (?) button seal CMS V Supp. IA, no. 51 (MM IB–IIB context: Weingarten Reference Weingarten and Koehl2016, 6–7). Weingarten Reference Weingarten, Macdonald, Hatzaki and Andreou2015, 71–2, fig. 4, 74; Anderson Reference Anderson2016, 257–8, 280–1. Fig. 7.

3. 7. MP/73/220; SMK; CMS II.6, no. 226. Area 98: trench Z4 level 11 #3232 (Fig. 1:7). Oval handle; traces of dark-on-light decoration. D. impression 1.6–1.8. Impression of round and flat soft-stone (?) seal face. Design: four amphorae placed one above the other, flanked by three floating amphorae plus two indistinct forms. Cf. Pelon Reference Pelon1970, 138–9, pl. 26:3, cat. no. 268, a weight from Malia Quartier Epsilon (LM IA context); and CMS IX, no. 3D, on the very worn side b of a three-sided soft-stone prism (MM I–II). Fig. 8.

Fig. 6. 5. MP/73/196. Drawing: D. Faulmann; photo: D. Evely.

Fig. 7. 6. CMS II.6, no. 225.

Fig. 8. 7. CMS II.6, no. 226.

Pyrgos III: MM IIB

Nine or 10 of the 20 seals and seal impressions from Pyrgos may be datable by context or style (or both) to the Pyrgos III / MM IIB period. They are four-sided Cretan Hieroglyphic prisms 8 and 9, and seal impressions 10–16 and mark 17, which is included but is uncertain. As 8 and 9, 11 and 12, and 15 have already been published (Ferrara, Weingarten and Cadogan Reference Ferrara, Weingarten and Cadogan2016), the accounts of them below will be brief, though with a few further comments.

Seal 9 and impression 11 are surface finds from the West Slope, whose principal feature is a huge deposit of MM IIB rubbish (called the Great Fall deposit) that had been thrown down from the top of the hill. Originally, this material would have been part of the contents of, or connected in some other way with, a Central Building that stood there in Pyrgos III: a predecessor of the Pyrgos IV LM I Country House (Cadogan Reference Cadogan and Hägg1997). Even though found on the surface, it is likely that 9 and 11 had been among the Great Fall rubbish. Finds clearly within the deposit are seal 8 and impression 10, from Area 98 at the south end of the Great Fall. No seals or impressions occurred at the north end of the Fall. In the topsoil at the south-west corner of the top of the hill in a level with a little pottery of mixed date (LM I, Hellenistic, and Ottoman or later), impression 12 almost counts as another surface find.

Five seal impressions were found on the north side of the Pyrgos hill, in differing contexts in or near the large Cistern 2, which was built by, and used in, MM IIB (Pyrgos III) and then became a rubbish dump (Oddo Reference Oddo2015; Oddo and Cadogan Reference Oddo, Cadogan, Sullivan and Olszewski2016). Impression 13 is from the muddy use level in the bottom of the Cistern: deposit 1. Above this, and pending final checks, we have identified two deposits: a middle deposit 2 and an upper deposit 3. The earth and stones of deposit 2 were probably rainwash, perhaps from a time in MM III when the settlement appears unoccupied (after the MM IIB destruction): the pottery is mainly Pyrgos III but has some of LM IA Pyrgos IV date (that had probably been washed in). Deposit 3 has large amounts of fine LM IA pottery (and a handful of LM IB sherds) plus some earlier pottery. The LM IA pottery of deposits 3 and 2 may come from another clearance at the top of the hill like the earlier one that produced the MM IIB Great Fall deposit. This clearance could have been an early, or the first, stage of a remodelling of the structures there when erecting the present grand Country House in LM IA (Cadogan Reference Cadogan and Hägg1997; Driessen and Macdonald Reference Driessen and Macdonald1997, 218). On our present understanding, impressions 14 and 15 are from deposit 2 and a possible, but unlikely, impression 17 from deposit 3; impression 16 was found above Steps 6 close by the Cistern.

In sum, the seals and seal impressions datable by context or style, or both, to Pyrgos III (MM IIB) are almost all from rubbish deposits, apart from two surface finds and one near-surface find. Only 13 is for certain from a MM IIB use level, just as 5 seems to be from a MM IB use level; 6 and 7 may be from use levels provisionally datable to MM IB–IIA; 14 and 16 appear to be EM III–MM IA antiques in later contexts.

Seals

Seals 8 and 9 are four-sided prisms inscribed with Cretan Hieroglyphic, both of them in the Great Fall deposit of Pyrgos III. 8 is inscribed on one side only, 9 on all four sides. The signs on 9 include a full-bodied cat, an animal of special importance in MM Crete (Krzyszkowska Reference Krzyszkowska, Macdonald, Hatzaki and Andreou2015), which may be rehabilitated as a script sign, as well as possibly a logogram (Ferrara and Weingarten Reference Ferrara and Weingarten2022; Younger Reference Younger1997, 387).

1. 8. MP/73/156; HM Σ2536; CHIC #282. Area 98: baulk Z3/A3 level 2 #4302 find 4 (Fig. 1:8). L. 2.1. W. 0.7. D. hole 0.2. Four-sided prism in grey–green steatite, inscribed on side a only (Ferrara, Weingarten and Cadogan Reference Ferrara, Weingarten and Cadogan2016, 84, fig. 3:a,b1,c1, 92). The reading of the inscription is contentious: Ferrara, Weingarten and Cadogan (Reference Ferrara, Weingarten and Cadogan2016, 91–3) proposed reading it as 008-011-SM 37 {} and, noting the decorative motifs on sides b–d, attributed the motif on side b to the ‘Curlicue Monster Workshop’ active at Malia (or possibly Petras) in MM IIB. Anastasiadou (Reference Anastasiadou2011, 104, 106, n. 549) notes that, although four-sided, 6 is stylistically similar to the three-sided prisms of her Malia / Eastern Crete group. Ferrara, Weingarten and Cadogan Reference Ferrara, Weingarten and Cadogan2016, 82, fig. 1:2, 84, fig. 3, 91–3, table 2, 96–7. Fig. 9.

2. 9. MP/75/3; HM Σ2595; CHIC #309. Surface find on upper West Slope. L. 1.7. W. 0.6. D. hole 0.25. Four-sided prism in green jasper, inscribed on all four sides. The reading suggested by Ferrara, Weingarten and Cadogan (Reference Ferrara, Weingarten and Cadogan2016) is shown in Table 1. Cadogan Reference Cadogan1978, 83, fig. 40; Krzyszkowska Reference Krzyszkowska and Tsipopoulou2012, 156, n. 40 (although from a ‘controlled’ excavation, it remains a chance find without context); Reference Krzyszkowska, Macdonald, Hatzaki and Andreou2015, 102–5, fig. 4a (placing the cat motif with other Minoan depictions of cats); Ferrara, Weingarten and Cadogan Reference Ferrara, Weingarten and Cadogan2016, 82–3, fig. 2:1, 88–91, table 2, 95–7; Decorte Reference Decorte and Steele2017, 43 and n. 22, 45, fig. 8, 55, fig. 19; Ferrara and Weingarten Reference Ferrara and Weingarten2022, 112–16, fig. 2a, tables 1–3, 117, n. 1. Fig. 10; Table 1.

Fig. 9. 8 HM 2536. Sides a–d.

Table 1. Proposed transcription of seal 9.

Fig. 10. 9 HM 2595. Sides a–d.

Seal impressions

At Middle Bronze Age Pyrgos, seal impressions appear stamped only on the handles of vessels, and none on any other type of object or document. Stamped handles of (almost always) coarse ware amphorae (or jars) were a feature of east-central Crete that extended to the far east of the island. Their contexts, when known, are on the whole MM II: Malia (11), Pyrgos (nine), Palaikastro (five), Petras (one), Gournia (two from the new excavations in the North Trench / Kilns area at Gournia [John Younger, pers. comm.]: in an EM III–MM IA context, 10.872, albeit stamped by a seal from the Malia Workshop Group, MM II; in a Protopalatial context, 14.1834, stamped by a seal from the Border Leaf Group, MM I [close to CMS II.5, no. 258, from Phaistos]), and Symi (one), and there is one from Sambas in the Pediada. Other singletons have turned up in north-central Crete at Archanes, Juktas and Poros. A possible Minoan import at Samothrace is CMS V Supp. 3, no. 342.

A surprising exception to the practice of stamping coarse ware jars is 10, a fine ware vessel, probably a jug: stampings on fine ware are extremely rare, if not otherwise unknown. As is the case with 5–7 above, the seals were stamped centrally (frontally) on or at the base of the handles (a favourite place also for incising pot marks) except for: 10, stamped on the top of the handle but still centrally; 12, stamped on the rim where the handle joins; and 13, which is stamped on the left side of the base of the handle.

1. 10. MP/73/262; SMK; CMS II.6, no. 227. Area 98: baulk Z3/A3 level 1 #4300 (Fig. 1:10). Round fine ware handle, probably from a jug; dark wash outside and to rim inside. D. impression 1.0. Impression, stamped at top of handle just below rim, of round and flat soft-stone seal. Design: central dot surrounded by six dots (five attached, one floating) with 11 lines radiating from central dot, eight of which touch or enclose dots (Punktrosette): cf. steatite button seal CMS II.1, no. 271 from Platanos Tomb B (lines more wobbly but equally irregular); steatite plate seal CMS II.1, no. 415 from Malia Maison E (lines even more irregular); and, confounding the dating, a ‘white paste’ hemispheroid, CMS III, no. 79, which cannot be later than MM IA, whereas the Punktrosette seals are stylistically dated in CMS to MM II. Weingarten Reference Weingarten, Macdonald, Hatzaki and Andreou2015, 71–2, fig. 5, 74. Fig. 11.

2. 11. MP/94/2; SMK; CMS II.6, no. 230. Surface find on lower West Slope. Round handle; burnt and/or weathered. L. impression 1.4. W. impression 0.85. Impression of half-oval flat hard-stone seal face at base, but off-centre to the left. Design: it is very likely that the impression was stamped by a hard-stone theriomorphic seal, for which a close parallel is CHIC #198 (070–073), a chalcedony theriomorph from the region of Mirabello (not listed in CHIC but an addendum to the corpus: Del Freo Reference Del Freo, Sacconi, Del Freo, Godart and Negri2008, 200 and n. 6). On the impression two signs are discernible: 070-019 , which do not correspond to any previously attested sequence. Weingarten Reference Weingarten, Macdonald, Hatzaki and Andreou2015, 73–4, fig. 7; Ferrara, Weingarten and Cadogan Reference Ferrara, Weingarten and Cadogan2016, 82–6, fig. 5:4, 94. Fig. 12.

3. 12. MP/71/268; HM σ1096; CHIC #133; CMS II.6, no. 229. Area of Street VIII: baulk B8/B9 level 1 #1380 (Fig. 1:12). Oval handle, almost certainly from an oval-mouthed amphora; dark band to rim inside and on rim, including over impression; horizontal bars on handle. D. impression 1.2. Impression of round and flat hard-stone seal face on rim, which is folded over junction with handle. Design: three Hieroglyphic signs and one non-Hieroglyphic (?) depiction, arranged in a circle. The order of signs is uncertain: CHIC #133 028-070-041 . The non-Hieroglyph possibly depicts a fish (the CMS drawing of a dolphin is unlikely), but even autopsy by Ferrara, Weingarten and Cadogan (Reference Ferrara, Weingarten and Cadogan2016, 94) could not resolve the issue. Ferrara, Weingarten and Cadogan Reference Ferrara, Weingarten and Cadogan2016, 82, fig. 1:3, 86, fig. 4, 94; Weingarten Reference Weingarten, Macdonald, Hatzaki and Andreou2015, 71, 73–4, fig. 6. Fig. 13.

4. 13. MP/73/240; SMK; CMS II.6, no. 228. Cistern 2 deposit 1: trench F02 level 9 #3196 (Fig. 1:13). Round handle, probably from an oval-mouthed amphora; diagonal dark bars on handle. D. impression 1.0. Impression of round and flat hard-stone seal face at base of handle on left side. Design: central cross in circle from which spring four identical ‘plants’, each with three branches ending in a dot. Krzyszkowska Reference Krzyszkowska2005, 99–100, Ill. 163, 387; Weingarten Reference Weingarten, Macdonald, Hatzaki and Andreou2015, 72–4, fig. 2 (upside-down). Fig. 14.

5. 14. MP/73/241; SMK; CMS II.6, no. 224. Cistern 2 deposit 2: trench F02 level 6 #3180 (Fig. 1:14). Round handle; fabric possibly with grano-dioritic inclusions; black wash outside covers impression; traces of linear decoration in creamy white typical of East Cretan EM III. D. impression 1.5. Impression of flat round, soft-stone seal face. Design: rectangular interlocking pattern. Cf. Sakellarakis Reference Sakellarakis1980, 10–11, fig. 7:4 (and Sakellarakis and Sapouna-Sakellaraki Reference Sakellarakis and Sapouna-Sakellaraki1997, 684, fig. 778 top right), from Archanes Tomb E (upper level: MM IA). Weingarten Reference Weingarten, Macdonald, Hatzaki and Andreou2015, 72, 74. Fig. 15.

6. 15. MP/73/239; SMK; CMS II.6, no. 231 (where upside-down); CHIC #175. Cistern 2 deposit 2: trench F02 level 6 #3172 (Fig. 1:15). Thick oval handle; traces of decoration in red on body of vessel. Impression of one side of a hard-stone (?) four-sided Hieroglyphic prism. Design: a four-sign inscription, only sign 019  clearly visible, preceded by very faint sign 005 , with further illegible traces. Weingarten Reference Weingarten, Macdonald, Hatzaki and Andreou2015, 73–4, fig. 8 (upside-down); Ferrara, Weingarten and Cadogan Reference Ferrara, Weingarten and Cadogan2016, 82, fig. 1, 5, 85, 87, fig. 6 (fig. 6a upside-down), 94. Fig. 16.

7. 16. MP/73/257; SMK; CMS II.6, no. 223. Steps 6: trench G01 level 3 #3123 (Fig. 1:16). Round handle. Impression as preserved, 2.8 × 1.8; original D. estimate 3.0. Impression of broken (almost half missing) round and flat soft-stone (?) seal. Design: Parading Lions (see below): lions walk around seal periphery in counter-clockwise direction; Vierpass in centre. Stylistic comparanda: the ‘Platanos Rotators/Slow-Drilled Dots subgroup’ (Anderson Reference Anderson2016, 278–9). Pini Reference Pini and Palaima1990, 36; Cappel Reference Cappel, Maran and Stockhammer2012, 181; Weingarten Reference Weingarten, Macdonald, Hatzaki and Andreou2015, 72, fig. 3 (upside-down), 74. Fig. 17.

Fig. 11. 10. CMS II.6, no. 227.

Fig. 12. 11. CMS II.6, no. 230.

Fig. 13. 12. CMS II.6, no. 229.

Fig. 14. 13. CMS II.6, no. 228.

Fig. 15. 14. CMS II.6, no. 224.

Fig. 16. 15. CMS II.6, no. 231.

Fig. 17. 16. CMS II.6, no. 223.

Hieroglyphic seal impressions

The East Cretan MM group of stamped amphora or jar handles is especially interesting because six or seven of the 27 handles were impressed by Hieroglyphic seals:

• Malia (two): CHIC #150 = CMS II.6, no. 189; CHIC #132 (not in CMS).

• Myrtos–Pyrgos (three): 11, 12, 15.

• Petras (one): CMS V Supp. IB, no. 329 (not in CHIC); Krzyszkowska Reference Krzyszkowska and Tsipopoulou2016.

• Palaikastro (one possible): CMS II.6, no. 246, stamped by a round and flat metal seal, engraved in negative with a Hieroglyphic or pseudo-Hieroglyphic inscription (not in CHIC).

1. 17. MP/73/245; SMK. Cistern 2 deposit 3: Cistern SE level 3 #3136 (Fig. 1). Round handle; diagonal dark bars on handle, and solid circle covering, and around, the mark. L. mark 1.0. W. mark 0.6. Design: two marks looking like the impression of an irregular shape of seal but, in fact, incised by some tool (perhaps a potter's smoothing stick). Weingarten Reference Weingarten, Macdonald, Hatzaki and Andreou2015, 73–4. Fig. 18.

Fig. 18. 17. MP/73/245. Drawing: J. Clarke; photo: D. Evely.

Pyrgos IV: LM IB

The LM I documents from Myrtos–Pyrgos were found in, or around, the Country House (Cadogan Reference Cadogan and Hägg1997) that dominated the period IV settlement. They date to LM IB when the House was destroyed by a fire so hot that it splintered masonry and vitrified pottery. In the collapse of the building large ashlar blocks and the gypsum slabs of the upper floor(s) fell into the ground floor rooms that had been terraced into the hill's soft bedrock, especially Passage 1 and Light Well 3 on the west side of the Country House (Fig. 1). This destruction happened at, probably, an advanced stage of LM IB, to judge from Alternating Style sherds in the destruction debris and a bell cup (Cadogan Reference Cadogan, Brogan and Hallager2011a, 145–8, fig. 2) in House A (next to the Country House to the east), and other evidence. Barley and vetch in Storeroom 9 of the Country House have produced a suite of C-14 dates for this disaster (Manning et al. Reference Manning, Ramsey, Doumas, Marketou, Cadogan and Pearson2002).

Roundel 18, nodulus 19 and Linear A tablet 22 came from a Shrine or Shrine Treasury on the upper floor of the Country House (Cadogan Reference Cadogan, Gallou, Georgiadis and Muskett2008), whose contents were mainly found scattered among destruction debris on upper floor gypsum slabs that fell into Passage 1. The assemblage also included five (or more) tubular stands for offerings, a red faience triton shell, a bronze rosette and two pieces of reworked Egyptian Early Dynastic stoneware, as well, in all probability, as Linear A tablet 23, which was among items fallen into adjacent parts of the building (Space 12, Stairs 2 and Light Well 3). Another likely member of the Shrine / Shrine Treasury group is roundel 20, which was a surface find near the top of Stairs 2.

1. 18. PYR Wc 3; MP/71/217; HM σ1097; CMS II.6, no. 233. Country House Passage 1 (Shrine or Shrine Treasury group): baulk G5/G6 level 2 #1748 find 4 (Fig. 1:18). Roundel, seal depicting two lions attacking a bull, from a metal or hard-stone ring (Becker Reference Becker2018, 487–8, cat. no. A 79). Preserved impression: L. 2.2, Ht 1.5. Burnt. Cadogan Reference Cadogan, Hägg and Marinatos1981, 170–1, fig. 2; Pini Reference Pini, Darcque and Poursat1985, 154–5, figs 1, 4, 5; Younger Reference Younger1985, 71, cat. no. 13 (Dot-Eye Mumps: m, Bulls with closed mouth); Reference Younger1988, 115, 399; Weingarten Reference Weingarten1990a, 22, cat. no. A-36; Reference Weingarten and Palaima1990b, 109, n. 27; Hallager Reference Hallager1996, 1.68–9, fig. 25, and n. 237, 83, 2.195; Cadogan Reference Cadogan, Gallou, Georgiadis and Muskett2008, 9–10, cat. no. 3, fig. 5:25; Becker Reference Becker2018. Fig. 19.

Fig. 19. 18. CMS II.6, no. 233.

The motif of two or three lions attacking a bull, with one lion usually attacking the bull's head while one or more leap onto its back, was listed and discussed first by Pini (Reference Pini, Darcque and Poursat1985, 154–5); a further example is from Chania (CMS V Supp. 1A, no. 140). Outside of glyptic, this may also be the motif of the gold inlays from Shaft Grave III at Mycenae of Late Helladic I date, where three lions attack a bull running in flying gallop (Karo Reference Karo1930–3, 119–20; Younger Reference Younger1978, 288–9, fig. 6:6).

In the list below seal impressions 1–3 were in LM IB contexts, and 4 in the LM IIIA2 context of the destruction of the Palace of Knossos.

1. 1. CMS II.6, no. 233; 18. Myrtos–Pyrgos. LM IB.

2. 2. CMS II.6, no. 274. Tylissos. Seal impression on nodulus from a metal ring (Becker Reference Becker2018, 488, cat. no. A 80). LM IB.

3. 3. CMS V Supp. 1A, no. 140. Chania. Seal impression on nodulus from a metal ring (Becker Reference Becker2018, 488–9, cat. no. A 81). LM IB.

4. 4. CMS II.8, no. 347. Knossos, Magazine 11 (erroneously attributed to the Archives Deposit [Evans Reference Evans1935, 534–5, fig. 487], corrected by Popham and Gill [Reference Popham and Gill1996, 10]). Seal impression on direct-object sealing from a metal or hard-stone ring (Becker Reference Becker2018, 534–5, cat. no. A 169). CMS stylistic dating: LM I–II; Becker Reference Becker2018: LM III.

All four impressions are from rings, either of metal or a hard stone; despite the oval ring form, the composition is strongly circular. None are stamped on typical LM I sealing types: rather, two were stamped on noduli (like many rings of Knossian origin/manufacture: Weingarten Reference Weingarten and Cline2010), one on a roundel, and one on a direct-object sealing (which dates the act of stamping to Final Palatial Knossos but not the ring's date of manufacture). Unfortunately, no impression is well preserved. While the theme is virtually the same, the engraving styles differ, with only a few common traits to support their contemporaneousness (e.g. the elongated-pellet lion manes of 1 [18], 2 and 4; and the three-toed lions of 1 [18] and 2.

1. 19. MP/71/218; HM σ1098; CMS II.6, no. 232. Country House Passage 1 (Shrine or Shrine Treasury group): baulk G5/G6 level 2 #1748 find 1 (Fig. 1:19). Nodulus (triangular prism shape), stamped by cushion seal depicting two standing, overlapping, boars. Burnt. Cadogan Reference Cadogan, Hägg and Marinatos1981, 170–1, fig. 3; Younger Reference Younger1985, 67, cat. no. 5 (Group of the Couchant Boars, a group dated by Younger [Reference Younger1985, 66–7] c. 1475–1450 BC, and its workshop assigned to Knossos [?]); Reference Younger1988, 74, 400; Weingarten Reference Weingarten1990a, 22 and n. 13, cat. no. A-37; Reference Weingarten and Palaima1990b, 109, n. 27; Cadogan Reference Cadogan, Gallou, Georgiadis and Muskett2008, 10, 12, cat. no. 2, fig. 5:24; Dionisio, Jasink and Weingarten Reference Dionisio, Jasink and Weingarten2014, 108, 236, 262, cat. no. S-38. Fig. 20.

Fig. 20. 19. CMS II.6, no. 232.

Valasia Isaakidou and Judith Weingarten write:

Pigs rarely appear in Aegean iconography. Having relatively few comparanda makes it difficult to distinguish wild from domestic pigs, not least because early domesticated breeds were smaller, thinner, and more bristly than the smooth, pink porkers of modern farms. Although palaeontological and biogeographical studies indicate that wild boars were absent (Mavridis Reference Mavridis, Kotjabopoulou, Hamilakis, Halstead, Gamble and Elefanti2003; Isaakidou Reference Isaakidou2005), feral animals (escaped domesticates) may have roamed the Bronze Age Cretan landscape (Isaakidou Reference Isaakidou2005, 280; Halstead and Isaakidou Reference Halstead, Isaakidou, Albarello and Trentacoste2011, 172). If not, Minoan craftspeople may still have been aware of the existence of boars elsewhere, for instance on the Greek mainland. The tusks depicted here do not resolve the issue, as both wild and domestic pigs bear tusks, which are larger in wild than domestic animals and, in both cases, are dramatically larger in males than females (e.g. Schmid Reference Schmid1972, 81, pl. 4). The front pig of the two has a V-shaped appendage at the end of its underbelly which CMS identifies as the male sex organ (though wrongly placed and wrongly drawn; correct: e.g. CMS III, no. 159b) – which suggests that 19 depicts two male pigs. In either case, the rounded configuration of these pigs perhaps invites identification as fattened domesticates rather than free-ranging wild or feral animals. Later (Linear B) texts from Pylos list a few cattle and more numerous pigs fattened (sialos) for sacrifice, and this term appears to have earlier roots in Linear A, albeit associated with sheep rather than pigs (Meissner Reference Meissner2019, 198).

Analysis of the animal bones from Pyrgos II, III and IV puts the discussion in a clearer context as it reveals a surprisingly high level of pork consumption (Gamble Reference Gamble, Davis and Cherry1979, 123, table 1; Isaakidou unpublished study, in progress) when compared with other EM–LM East Cretan assemblages.Footnote ² In fact, the Pyrgiots’ consumption of pork is matched only at the Palace of Knossos (Isaakidou Reference Isaakidou2005, 210, table 6:19). The similarity with Knossos, where the Neopalatial faunal assemblage comes overwhelmingly from the ‘public/elite core’ area of the site, may be seen as indicating privileged diet, in cultural (Knossian) and/or social (elite) terms. In support of the latter, it is notable that biometric evidence shows that at least some of the Pyrgos pigs, like their Knossian counterparts, fall in the upper size range of Bronze Age Aegean domesticates (Isaakidou Reference Isaakidou2005, 252) and so were well fed, which is consistent with the iconographic hints of fattening. In the recent past, at least, the relatively small size of fattened domestic pigs on Crete, compared to their counterparts in mainland Greece, highlights the difficulties faced by many small-scale farmers in providing large amounts of nutritious fodder (Halstead and Isaakidou Reference Halstead, Isaakidou, Albarello and Trentacoste2011, 167; Reference Halstead, Isaakidou, Macdonald, Hatzaki and Andreou2015, 32), reinforcing the suggestion that consumption of fattened pigs at Neopalatial (and Protopalatial) Pyrgos implied elite social status.

1. 20. PYR Wc 4; ANM 12567; CMS II.6, nos 234–5. Surface find near Country House Stairs 2 (Fig. 1:20). Roundel (disc shape), inscribed on both flat sides and stamped with five seal impressions, three by a cushion seal (CMS II.6, no. 235) with a cult scene and two by a hard-stone lentoid (CMS II.6, no. 234) depicting two lions flanking their kill, a bovine. All five seal impressions are scored supra sigillum with an oblique mark indicating the number ‘1’. Rehak and Younger Reference Rehak and Younger1995; Hallager Reference Hallager1996, 2.196–7; Younger Reference Younger, Macdonald, Hatzaki and Andreou2015; Cadogan Reference Cadogan, Gallou, Georgiadis and Muskett2008, 9, fig. 5:54, 11–12, cat. no. 28; Dionisio, Jasink and Weingarten Reference Dionisio, Jasink and Weingarten2014, 108, 236, 262, cat. no. S-39; Weingarten Reference Weingarten, Jasink, Weingarten and Ferrara2017, 101, n. 6, n. 9, 104, n. 19. Figs 21, 22.

Fig. 21. 20. Roundel impressed by seals CMS II.6 (a) drawing no. 234, (b) photo no. 234, and (c) drawing no. 235.

Fig. 22. 20. Roundel inscriptions: PYR Wc 4A and PYR Wc 4B. Photo: J. Weingarten.

The sign on one face is difficult to interpret (Fig. 22b), not merely because the surface is damaged. Rehak and Younger (Reference Rehak and Younger1995; Younger Reference Younger, Macdonald, Hatzaki and Andreou2015) identified it with a logogram that in Linear B was used for gold (see tablet from Pylos PY Jo 438). If the interpretation is at all valid, this version would be more than marginally different. While the two hooks on either side do match such identification, the middle section of the sign does not. We could argue that it may be an untidy, approximate version of this logogram, but we cannot discount the possibility that it can be a reduplicated simple sign, given that the main body of the sign presents two symmetrical, specular sections.

The cushion seal impression is extremely damaged. One can be sure only that it includes a female wearing a flounced skirt, her arms raised at the elbow in a gesture of veneration/prayer. Possibly the shape to her right is from a hide skirt with a tiny tail which would indicate (if a hide skirt) that the figure wearing it was facing in the same direction as the female figure.

The lentoid depicts lions standing on either side of their prey, a bull, upside-down, its collapsed legs and neck twisted back, indicating death. Although stylistically different from the lions’ attack scene pictured on roundel 18, it is worth noting that the two roundels from Pyrgos are both stamped by seals depicting lions attacking bulls: this could be meaningful.

Two different seals, a cushion and a lentoid, were used to stamp 20. While a handful of earlier roundels from Malia (MA Wc 13/14) and Samothrace (SA Wc 2) were stamped by more than one seal, it is only here at Pyrgos (20) and at Knossos (KN Wc 3, 30, 41, 46) that the practice of stamping roundels with two or more different seals continued into Neopalatial times. Cushion seals stamped on roundels are found only at: Samothrace (Dionisio, Jasink and Weingarten Reference Dionisio, Jasink and Weingarten2014, cat. nos S-9, S-10, S-11 [S-9 and S-11 inscribed with Cretan Hieroglyphics and stylistically connected to S-10]); Pyrgos (20 = Dionisio, Jasink and Weingarten Reference Dionisio, Jasink and Weingarten2014, cat. no. S-39); and Knossos (Dionisio, Jasink and Weingarten Reference Dionisio, Jasink and Weingarten2014, cat. no. S-17). Likewise, cushion seals stamped on noduli occur only at: Samothrace (Dionisio, Jasink and Weingarten Reference Dionisio, Jasink and Weingarten2014, cat. nos S-7, S-8); Pyrgos (19 = Dionisio, Jasink and Weingarten Reference Dionisio, Jasink and Weingarten2014, cat. no. S-38); and Knossos (Dionisio, Jasink and Weingarten Reference Dionisio, Jasink and Weingarten2014, cat. nos S-15, S-16, S-18 [13 examples], S-19 [four examples]). Clearly, one of the links in sealing practices of Neopalatial Knossos was with Pyrgos.

MM (IIB)–LM IB

1. 21. PYR Zb 5; MP/71/79; SMK. South of House Y: trench B10 level 2 #1347 (Fig. 1:21). Body fragment of jar or other vessel. 5.3 × 5.1 × 6.3. Coarse fabric. L. of sign 1: main stem 2.1; tail 1.0. L. preserved of sign 2: 2.1. Faint red horizontal band below inscription. Olivier Reference Olivier, Deger-Jalkotzy, Hiller and Panagl1999, 428–9; Del Freo and Zurbach Reference Del Freo and Zurbach2011, 92; Ferrara, Weingarten and Cadogan Reference Ferrara, Weingarten and Cadogan2016, 82, fig. 1:6, 87–8, fig. 7:6, 94–6. Fig. 23.

Fig. 23. 21. PYR Zb 5. Photo: J. Weingarten.

This is a small sherd from a coarse ware jar, perhaps an oval-mouthed amphora. Two signs are inscribed neatly and deeply on its surface. The signs, in our opinion, can be more safely ascribed to the Cretan Hieroglyphic script than Linear A, even though they have been transcribed into Linear A signs as AB 04-57 (Olivier Reference Olivier, Deger-Jalkotzy, Hiller and Panagl1999, 428–9; Del Freo and Zurbach Reference Del Freo and Zurbach2011, 92) for reasons tied to the chronology of the pottery in association with this piece, which point to a LM I date (and thus more embedded in a Linear A script milieu). We cannot, however, exclude the possibility that this sherd is earlier, belonging to Pyrgos III. If interpreted as Cretan Hieroglyphic, the two signs would be read as CH 025-056, although the second sign is damaged in its top section, so its diagnostic features cannot be ascertained. It must be noted that a document from Petras (Tsipopoulou and Hallager Reference Tsipopoulou and Hallager2010, 180) bears the sequence 025-056-005, which partly overlaps with the sequence of 21.

LM IB

1. 22. PYR 1; MP/70/78; ANM 6524; GORILA I, 321–2. Country House Passage 1: trench G6 level 2 #97 find 13 (Fig. 1:22). Tablet fragment. L. preserved 3.2–3.4. W. 4.9. Th. 0.8–1.0. Red–orange coarse clay. Smoothed surface with some cracking. Burnt or/and already fired. Morpurgo-Davies and Cadogan Reference Morpurgo-Davies and Cadogan1971; Raison and Pope Reference Raison and Pope1971, 315 and frontispiece, cat. no. PU 1 (now PYR 1); Hooker Reference Hooker1973; Raison and Pope Reference Raison and Pope1994, 283, cat. no. PU 1; Cadogan Reference Cadogan, Gallou, Georgiadis and Muskett2008, 9, fig. 5:33, 10, cat. no. 1, 12; Ferrara and Weingarten Reference Ferrara and Weingarten2022, 118–19, fig. 5. Fig. 24.

Fig. 24. 22. PYR 1. Photo: D. Walker.

Although this tablet is damaged and its bottom section broken, we assume that the text is complete, as it records a seemingly self-standing set of information. (A nick, however, at the break, beneath but slightly to the right of the right end of the ninth stroke of the numeral, may be possibly part of a third line.) Some gypsum incrustation on the surface of the break must be an effect of the fire that destroyed the Country House. It shows that this is an old break that may have happened earlier or, otherwise and perhaps more likely, during the fire. The cracking on the surface is another effect of the fire (rather than from an earlier intentional firing).

The Linear A script of the inscription is consistent with its LM IB date and find spot. The text covers two lines for a total of two sequences, one syllabic and neatly readable (Morpurgo-Davies and Cadogan Reference Morpurgo-Davies and Cadogan1971), and the second line, possibly wholly logographic, which conveys the subject matter via the logogram for wine and a stated quantity of 90 via the numeral.

The reading of the signs needs to be updated in accordance with the GORILA standardised sign list, as AB 37-80-26-40-04, as far as the first line is concerned (GORILA V, 264). The first sign in line 2 was dubious when Morpurgo-Davies and Cadogan first published the item, and they interpreted it as a ligature of sign 92 (te in Linear AB, which is indeed attested at the end of the first line). Hooker (Reference Hooker1973) in turn, and following their lead, assumed it qualified the type of wine mentioned. However, this is likely to be sign A316, as attested in Phaistos (PH 8b.1, PH 1a.1.2) and Knossos (KN 91.2), and equally likely a logogram. The final, and ninth, horizontal stroke marking the tens in the numeral appears to have been added after the other eight strokes, as it is slightly detached from them and unbalanced: we should expect two columns of five and four tens, rather than the other way round.

1. 23. PYR 2; MP/70/210; HM 1681; GORILA V, 58–9. Country House Light Well 3: trench G5 level 3 #431 (Fig. 1:23). Tablet fragment, broken at sides and underneath, which is rough. L. preserved 1.85. W. preserved 2.7. Th. preserved 0.5. Fine pink-buff clay; buff slip. Burnt, perhaps resulting in (slight) curling of the preserved surface. Morpurgo-Davies and Cadogan Reference Morpurgo-Davies and Cadogan1977; Raison and Pope Reference Raison and Pope1994, 283–4, cat. no. PU 2; Cadogan Reference Cadogan, Gallou, Georgiadis and Muskett2008, 11, cat. no. 25. Fig. 25.

Fig. 25. 23. PYR 2. Drawing: J. Clarke; photo: C. Papanikolopoulos.

This item is extremely damaged but all the same two Linear A signs are discernible, one being a numerical sign belonging to the fraction series. We cannot surmise, nor reconstruct, the original dimensions of the tablet, but we can assume that it is broken on all sides with the exception, perhaps, of the top section. We can safely identify the klasmatogram J corresponding to ½ (for the mathematical values of Linear A fraction signs: Corazza et al. Reference Corazza, Ferrara, Montecchi, Tamburini and Valério2021). Before it is a damaged sign, upon which Morpurgo-Davies and Cadogan (Reference Morpurgo-Davies and Cadogan1977, 9) rest their case, and so shall we. The fine clay skim on which the signs are incised is surprising, as are the ruled lines. While lines do exist, if rarely, on Linear A tablets, most are very different from the neat, very orderly lines that we find on this specimen. The closest parallels are on two tablets from Phaistos (PH 8a and 16), and on other tablets from Palaikastro, Tylissos and Hagia Triada (PK 1, TYL 3, HT 86a; Morpurgo-Davies and Cadogan Reference Morpurgo-Davies and Cadogan1977, 9). Lines in Linear A appear to be drawn as section separators, rather than as guiding lines, which is the regular practice in Linear B (Salgarella Reference Salgarella2020, 190–1 and n. 55).

1. 24. PYR Zb 6; MP/70/P74; SMK. Room 9; trench K5 level 2 #169–70, 172; baulk K5/K6 level 2 #199–200 (Fig. 1:24). Jar, c. 80% preserved; one horizontal handle broken, one vertical handle missing. Ht 39.0. D. rim 17.6. D. base 22.0. Max. capacity c. 17.2 litres.Footnote ³ Coarse buff clay. Apparently handmade. Broad piriform shape; low collar rim; two vertical and two horizontal round handles below rim. The surviving vertical handle has a deep vertical incision at the point of greatest projection (which was almost certainly not a sign but part of the LM I ceramic practices with storage jars). Possible original decoration of brown bands on the vessel is hard to substantiate. There are faint traces of brown bands around the rim, on the upper body, and to, and above, the base – and possibly over the whole body. Fig. 26.

Fig. 26. 24. PYR Zb 6. Drawing: D. Faulmann; photo: S. Ferrara.

A possible, if tentative, sign can be found to the right of the surviving handle. The ductus of its traits is untidy and tentative, and marred by the several sherd fragments reassembled in reconstructing the vessel. Some diagnostic segments of a sign are, however, observable as their trait is deep and deliberate, and does not appear to be accidentally scratched or part of a severed fragment. Whether there was any intention to make the sign legible and to inscribe the surface with clarity is another matter. The damaged state of the jar is not conducive to a definitive reading, nor was autopsy conclusive. Our interpretation remains highly speculative, if pondered. In terms of similarity, the sign might be interpreted as A 367 (GORILA V, 309), so far a hapax found on a conical hanging nodule from Ayia Triada (GORILA II, 66, cat. no. HT Wa 1851).