Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Wachsmann (1998) Seagoing Ships and Seamanship in The Bronze Age Levant
Wachsmann (1998) Seagoing Ships and Seamanship in The Bronze Age Levant
1. Introduction
Notes
Glossary of Nautical Terms, by F. M. Hocker
Bibliography
Index
FOREWORD
It was only with watercraft that as far west as Sardinia. The role of e'gypfienne and August Koster's
ancient peoples could discover, Cyprus within this economic sphere Das anfike Seewesen and Schiffiihrt
explore, colonize, and supply the has not yet been determined, but und Handelsverkehr des osflichen
once uninhabited islands of the it must have been considerable. Mittlerneeres in 3. und 2 . \ahrtausund
eastern Mediterranean, and it was The long-distance exchange of v. Chr. For pre-Classical ships we
mainly with watercraft that an- goods and ideas by sea was not read Spyridon Marinatos's "La ma-
cient peoples of the bordering Af- always peaceful. We cannot imag- rine crkto-myc6nieme" in the Bul-
rican, Asian, and European coasts ine Mycenaean Greeks without the letin de correspondance helle'nique
acquired the raw materials-espe- knowledge of writing and art they (1933)and G. Kirk's "Ships on Geo-
cially metals and timber-that obtained by naval conquest from metric Vases," in the Bulletin of the
allowed the rise of Bronze Age the Minoans of Crete. And Myce- British School of Archaeolom at Ath-
civilizations in the Levant. naean troops did not march but ens (1949).
Of course there were overland sailed to Troy. Even the end of the More generally, we could con-
caravans and inland caravan cit- Bronze Age in the eastern Mediter- sult a few pages each in R. and
ies, but one can scarcely imagine ranean was marked by destruction R. C. Anderson's The Sailing Ship:
huge cedar logs being hauled over- wrought along the Syro-Canaanite Six Thousand Years of History (1963),
land from Lebanon to the Nile val- coast and on Cyprus by raiding James Hornell's Water Transport:
ley or tons of copper and tin being Sea Peoples. Origins and Early Evolution (1946),
carted from the East across Ana- Scholarly interest in the ships Bjorn Landstrom's beautiful but
tolia to Greece, even had there and boats of these events has not speculative The Ship (1961), and
been a bridge over the Bosporus. been lacking. But when I, as a the splendid but popular Illus-
It was on the waters of the Red young assistant professor, first of- trated History of Ships and Boats and
Sea, not across desert and through fered a graduate seminar on an- The Ancient Mariners, both by Lio-
jungle, that Egyptians sent expedi- cient seafaring at the University of nel Casson.
tions to Punt to bring back the ex- Pennsylvania in the middle 1960s, Mostly, however, we had to
otic goods of tropical Africa. there were few general references seek out depictions and ancient
Maritime commerce turned the to which my students and I could written records on our own, slowly
eastern littoral of the Mediterra- turn for the study of early Near building up a bibliography of sev-
nean into a bustling, cosmopolitan Eastern and Aegean watercraft. eral hundred titles, carrying heavy
entrep6t. Ships sailed from the M. G. A. Reisner's Models of Ships armloads of books from the library
harbors of Ugarit, Sidon, Tyre, and Boats (Cafaloguege'nkraldes anfi- to the seminar room, each tome
Ashkelon, and Dor, transporting quite's e'gypfiennes d u Muske du often containing but one relevant
metals, ceramics, resins, and spices Caire) had appeared in 1913, and illustration of an Egyptian paint-
southward to Egypt and west- from the mid 1920s there were ing or relief or model. Working
ward to the Aegean, some at least M. C. Boreux's ~ f u d e de
s naufique with such primary sources is es-
sential, but we lacked handbooks Preservation de la Tradition Nau- ized the overlap between his semi-
like those that had proved so use- tique. Small wonder that 75 per- nar in Near Eastern seafaring and
ful to me in learning the basics and cent of the nearly thousand refer- mine in pre-Classical seafaring,
bibliographies of subjects I had ences Shelley Wachsmann has for the Near East and Aegean
only recently studied-books like listed in this book have appeared were so closely tied by ships in the
William Dinsmoor's The Archi- in the three decades since my first Bronze Age that one cannot study
tecture of Ancient Greece, Gisela seminar. the maritime history of one area
Richter's The Sculpture and Sculp- For the Classical period, espe- without studying that of the other.
tors ofthe Greeks, or the many com- cially, there are now three out- We combined our two classes into
prehensive works on vase painting standing reference works: Lionel one covering the entire Levant-
and coins. Casson's Ships and seamanship in which encompasses the Aegean
Since that early and perhaps the Ancient World (1971),J . S. Mor- and the eastern Mediterranean-
unique seminar on ancient sea- risonBnd R. T. Williams's Greek after which some of our former
faring, the study of ancient ships Oared Ship: 900-300 B.C.(1968), and students, we are told, commented
has expanded rapidly, largely be- Lucien Basch's Le m u s h imaginaire that they especially liked the times
cause of the new field of nautical de la marine antique (1987). These when we disagreed, sometimes
archaeology that reveals ancient touch on Bronze Age seafaring, as strongly (but always politely!) in
ships themselves, both on land do Marie-Christine de Graeve's the seminar room.
and underwater. Graduate pro- The Ships ofthe Ancient Near East (c. Now, at last, Dr. Wachsmann's
grams in nautical archaeology are 2000-500 B.c.)(1981)and J. Richard new book pulls together, in a most
springing up around the world, Steffy's essential W o o d e n Ship thought-provoking manner, all the
with a growing number of under- Building and the Interpretation of major evidence about Bronze Age
graduate introductory courses on Shipwrecks (1994), but none is de- seafaring in the eastern Mediterra-
the history of ships being offered voted specifically to it. nean. It is another major step to-
at various universities. For those interested especially ward the day when courses on
Publications have kept pace. in the dawn of seafaring, a book ancient watercraft can be taught as
Specialized periodicals, the En- that brings together the earliest regularly as are those on ancient
glish International Journal ofNauti- writings about and portrayals of architecture, sculpture, and paint-
cal Archaeolopj since 1972 and the seagoing vessels-mixed pru- ing. And how welcome that will
French Archaeonautica since 1977, dently with ethnographic evi- be. After all, we cannot imagine
are now devoted solely to the ar- dence-has been sorely needed. the Bronze Age without the ships
chaeology of ships and harbors, When Dr. Wachsmann joined and boats that played such a criti-
with proceedings of conferences the faculty of the Nautical Archae- cal role in its development and
on those subjects published regu- ology Program at Texas A&MUni- demise.
larly from Australia to India to the versity, he added a seminar on
Americas. Of special interest to Near Eastern seafaring to those we George F. Bass
scholars of the early Aegean are already offered on pre-Classical, Abell /Yamini Professor
those entitled Tropis, published by Classical, medieval, and post- of Nautical Archaeology
the Institut Hellknique pour la medieval seafaring. We soon real- Texas A&M University
X @ FOREWORD
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This book is a developed, revised, agement and assistance during the relating to Linear B documents; to
and updated form of my Ph.D. writing process. Lionel Casson for advising me on
dissertation, submitted to the In- The Uluburun shipwreckis with- numerous nautical matters; to
stitute of Archaeology of the He- out doubt the single most signifi- Brenda Conrad for bringing to my
brew University, Jerusalem, in cant key to understanding Bronze attention several important pub-
1989.I owe a particular debt of ap- Age seafaring. I have profited lications on the subject of Minoan
preciation for the help and guid- greatly from discussions with archaeology and religion; to Fan-
ance of my dissertation advisors George Bass and Cemal Pulak. I ouria Dakoronia for permitting me
and mentors, Trude Dothan and thank them both for their insights to use illustrations of her discov-
George F. Bass. To Professor Bass into Bronze Age seafaring, for per- eries from Kynos in this book; to
I owe a special thanks for propos- mitting me to take a small part in Michael Fitzgerald for our many
ing that I turn the dissertation into their excavation at Uluburun dur- stimulating discussions; to Honor
a book; I am sincerely grateful for ing the 1985 and 1986 seasons, and Frost and Gerhard Kapitan for
his encouragement to do so and for their kind permission to pub- sharing with me their understand-
for his advice and financial sup- lish illustrations from their excava- ing of anchors and rigging; to
port in seeing this book become a tion here. Cheryl Haldane for her insights
reality. In a book that deals with such a and comments concerning ancient
The writing of my dissertation wide range of cultures and topics, Egyptian ship construction; to
was made possible by generous it was inevitable that I would seek Maria Jacobsen for her assistance
grants. For this assistance I sin- advice from experts in various with aspects of Ugaritic trade; to
cerely thank the Memorial Foun- fields of research. I was gratified to Barbara Johnson for her valuable
dation for Jewish Culture, particu- discover an openness and unstint- comments on the Late Helladic
larly its director, Jerry Hochbaum; ing willingness in all the scholars IIIC l b sherd from Ashkelon; to
and the Sarah Rabinovitch Fund. whom I approached to share their Paul Johnston for supplying sev-
I wrote this book while serving as knowledge and insights with me. eral illustrations; to V. Karageor-
the Meadows Visiting Assistant My warm appreciation goes to ghis for his comments concerning
Professor of Biblical Archaeology Amnon Altman for his valuable the abandonment of Kalavassos; to
at Texas A&M University's Nauti- comments on the Ahhiyawa prob- Christine Lilyquist for information
cal Archaeology Program. I am lem; to Lucien Basch for kindly on the tomb of Iniwia; to Ezra
grateful to Professor Bass, to the supplying me with a photo of the Marcus for bringing the Tell el
Meadows Foundation of Dallas, to Karnak anchor; to Jacqueline Ba- Dabca seal to my attention; to
the Institute of Nautical Archaeol- lensi, who told me about the Tel Robert Merrillees for noting the
ogy, and to Texas A&M University Abu Hawam anchors; to Emmett bird-head ship model fragment
for making this possible. I also L. Bennett and John Chadwick for from Maroni; to Bezallel Porten for
thank my parents for their encour- their valuable comments on topics supplying me with his revised
translation of Elephantine text Rod el 'Air was made possible by the instantaneous sharing of infor-
Cowley 26 (BIZ) and permitting the gracious permission of the late mation among scholars around the
me to publish it here; to Anson Raphael Giveon of the Institute of globe. Numerous lists deal with
Rainey for his many important in- Archaeology, Tel Aviv University. archaeological topics. Of these, I
sights into many of the texts stud- Professor Giveon invited me to have been following the discus-
ied here; to Joe and Maria Shaw for take part in his 1972 archaeologi- sions on "Aegeanet," which is
supplying me with information cal survey at Serabit el Khadem owned and operated by John G.
and illustrations on the stone com- and its surroundings and later per- Younger. This list has been par-
posite anchors from their excava- mitted me to publish the results of ticularly valuable and stimulating
tion at Kommos; to Patricia Sibella my study of the ships from Rod el for me in doing this research. I
for a variety of help; to Larry 'Air. My thanks goes to Benjamin thank Professor Younger and his
Stager for referring me to the Sass, then assistant district archae- host of contributors for enabling
Kamose text and for his many ologist of Sinai, for his help at that me to follow developments in the
other insightful comments; to J. time. world of Aegean archaeology
Richard Steffy for sharing with me I received much welcome assis- through their communications.
his unique perspective on ancient tance in researching the shfifonirn of My past six years at Texas A&M
ship construction and his incom- the Sea of Galilee region: the late University have been particularly
parable knowledge of ancient Pesah Bar Adon, Dan Bahat, Arnit- valuable for me. I have had the op-
ships; to Frederick van Doorninck, zur Bolodo, Moshe Kochavi, the portunity to discuss many of the
Jr., for his knowledgeable com- brothers Moshele and Yuval Lufan, problems dealt with in the follow-
ments; to Michael Wedde for his and, of course, Mendel Nun. Spe- ing pages with the other faculty of
penetrating comments on the cial thanks are due to Uzi Avner for the Nautical Archaeology Program,
Aegean iconographic material; to his penetrating comments on the who are among the foremost ex-
Malcolm H. Weiner for reviewing cultic connotations of the Degania perts in the fields of nautical ar-
the Aegean chapters and for mak- " A tomb, and to Yizhar kfirschfeld cheology and ancient ship recon-
ing numerous valuable sugges- for inviting me to study the fasci- struction. I have learned much
tions; and to physical anthropolo- nating shfifon uncovered in his ex- from them. Robert K. Vincent, Jr.,
gist Joe Zias for his observations cavations at Mount Berenice. past president of the Institute of
on the Anemosphilia material. I have also learned from my stu- Nautical Archaeology, was a source
As work progressed on the dents. My heartfelt appreciation of encouragement. The staff of the
manuscript, it became clear to me goes particularly to Kyra Bowling program and of the Institute of
that the book would be enhanced for her artwork; to Steven Butler Nautical Archaeology, Becky Hol-
by the contributionsof other schol- for his assistance during the final loway, Claudia LeDoux, Clyde
ars. My sincere thanks go to Fred- stages of the manuscript prior to Reese, and Pat Turner have been
erick Hocker for discussing the its publication; to William H. (Bill) most helpful to me in a variety of
question of keels on Hatshepsut's Charlton for his valuable editing ways. I thank them all.
Punt ships as well as for writing skills and insightful comments; to I am grateful to the staff at Texas
the glossary of seafaring terms; to Roxani Margariti for making me A&M University Press for their
John Lenz for writing an appendix rethink old interpretation.; to Sam considerable efforts in seeing this
on the question of bird-head ship Mark for his aid in tracking down book through the long and ardu-
ornaments in Homer; to Thomas obscure references; to Edward ous path of publication.
G. Palaima for his commentary on Rogers for his comments on the Finally, it is my pleasure to
PY An 724 and An 1 as well as for scenes of ship construction in the thank Karen, my soul mate, for
his translation of the latter; and to Old Kingdom tombs of Ti and her endless patience, for her un-
J. Hoftijzer and Wilfred van Soldt Mereruka; and to Sam Turner for stinting support, and for her excel-
for their translations of the pri- our stimulating conversations on lent editing skills from all of which
mary Ugaritic and Akkadian texts the Ahhiyawa problem. I-and this book-have greatly
pertaining to seafaring from Ugarit. We now live in an amazing benefited.
My study of the ship graffiti at electronic age. The Internet allows
xii L
@ ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Seagoing Ships
& Seamanship
in the
Bronze Age Levant
CHAPTER 1
Introduction
One of the most fascinating and of inquiry. Why did these peoples I have divided the study into
vibrant facets of the Bronze Age- go to sea? What types of ships did two parts. The first discusses sea-
particularly during its latter half- they build? How efficient were the going ships of the cultures border-
was the expansion and intensifica- ships and the seafaring practices of ing the eastern Mediterranean,
tion of cultural horizons. These those times? And what insights country by country. The order fol-
international contacts resulted in into a culture can be gleaned from lows the trade routes of antiquity
an inevitable exchange in material studying its ships and the manner in a counterclockwise sweep of the
and cultural concepts that measur- in which it interacted with the sea? eastern Mediterranean, beginning
ably enriched the participating Although innumerable studies in Egypt. The second part deals
civilizations and significantly in- have dealt with various aspects of with seven primary aspects of sea-
fluenced the course of history. Bronze Age ships and seafaring, faring: ship construction, propul-
For the societies ringing the there is no single monograph that sion, anchors, navigation, sea
eastern basin of the Mediterranean, covers the subject comprehen- trade, war and piracy, and laws
contact was established primarily sively.This book attempts to do so. pertaining specifically to conduct
by sea. By the second part of the The Mediterranean Bronze Age at sea.
Bronze Age, the Mediterranean encompasses the third and second When studying evidence for
had been transformed from an millennia B.C. Yet in order to un- Bronze Age seafaring, one should
impassable barrier into a super- derstand and to place several of keep in mind the limitations im-
highway by which cultures com- the phenomena discussed below posed by the material-and by the
municated. This new-found freedom in their proper cultural perspec- types of materials studied. It is
primarily resulted from the ability tive, it is at times imperative to go well to ponder the Indian proverb
to build vessels capable of stand- beyond these chronological re- relating what happened to a group
ing up to the rigors of open-water straints. One example of the need of blind men, each of whom was
travel and from the seafaringknow- to allow for temporal latitude is the commanded to describe the ap-
ledge required to use them. study of the phenomenon of bird- pearance of an elephant by touch-
The study of seaborne explora- head stem and stern devices that ing only one part of the animal.
tion, trade, migrations, and coloni- appear on the Sea Peoples' ships Each blind man, depending on
zation depends on understanding at Medinet Habu.' These have little which part he had touched-
the nautical capabilities of the vari- meaning if they are removed from trunk, leg, body, or tail-came
ous nations. A knowledge of their a cultural continuum that still away convinced that the elephant
ships and seafaring practices is a manifests itself today. Further- was most similar to a snake, a pil-
prerequisite for any understanding more, the absolute chronology of lar, a wall, or a rope, respectively.
of the mechanisms and directions Egypt, upon which all Near East- There is an important lesson in this
of Bronze Age cultural flows. ern dating systems are primarily parable for those of us who would
This raises numerous directions based, is itself problemati~.~ attempt to reconstruct the past, for
we have much in common with three decades. The invention of On a different level, stone an-
those blind men. In a very real SCUBA, together with the intro- chors, found in large quantities on
sense we may touch the past, but we duction of a proper methodology the eastern Mediterranean sea
cannot see it. Only by marshaling as of underwater research and exca- floor, are an important source of
many different aspects of the prob- vation, has opened up the seabed information for the study of an-
lem as are available to us-meta- to serious archaeological explora- cient seafaring.These bear witness
phorically "touching as many tion. Of particular importance are to trade routes and to seafaring
limbs of the elephant as possible" the actual remains of ships and practices. Dating and identifying
-can we reach conclusions that their cargoes, retrieved from the anchors found out of archaeologi-
may approach past realities. sea floor. Two coherent wrecks in cal context, however, remain prob-
The following research tries to particular, at Uluburun and Cape lematic unless they can be linked
collect, describe, and-most im- Gelidonya in Turkey, have yielded to diagnostic anchor shapes found
portantly-make sense of a wealth a wealth of information and are in firmly dated stratified land sites
of information. This "raw mate- discussed in detail below. or on shipwrecks.
rial" must be studied critically, The interpretation of wreck ICONOGRAPHIC EVIDENCE.
however, as it can rarely be taken sites, however, is problematic. Contemporaneous depictions of
at face value and is often of an And one of the most difficult ships, their construction, and their
ambiguous nature. In most chap- things to determine is a ship's uses are an invaluable third type
ters the data are subdivided the- home port. What can be accepted of information, particularly for
matically, often followed by a dis- as evidence for the ethnic identity those elements of ships that will
cussion in which specific problems of a ship remains a difficult ques- not normally be preserved in the
arising from the material are re- tion, particularly when personal archaeologicalrecord. Iconographic
viewed. The methodological ap- objects of a variety of cultures are evidence presents numerous prob-
proach I have chosen here is a syn- found on a single wreck, as at lems of interpretation, however.
thesis based on four available Uluburun. At present it is not pos- Some depictions were created
sources of information. sible to define the specific ethnic by master craftsmen working un-
TEXTUAL EVIDENCE. Contem- identity of any Bronze Age wreck der strict artisticcanons, while oth-
poraneous written evidence deal- with absolute certainty. As a re- ers were no more than simple graf-
ing with nautical subjects is of sult, the archaeologicalevidence of fiti or rough models fashioned by
varying intrinsic value to this wrecks is explored in the various unskilled hands. In some depic-
study. Those texts that indicate the thematic chapters in the latter part tions, scholars disagree even as to
nationality, destination, and other of the book. which end is the bow or the stern.
information concerning seagoing Few artifacts found in foreign When trying to interpret ships
ships are particularly valuable. archaeological contexts allow us drawn by ancient artists, one some-
Other texts discuss the construc- to determine the nationality of the times feels compassion for the pro-
tion and repair of vessels, but these ships that transported them. Car- verbial Martian who was given the
are rare. goes are generally useless in this task of reconstructing an earth-
More common are documents regard: they indicate that trade woman based on a collection of
that contain references to sea con- had taken place but do not iden- Picasso paintings retrieved by a
tacts between trading agents or tify the carrier. On occasion, how- scout mission.
colonies. A third form of textual ever, an artifact can actually indi- In discussing the scenes of for-
evidence, of limited interpreta- cate "beyond reasonable doubt" eigners in the Theban tombs of
tional value, is perhaps best that a ship originating in a specific Eighteenth Dynasty nobles, Nor-
termed "miscellany." These consist country brought it to a foreign man de Garis Davies voices a warn-
of personal names or linguistic shore. Because of the limitations of ing that rings equally true for the
terms that appear, seemingly out shipwreck archaeology described study of ancient ship i~onography:~
of place, on foreign shores. Al- above, the archaeological evi-
though such documents are indica- dence is limited to artifacts of this If the study of written docu-
tive of some form of sea contact, nature as discussed in the chap- ments and that of excavated ob-
their interpretation remains open. ters dealing with the ships of the jects have their special difficulties
ARCHAEOLOGICAL EVIDENCE. various cultures. As we shall see, and limitations, the interpreta-
Underwater archaeology has these artifacts are exceptionally tion of pictured records, forming
made immense strides in the past rare. a third division of historical re-
INTRODUCTION CV 5
THE SHIPS
Review ofthe Evidence
CHAPTER 2
Egyptian Ships
Egyptian civilization developed together. J. H. Breasted notes how Dynasty). The text, however, does
along the Nile River. It was, there- similar this is to the term for raft not indicate the nationality of
fore, only natural that movement in the Pyramid texts where it ap- these transport ships.
was primarily by water; even the pears in the dual usage ("two
concept of "travel" was expressed +nu). Interestingly, apart from the Bringing forty ships filled (with)
as "sail upstream" and "sail down- verbs meaning "to hew" and "to cedar logs.
stream."' make," the most characteristic Shipbuilding (of) cedarwood,
There are innumerable depic- Egyptian word for shipbuilding is one "Praise-of-the-Two-Lands"
tions of river boats in Egyptian ico- "to bind."5 ship, 100 cubits (long) and (of)
nography; here the discussion is Opinions vary as to whether rneril-wood, two ships, 100 cubits
limited to seagoing craft, or mate- Egypt can be considered a sea- (l~ng).~
rial that bears directly on them and going culture. T. Save-Soderbergh
their uses. Egypt was the only argues for a strong Egyptian sea- Thus, from earliest times, timber
country to trade in both the Medi- going presence on the Mediterra- for shipbuilding and other pur-
terranean and the Red Sea during nean6 In doing so, he totally ne- poses was a primary article of trade
the Bronze Age; much of the ex- gates Syro-Canaanite seafaring. At for Egypt. Pharaonic inscriptions
tant information on Egyptian sea- the other extreme, A. Nibbi claims found at Byblos suggest that trade
going ships derives from the trade a total lack of Egyptian maritime connections may date back at least
with Punt and will be discussed involvement. She argues that the to Nebka (Khasekhemi), last pha-
below. Egyptian term "the Great Green raoh of the Second D y n a ~ t yBy
. ~ the
Primitive river craft probably Sea" (wS'd-wr), normally under- Fifth to Sixth Dynasties, Byblos had
existed on the Nile by Paleolithic stood to be the Egyptian term for become an Egyptian entrepat for
times: the earliest Egyptian craft the Mediterranean, actually refers the importation of timber.
were presumably papyrus rafts.2 to the Nile Delta7 The reality of Uni, a military commander un-
Indeed, the Cheops ship is so tech- pharaonic seafaring probably is to der Pepi I (Sixth Dynasty), de-
nically advanced that develop- be found somewhere between scribes the transport of his troops
ment over thousands of years these two extremes. by sea in his cenotaph at Abydos:
must be a s s ~ m e dReed . ~ rafts,
wedge-shaped bundles of reeds The Textual Evidence When it was said that the bnck-
constructed of two conical bundles sliders because of something were
laid side by side and lashed to- The earliest reference to a nautical among these foreigners in Ante-
gether at intervals, were still used Egyptian presence on the Mediter- lope-Nose, I crossed over in trans-
on the Nile in this century."he ranean Sea is a report, recorded on ports with these troops. I made a
modern Nubian rafts consist of the Palermo Stone, of the irnporta- landing at the rear of the heights
pairs of bundles of reeds lashed tion of wood by Sneferu (Fourth of the mountain range on the
north of the land of the Sand- ever. Sahure refers to 100-cubit- with various (kinds of)bread, with
Dwellers. While a full half of this long ships that he had built. Fur- olive oil, incense, wine, honey,
army was (still) on the road, I ar- thermore, the beam /length ratio fr[uit], . . . .They were more abun-
rived, I caught them all, and ev- of 1:3 is credible, although it does dant than anything."" References
ery backslider among them was suggest an extremely beamy and to stockpiling the harbors continue
slain.lo slow craft. in all the following years for which
The "Admonitions of Ipu-wer" annals are preserved.25
The term "Antelope-Nose" ap- describe a period of social unrest Timber, particularly Lebanese
parently refers to a prominent when foreign trade connections cedar, continued to be a valuable
mountain range. Although the ceased to exist. It was created some- import commodity during the New
identification is not certain, Uni time during the turbulent years be- Kingdom. Senufer, an official un-
may be referring to the Carmel tween the collapse of the Sixth Dy- der Thutmose 111, recorded bring-
ridge, which juts out "noselike" nasty and the rise of the Eleventh.I9 ing back a cargo of cedarwood
into the Mediterranean." If so, Uni In describing a lack of embalming from the Lebanon. Concerning his
perhaps landed his troops north of materials that were normally im- return trip he wrote, "[I sailed on
the Carmel mountains, on the ported from Byblos, Ipu-wer com- the] Great [Green]Sea with a favor-
Plain of Jezreel, and found villages plains of the lack of trade with By- able breeze, land[ing in Egypt]."2h
and fortified towns there. b10s.~"This assumes that maritime In one Amarna text, Abimilki of
During the Twelfth Dynasty trade had existed previously. Ipu- Tyre mentions a contingency plan
considerable quantities of cedar- wer also emphasizes the direction- for abandoning Tyre with all the
wood were being imported into ality of the trade: Egyptians had "king's ships."27If these refer to
Egypt: one text mentions "twenty gone north to Byblos. Egyptian ships stationed in Tyre,
ships of cedar."12 An inscription During the Eighteenth Dynasty, it suggests that Thutmose's orga-
from Saqqara describes military Thutmose I11 sailed with his army nization of harbor cities, with its
expeditions to the Syro-Canaanite to the Syro-Canaaniteshore on his emphasis on rapid sea transport,
coast and possibly to Cyprus (Z3sy) sixth campaign (thirtieth year, ca. continued to operate into the
in which ten ships transported the 1449 B.c.).This is evident from the mid-fourteenth century. Another
army returning from Lebanon.13 ship determinative following the Amarna text is also best under-
The "Tale of the Shipwrecked word "expedition" that is used stood in this light.28Rib-Addi, the
Sailor" describes the adventures of here for the first time.2'The previ- embattled king of Byblos, repeat-
an Egyptian who survived the ous year Thutmose's forces had edly requested an Egyptian ship to
sinking of his ship in the Red Sea captured Syro-Canaanite ships. take him to Egypt if troops did not
while on a voyage to the mines of Breasted assumes that these were arrive.29Save-Soderbergh believes
Sinai.'"his is the earliest "ship- used to return the army to Egypt." this to be indicative of Egyptian
wreck" ever recorded, and, al- Save-Soderbergh notes, however, supremacy of the sea lanes during
though meager, it also supplies the that only two ships were captured the Amarna period.
only textual information on sea- and that the reference in Thut- Egyptians, some of whom must
going ships in the Middle King- mose's annals probably resulted have been trading agents, are men-
dom.I5 The sailor relates that his from their valuable cargoe~.~? Two tioned operating in several Syro-
ship had a 120-man crew and that ships would not have been suffi- Canaanite cities3"The Mycenaean
the craft measured 120 cubits in cient to carry the army home but personal name a,-ku-pi-ti-jo(the
length by 40 cubits in beam.16 could perhaps have transported Egyptian) suggests some form of
Because the entire tale is phan- Thutmose and his staff. contact with Egypt." This name is
tasmagoric, these numbers must Thutmose soon realized the ad- enigmatic, however. Is this an
be approached with caution, par- vantages of transporting his army Egyptian living in the Aegean, an
ticularly as we know little of the by sea and improved the logistics Aegean who had some form of
sizes of ships' crews. One Ramme- involved by organizing and stock- contact with Egypt, or does it have
side Nile ship had a crew that var- piling the ports on the Syro-Ca- some other significance?
ied daily from 26 to 40 men.17 A naanite coast during his seventh In Papyrus Harris I, Ramses I11
ship of Amenhotep I1had 200 row- campaign (thirty-first year, ca. records the building of three types
ers, but this number might be a 1448 B.c.):"Now every port town of seagoing ships to transport
conventi~n.'~ The size of the sailor's which his majesty reached was goods from Canaan to the treasur-
ship need not be exaggerated, how- supplied with good bread and ies of three Egyptian gods:32
EGYPTIAN SHIPS @ 11
seas. This must indicate that the
Asiatics were not the ships' crews.
Finally, even if the Egyptians
were using Asiatic crews, why
would a pharaoh wish to commu-
nicate this information in his
temple complex instead of depict-
ing the impressive importation of
valuable tribute? Contrast this, on
the one hand, to the importance
placed on the ships' cargoes in
Hatshepsut's scene of her expedi-
tion to Punt (Figs. 2.17-18,33) and,
on the other hand, to Wenamun's
embarrassment w h e n h e is re-
minded by Tjekkerbaal that the
ship on which he arrived, and its
crew, were Syro-Canaanite:
\
Figure 2.5. Seagoing ships portrayed on a relieffrom the cattseway of Unas at Saqqara (Fiffh
Dynasty) (from Hassan 1954: 139fip. 2 )
EGYPTIAN SHIPS 69 15
Figure 2.9. River cargo craft portrayed on a reliefiotn the cartsewfly of U I I ~(front
S Hflssnn 1954: 137fi. I )
Middle Kingdom
There are no known depictions of
seagoing ships from the Middle
Kingdom, nor from the intermedi-
Figure 2.12. The land o f P ~ n (from
t Nmille 1898: pl. 6 9 ) ate periods that preceded and fol-
lowed it.
in much less detail in Unas's ships,
is similar to those on Sahure's New Kingdom
ships. In the latter, the truss is con- D E I K E L BAHRI. A most detailed
nected to the hull by girdles, while depiction of Egyptian seagoing
Unas's ships have the truss itself ships is the expedition to Punt por-
passing directly around the hull, a trayed on Hatshepsut's mortuary
feature probably attributable to temple at Deir el Bahri (Fig. 2.11)."
artistic license (Fig. 2.8). Nile cargo Hatshepsut emphasized foreign
ships portrayed on Unas's cause- connections and internal affairs
/ way bear multiple vertical posts at over military accomplishments-
stem and stern and a tripod mast to which she could hold little
(Fig. 2.9). ~ l a i mHer. ~ representation of the
B. Landstrom notes that during Punt expedition suggests that it
the Fifth Dynasty, the booms of was a unique voyage. Actually, it
Nile River ships rested abaft the was remarkable that Hatshepsut
mast on the caprails (Fig. 2.10: A- chose to emphasize this accom-
C)." On seagoing ships, the boom plishment, because maritime con-
Figurr 2.13. The king nnd queen ofPrrnt must have been placed higher up tacts with Punt had been common
(affer Nnville 1898: pl. 6 9 ) and hung forward of the mast be- as early as the Old Kingdomqh9
Punt is first mentioned in the on the run from Egypt to Byb10s.'~ details of the voyage and the land
Fifth Dynasty when Sahure lists Apparently, this term originally of Punt, its inhabitants, and the sea
myrrh, electrum, and wood ob- defined a class of Egyptian sea- creatures encountered during the
tained there.70Under Pepi I1 (Sixth going ship that was used on the voyage (Fig. 2.12). Note particu-
Dynasty), Enenkhet was killed Byblos run; however, by the end of larly the grossly fat wife of the
while building a "Byblos ship" for the Old Kingdom, the term had leader of Punt (Fig. 2.13).78The
a voyage to Punt?' In the contem- come to include large seagoing fishes and other marine animals
poraneous inscription of Harkhuf, ships, whatever their destination. depicted here are, for the most
Pepi I1 refers to a dwarf brought The ships, probably constructed of part, indigenous to the Red Sea
from Punt." A short historical in- cedarwood, may have been built (Fig. 2.14).79Some, however, are
scription of Khnumhotep in the on the Nile and then disassembled fresh-water Nile fish that have
tomb of Khui at Aswan (Sixth Dy- for transportation through Wadi been transferred to this scene.s0
nasty) refers to visits to both Punt Hammamat to Quseir on the Red Presumably, the marine creatures
and Byblos." Henu (Eleventh Dy- Sea coast, where they were reas- were recorded after they had been
nasty) recorded the construction of sembled." At the completion of hooked-or netted-by the crew
a Byblos ship for a trip to Punt in the voyage, the craft would have but before they ended up in the
his Wadi Hammarnat in~cription.7~ been stripped down and carried pot.81The artist did not see the
Hatshepsut's craft are termed back through the desert valley to animals in their natural habitat.
Byblos ships ( K b r ~ )The
. ~ ~ name Koptos. For this to be possible, the This is evident from the manner in
need not indicate that the ship was craft must have been of lashed which they are depicted. All the
bound for Byblos but instead that construction. fish and other creatures are de-
it was of the class normally used The scene depicts memorable picted swimming to the right, in-
E G Y P T I A N SHIPS 69' 19
Figure 2.15. Ships sailirrx for Ptrnt. Lower right quarter of scene of Hatslrepsrrt's expedition to Punt at Deir el Bahri @om N m d k 1898: pl. 7 3 )
Figure 2.26. Ships arriving at Punt and rtnloaditrg trade itnns. Lower left quarter of scene of Hatshepsut's cu-yedition to Pirrrt at Deir el Rallri @ern
Naville 1898: pl. 7 2 )
Figure 2.17. S l ~ i p slocldi~rgcclrgo clt Punt. Upper Irft qrrarter ofscrne ofHc7tshepsrrt's n-pditio11
to Punt fit Deir el Bclhri (fio111 N m i l l r 7999: pl. 7 4 )
Figure 2.22. Deck plmr of A shipfrom the tomb o f Antci~hotcp11 (Rcisrter no. 4946) (aftcr Rcisncr 1913: 9Sfig. 354)
EGYPTIANSHIPS 23
Fiprre 2.23. Wooden model o f n trnvr~lingshipfrom the tomb ofTutank11nmen (after Landstrorn
hull form that appears in the New Faulkner believes that the through-
Kingdom and is known from mod- beams took the place of the truss
els found in the tombs of Amen- girdle that appears on Old King-
hotep 11 and Tutankhamen (Figs. dom seagoing ships (Figs. 2.2-3)?8
2.19-23).96 These models have The Old Kingdom vertical stern-
long, nearly horizontal stem- and post was replaced with a conven-
sternposts. The Punt ships differ in tionalized recurving papyrus um-
several details from the models: bel, a decoration also used on New
they lack the central cabin, their ex- Kingdom Nile traveling ~ h i p s . 9 ~
tremities are finished in a different Each ship is portrayed with fif-
manner, and they are outfitted teen rowers to a side. Assuming a Figure 2.25. Bmu section and quarter rudder
with hogging trusses. The models standard minimum interscalmium on two ofHatshepsrrt's Punt ships (detail
from Nm~ille1898: pl. 73)
suggest a beam / length ratio of of about one meter and allowing
about 1:5 for this ship type." another four meters at both stem
Only one hull at Deir el Bahri and stern, the total length of these cated, although it is unconvin-
has the rectangular butt ends of craft would have been about cingly low. The stempost is verti-
through-beams evident (Fig. 2.15). twenty-three metereifthe number cal with a straight forward face
Either the beam ends were painted ofrowers is not a convention. The and a curving rear surface. It lacks
on the other hulls and have subse- ships show prominent and no the Eye of Horus decoration, but
quently disappeared, or the artists doubt exaggerated overhang, both with that exception is basically
never bothered adding them. R. 0. fore and aft. The waterline is indi- identical to stems on Old King-
. -*
. r
Figure 2.24. The bow section o f a Punt ship (detail from Naville Figure 2.26. A Punt ship's stern (dctailfrorn Naville 1898: pl. 74)
1898: pl. 72)
24 &
L SEAGOING SHIPS & SEAMANSHIP
dom seagoing ships. The Eye of
Horus may have been originally
painted on the stems in the relief
and subsequently disappeared.
The decking of these ships re-
mains unclear. L. Casson assumes
that they were decked only along
their center line and that there was
an open space for the rowers to sit
at their oars.Io0Thebows are taken
up with a forecastle in which two
men are stationed; no figures are
portrayed in the sterncastles.
These castles are probably similar
to those on New Kingdom travel-
ing ships, of which several illustra-
tions exist.lO'
The heavy twisted-cable hog-
ging truss is carried over four
crutches. It is not clear how it is at-
tached inside the hull. Perhaps it
was connected to through-beams.
The multiple cables circling the
bow and stern were intended to
prevent the planking there from
buckling under the strain of the
hogging truss (Figs. 2.24-26).
Although the hogging truss is a
hallmark of Egyptian seagoing
ships without keels, trusses were Figure 2.27. Three cnrgo ships from the tomb of H u y havc hogging trusses thnt are carried w e r
also used on other craft whenever the hiill on forked stnnclrions nird arc fastened to thc stein and stcril (Eighteenth Dynasty) (nffer
tension was needed. They appear Lar1dstrom 1970: 1 3 4 f i s . 390-92)
Figure 2 3 1 . Rozus of the ships depicted returrring to Egypt (detailfrom Naz~ille1898: pl. 75)
E G Y P T I A N SHIPS 29
hull of several other models from
Tutankhamen's tomb.lRh
The stempost of Ramses's ships
ends in a lion's head with a Syro-
Canaanite head in its mouth; the
sternpost continues the curve of
the hull. Faulkner thought the
ships had a raised gangway.137
Each of the ships has castles at bow
and stern. The sterncastle is at least
partially roofed, for the helmsmen
are repeatedly shown seated on
top of it and the archers stand in
Figure 2.37. Ship E.2, M e d i w t Hnbrr (Ra~nsesIll) (detnilfronr Nelson et al. 1930: pl. 39; it. The butt ends of through-beams
irrtrodrrctio~~
01930 by the Urlizwsity ofchicngo, nll rights reserved, published lutre, 1930) appear on three ships, E.2-E.4
(Figs. 2.3742).
The actual length of these ships
is difficult to determine. The fig-
ures are clearly depicted at a scale
larger than the ships, and the num-
ber of rowers varies from eight
(ships E.l and E.2) to eleven men
(ship E.4) on each side.
A single helmsman steers each
Figure 2.38. Ship E.2 in the nailel battle at Medirtet Habrr (Ran~sesIll) (photo b y R. Rrn17dle) ship with a lone quarter rudder.
The rudder is attached to a stan-
chion that appears on at least one
ship (E.3), but the vertical rect-
angle that constitutes the stern part
of the sterncastle on ship E.2 may
also be a rudder stanchion (Figs.
2.37-39). The tiller is short and
straight, like those used in the Fifth
through Eleventh Dynasties.ImThe
helmsmen grip the quarter rudder
in an unusual manner (Fig. 8.9).139
The short tiller is always held in
the right hand, and on three ships
(E.l-E.3), the helmsmen either
hold the loom in their left hands or
cradle it in their arms. The need for
F i g u t ~ 2 . 3 9Ship
. E.3, A4~~di12ct
Hnbu ( R R I ~ S111)
C S (detnilfroln Nelsorr et al. 1930: pl. 39; this is unclear.
ir~trodrrctio~r 0 I930 by the U~?izwr.sih/
of Chicago, nll rights rcservcd, published lunc, 1930)
The rig used by the Egyptian
ships is identical to that of the Sea
Peoples' ships appearing in the
same scene. In place of the boom-
footed rig, the ships carry brailed
sails.140One can only speculate
whether the unusual Egyptian cus-
tom of attaching the brail fairleads
to the after side of the sail began
at this time.14' The mast ends in a
crow's nest, from which slingers
Figure 2.40. Ship E.3 in the naiial battle at Medirret Habu (Ramses 111) (photo by R. Rrnndlc)
Kingdom ships.'"" It consists of a
single yard with a triangular sail of
black cloth o r matting. No out-
rigger is shown, but if these craft
were dugouts, an outrigger would
have been necessary to prevent
them from capsizing when a sail
was used. Interestingly, the much
later Peripl~rsof the Erythraeart Sea
repeatedly mentions similar small-
scale trade taking place in various
types of rafts and other small craft
in the lowermost area of the Red
Figrdrc 2.41. Ship E.4, Mrdinrt Hnbri (Rnrrrscs Ill) (dctnilfiom Nrlson rt nl. 1930: pl. 39; Sea.
irrtrodrrction O 1930 by the Universily of Chicngo, all rights rrsrrucii, published lrrnr, 1930)
crossing the Red Sea to Sinai dur- Middle Kingdom (Figs. 2.46, 48:
ing the Middle Kingdom.14s A New B).'53The crescentic hull has an
Kingdom port was identified by W. unusual tripartite stem. The large
F. Albright at Merkah, south of steering oar is placed over the
Abu Zneimeh, on the west coast of sternpost and rests on a large stan-
Sinai.'" Therefore, the Rod el 'Air chion. A rectangle in front of the
Figure 2.44. Detail ofthe Pulrtite watercraff
graffiti may represent the seagoing stanchion may represent a cabin.l9 (afler Davies 1935: 47fiX. 2 )
ships that transported the expedi- In the center of the hull is an enig-
tions across the Red Sea. None of matic object that may be either a
them has been studied in a nauti- three-legged oryx or an unsuccess- ing assembly faces the prow with
cal context; some have never been ful attempt to portray a lowered staff and scepter in his hands, and
published. During a visit to the site mast above a central deck struc- a figure to the right of the craft faces
in 1972, I studied thirteen ship graf- ture. Several obscure signs are in- the stern and brings an offering of
fiti described below, of which eight cised under the stern. Above the bread and a bird. The last figure
have been previously discussed by hull is a horn-shaped object that is bears the inscription "Serving man,
A. H. Gardiner and T. E. Peet. probably unrelated to the ship. ( w b 3 Bed, beloved of Hathor."
S H I P N O . 1. Ship facing left; S H I P NO.3. Ship facing right; S H I P N O . 4. Ship facing left;
dated by Gardiner and Peet to the dated by Gardiner and Peet to the dated by Gardiner and Peet to the
Middle Kingdom (Figs. 2.45, 48: Middle Kingdom (Figs. 2.47, 48: Middle Kingdom (Fig. 2.49).15'
A).I5OThis crude graffito has only C).'55Thegraffito is schematic. The This schematic graffito consists of
three elements: the hull, the steer- hull is crescentic with a steering only three lines. The hull is cres-
ing oar, and its stanchion. The hull oar placed over the sternpost and centic with a large steering oar
is crescentic; the long steering oar supported on a stanchion. A series supported on a stanchion placed
passes over the sternpost. No tiller of five parallel lines rising in the over the sternpost. To the right are
is ~isible.'~'There are several un- bow may represent a baldachin several undecipherable signs. Like
decipherable hieroglyphic signs like those on ships from the tomb numbers one through three, this
over the hull; above it is a Middle of Amenemhet at Beni H a ~ s a n . ' ~ ~graffito represents a Middle King-
Kingdom inscription. This graffito The graffito apparently represents dom traveling ship.
probably represents a Middle a Middle Kingdom traveling ship. S H I P NO.5. Two ships facing
Kingdom traveling ship (Fig. Three figures are on and above right; dated by Gardiner and Peet
11 .3).15= the boat: an archer stands in the to the New Kingdom (Fig. 2.50).158
S H I P NO. 2. Ship facing right; center of the hull and faces the bow, The leftmost ship has a crescentic
dated by Gardiner and Peet to the a figure positioned above the steer- hull positioned above a n elon-
EGYPTIANSHIPS @ 33
gated rectangle (plinth?) that is bi-
sected horizontally in its left half.
The mast is stepped amidships
and appears through the central
deck cabin and bisects the horizon-
tal rectangle beneath the ship. The
steering oar is placed over the
stern; a tiller is connected to the tip
of the loom so that a helmsman
would have steered from the roof
of the cabin.'59
The rightmost ship has a cres-
centic hull with a cabin amidships
and a baldachin at the bow. The
steering oar is placed on the
quarter.
Below the ships are two inscrip-
tions: "Setekhnakhte, true of voice"
and "engraver Huy, true of voice."
Figure 2.45. Ship grafiito no. 1 (Rod el 'Air) (from Gardiner nnd Peet 1952: pl. 93: 502-503)
The midships cabin on both ships,
the mast stepped amidships in the
left ship, and the steering oar
placed over the quarter in the right
ship support a New Kingdom date
for these ships.
S H I P N O . 6. Ship facing right;
dated by Gardiner and Peet to the
Middle Kingdom (Fig. Z.51).'MThis
graffito has a well-drawn cres-
centic hull. The steering oar is
placed over the sternpost and is
supported on a tall stanchion. A
Figure 2.46. Ship grffito no. 2 (Rod el 'Air) (from Gardiner and Peet 1952: pl. 93: 5 0 6 ) long vertical tiller is attached to the
loom abaft its junction with the
stanchion. This is a typical Middle
Kingdom feature as is the horizon-
tal quarterdeck for the helmsman
beneath the rudder (Fig. l1.3).lfi'
A cabin in the stern abuts the
rudder stanchion. The mast has
been unstepped and lies horizon-
tally on two crutches. In the bow,
a quadruped faces forward.'62To
the right of the ship are quarry
marks and the figures of a deer and
an ostrich. The ship is located be-
neath a Middle Kingdom inscrip-
tion, "He who wishes to return
(home) in peace says: 'Cool liba-
tion, burning offering and incense
to the intendant Neferh~tep.'"'~~
The graffito depicts a Middle King-
Figure 2.47. Ship grnffrto no. 3 (Rod el 'Air) (from Gardiner and Peet 1952: pl. 93: 5 0 7 ) dom traveling ship.
Figure 2.49. Ship ~ r l l / / i t oito. 4 (Rod el ' A i r ) @or11 Gardir~eraud Perf 1952: pl. 94: 5 1 7 )
Figure 2.50. Ship grnffito rto. 5 (Rod el ' A i r )
(frotrr Garrfirrcr alrd Pcet 7952: pl. 95: 524)
Figrlrc 2.51. Ship graffito rm. 6 (Rod el ' A i r ) (fro111Gnrdirtcr and Pee1 1952: pl. 95: 5 1 8 )
allels in the Eighteenth Dynasly.lhg Figrrrc 2.59. Ship graffito no. I I (Rod el ' A i r ) (photo by the nuthor)
S H I P N O . 13. Ship facing left loom forward of the stanchion. A stern. The forecastle is crossed ver-
(Fig. 2.60). This is the most detailed large deck cabin, crossed by hori- tically by one line, the sterncastle
of the three ships. It has a crescen- zontal and vertical lines, is placed by two. The mast is stepped amid-
tic, spoon-shaped hull; the lower amidships. Landstrom suggests ships and passes through cabin
part of the hull is worked. Appar- that deckhouses on New Kingdom and hull. The sail has been struck
ently the artist intended to work traveling ships were made of a down: the yard, boom, and sail are
the entire surface of the hull but timber framework covered by secured in a crisscross pattern. No
never completed the task. The hull highly decorated tent cloth.17"This rigging is represented.
ends in the stern in a recurving graffito seems to display just such
(decorative?) element. A large a wooden framework.
steering oar is placed on the quar- The rectangle behind the cabin
ter and supported by a short stan- was probably intended as a flight
chion. The oar has a very wide of steps but was never finished.17'
blade; the tiller is connected to the Castles are located at stem and
The Iron Age Phoenicians are con- tense level of i~ivolvementin mari- The Syro-Canaanites did not "rule
sidered the seafaring merchants time trade by the Syro-Canaanite the waves."
par excellence of the ancient world. city-states among themselves and Most textual references to their
This is largely because of the re- with other lands and culture^.^ ships refer specifically to heavily
spect the Classical Greeks held for Despite long-standing assump- laden merchantmen with rich car-
them as merchants and seafarers. tions to the contrary, Homeric goes. During his expulsion of the
But the Phoenicians were not new references to Phoenician (Syro- Hyksos from Avaris, Kamose de-
to the sea; their Syro-Canaanite Canaanite) sea traders in Myce- scribes the capture of numerous
ancestors h a d already come to naean Greece are entirely compat- Hyksos ships in which he found a
k n o w the Mediterranean inti- ible with Late Bronze Age realities.' wealth of trade goods.XThis is the
mately.' A review of the following textual, earliest known reference to trading
archaeological, and iconographic ships definitely owned, and pre-
The Textual Evidence materials indicates that the Syro- sumably constructed, by Syro-
Canaanites were particularly ac- Canaanites: "I have not left a plank
T. Save-Soderbergh, in lauding tive-although most certainly not under the hundreds of ships of new
Egyptian Mediterranean involve- alone-as sea traders in the Late cedar, filled with gold, lapis lazuli,
ment, leaves little room for the Bronze Age and possibly earlier. silver, turquoise, and countless
Syro-Canaanites. At the same time, In addition, it is important to battle-axes of metal, apart from
J. D. Muhly downplays the role of emphasize that this seagoing trad- moringa-oil, incense, fat, honey,
the Syro-Canaanite sea traders of ing ability did not translate into itren -wood, sesedjerll -wood, wooden
the Late Bronze Age, arguing that political power. Recent studies in- plnnks, all their valuable timber, and
Homeric references to Phoenicians dicate that Canaan-modern-day all the good produce of Tetenu. I
in Mycenaean Greece must repre- Israel and Southern Lebanon- seized them all. I did not leave a
sent an Iron Age reality.>A signifi- was politically and financially im- thing of Avaris, because it is empty,
cant role for Syro-Canaanites in poverished during the Late Bronze with the Asiatic vanished."'
maritime mercantile trading dur- Age, w h e n Syro-Canaanite sea Thutmose 111 supplies the next
ing the latter p a r t of the Late trade was at its height.; The Syro- description of Syro-Canaanite ships
Bronze Age was first proposed by Canaanites, including the major when he describes his capture of
G. F. Bass on the basis of the Cape trading "power" of Ugarit, did so two cargo-laden Syro-Canaanite
Gelidonya shipwreck and Egyp- at the pleasure of their Egyptian or merchantmen during his fifth cam-
tian iconographic evidence and by Hittite overlord^.^ Thus, terming paign (year twenty-nine; 1450 KC.):
J. M. Sasson based on the Ugaritic Ugarit-or any other Late Bronze "Now there was a seizing of two
texts. The many texts dealing with Age Syro-Canaanite city-state, for ships,. . . loaded with everything,
maritime matters found in Ugarit, that matter-a "thalassocracy" is a with male and female slaves, cop-
as well as in Egypt, indicate a n in- misinterpretation of the e ~ i d e n c e . ~ per, lead, elnery, and every good
thing, after his majesty proceeded clear. The name Turios appearing to Egypt. And I spent twenty-
southward to Egypt, to his father in the Linear B texts may indicate nine days in his h[arbor while] he
Amun-Re, with joy of heart."1° a connection with the city of TyreZ0 daily [spent] time sending to me,
The Amarna texts shed light on Several condiments listed in the saying: Get out of my harbor!
the Syro-Canaanite maritime trade Linear B tablets have Semitic Now when he offered to his
in the mid-fourteenth century. names: cumin, kupairos, and ses- gods, the god took possession of
Ships of Arwad and Ugarit are ame seed.21An unidentified "Pho- a page (from the circle of) his
mentioned visiting Egypt." Aziru enician" spice appears on two Lin- pages and caused him to be ec-
promises to send his messenger, ear B texts at K n o s s o ~Three
.~~ static. He said to him: Bring [the]
along with gold and various imple- other Semitic terms appear as loan 'godl up. Bring the envoy who is
ments, to the pharaoh by ship.12 words: ki-to (garment), ku-ru-so carrying him. / It is Amun who
The ship referred to presumably (gold), and re-wo (lion).23 dispatched him. It is he who
belonged to Aziru; i.e., it was Syro- The intensity of Late Bronze caused him to come. For it was
Canaanite. Elsewhere, Biridiya of Age Syro-Canaanite sea trade con- after I had found a freighter
Megiddo reports that Surata of tinued right up to the time that the headed for Egypt and after I had
Acco has taken Labaia and has barbarians were literally at the loaded all my (possessions) into
promised to send him by ship to gates of Ugarit. Some tablets were it that the possessed one became
Egypt.13 found adjacent to the "southern ecstatic during that night, (this
Documents from Ugarit contain archive" in a kiln, in which they happening) while I was watching
references to traders from Arwad, were being baked when Ugarit for darkness to descend in order
Byblos, Beirut, Tyre, Acco, Ash- was destroyed.24Thus, they must that I might put the god on board
dod, and Ashkelon stationed at date to the very last days of Ugarit. so as to prevent another eye from
Ugarit; these indicate significant The tablets reveal a vibrantly ac- seeing him.
interstate trade along the Syro- tive commercial entity, seemingly The harbor master came to me,
Canaanite coast.14One Ugaritic oblivious to the impending doom. saying: Stay until tomorrow, so
ship was wrecked in a storm near By the eleventh century, in the the prince says. And I said to him:
Acco while on a voyage to Egypt; aftermath of the migrations that Are you not the one who daily
another text mentions a ship that toppled the Late Bronze Age cul- spends time coming to me saying:
was lost (sank?) with a cargo of tures, Egypt lost its political and "Get out of my harbor!"? Isn't it
copper.15Idrimi, in relating the nautical control over the Levantine / in order to allow the freighter
story of his life, tells how, after liv- coast.25Now Syro-Canaanites,per- which I have found to depart that
ing among the Habiru for seven haps together with the Sea Peoples you say: "Stay tonight," and
years at Arnmiya, in the mountains as well, controlled the maritime (then)you will come back (only)
above Byblos, he had ships built (at trade between Egypt and the Syro- to say, " M O ; ~on!"? And he went
Byblos?) for his nautical invasion Canaanite coast. and told it to the prince, and the
of the land of Mugisse, thus gain- When Wenamun arrived at prince sent to the captain of the
ing the throne of Alalakh.16 Byblos, it was on a Syro-Canaanite freighter, saying: Stay until to-
Ugarit's fleet just before its fall (Phoenician) ship. This is evident morrow, so the prince says."
is impressive by any measure. One from an argument in which Wena-
text refers to 150 ships that are to mun claims to have arrived on an Wenamun worried, lest he miss
be dispatched." In another, the Egyptian vessel. However, Tjek- his ship and have to wait some
Hittite king notifies "his sontr-a kerbaal, the king of Byblos, knew time for another opportunity. In a
vassal ruler or official-f the ar- better.26Wenamun's comments later conversation with Tjekker-
rival of a hundred ships loaded may also allude to the frequency baal, Wenamun refers again to
with grain.'*A third text indicates of ships on the Byblos-Egypt run. waiting in the harbor of Byblos for
that during the Late Bronze Age, When he first arrived in the port, twenty-nine days.28H. Goedicke
Syro-Canaanite ships were reach- Tjekkerbaal ordered him to leave. suggests that the time periods
ing-and. being taxed-for voy- Notes Wenamun: mentioned by Wenamun may be
ages to the Aegean.lq a literary device.29He notes that
The exchange of foreign words And I sent (back) to him say- twenty-nine days is one day short
and personal names may also ing: Where should [I go]? . . . 1'1 of a month, as the nine days Wen-
suggest contacts, although their go . . . If [you can find a ship] to amun spent at Dor are one day
meaning and significance are un- transport me, let me be taken back short of a decade; thus, a solution
S YRO-CANAANITE LITTORAL N 41
Recent discoveries s u p p o r t
Yannai's conclusion. A smiting-
god is depicted next to the ship on
the Tell el Dab% seal, and a fe-
male statuette of apparent Syro-
Canaanite origin, on the shipwreck
off Uluburun, Turkey, may have
been the ship's tutelary image."'
The Iconographic
Evidence
Figure 3.1. Ship on a Syrian c!ylirrder seal
Egypt frc~rrrTdl cl D a k a ( ~ i x l ~ t w t tcetrtury
tl~ B.c.)
TELL E L DAB'A.A Syrian cylin- ( ~ f t e Poradn
r 1984: pl. 65: 1 )
der seal from the eighteenth cen-
tury B.C. found at Tell el Dab%in the
eastern Nile Delta bears a represen-
tation of a ship, perhaps not unlike parts. The left third of the scene is
those captured two centuries later a single register with four ships
by Kamose (Fig. 3. The site, (Figs. 3.3-4). In the scene's center
identified as the Hyksos capital of are two registers with seven ships
Avaris, contains significant Middle docked at an Egyptian port (Figs.
Bronze Age IS Syro-Canaanite ma- 3.5-6). To the right, the frenetic ac-
terial cultural r e m a i n ~ . ~ V o r a d a tivities of shore trade are illus-
believes the seal is a copy of an ac- trated in three registers (Fig. 14.6).
tual Syrian cylinder seal made by Although Syro-Canaanite ships
a local seal engraver. Next to the were probably reaching Thebes at
ship is a Syro-Canaanite smiting the time that the scene was painted,
weather god, similar to those dis- the artists lacked actual knowledge
cussed above. Porada, echoing of the ships themselves. Kena-
Yannai's comments, notes that the mun's scene was probably copied
god's proximity to the ship may from stock scenes.
identify him as a guardian of An understanding of the sources
mariners. available to the Egyptian artist and
The ship's hull is crescentic; one of the mechanics involved in the
extremity curves gently outward decoration of Egyptian tombs is a
while the other is vertical. The mast necessity, if only to correctly inter-
is positioned amidships. From the pret the ships appearing in the
masthead fore and aft stays extend tombs. The Theban tombs exhibit
diagonally to the bow and stern. numerous cases of scenes and de-
The heads of two figures are vis- tails so similar in context that some
ible, one on either side of the mast. form of relationship must have
Two oars are positioned beneath existed between them. There are
the hull, adjacent to the figures. two possibilities: either artists vis-
TOMB OF K E N A M U N . The tomb ited and copied earlier tombs or
of Kenamun (T. 162) at Thebes con- sets of original drawings existed,
tains the most detailed known collected in some form of "pat-
scene of Syro-Canaanite ships tern" or "copyn-books. It is pos-
(Figs. 3.2-6)."' The deceased was sible to demonstrate beyond rea-
the "Mayor of Thebes" and "Su- sonable doubt that copybooks
perintendent of the Granaries" were indeed used in the creation of
under Amenhotep III.J5 wall paintings in the Theban
The scene is divided into three tombs during the Eighteenth Dy-
S Y R O - C A N A A N I T E LITTORAL 45
Figure 3.7. Scenefro~nthe tomb oJNebamurr ( T . 17) at Thcbcs. A Syro-Canaarritc ship appears at the left oJthc lo7uest register (Amenhotcp 11) (Fronr
Sii71e-Soderbergh 1957: pl. 23; 0Grxfith Institrrte, Ash~iioleanMrrserr~n,0.yJord)
Figurc 3.8.~Muller'sdrawing of the Syro-Canaanite ship in the tomb ojNebanrun (nfter Miiller 1904: T a t 3 )
----- ,,,--,,,,,,,
-z,-
-- ,,,,,,,,-,-..-- - . - - - - - 4 - - - - - -- - - --. . *- - - -
,
h
F i p r e 3.9. Detail ofthe ship (Siivc-Soderbergh) (after Siive-Soderbergh 1957: pl. 23; O GrifFth lmtitute, Asl~moleanA41cseurn,Oxford)
those on Kenamun's craft, or sim- tions in five inscriptions of Ramses 11, this Syro-Canaanite ship variety
ply a mast cap. The raised yard 111 on the temples of Abydos, Kar- was being built in Egyptian ship-
curves down at the tips, a decid- nak, and Luxor, illustrates a ship of yards." That these ships were mer-
edly non-Egyptian trait.hR the type depicted in the tombs of chantmen is clear from an inscrip-
The boom is missing in a lacuna; Kenamun and Nebamun (Fig. 3.10). tion of Ramses 11: "I have given to
in Save-Soderbergh's drawing it is Save-Soderbergh assumes that the thee (Seti I) a ship (mnS), bearing
reconstructed. Two lines carried determinatives depict a n indig- cargoes upon the sea, conveying to
aft are probably halyards. The pen- enous Egyptian ship type, later thee the great [rmarvels'] of God's-
dant arc of a single lift is attached adopted by the Syro-Canaanites.'O Land, and the merchants doing
to either side of the yard. Three In fact, as the type appears earlier merchandising, bearing their wares
diagonal lifts (two forward, one as distinctly Syro-Canaanite, it is and their impost therefrom in gold,
aft) support the boom. In Miiller's clear that by the times of Ramses silver and ~opper."'~
reproduction, the port lift is at-
tached to the mast at its lower iunc-
tion with the yard. The starboard
lifts continue up, crossing the yard,
and seem to be connected to the
square at the masthead.
A single quarter r u d d e r is
shown. It rests on a stanchion, an
element notably lacking on the
Kenamun ships. The tiller is at-
tached above the stanchion, which
is identical to the Egyptian New
Kingdom form of quarter rudder
(Figs. 2.23, 26).69
THE M N ~ S H I PThe
. peculiar de-
terminative for the inn5 ship, which F i ~ u r e3.70. Defcrrninafiveof the word mnS (Ranlses 11) (from Siive-Soderbergh 7946:
appears in slightly different varia- 58fip. 1 2 )
S YRO-CANAANITE LITTORAL CS 47
The Syro-Canaanite Const through thirteenth centuries B.c., is terminated at the uppermost line.
DOR. In 1982 an ashlar stone in- one of only two Late Bronze Age This horizontal line does not con-
cised with the fragmentary re- ship representations presently tinue forward of the mast.
mains of what appears to be a known from Israel (Figs. 3.12-13).76 The graffito may never have
(Syro-Canaanite?) ship's hull and Two quarter rudders trailing at the been completed. Interpretation of
rigging was found at Dor (Fig. left indicate that the ship is facing the left extremity of the ship is dif-
3.11).71Thestone was in secondary right. The bow is missing. ficult because of a large piece of
use in a Hellenistic city wall. The The hull is angled, showing a grit in the sherd. This part is drawn
rigging has numerous lifts and is strong sheer. The four parallel very lightly, in contrast to the
clearly of the boom-footed type, lines that seem to compose it may deeply incised lines of the rest of
giving the graffito a termit~rrsm t e represent an open bulwark. Alter- the hull, mast, and most of the
q ~ ~ eca.
~ r 1200
i ~.c.'"Itmay represent nately, they may be interpreted, yard. The mast is stepped amid-
a Syro-Canaanite ship.'j from top to bottom, as the boom, ships, ending at the first horizon-
T E L L A B U H A W A M . A sche- the top of an open bulwark, the tal. The yard curves downward at
matic graffito incised on the outer junction between bulwark and the tips and seems to be connected
surface of a bowl fragment from sheer, and the bottom of the hull. in some form (brace?) to the upper
Hamilton's Stratum V at Tell Abu In the latter case, however, it is dif- two horizontals by their lightly
Hawam, dated to the fourteenth ficult to explain why the mast is drawn continuations at left. Al-
Figure 3.11. Ship ,qrn]$to canmi on plnstcrf?onr Tel Dor (photo and drazuin~by the author. Courtesy of E . Stern)
downward. Slanting lines lead
from the mast to stem- and
sternposts. These may be either
stays or lifts. They probably repre-
sent the latter, because lifts were
the most prominent element in the
Late Bronze Age boom-bottomed
rig and were the most frequently
represented part of the rigging.
The rigging of the second craft
is enigmatic. The only vertical
(mast?)is off-center, and the upper
horizontal (yard?) is twisted in a
pretzel-like configuration.
Cyprus
H A L A SULTAN TEKE. A h n e -
stone ashlar block uncovered in a
7 Late Cypriot IIIAl context at Hala
Sultan Teke bears a rough graffito
Figure 3.12. Photo of the Tell Abrc Hawanr grffito (courtesy ofthe Israel Antiquities.Authority)
of a Syro-Canaanite ship (Fig.
Figure 3.14. ( A )Ashlar blockfrom Hala Sultan Teke with a graffito of a ship (Late Cypriot IIIAl); ( B ) detail of the ship graffito (from
dbrink 1979: 73fig. 103)
SYRO-CANAANITE LITTORAL d 51
that Glanville identified as "the markable for Syro-Canaanite ship- Ships Misinterpreted
Arwadian." Other Syro-Canaanites wrights to construct Aegean-style ns Syro-Cai~nnizite
at Przo nfr are assigned more menial craft in Egypt. The Syro-Canaanite identity of
tasks.93 , One author assumes that several other ship representations
There are two reasons for nam- "Egypt's famed Keftiu-ships ap- is questionable. These include ship
ing a ship class after a geographic pear to have ranged northward to models found by M. Dunand at
area. A ship type may have been Cyprus, Cilicia, Crete, Ionia, the Byblos and an Egyptian relief. Be-
built by, copied from, or com- Aegean islands, and perhaps even cause the Byblian models come
monly used by the inhabitants of the mainland of Greece."%There is from the Syro-Canaanite coast,
a specific region-as, for example, nothing to indicate, however, that they have been thought in the past
in the case of the Roman libur- Egyptian ships ever sailed farther to represent local craft.
nian.Y4Alternately, it may have than the north Syrian coast. On the BYBLOS. A terra-cotta model
been used on a particular commer- other hand, Syro-Canaanite ships found at Byblos is perfectly sym-
cial run to a specific destination, were making the run to the Aegean. metrical fore and aft and has a
like the "East Indiamen" and "Bos- This, along with the connection to rounded, rather shortened shape
ton packets" of the recent past.y5In Canaan and Syro-Canaanite ship- (Fig. 3.16).ysIt is painted red and
these cases, the name always refers wrights and religion in the texts, stands on a plinth reminiscent of
to a ship's destination. strongly suggests that the Keftiu those found at the base of some
There is no other evidence for ships were a Syro-Canaanite class Egyptian Middle Kingdom wooden
an Aegean ship class being copied commonly used on the Aegean models." A keel runs inside the full
in Egypt, and it would be truly re- run.97 length of the hull, protruding hori-
zontally at stem and stern (Fig.
3.17).lo0There are castles at both
extremities. The ends of four
through-beams protrude through
the hull-planking on either side.IO'
No frames are indicated.
Dunand believes the model rep-
resents a small Syro-Canaanite
fishing boat. He compares it to
Kenamun's ships and the large
mahons that traded along the Syr-
ian coast in the recent past. The
two central through-beams he
identifies as benches; the protrud-
ing beam ends at the model's ex-
tremities he considers oculi. He
Figrtre 3.16. Tcrra-rotta ship rnodelforrrrd in the exraoatiorrs at Byblos (frorrr Drtriacrd 1937: pl.
does not offer an identification for
140, no. 3306) the external protrusions of the two
central beams. J. G. Fevrier also
considers that the model repre-
sents a Syro-Canaanite ship and
notes that, although internal
frames are lacking, the through-
beams must have strengthened the
hull ~tructurally.'"~
Basch identifies the model as a
Late Bronze Age Syro-Canaanite
merchantman but then compares
it to the Sea Peoples' ships at Medi-
net Habu (Fig. 8.1). He notes that
Figrtre 3.17. The irrtcrior ofthe hullofthe ship model from Ryblos (after Rasch 1987: both the model and the relief de-
67fig. 122: R) pict ships that are symmetrical,
52 LM S E A G O I N G S H I P S & S E A M A N S H I P
with castles at stem and stern.
Basch concludes that the model's
end projections are the continua-
tion of the keel but then compares
these prominent elements with
undersized spurs that appear at
the junction of sternpost and keel
on ships N.4 and N.5 (Figs. 8.11: El
12: A).IU3Basch considers the pro-
jections of ship N.4 to be at the
ship's bow, while on N.5 it is at the
stern. However, the position of
the steering oars on the ships indi-
cates that in both cases the projec-
tion is at the stern.'"
I believe that this model copies
a known Egyptian ship type, even
though it was not made to scale or
reduced uniformly in size. If the
terra-cotta is "stretched," it bears
a remarkable resemblance to the
New Kingdom Egyptian traveling Figure 3.18. BOW qf n zuoodm t r n z ~ d i ship
r ~ ~ n~odelu d l t forecastle nnd stc~trpostir~tnct(from
&ip variety already discussed Lar~dstrijttr 1970: 708 frx. 338)
(Figs. 2.19-23; 3.18).'05 These ves-
sels have long, drawn-out stem- a small but strong seagoing Syrian this terra-cotta. FPvrier further ar-
and sternposts, castles at either craft.IoxH e tries to calculate the gues against Dunand's nilotic
end, and through-beams. This dimensions of the craft on which identification. He believes that the
model, together with the Egyptian the model is based, assuming that cabin was placed inside the hull
wooden models and depictions, the cabin w a s high enough to rather than on a deck, as was cus-
suggests that these ships did in- stand up in. From this, FPvrier pos- tomary in Egypt, to provide addi-
deed have keels but that amid- tulates a length of from eight to ten tional stability in a seagoing craft.
ships they protruded prominently meters and a beam of between four FPvrier's uncritical evaluation
inward-not outward-beneath and six meters for the model's pro- and conclusio~isare unconvincing.
the I i ~ l l . ~ ~ ~ totype. The model bears no resemblance
The second terra-cotta model Calculatio~~s of this type are ex- to known Bronze Age Syro-
from Byblos has a flat bottom, a tremely tenuous when one is not Canaanite seagoing boats. The
high sheer, and is crudely made dealing with scale models-a cat- cabin is placed inside the hull,
(Fig. 3.19).Io7The stern has less egory that clearly does not include probably more because of the tech-
overhang than the stem. A rectan-
gular cabin, divided into two
rooms, is located in the stern; its
roof is flat and decorated in a
checkered pattern. The interior of
the craft is painted red, and the
area of its caprail is ornamented
with short incisions.
Dunand theorizes that the model
was inspired by Nile boats. He is
led to this conclusion by the model's
width, its flat bottom, and the
checker decoration on the cabin's
roof. FCvrier, followed by Sasson,
believes that the model represents
I
Fi,qrrrr 3.19. Terra-cofta ship rnodelfo~rndat t?yblos (from Dlrtlnrld1937: pl 140, no. 6 6 8 7 )
S Y R O - C A N A A N I T E LITTORAL 69 33
cotta is a copy of an Egyptian river
craft raises an interesting question:
how was a local Byblian potter fa-
miliar with non-seagoing Egyptian
craft? One possible explanation is
that wooden Egyptian ship models
found their way to Byblos through
trade, or perhaps as part of the per-
sonal baggage of visiting Egyptian
officials. Since such models were
constructed of perishable materi-
als, they would have left no trace
in the archaeological record.
Several metal ship models were
found at Byblos in the Champ des
~ f i a n d e s . 'The
~ ~ best preserved of
these is a craft of long and narrow
dimensions dating to the eigh-
teenth century B.C. (Fig.3.21)."'The
model's hull is a thin plate of
bronze flattened by hammering.
The stem is pointed, the stern
curved. The posts are not accentu-
ated. Two through-beams are lo-
cated at the bow and at the stem.
Dunand assumes that the through-
beam in the bow was used for step-
ping the mast. The stern beam acts
as a base for the steering oar's stan-
chion. Metal ribbons attach the
steering oar to the ship at the stan-
chion and the stern. The model is
either patterned after an Egyptian
model or is in itself Egyptian; its
closest parallels are representa-
tions of Egyptian traveling ships of
Middle Kingdom date (Fig. 11.3).lI2
Metal ship models are also known
from Egypt (Figs. 3.22-23).
In conclusion, Egypt's influence
on Byblos during the second mil-
Figure 3.20. ( A - 8 ) Egypfian wooden models of Nile ships (First Intermediate period) (after lennium is manifest in the ship
Landshom 1970: 74figs. 219,221) models from that site, as it is in so
many other areas. Unfortunately,
these models add nothing to our
nical difficulties of constructing a the First Intermediate and Middle knowledge of Syrian ships.
deck than because of consider- Kingdom periods, however, that T H E SHIPS OF I N I W I A . A relief
ations of stability. Terra-cotta ship Dunand's identification is almost from the tomb of Iniwia dating
models with decks are exception- certainly correct (Fig. 3.20). Even from the Nineteenth to Twentieth
ally rare in the Bronze Age (Fig. the division of the cabin into two Dynasties depicts three ships that
6.37). compartments finds its exact have been compared with Hat-
The model is so similar to Egyp- Egyptian parallels.109 shepsut's Punt ships (Figs.3.24,30:
tian traveling boats dating from The conclusion that this terra- A).l13These ships raise a number of
L
'* SEAGOING SHIPS & SEAMANSHIP
bow. All of these elements appear
also 011 the Syro-Canaanite ships in
the Kenamun scene (Figs. 3.2-6).
To further illustrate the borrow-
ing that has taken place here, note
the portions of the Kenamun scene
blocked out in Figure 3.29 and en-
larged in Figure 3.30:B. For further
clarity, the latter illustration has
been reversed right-to-left, and the
vertical lines of the fence above the
sheer, as well as the zigzag lines of
the water, have been excluded.
When the Iniwia relief is com-
pared with this portion of the
Kenamun scene, their likeness is
striking. There are three ships in
the Iniwia scene and only two in
the Kenamun scene. But in the lat-
ter scene there are three boarding Frxurc 3.26. A sccrre from T l ~ ~ ~ t r rIll's
~ o s e"botnnicnl xarderr" r r r llrc Ternplc of Knrrrnk ( p h o t ~by~
the arrtltor)
ladders. The Kenamun ships have
large jars in the bows and a crow's
nest attached to the forward side
of the mast. These are the only two
scenes in Egyptian art in which a
crow's nest of this type appears.
Fixwe 3.27. Hybridism in hrrttrnrrfigures. Figure C is n hybrid crrntion ill which the E,q?lytinrt artist combined the body, skirt, nnd red skirt color of n
typicnl Minonn ( A )with the benrded head n t ~ dstmight-cropped lorlg hair, held it1 ylact upit11nfillet, of n stock yelloup-skit~trerlSyro-Cnnanrrite (8).
(Torrrb o f M ~ t ~ c l r c ~ ~ c r r[eTs.o861;
~ ~ bThrrtrrrose 111) (fixures nfter Doz~rcsarrd Dn~ries1933: yls. 5 arrd 7 )
SYRO-CANAANITE LITTORAL 57
Figure 3.28. Ratnesside sketch o f the Qnevn
of Punt derizwdfiorn her depiction in the
rnortrrnr!y temple of Hnts/tepsrrt nf Dcir rl
Deir el Mrdilrn
Rnlrri. Lir~restorrcflnke~fro~~r
(nftcr Peck 1978: 11.5 fiq. 4 6 )
Figure 3.29. Detail yf tlrr scene from the tomb of Kennmun showing the portions drpicted in F i p . 3.30:R and 3.31:A-B (fiom Dn7k-s and Farrlktrer
1947: pl. 8 )
F i ~ u r e3.30. ( A )Lirle drnzuin~@the religffiom tile tornb oJ11liwin; (6) Line drnzoin~o f the scene oJSyrinrt shiysfronl the tornb of Kennnrun. For tlte
snke qfclnrity, this stew hns bee11reversed ltere ( A after Lnrtdstrb~n1970: 138 fig. 40.3; R afler Dnziies and Fnulkner 1947: yl. 8 )
The ships carry the same number
of lifts (six) on each side of the
mast, instead of the eight carried
by Hatsl~epsut'sPunt ships. Fur-
thermore, in both scenes the por-
ters are carrying what appear to be
Canaanite jars on their shoulders.
Note the scribe and "headless"
man with a staff in Kenamun's
scene blocked out in Figure 3.29
and enlarged in Figure 3.31: A-B.
The scribe is again reversed here
left-to-right for clarity. Compare
these figures to the two Egyptian
officials facing the ships in the
Iniwia scene (Fig. 3.31:C-D). They
are identical with the exception of
their clothing. Note also that in the
Kenamun scene, the Egyptian
scribe holds his pen box under his
arm (Fig. 3.31: A). Iniwia's scribe
has raised his arms, however,
making it impossible for the artist
B to place the pen box under his arm
(Fig. 3.31: B). The pert box was trans-
ferred, therefore, to the oficial with the
stick (Fig. 3.31: D).
In summary, the ships in the
Iniwia relief never really existed.
They are cleverly contrived hybrid
constructions that lived only in the
fertile mind of the artist who cre-
ated them. Attempts to reconstruct
an actual ship on the basis of this
relief are not valid.'20
C D
Fi~rrrr3.31, ( A )Scribe frorrr the Krrlnr~~rrn s c m e (revrrsrd); ( R ) rrlnrr ioitlr stnflfrorn thc
Ki~rrnrrrrrrrsccrri:. ( C ) the scribe frorrr 1 1 1 lrriiuin
~ (D) the officid with stn~ffrornthe Inizuin
SCLVI~:.
scrrrr ctnrirs thr scribe's pefr bm rrridcr his nrrrr ( A nnd R nfter D m i e s and Farrlkner 1947: pi. 8;
C nrrd D ~ f t e rLn~rdstriinr1970: 13Sfi-q.403)
Cypriot Ships
Cyprus was being exploited by persist, however, in locating Ala- rit, included fifteen talents of cop-
seafaring hunters ten thousand shia in northern Syria or C i l i ~ i a . ~ per.12 The Cypro-Minoan texts
years ago; it had been settled by The nautical evidence of Amarna found at Ugarit also substantiate a
the eighth millennium and possi- text 114, though, requires that Cypriot presence there.13
bly as early as the ninth.' This colo- Alashia be located in C y p r ~ s . ~ We lack references to Cypriot
nization must have been carried Eight Amarna texts, sent to ships visiting the Aegean. The term
out by means of water transport. Egypt from Alashia, indicate close ku-pi-ri-jo ("Cypriot"), however,
From that time on, because of the trade and diplomatic contacts be- appears in Linear B tablets at both
island's geography, the sea played tween them.4 In one, an Alashian Knossos and Pylos. At the former
a significant part in the develop- has died in Egypt, and the pharaoh site, this appears to refer primarily
ment of the Cypriot cultures. In the is asked to return his possession^.^ to an ethnic used as a man's per-
Late Bronze Age, the island flour- An Alashian living in Egypt, even sonal name.I4 At Knossos the
ished as a source of copper. Stone for a short time, is best understood term is used in connection with
anchors, boat models, and perhaps as a merchant or trading agent. In honey, oil, vases, wool, and the
texts all point to Cypriot seafarers another case, the ship may have ingredients of salve.'5 There it
playing a significant role in Medi- actually belonged to the king of seems to define an item's origin
terranean trade. Ala~hia.~ or, more likely, its ultimate desti-
The cordiality of the letters be- nation.16
The Textual Evidence tween the Alashian and Ugaritic Cypro-Minoan signs found on
kings indicates a very close, if not some Late Helladic I11 and Late
Textual evidence for Cypriot Late familial, relati~nship.~ Numerous Minoan I11 pottery in the Aegean
Bronze Age seafaring depends on Ugaritic texts refer to Alashian area-primarily at Tiryns and
whether the term Alashia was the traders. One of them, named Abi- Crete-were incised after firing.I7
island's ancient name. If Alashia ramu, received 660 units of oiL8 These marks seem to be part of a
was Cyprus (or part of that island), Other texts refer to persons simply system for designating these items
then a considerable amount of tex- termed "the Alashian." An exten- for export to Cyprus, perhaps by
tual evidence exists, particularly sive list of the names of women and Cypriot traders situated in the
from Amarna and Ugarit, concern- youths who were in several estates Aegean.
ing Cypriot nautical activities. has the marginal note "the town of Wenamun, shipwrecked on
The "war" over the identity of Ala~hia."~ Presumably this is a list Alashia and with the locals about
Alashia has been fought now for a of the Alashian community at to kill him, tried to communicate
century. Today, the scholarly Ugarit.'O The estate may have be- with them: "Surely there is one
world seems to lean toward the longed to persons with Hurrian among you who understands
Alashia-Cyprus equation. Several and Semitic names.I1An Alashian Egyptian. And one of them said: I
venerable and vocal proponents ship's inventory, recorded at Uga- under~tand."'~ Perhaps the Ala-
shim had learned the language
during visits to Egypt?
The Archaeological
Evidence
An anchor of typical Cypriot
Bronze Age shape-but made of
local Egyptian stone-was found
among architectural fragments in
the enclosure of the temple of
Amun at Karnak (Fig. 12.44).19It
may have come from the region of
the landing in front of the First
Pylon. The inescapable conclusion
is that the anchor was made by a
seaman familiar with the Cypriot
tradition of anchors, presumably
from a Cypriot ship that had ar-
Figure 4.1. Terra-cotta ship model of unknown provenance (Middle Cypriot I ) (from Buchholz
rived in Egypt. and Knmgeorghis 1973: 471 no. 1718; courfesy ofPhnidon Press)
The Iconographic
Evidence once on either side of the ship, but appears to be a tumble-home. This
these holes are not aligned. The feature may indicate basketry
Unfortunately, neither the Ala- hull curves slightly inboard at the (coracle-curragh) c o n ~ t r u c t i o n . ~ ~
shians nor their seagoing ships sheer, creating a tumble-home. Because the figures are sitting on
were ever depicted by the Theban There are no internal plastic deco- the hull's exterior facing outward,
tomb painters. Most of our icono- rations. Eight animated figures however, this seems unlikely.
graphic information on Cypriot and two birds surround the ship's Therefore, the identification of
Bronze Age ships is limited almost caprail, perhaps representing a cult these sherds as parts of a ship
entirely to terra-cotta models. scene. The manner and position of model is tenuous, in my view.
Only a small portion of the many the figures at the ship's extremities One model that may suggest
Bronze Age ship representations suggest that the bow is to the left the existence of coracles in Bronze
from Cyprus represent indigenous in the photograph. The figures are Age Cyprus is made of White
craft. Those belonging to foreign apparently represented in a scale Painted IV Ware and dates to the
traditions are discussed in the ap- larger than the ship itself. Middle Cypriot I11 period (Fig.
propriate chaptex2O R. Dussaud assumes that the 4.3).?Vhe outer surface of the
L. Basch suggests that an Early model represents a merchant model is decorated with a net
Cypriot vase from Vounous may ship;'". M. Sasson errs in compar- (basketwork?) design. The bottom
be the earliest representation of a ing it to one of the Byblos ship of the hull is rounded. Pairs of
Cypriot ship.?' The earliest defi- models (Fig.3.19).'4Basch suggests piercings appear on four sides of
nite Cypriot ship model dates to that it represents a coracle.'"he the craft. A single anthropomor-
Middle Cypriot I (Fig.4.1).2'Of un- model bears comparison to the phic figure sits inside the hull.
known provenance, it is made of Late Cypriot ship models that fol- A largely reconstructed Red
local White Painted I1 Ware. The lowed; it is so schematic, however, Polished I11 Ware vessel of Early
stem- and sternposts lack decora- that little can be learned from it. or Middle Cypriot date may rep-
tion and are identical in shape, rak- Several White Painted IV Ware resent a watercraft (Fig. 4.4).29 The
ing outward. The bowl-shaped sherds found at Politiko, Lamhevfis, hull and deck are decorated with
hull is deep, with a flat base. It is have been identified by K. Wester- incisions. The posts, projecting
decorated with a row of cross- berg as part of a ship (Fig. 4.2).26 above the sheer, are square. Each
hatching with a net decoration be- Remains of five anthropomorphic post is pierced by a single hole,
neath, separated from it by two figures sit on the "sheer" facing and there is a rectangular hole in
horizontal lines. The sheer is pierced "outboard." The "hull" has what the center of the deck.
CYPRIOT SHIPS @c 63
ships. A narrow, flattened bottom
rises at stem- and sternpost, both
of which have been broken. A
raised mast socket is situated di-
rectly amidships (Fig. 4.9). The
"caprails" are flattened; beneath
them also are eighteen equidistant
horizontal holes, made before fir-
ing. Four holes cut into the hull
after firing may have served to
hang the model.
These three models from Kaza-
phani and Maroni are so similar in
shape that they may have origi-
nated in the same workshop. The
standardized beam / keel ratio of
the three models varies between
1:2.19 and 1:2.71.They apparently
represent a beamy merchant ship.
The bifurcation at the sternpost
perhaps accepted a single steering
oar resting on a stanchion. Steer-
ing apparatus, placed over the
sternpost, was used on Egyptian
river craft by the First Intermedi-
ate Period and continued in use
throughout the second millen-
nium KC." In Egypt, however, this
arrangement was never used on
seagoing ships, which are always
depicted with rudders hung from
their quarters (Figs. 2.3,5,8,11,15-
18, 26, 3742). Perhaps the bifur-
cation was a device intended to
imitate a bird's (swallow?)tail, like
those found on the posts and mast-
heads of Pacific canoes of the re-
cent past.36
Figure 4.4. Terra-cotta model of a ?ontercrflft,prozlellai~ce~rrikrzozilii.Red Polished W a r e I11 The rows of piercings along the
(Early or Middle Cypriot) (from Westerberg 1983: 7 9 f i g . 4 ) sheer are enigmatic. R. S. Mer-
rillees assumes that they are
"elaborate provisions for sails and
rigging."" Although the two up-
contour as the keel. Below them, made before firing. The model is per horizontal piercings on the
just inside the hull, is a narrow, broken; the hull's lower half is Kazaphani model may have been
molded horizontal ledge (Fig. 4.7: missing. This is presumably why, used to hold a double forestay, I
A). At either side on the center of unlike in the case of the other two am not familiar with rigging from
the ship are stubby horizontal models, no maststep is reported on the period under discussion (or
ledges that are pierced vertically this terra-cotta. any other period, for that matter)
(Fig. 4.7: B-C).'3 On either side of The second model from Maroni that would require such an ar-
the hull are eighteen equidistant comes from Site A, Tomb 1, and rangement." Perhaps the holes
horizontal piercings extending dates to Late Cypriot 1-11 (Fig. served to attach to the model an
from stem to stern, which were 4.8).'4 This model is broad amid- open bulwark-similar to that de-
Figure 4.6. Terra-cotta skip model A-5Ofrom Site A, Tomb 7 , at Marotli Zarukas (Late Cypriot 1-11) (from Merrillees 1968: pl. 37: 2 )
picted on Syro-Canaanite ships
and perhaps carried by the Ulu-
burun ship-made of organic ma-
terial that has not survived.39
Basch assumes that these mod-
els represent skin-covered ships
and that the horizontal piercings
depict holes through which the
skins were connected to the wood
framework at the capraiL40The
hooks, in his opinion, were used
to support shrouds. He notes that
the narrow plastic ridges on the
Kazaphani model's exterior can-
not be explained in the context of
wood ship construction.
I believe that these models rep-
resent beamy wood-planked craft
Figure 4.7. Detail of the interior of terra-cotta ship model A-50,from Maroni Zarukas. (after
Basch 1987: 74fig. 145)
constructed with a keel. The plas-
tic ridges on the hull's exterior
would then represent pronounced
wales." The massive sternpost on
the Kazaphani model is difficult
to explain with respect to skin ship
construction. Therefore, I believe
that the three models from Kaza-
phani and Maroni probably portray
an indigenous class of spacious
Late Cypriot seagoing merchant
ship for which additional informa-
tion is lacking at present.
A crescentic ship appears on a
cylinder seal dating to the end of
the Late Cypriot period (Fig.
4.10).42The ship is sailing to the
right on the sealing. One of the two
Figure 4.8. Terra-cotta ship model A 4 9 f r o m Site A, Tomb I , at Maroni Zarukas (Late Cypriot
1-11) (from Merrillees 1968: pl. 37: 2 ) crew members depicted is han-
dling the two (?) quarter rudders.
The mast is seen through the hull:
the identification of the seven
other vertical lines crossing the
hull is more difficult to i n t e r ~ r e t . ~ '
Two lines, representing lifts or
stays, lead from the top of the mast
to the bow and stern. The mast
seems to carry a crow's nest.
Horned animals, dots, and oxhide-
ingot-shaped objects surround the
craft.
A Proto-White Painted am-
phora from Vathyrkakas has a boat
motif on its shoulder (Fig. 4.11).44
Figure 4.9. Interior ofterra-cotta model A49 (after Basch 1987: 73fig. 144) The craft's hull is a crescentic line
66 @ S E A G O I N G SHIPS & S E A M A N S H I P
in which two figures are rowing.
The figure at right holds two oars;
the object in the left hand of the fig-
ure at left may be a fish line instead
of an oar since it seems to lead to
the mouth of the fish beneath the
boat. The drawing confirms the
reasonable assumption that small
craft also existed in Cyprus during
the Late Cypriot period but is too
schematic to tell anything more
about the craft itself.
The Late Cypriot date attributed
to two other models is question-
able. Westerberg compares a
model found in the sea near Ama-
thus to the Kazaphani / Maroni Figure 4.10. Impression of the Cypriot cylinder seal depicting a ship (end of the Late Cypriot
models, dating it to the Late Cyp- period) Worn Westerberg 1983:fi~.16)
riot period," but this model finds
its closest parallel in a model from model that Westerberg dates to
the ninth or eighth century B.C. of the Late Cypriot period is identi-
a merchantman and should be fied by Basch as a Cypro-Archaic
dated a c ~ o r d i n g l y .Another
~~ merchantman.-''
Figure 4.1 1. Boat on Proto-Wlzite Painted amphorafrom Vathyrkakns (Late Cypriot 111) (from Westerberg 1983:fig. 1 2 )
CYPRIOTSHIPS 69 67
CHAPTER 5
Early Ships
of the Aegean
Aegean geography, with its many troduction of agriculture in the types of craft may have existed, but
islands, numerous small natural Neolithic period, which allowed if so, we have no known depictions
harbors, and rugged topography, the immigrants to exploit islands of them.
required early on that the cultures with sparse resources, did settle-
inhabiting its rocky shores develop ment of the Aegeali islands begin.J Early Rrvme Age
seafaring skills, which were in- There is mounting evidence for Aegca~zLmgshiys
grained into their cultural heritage. Late Neolithic settlement on vari- LEAD MODELS FROM NAXOS. AS
Fortunately for us, the Aegean o u s Aegean islands and for the might be expected from the pre-
region, unlike some of the geo- founding of Crete in the late eighth ceding discussion, the earliest
graphical areas discussed earlier, is or early seventh millennium B.c., iconographic evidence for ships in
exceptionally rich in iconographic apparently as the result of a well- the Aegean already shows consid-
materials depicting seagoing ships.' organized and concerted effort.' erable structural development.
The Early Bronze Age, however, The clearest indication for the
The Archaeological experienced the main thrust of shape of these longships is three
Evidence Aegean settlement. lead ship models from Naxos that
date to the third millennium B.C.
The earliest evidence tor seafaring The Iconographic (Figs. 5.1-2).h Each of the models
in the Aegean-and in the entire Evidence is constructed of three lengths of
Mediterranean, for that matter-is lead. The bow and keel are made
flakes of obsidian originating on Iconographic information on from a rod of lead that was flat-
the island of Melos that were found Aegean seafaring begins only in the tened by hammering the central
in the strata of the Franchthi Cave, third millennium. Thirs, the period two-thirds of its length to form a
located in the southern Arg01id.~ s t p r n t r r ~the
~ enrliest ezdencefor sen- flat bottom. Two other flat strips
These indicate that the inhabitants f n r i n ~frotr~ Nie earliest icoriogrnphic form the sides of the hull. One ex-
of the Greek mainland had the represe~ztntiorzsof s e n ~ i ~ i crnfti l ~ is tremity is raised and finishes in a
technical skills required to navi- corisiderably l o r l ~ e thnrl
r Niat sepnrat- vertical transom, while the other
gate the Aegean by the Upper Pa- ir18 orrr O W I Z tirile frorri t h e Enrly end is narrow and rises at an angle.
leolithic o r Mesolithic periods. B r o r ~ i eAge. Two diqtinct types of The models are exceptio~iallynar-
Unfortunately, we know nothing ship5 can be defined during thiq row; the largest and best preserved
ahout the craft in use at that time.? period. The first is a variety of sea- has a beam/length ratio of 1:14.
Navigational skills, however, going longship; the other seems to L. Casson believes these to be
did not translate into patterns of be a fairly qmall vessel with a models of dugouts; L. Rasch con-
settlement. Only later, after the in- cutwater how and stern. Other siders their prototypes to have
been planked ships.' The largest usual group of third milleilnium but it is the group from the Cycla-
model is reported to have been terra-cotta artifacts that haveheen dic island of Syros, found in the
discovered i n a tomb togetherwith termed generically a s "frying context of theKeros-Syros culture,
two stone idols." pans" because of their odd shape that has created the most interest
CYCLADIC "FRYING PANS." Per- (Fig. 5 . 3 ) . V r y i n g p a n s a p p e a r for studying ancient seafaring, as
haps the best-known examples of throughout a wide area, including only its members bear depictions
this ship type appear on a n un- mainland Greece a n d Anatolia, of ships (Figs. 5.3-4)."'
The one thing that seems clear
about these particular artifacts is
that they were probably never in-
tended for use as frying pans. The
purpose for which they w e r e
made remains enigmatic." The
frying pans may have had a cultic
or ritual function. This seems to
he supported by the occasional
depiction of female genitalia just
above the two-pronged variety of
handles (legs?) (Fig. 5.5).12These
sometimes have a leafy sprig that
later reappears in conjunction
with ships and in other, clearly
cultic, contexts on Minoan seals
(Figs. 6.39: D-E, I, K, 45).
The ships are long and narrow
in profile. They obviously depict
the same type of ship after which
the lead models from Naxos are
patterned. One extremity ends in
a high post that forms an almost
right angle with the hull. The post
is decorated with a fish device and
tassel placed on a pole. The device
invariably points away from the
craft. The angle at the other end
of the ship, already noted on the
Naxos models, also appears in
varying degrees on the Syros
ships.
Ethnographic parallels of fish
ornaments are known from the
Solomon Islands, where the de-
vice was connected to the stem
a n d faced the stern; a n d t h e
h4oluccas, where it was connected
to the stern and faced the stem
(Figs. 5.6-7).13 Tassels are a more
common decorative/ cultic em-
blem; parallels are known from
antiquity and recent times (Fig. number of strokes on a side (up to terra-cotta model of this ship type,
5.6).14The low ends of the ships twenty-eight) to be taken as the uncovered in an ossuary dating to
terminate vertically, apparently exact number in actual use; clearly the Early Minoan 1-11 period at
ending in a transom-like manner, a good number is implied, how- Palaikastro in eastern Crete, indi-
as on the Naxos models. A hori- ever. Two rock graffiti from Naxos, cates that these ships were also
zontal device projects at keel-level although of lesser quality, depict known in Early Bronze Age Crete
abaft the transom. the same ship type (Fig. 5.8).IhBoth (Fig. 5.9).17The model has a tear-
The short parallel lines on ei- have horizontal (fish?)devices atop drop-shaped hull when viewed
ther side of some of the ships are the high extremity. One ship has a from above; the same shape is re-
best understood as paddles." The horned (?) quadruped above it. peated on later models from Chris-
ships are too schematic for the P A L A I K A S T R O M O D E L . A rough tos and Hagia Triada (Fig. 5.10).lS
S H I P S OF T H E A E G E A N W 71
--
Fixrrre 5.1. The best preserved ofthe Naxos lead ship rrro~felsin the Aslitnolean iMll5ellIfl (third nrillcrrrrirrn~)(froirr A J A 71 [I9671 pls. 1 : 1 2 .
[Rer7fieur])
Fi,qrrrc 5.4. Ships irrcised on Cycladic "fi/ing parrs" (Earl!/ Cycladic 11) (from Colemarr 1985: 199 ill. 5 )
The pointed end of the "teardrop"
finishes in a high post. The
rounded end is apparently the
terra-cotta equivalent of the stern
transom on the Naxos models. The
widest part of the hull is well
astern of amidships.IqAblunt hori-
zontal projection extends abaft the
stern.
ORCHOMENOS. Another ship
of this sort is incised on an Early
Helladic vase handle from Orcho-
menos (Fig. 5.11). Two vertical
lines above the hull are probably
accidental scratches and are not
related to the craft.20The line of the
keel is slightly longer than the top
(sheer) line, forming the familiar
horizontal projection. Sixteen
short vertical strokes above the Figure 5.5. Genitalia appearing on Cycladic ':frying pans" (Earl!! Cyclndic 11) (from Co1e1na11
sheer are best interpreted as 1985: 796 ill. 4 )
paddles.
PHYLAKOPI. None of the above the megalithic temples of Tarxien Oceanic region in the more recent
representations show steering on Malta (Fig. 5.13)." He believes past. The iconographic evidence,
oars. However, the curuirzg stern of that other graffiti at Tarxien rep- however, is not sufficiently clear
a ship with a single steering oar resent merchant craft because of to permit such differentiations.
appears on a sherd from Phyla- their dumpier proportions. Variations may result from their
kopi (Fig. 5.13). A short tiller (?) CHARACTERISTICS O F EARLY expression in different medi-
extends nbuff the steering oar. The BRONZE AGE AEGEAN LONG- ums-incision on clay, metal/
stern projection is absent. Rows of SHIPS. It has been suggested that stonelterra-cotta models, and so
parallel lines above and below the the ships depicted in the various on-which may significantly
hull again apparently depict iconographic mediums represent change the relative dimensions of
paddles. different sizes or even classes of the i l l ~ s t r a t i o n s . ~
TARXIEN. The longship class longships.?' Variations of craft An argument still persists
seems to have had a particularly probably did exist in the Early among scholars as to which end of
wide area of use. Casson identifies Bronze Age Aegean, just as there these ships represents the stern
a ship of this class on a stone from was a variety of ship types in the and which the There are
two compelling arguments for
identifying the high end as the
stem. Firstly, the lower extremity
of the Naxos lead models have a
blunt, transom-like ending,
strongly suggesting that this end
I/ was the stem. Secondlv. ,'
the s h i ~ s
taking part in the waterborne pro-
cession depicted in the miniature
frieze at Thera have similar hori-
zontal projections at their sterns
(Figs. 6.13-14). This device, un-
known outside the Aegean, is so
unusual that one may assume it
represents the same device in both
the Early Bronze Age depictions
SHIPS O F T H E A E G E A N L 73
their elongated, extremely narrow range in size from twenty to one
dimensions, they would tend to hundred men, depending on the
hog. The zigzag lines on two of the vessel's length, which can vary
Cycladicships may indicateeither from twelve to thirty meters.
some type of decoration, addi- These vessels are definitely seago-
tional strengthening, or perhaps ing, although because of their long
that the ships were lashed (Fig. and narrow proportions and lack
5.4).?\ of internal .structure, they tend to
I'erhaps tlwclosest modern eth- hog in even a moderate sea. To
nological parallel to these Aegean prevent this, bamboo hawsers, or
ships is the long, narrow "dragon on occasion a true hogging truss,
boats" of the Far East (Figs. 5.14- are employed
. . (Fig. 5.15:B). C. W.
F ' i ~ r r jr,~7~, Slcrrr 0 f p ~ d 1b~e1l ~ n g:, L I O / I I C ~ ~ Tl5)."
~ Their beam /length ratio var- Bishop notes one example of a true
(rzfttr f f o r r ~ e 1978:
e 4.3fix. .31: A ) ies between 1:10 and 1:14, thus hogging truss that ran the length
agreeing with the Naxos models. of the hull over its center.
Like t h e Aegean longships,
and at Thera. Given this consider- dragon boats are seagoing craft
ation, i t seems highly unlikely that that are manned by rows of pad-
the horizontal stern projection- dlers a n d have n o sail. Crews
w h a t e v e r its function-would
have been transferred from one
end of the ship to the other.?'
Depictions of the Aegean Early
Bronze Age longships suggesf the
following general conclusions:
The ships are extremely long 'i3
cw--w 1
. .
and narrow and may have de- !.\:
scendcd from monoxylons.'" \I.: -.
The high stems were topped \
on occasion by fish devices and
tassels.
The Cycladic frying pans may
be connected ivith fertility and re-
generation." The appearance of
ships on these objects also argues A
has tholes or frames extending Cutwater bows were common in and on cultic ships appearing in
above the sheer. This model is gen- Classical a n t i q ~ i t y . ~ Minoan glyptic art is reminiscent
erally considered to represent a of the feather stem decorationson
relatively small Another The Phaistos Disk the Solima (Figs. 6.28 [mast top], 52:
terra-cotta fragment from Phyla- A terra-cotta disk found at Phais- AX). Perhaps the Aegean devices
kopi may belong to a similar tos and dated to the seventeenth were also made of feathers.
modeL3' century B.C. has a spiral inscription SHIP DEPICTIONS AT AEGINA.
Double-ended construction on both sidesu The symbols are A piths from Kolona on the island
with horizontal projections at both not related to any known scripts, of Aegina, dating to the Middle
extremities may have its roots in and the disk itself is believed not Helladic period, is decorated with
monoxylons, skin boats, or bark to have been of Minoan manufac- crescentic ships. The pithos is very
canoes (Figs. 5.17-22).38 J. Homell tumU This unique artifact carries fragmentary, but it is clear that
reports a number of types of mod- the imprintsof forty-five different o r i g d l y it had four ships painted
em double-ended craft with hori- seal stones that were impressed in g frieze on its shoulder. The fig-
zontal projections i t both ends in into it while it was wet." Among ures in the ship are bunched closely
Indonesia, the Philippines, Bali, the signs is a ship, repeated seven together and in one fragment are
the Northern Celebes on the is- times (Fig. 5.23). At one end the clearly shown facing the bow,
lands of Geelvink Bay, New ship has a slanting post with a tri- indicating that the ships were
Guinea, Java, Melanesia, Madura, partite decoration. paddled and not rowed. The high
and the island of Aua (Fig. 5.22: Although not related, being dis- stem ends in an elongated point
A).39Canoes from the island of tant in both time and space, an in- below a double-curved "stalk"
Aua in the Bismarck Archipelago, teresting ethnological parallel to (Fig. 5.24). Vertical stanchionss u p
ranging in size from 3.5 to 18 the shape and decoration of the port lances. The best-preserved
meters, are dugouts in which the Phaistos Disk ship is found in the ship depiction on the piths origi-
bow and stem are prolonged into Solima canoe, which was used un- nally contained about thirty-one
a very long, thin point and have til recently in the Solomon Islands men.u
vertical end-pieces added to the (Fig. 5.6).& The largest recorded A matt-painted drawing on
hull (Fig. 5.22: B)." Solima was nearly fourteen meters Middle Helladic sherds from the
This double-ended bifid form is long and could carry up to ninety island of Aegina depicts a figure
characteristic of vessels of varying men. The Solima had a high stem, wearing a homed helmet standing
dimensions, ranging from the which was decorated with a com- on a ship's bow that ends in a bird-
smaller types of outrigger canoes plicated carving of a frigate bird, head stem ornament (Fig. 5.25).
to ships of considerable size. Other a fish, and a tassel (Figs. 5.6; 8.60). This is the earliest recorded ap-
modem craft have a horizontal The tripartite device on the angu- pearance of a bird-head device on
projection at only one extremity." lar stem of the Phaistos Disk ship an Aegean ship. If they are integral
-- -
Figure 5.17. Two-masted canoe, Papua (after Haddon 1937: 297fig. 172)
Figure 5.18. Canoe, New Hebrides (after Haddon 1937: 32 fig. 19)
lines are depicted on the ships. In
several cases, one line may repre-
sent a quarter rudder.
IOLKOS. Designs on painted
sherds from a transitional Middle
Figure 5.19. Canoe, Cook Islands (after Hornell 1936: 191 fig.127) Late Helladic pot found at Iolkos
have been identified as a series of
oared craft.49This reconstruction
has been accepted uncritically by
some ~cholars.5~ However, there is
insufficient evidence to recon-
G. F.
struct these designs as ~hips.5~
Bass notes that the decoration has
been compared convincingly with
fish painted on a contemporane-
ous vase in the Archaeological Mu-
seum at Nauplion?
to the ship, two parallel vertical ARGOS. Seven tiny craft are de-
lines behind the figure may indi- picted on a vase found in a Middle
cate a pole-mast instead of a bipod Helladic Argive tomb (Fig. 5.26).#
one. The horizontal lines above the The ships vary in shape from cres-
figure may suggest a yard, but this centic to rectilinear. Three of them
is questionable since no boom ap- show a recurving extremity at one
pears, nor do the cross-hatched end; others show one vertical and
triangles lend themselves to inter- one slanting post. All the vessels
pretation as an element of a boom- carry a curved structure (cabin?)in
footed rig. the center. Seven, eight, and ten
Figure 5.23. Ship represented on the Phaistos disk (after PM I: 654fig. 485: L )
Figure 5.25. Fragment of a ship, with a bird-
head device on its stem, painted on sherds
from Aegina (Middle Helladic) (after
Buchholz and Karageorghis 1973: 301 fig.
869)
Figure 5.24. ( A ) Basch's reconstruction of a crescentic ship on a pithosfrom Kolona, Aegina, ca.
1700 B.c.; ( B )detail of a stempost decoration (after Basch 1986: 422fig. 6,424fig. 8: D )
Figure 5.26. Seven ships depicted on'a jugfrom a shaft tomb in Argos (seventeenth century B.c.) (after Deilaki 1990: 126 figs. 1-2)
S. Lloyd and J. Mellaart point coes from KII~SSOS and Thera, in- "Keftiu" (= Caphtor) and the "Isles
out the possibility of Minoan ele- clude images of bull-jumping. in the Midst of the Sea" in the ac-
ments in the plan and construction companying inscriptions, indi-
of the nineteenth-century R.C. pal- The Iconographic cates that their ships were arriv-
ace at B e y ~ e s u l t a n If. ~ their
~ hy- Evidence ing in Egypt during the reigns of
pothesis is correct, it suggests a Hatshepsut and Thutmose 111, and
possible presence there also of Minoans iu tlrr TIl~barlTovzh perhaps earlier. The term Ides irr
Minoan artisans during the Middle A unique foml of graphic evidence the Midst cfthe Sea may have been
Bronze Age. concerning Minoan contacts with the Minoan name for Crete and the
In Egypt, fragments of Minoan- Egypt consists of tableaus of Aege- surrounding islands as adopted in
style wall paintings have also been ans depicted in the tombs of the translation by the Egyptians.
uncovered a t Tell ed-Dab'a.'" nobles a t Thebes.'-' A s t u d y of Scenes of Minoans are discon-
'These paintings, reportedly simi- these Aegean figures and their tinued in the Theban tombs after
lar in style and execution to fres- wares, identified as inhabitants of the opening years of Amenhotep
culture fell and was not revived by
the Mycenaeans after they consoli-
dated their hold on Crete.
Them
The Miniature Frieze that revolu-
tionized o u r understanding of
Minoan ships was found in a struc-
ture at Akrotiri termed the "West
House" by Spyridon Marinatos
(Fig. 6.2).'" Only two rooms (4 and
5) 011 the building's second story
were decorated with frescoes; tlie
Miniature Frieze was situated be-
low the ceiling in Room 5 (Fig.
6.3)."
Here, windows, doors, a n d
niches in the walls significantly
limited the amount of space avail-
able to the artists. The lower parts
of the walls were covered with a
dado consisting of panels imitat-
ing stone and wood. At the east-
ern extremity of the north wall and
the s o u t h e r n extremity of the
western wall are two nude youths,
each over a meter high, who carry
fish, seemingly toward the north-
west corner of the room.'%t the
vestibule connecting Rooms 5 and
4, a youthful priestess strides into
Room 5."'Tliis figure wears an un-
usual sari-like outer garment and
holds what appears to be an incense
burner into which she drops a yel-
low ingredient, perhaps saffron.
Although the Miniature Frieze
from Akrotiri is the best-preserved
example of this Aegean art style,
similar miniature wall paintings
are known from Late Minoan/
Late Cycladic I contexts in Crete-
at Knossos, Tylissos, Prasa, and
Fixrrr~6.2. M a p o f t h r excmrutiot~sut Akrotiri. Notc fhc Incutior~q t h r West House ( f r o ~ n Katsamba-as well as on the is-
Morgur~198s: ? f i x . 1 ) lands of Kea and me lo^.'^ In all
cases, the miniature wall paintings
II'.; reign. The tomb of Rechmire, of the Late Minoan IB, which seem to depict cultic activities. The
where they appear for the last seems to have occurred in tlie lat- scenes always take place in tlie
time, was completed soon after ter part of Thutmose 111's reign.?i open, although adjacent towns or
Amenhotep's coronation (Fig. 6.1). Apparently the Egyptians ceased buildings are depicted. For ex-
This cessation of contact is syn- to draw the Aegeans in their tombs ample, in the Knossos miniatures,
clironous w i t h the e n d o f the because direct contact with the crowds watch a cultic dance or
Minoan culture in Crete at the end Aegean ended when the Minoan stand beside a shrine.
Fi~rrrc6.71. Recorrstrrrctio~~ (4) o f the rlortlr Mirrintrrw Frieze showirrg the d d i e r s n&c:nrrcing t o u w d a city, pmtoral sccrrcs, ships, n17d bodies irr thr
nwtcr (,frurlr T d ~ i ~ a r ~1990:
t ~ r i 3 1 6.fix. 1 0 )
F r x ~ r r6.14.
~ , T11rprocrssionnl ships cnrry a s t y l i s - l i h pole, n horizorrtal w n f r r - l e ~ dprojection,
nrrd a srtrnll cnbin (ikria) at fire stern (nfter Marinntos 1974: color pI. 9 )
MINO..\N/CYCLAL,~C S H I P S $95
T l I E SAILING Sl-Ill' AND RIG-
GING AT THERA. One fragmentary
ship accompanying the proces-
sion/race is under sail (Fig. 6.19).
It has been reconstructed with and
without an ikrin, for which there is
no evidence." The ship has a stern
deck where the helmsmen stand.
The heads of three seamen, just
visible above the open bulwark,
suggest that the hull was at least
partially undecked amidships.
The sailing ship, as well as two
other vessels in the Miniature
Frieze, h a w open bulwarks simi-
lar to those still used in the Aegean
(Fig. 6.24)." Although missing on
the ship under sail, mastheads car-
rying rows of sheaves to support
the lifts and halyards are seen on
two ships depicted with their
masts stepped (Figs. 6.13,27 [com-
pare 32])."
L. Morgan assumes that since
the ships in the Miniature Frieze
lack stays, these were not used on
the actual prototype ships." This
is most unlikely, however, for
stays are required to give a mast
longitudinal support. Their ab-
sence is probably traceable to ar-
tistic convention. Stays normally
appear on contemporaneous Egyp-
tian rigs (Figs. 3.11, 15-18, 24, 26,
29-32) and seem to have become
more popular in ship iconography
after the introduction of the brailed
rig (Figs. 7.8: A, 17, 19, 21, 25,27).
The rig used on the Theran
ships has been compared to the
contemporaneous Egyptian rig.36
The area of the sail is mostly lack-
ing in the wall painting. Spyridon
Marinates was able to reconstruct
the sail and its rigging, however,
based on the remaining fragments
and on the rigging shown 011 the
ships that have struck sail (Fig.
6.20).;' The lines depicted are two
pairs of lifts for both the yard and
boom (B), halyards (C), braces (D),
and sheets (E)." The area beneath
the raised yard is missing. Presum-
Slzips o i l Mimm S P ~ S
Ships appear on a wide variety of
Minoan seals, beginning in the
Early Minoan I11 period.6bThe
ships depicted on tiny Minoan
Figrrre 6.26. Ship ioith&stoorrrd lirres depicted 011 a steatite lerrtoid seal (Late Mirroarr 111H)
seals are often schematic, making (after PM 11: ?43/iy. 1.39)
it possible to interpret the various
representations as different classes
of craft." The seals must now be
correlated with the evidence from
Thera.
TALISMANIC SEALS. A number
of seals show the abstract bow of a
boat with a bird ornament on the
stem; behind this is an object con-
structed of two or three vertical
poles with hatching between them
(Fig. 6.35)."-$The motif undergoes
a progressive abstraction during
the series. This object is interpreted
as masts and sails by Spyridon Figlire 6.27. Orrc qf the ships in the processinn /ins rams ~!fgnrlarrdsrurrnirigJfi~~n1
the inast to
Marinates, as deck awnings by the houi arrd stern (lioirr Dorrtrrns 1992: 7\5-76)
R. W. Hutchinson, and as a type of
pole sail by L. Basch."'
The identity is closer at hand, This variety of seal, termed "tal-
however. H. Van Effenterre iden- ismanic" by Evans, dates from the
tifies this construction as the stern Middle Minoan 111 to the Late
ikrin.'" Indeed, in the more realis- Minoan I periods and ceases to be
tically portrayed seals, the device made after the Mycenaean take-
is too similar to the ikria on the over of Crete.7' Concerning the
Theran ships for this to be a coin- uses of this seal type, J. H. Betts
cidence (Figs. 6.15, 25: C-F). Fur- notes:'"
thermore, on a seal from Thebes,
the device appears at the stern of In addition to its incidental ar-
the ship, the actual position of the tistic attractiveness as jewelry,
ikria on the processional ships (Fig. the sealstone had two main func-
6.48). Thus, the seals portray two tions as the personal symbol of
important elements-bird decora- its wearer. The one was sphrag-
tions and ikria-that at Thera are istic: the functional use of a seal
specifically connected with the to make a mark guaranteeing a
water ceremony. Apparently, coil- document or product as authen- Figr~rtb.28. iliitroarr cresccrrtic ship iiepicteii
tra Basch, we are not seeing an en- tic; the vast number o t clay ON n gold riirg-fionr Tiryris (co. 1.300 R . c . )
tire ship on this seal type.71 sealings trom the Cretan and (offer Cassorr 1995A:fig. 50)
M I N O A N / C Y C L A D I C SHIPS LV 99
1 1 nr~rir i x x i r r ~rlcpictcd on Enrly A4irion~1111 (A-B) iir~dMiddle h4irioari (C-K) s n ~ l s111
Fi,yirrc 6.29. S h i p i ~ ~ i t rrrn.st . all C I I S C S , tlw snils I I R ~ ~ lC v m
r 11: 2 , 3 9 J x s . 136: U-1); C-E rl~rdG-K a f t ~ )M
l o z w r ~ d(A-B r t f t ~ Phl r a r i r ~ a f o s193.3: pl. 7.5: 3.3. 31, .39, 3.1-35, .32, .3h-,37; F @cr Cusso~r7993A:
fi,q. 48)
Mainland palaces, often found in
association with tablets bearing
script, indicates the extent of this
tunctinn. The other was amuletic,
the seal being the personal sym-
bol of the individual and so in
some way his magical protector.
In the case of most sealstones the
two uses were not apparently dis-
tinct, and it is in general not pos-
sible to say that one served as a
seal and another as an amulet; but
irl the. case o j thosr _sralston~,sfor
whidi E M H Sc o i i ~ the ~ ~ IfZ L I I I ~ C" t d -
isirrarlic" it swirls pssiidr to I I I L ~ ~ L ~
sirilz a rfisti~zctioi~ a1rd to sn!/ t/lnt Figrirc 6.30. D~si'ynoil a /~ri.s.riiw l l , p,riraps rryrrsenttr~ga p l m ~liei~l
i?f 11 4 i p b e r r r ~p f r l l ~ ~ r l
. L ~ I ~ O A Y / C Y C L A USIH
CI P S @ 103
based as much on their limited
range of symbolic motifs as on
their material and shape. This cu-
rious fact, along with the evi-
dence of boat votives and "ba-
teaux de culte," indicates that,
despite Minoan Crete's reputa-
tion in later antiquity as a sea
power, the ships which occur in
Minoan art nltnost nll hnor sorrw
kir~dof synlbolic, semi-rrlixio~rsor
occult si,qrlificnrlce. The ill~~strnfiotzs
tend, cspecinlly it1 t11c Lntc Mirzonrl
period, to be scllcrnntic nrld to ozlcr-
rtrrphnsize certnirl fcntirres of the
ship, perhaps tllose zd~icll111111 settle
specinl tnnxico-relixious six~lifi-
C U I I C ~More
. ~ ~ or less naturalistic
representations of ships are
rarely found.
Discussion
Irz terpretitz~the
Mitziutirre Frieze ut TIzeru
The meaning of the waterborne
procession o r race at Thera is in-
triguing, and various explanations
have been put forward to explain
it. There are two basic theories con-
cerning this procession: military or
cultic. Some scholars studying the
Libya in the mid-second millen- the Theran ships and painted 011 tacking coastal settlements on pi-
nium IX. This is unlikely to have their hulls need not be an Egyptian ratical raids.lWD. 11. Kennedy be-
been the case, however. Although influence as Rasch s~iggests.~"! Li- lieves i t served to stabilize the
ships could have sailed with rela- ons have a strong connection ivith ships, preventing fore and aft rock-
tive ease froni the Aegean to Libya, h4inoan religion: they appear re- i i ~ g .Rasch
~ ~ " interprets i t as an axial
returning against the predomi- peatedly in seals and seal impres- fin, located beneath the waterline
nant northwest winds that blow sions representing the young veg- and used to offset drifting."' Mar-
throughout the s u m m e r sailing etation god and the mother god- gall identifies the stern dt\71ceas a
'
season would have been difficult, dess as the "Mistress/Master of landing plank."'
i f not impossible, for a ship using Aninlals," as ~ 7 e l as
l striding next These identifications have one
a square sail footed with a boom. to armed male figures.l0' thing in common: they all begin
Therefore, ships were normally re- TI lE I IOI<I%ONTAL STERN DE- with the unstated premise that the
quired to make a counterclockwise VICE. 111 the third millennium when horizontal stern device was func-
circuit of the entire eastern Medi- i t first appears, just as in the time tional nautical gear. I believe tliat
terranean to reach the Aegean from of the Theran frescoes, the horizon- this basic assumption is wrong, for
J%y P. tal stern device seems to have been at Thera tlw s t ~ drvicc
~ n appcr7r.s orzl!y
Rasch suggests that the scene optional gear 011 ships. It is carried tl~os~,sliips
011 t n k i l i ~ p n rirl
t tlrc witcr-
depicts a Minoan military expedi- by some ship representations: the Oorn~,yroc~wiori/rncr.All the ships
tion to Egypt in the service of the Cycladic "frying pans," rock graf- portrayed in functional rig in the
Egyptian pharaoh. H e argues that fito of a ship from Naxos, a model M i n i a t u r e Frieze, o n b o t h the
d u r i n g their stay in Egypt, the from Palaikastro, and an incised south and the north ivalls of Room
Minoans never reached Thebes. sherd froni Orchomenos (Figs. 5.3- 5, lack the stern mechanism.
Instead, they visited Lower Egypt 4, 8-9, 11). It is lacking, however, This can only mean that at the
a n d copied scenes of p a d d l i n g on the lead models from Naxos time the Miniature Frieze w a s
there. In this manner, according to a n d a graffito from Phylakopi painted, the horizontal stern de-
Basch, t h e p a d d l e r motif w a s (Figs. 5.1-3, 12). This situation ad- vice had a solely ceremonial /cultic
a d o p t e d in t h e T h e r a n relief. mittedls lends itself to a variety of use, similar to the other decora-
Rasch's scenario d o e s not give interpretations. tions and mannerisms associated
sufficient consideration to the e v - h~lanyingenious nautical espla- in tlie ivall painting with this cer-
dence for a long tradition of pad- nations have been proposed to ex- e m o n y . A similar e x p l a n a t i o n
dling in the Aegean or to the ap- plain the unusual horizontal stern ivould s ~ ~ f f to ~ cexplain
e why some
pearance of Minoans in contempo- mechanism on tlie processional third-millennium ship depictions
rary Theban tombs. There is n o s h i p s a s well a s o n t h e Early carry the stern dewce ivhile oth-
reason to doubt tliat these Minoans Cycladic longships. Evans believes ers d o not.
iverc recorded during actual vis- i t to be a fixed rudder.'"' Hutchin- This connection with ceremo-
its to the city of Thebes itself. son suggests that the "projecting nial use at Thera is our sole clue in
The lion figures in the stcrns of keel at the stern" was a carryover attempting to identify the nature
from the Early Bronze Age long- of the Aegean horizontal stern
ship type, perhaps resulting from mechanism. Hccn~tscthe L ~ ~ ~ isJ ~17 C C
the dugout origins of the hulls.""
Spyridon Marinates considers i t a plnrrlrd i ~ ~ i r.cfcrcncc
th to n 17n1rtical
landing ladder that also doubled p i ~ r p s c In
. fact, being a symbol, the
as a ship's head.'"' L. Casson be- device may have represented an
lieves that i t was used to maintain object that had nothing at all to d o
proper trim."'" G. B. R. De Cervin with seataring."'
suggests that the stern device was P A D D L I N G . The men paddling
used when pulling the ships the ships in the procession are hav-
ashore (Fig. 6.41).11"T. C. Gillmer ing a difficult time of it. They have
identifies it as a s t a g e o r plat- to bend double over the caprails to
form.ln' C. G. Reynolds considers reach the water with their short
the stern device to be a landing paddles (Fig. h.42).11'Obviously,
ramp, or apohnthrn, used to get the they are not going to get far pad-
crew quickly off the ship when at- dling in this n1anner. It is also clear
that the ships in the procession
were not normally paddled.
The. paddling has received a
number of interpretations. Spyri-
don Marinates writes that this was
necessary because of shallow wa-
ter.ll' A. F. Tilley and P. Johnstone
hold that the ships were being
paddled to permit inboard space
for the figures sitting in the center
of the ship, since rowers take more
inboard space than paddlers (Fig.
h.43).'Ih Gillmer suggests that
paddles were used for short peri-
ods to allow "more manoeuver-
ability and speed and were pre-
ferred for this work to the more
permanent installation of heavier
and cumbersome oars."li7
Paddling, as we have already
seen, has a long history in the
Aegean. There is further evidence
for the continuing practice of pad-
dling during the Late Minoan pe-
riod. Paddlers appear on a sealing
from K ~ ~ o s s that
o s shows part of a
ship with a horse engraved on it
(Fig. 6.23:A). If the horse is facing
the ship's bow, which seems likely, Figure 6.43. T i h y arrd jolrrrstorle's rccc~rrstrrrctior~oJ't/rc tllidshi/~ofn Tlrtro ship hrirlx prrddlcd
then the men are paddling and not ( A )and rourcd ( B ) (frc)rrrTilley a i d [ohrrstorrr 197b: 287fix. I ; corrrtcs!y ofthe International
r~wing."~Similarly, a seal impres- Journal o f Nautical A r c h a e o l o g y )
sion and a seal may show men
with paddles in hand (Fig. 6.44).ILq
Casson convincingly explains
the paddling as an archaic cultic
practice:
110 e
' SEAGOING S H I P S k S E A M A N S H I P
completion. The horizontal stern
device was probably a cultic object,
even at its inception, as is the case
with the mechanisms a d d e d to
dragon boats before the races.
These third-millennium ships
were often, although not always,
represented in contemporary art in
full regalia, apparently in connec-
tion with this cultic event.
By the beginning of the second
millennium, a new class of craft
was introduced to the Aegean or
developed locally. It is perhaps
this variety of ship that is being
used in the waterborne proccs-
sion/ race at Thera.
Even though the type of ship
h a d changed, the w a t e r b o r n e
cultic pageant continued. To give
continuing tradition to the custom
it became customary to make the bound at half their height with a
ships taking part in the procession horizontal line. These "garments"
as similar as possible to the now- are quite different from the vari-
defunct longships. Since the latter ous other kinds of Minoan skirts
had lacked sails, these were low- (Figs. 6.45: A, 69: D, 72).13"
ered during the races. Likewise, TIzc t w o figures are dressad ill
the ships were paddled in the race, sllcnzws o f ~ r a i i iAn
. excellent par-
in memory ot the manner in cvhich allel to this dress, engraved on a
the longships had been propelled fragment of a stone vessel from
in antiquity, even though paddling Sacke Gozii and dated to the Halaf
had been replaced by this time on period, depicts a figure ~vearingan
all but the smallest vessels (Fig. identical sheaf-skirt, standing in
6.34). the middle of a reed raft (Fig. 6.49).
TIIE CULTIC SIGNIFICANCE OF The figure has upraised hands,
TIIE PROCESSION / RACE. The key and its head and hands are made
to interpretation of the procession of ears of grain. A q u a d r u p e d
or race is in a Minoan amygdaloid stands in front of the ship. This
seal portraying a cultic ship that motif resurfaces on later Meso-
was found at Thebes (Fig. 6.48).12K potamian seals in which a god is
It has a double Minoan bird (swal- being paddled in a "living boat,"
low?) device at the stem, while be- again with a quadruped and other
neath the stern is located a typical agricultural symbols around it
horizontal device, and above it an (Fig. 6.50). A similar vegetation
ikria.'" Beneath the hull are five di- god, with head and hands made
agonal lines, no doubt representing of grain, a p p e a r s o n a n Early
paddles. Thus, the ship bears three Bronze Age I1 cultic stone from
elements that, at Thera, are linked Arad (Fig. 6.51)."' the motifs on the bowsprits of the
only to ships participating in the The sheaves of grain worn by Theran ceremonial ships (swallow,
waterborne procession (race). the figures on the Theban seal butterfly, and s o on), it appears
Two standing paddlers face the seem to imply that the waterborne that this was a spring festival.
bow. The figures' skirts are com- ceremony was linked to an agricul- A. Sakellariou and Morgan con-
posed of vertical lines and are tural cultic festival. To judge from nect this festival to the inaugura-
112 @ c
9.52 f r ~ ~ ~119-920;
;. D nftcr Sakcll~~raki.;
S E A G O I N G S H I P S 6r S E A M A N S H I P
.,
,.,.,,. :; -,.
-wew:ri?~~wa$:p~,
---..
-......-...-...rr
D
.. ., . .. -..-.
,+
... -.-.--*--
L I U L ~Sal~orrrrn-Sakrlli~ri~kis
-.".i. ,.
--, . _ ..._,_.._
.. ..* . etation cult. A butterfly, like those
c D on the bowsprits of the Theran
ships, appears 011 a gold signet ring
t l ~ i c dccornlio1is$7ci1ix lhc boru (A-C nfler
Fixurc 6.52. Mitroan crrlfic boats -il~itkz o o ~ ~ r o r ~ stcrri from Phourni that was found with
PM 11.': 9.50 fix. 91 7, ~ . i ? f i x s . 979-920; D qftw Sokcllnrah-i.5m d S~;JOIIIIIZ-Sak~~llrlrakis the skeletons of a woman and a
1981r221) sacrificed bull."' It shows a god-
116 & S E A G O I N G S H I P S 6r S E A M A N S H I P
skeleton found in a building at Given the possibility of ritual Such an "institutional organiza-
Anemospilia near Arkhanes.'.'" human sacrifice in the Bronze Age tion," such a "cultural normalcy"
The arguments put forward by the Aegean, the incongruously pasto- and acceptance of human sacrifice
excavators in this case d o not stand ral atmosphere above the sea in as that postulated by Buck in Myce-
u p to scrutiny, h o ~ e v e r . ~ " which the n u d e bodies are floating naean Greece-were it to have ex-
The Mycenaeans may also have in the north frieze, the religious isted at Thera-would neatly ac-
practiced h u m a n sacrifice. A significance of male nudity, and count for the six bodies floating o n
unique Linear B document from the ritualistic aspects of cultic ship the water. It would also explain
Pylos (Tn 316) refers to a special races, human sacrifice becomes a ivhp the physical sacrifice of IILI-
religious ceremony.lN'It w a s writ- reasonable interpretation for this m a n beings-so foreign a n d re-
ten in a month that has been in- scene. p u g n a n t to the m o d e r n mind-
terpreted as "the month of sail- If the proposed interpretation is could have been recorded in such
ing," that is, the time when sail- correct, then human sacrifice was a matter-of-fact manner o n a wall
ing w a s r e s u m e d each s p r i n g . a more common aspect of Aegean painting at Thera.
Notes J. Chad~vick: religion than has previously been
thought. R. J. Buck, in a review of The Corz tilrrlatiou
The formula continues with a the evidence concerning Tn 316, of Culfic ProccssionslRm~s
reference to the carrying of gifts concludes that thepurerzes made u p in the Aegenrl
and the bringing of po-re-rln. This a n "institutional" group within the The s h i p procession o r race de-
too is a word missing trom the palace.'"' Thus, this phenomenon picted in the West H o u s e was,
later Greek vocabulary, but the was neither esoteric nor secretive; then, not a uniquely Theran festi-
verb translated "bring" implies the poreires were, as Buck puts it, val. The custom continued in the
that i t means something which "part of the administrative ma- Aegean long after Thera had sunk
could walk. Then follows the en- chine." H e concludes thus: into the sea and after the autono-
try: "(for) Potnia: one gold vessel, mous Minoan culture had ceased
one woman." After this come All this makes it clear that hu- to exist. This cultic race o r proces-
four more names, presumably man sacrifice was not something sion w a s absorbed i n t o various
also deities, each receiving a gold exceptional, but part of the ad- cultures and took place, presum-
vessel and in two cases a woman. ministrative routine. This point ably every spring, over millennia
This pattern is repeated in the does not mean that human sacri- in the Aegean.
other paragraphs with different fice was practiced on the massive TFIE MYCENAEAN CULTURE.
names of deities; in two cases, scale of, say, the Aztecs, but that There are several clues suggesting
where the deity is male, a man is it was something that was done that the Mycenaeans carried o u t
substituted for a woman. trom time to time, and that it was similar ship processions/ races:'h4
It is impossible. to resist the appropriate to have a pool of per- A scene appearing on the thir-
conclusion that the obscure word sonnel available. teenth-century amphoroid krater
po-re-im in the introductory for- We have as clear documentary
mula refers to the human beings, evidence as we are likely to get,
and, despite initial reluctance to evidence that confirms what the
accept the unpalatable fact, that Greek myths have long told us,
these unfortunate people were to and ivl~atarchaeology has led us
become sacriticial victims. The to suspect, that human sacrifice
same word has now appeared was a recognized, standard, fairly
again, in the dative plural, on a routine activity in the Mycenaean
new tablet from Thebes (Of 36) age; that small (probably) squads
indicating recipients of wool, but of poretzes were kept on hand (like
in a religious context. Since sac- Theseus' group at Knossos), un-
rificial victimr in Greek ritual der the supervision of 5ome pal-
were frequently decked out with ace official, at least at Pylos and
wool, this is some slight confir- probably at all Palace sites; that
mation of the meaning of the the porerles were fed and main-
tained by the Palace.lh'
M I N O A X / C Y C L : I D ~ CS H I P S 6 117
found at Enkomi may depict ships placed with the Helladic water a helmet, indicating that the pad-
taking part in a cultic procession bird. The sternposts carry three or dlers were also soldiers. This was
or race (Fig. 7.28).'"' Although at four curlicues. Warriors dressed in probably the case at Thera also.
first glance there seems to be little heavy robes, identical to those The a p p a r e l of the soldiers o n
similarity between these ships and worn by the seated figures in the shore in the Miniature Frieze is
those participating in the proces- Theran ships, are portrayed above hidden behind their rectangular
sion or race at Thera, a closer ex- g r o u p s of m e n t h a t , a l t h o u g h skin shields. However, they are
amination reveals that there are painted black, are shown without definitely not wearing the robes of
many parallels (Fig. 6.13). clothes. This grouping is identical the seated figures in the ships: one
Like the ships at Thera, the sails to the situation in the Miniature warrior \vhose shield is held low
have been lowered on the Enkomi Frieze where the warriors sit in the shows a bare shoulder (Fig. 6.60).
ships. They have decorations at center of the ships with paddlers The soldiers were presumably the
both stem and stern, although the on either side. rowers of the ships beneath them
Minoan/Cycladic swallow adorn- The figure to the right of the (Fig. 6.7).
ment on the bowsprit has been re- handle on the E~lkomikrater wears The ikria was an important ele-
ment of the cultic practice. I t ap-
pears only on those ships at Thera
taking part in the procession/race
a n d is also a main element de-
picted on the talismanic seals. The
large ikrin painted on the walls of
Room 4 of the West House further
attests to its cultic ~ignificance.'~"
Therefore, the possible appearance
of ikrin on a wall painting from
Mycenae supports the conclusion
that the ikrin-and with i t the pro-
cession / race-continued into the
Mycenaean cult (Fig. h.6l).Ih7
A seal, discussed above, depicts
a ship decorated in garlanded lines
leading from the masthead to the
ship's stem and stern in a manner
identical to one of the Thera pro-
cessional ships (Fig. 6.26).Iw Rased
on its material, shape, and style, J.
Roardman dates the seal to the
Late Minoan I I I R period-long
after the demise of the Minoan cub
ture on Crete.IbYThis ship is ren-
dered without the stern device and
ikria, however. Either on non- "tal-
ismanic" seals the seal makers did
not need to include all the at-
tributes of the ceremony, or the
ship is garlanded for a different
reason. As on the "talismanic"
seals, one or two attributes were
sufficient to indicate their religio~is
significance. Alternately, the ship
may be garlanded for a reason not
associated with the ceremony.
Note also a Linear B sign depict-
ing the forward part of a ship, from
mast to bow, containing a swal-
low-shaped bowsprit device typi-
cal of ships taking part in the water-
Fixlire ti.64. (A) Storre borne procession (Fig. 6.62).
rcccptaclejro~~r the c n i ~ l f THE CLASSICAL PERIOD. Rasch
Hcxrirres Krtliraios at Pats05
cites horizontal devices on what he
w i t h n drip errgrnrvd orr it;
(B) liirc drnioiir~ojtlri, drip interprets as the sterns of ships
(fro111Wflrrc~rr1966: ; I / . 4.3: portrayed on Macedonian coins
a, 19.ifiy. I ; corrrtesy qf tlrr from the second century a.c. (Fig.
Rritislr Srlrool nt Atlrelrs) 6.63).Ix One ship's stern bears a
; L I I N O A N / C Y C L A D I CS H I P S @' 11'9
double-crescent cultic object (Fig. Thera, it is worth highlighting ment was limited to deities and of-
b.h3: E): this is reminiscent of the several additional aspects of cultic ficiates.""
lunates that appear in the bows of portent evident in the frieze. Other figures on tlie shore wear
two Theran processional / race SAC'RAI- C L O T H I N G . Some of knee-length hides (Fig. 6.65). Spyri-
craft, on ships depicted on seals, the figures in the Miniature Frieze don Marinatos considers this evi-
a n d perhaps above a s h i p en- wear garments of a sacral or cultic dence of a Libyan locale for the
graved on a stone cultic vessel cl~aracter.'~? The seated figures in scene. However, animal-hide skirts
(Figs. 6.13, 17, 18: R-C, 29: F, (74).'71 the Theran ships wear heavy robes were an integral part of hflinoan
These coins may suggest a niem- that envelop their arms. The same sacral dress and are worn by the
ory of the ceremony continuing type of robe is worn by some of the officiates on the Hagia Triada sar-
into Classical times. spectators on the shore and by tlie cophagus (Fig. 6.X).'77A shoulder-
figures taking part in the "Meet- length fur (?) robe is also worn by
Additiorznl Cnltic A s p ~ t s ing 011 the Hill.""' These are iden- the leader on the "1-Iarvesters
it1 tlrc A4inifltr1re Frieze tical to the robe worn by the de- Vase" from t Iagia Triada.lTs
There can be little doubt today, ceased /god on the Hagia Triada S A C R A L KNOTS. Spyridon Mari-
after the detailed and exhaustive sarcophagus, on a wall painting nates, describing the clothing of the
.;tudies of the Miniature Frieze by f r o m t h e s a m e site, a n d from two figures in the "Scene on the
Morgan, Nanno Marinatos, and seals.1i4Both men and women wore Brook," writes, "The ribbons fas-
others, of the cultic nature of the this robe, the sacral nature of which tening the furs over the shoulders
procession (race). As cult and sea- was first identified by E v a i ~ s . ' ~ ' are so stiff that they suggest that
faring seem to be inseparable at M. P. Nilsson notes that this gar- they are the feet of the animal's
Figlrrr 6.65. ( A )Sflr-rrd h o t t~iorir
, c f r C w y(f&imx); ( B ) "L'I P t r r k h r w " ~c~1t11
m ~ r o k1ic11
l
r 1: 430fiq.,303.4.3.3 ficg.
( ~ f t c I'M 317)
o t ~ ~c !tlr~,
f proc.essior~nlships (rqtrr r l f r ~ r i r i n t a ~
1974: lrl. 107)
66-67).
This object, which appears re-
peatedly in Minoan art, is a sacral
knot (Figs. 6.68-69). A knotted
cloth, somewhat like a tie, it had
two extremities with fringes hang-
ing down and a knot looped into
the fabric.'*' A sacral knot is also
worn by "La Parisienne," who may
represent a goddess-thus con-
firming the knot's cultic impor-
tance (Fig. 6.68: B). Elsewhere, it
appears in combination with a
cultic double ax (Fig. 6.69: C-D).
CULTIC GESTURE. A crewman
standing forward of the helmsman
at the stern of one of the proces-
Fixrrr.c (i.70.iL111rrcli7pying his hands (?) arr +lrrrr~ skrff: Tolrrk qf lpy ( T . 217) at T l r ~ h
(Rarrrscs 11) !fi.orrr Dm~ies1927: PI. 30; Q, flic ~McfrupolitnrrMrrscrrrir of Art, A h York)
Mycenaean1
Achaean Ships
Beginning in the sixteenthcentury palace bureaucracies. Linear B may have existed among the vari-
R.c.,the energetic Mycenaean cul- signs were also painted on jars. ous Mycenaean centers: practices
ture made its appearance on main- Although much about the world of in one palace may not be assumed
land Greece. R4ycenaean pottery, the Linear B documents remains to apply to the entire Mycenaean
found throughout the eastern enigmatic, concentrated scholarly world concerning subjects on
Mediterranean, is a valuable tool research in the decades since its which documentation is limited, as
for comparative dating. At the decipherment has gleaned many in the case of seafaring. Indeed, as
same time, this vast spread of insights into Mycenaean palace we shall see, the reasons for pre-
what is, archaeoIogically, a highly administration. But the documents paring these documents may have
visible commodity has signifi- are frustratingly telegraphic in varied from one site to the next.
cantly confused our understand- nature. The Linear B script apparently
ing of the Mycenaean role in Late Unlike other cultures in which went out of use with the destruc-
Bronze Age trade. This is particu- clay tablets served as a principal tion of the Mycenaean palaces at
larly true of the thirteenth century, form of documentation, most Lin- the end of the Late Helladic IIIB or
when Late Helladic IIIB pottery ear B tablets were not intended for the very beginning of the IIIC.
flooded the East. O n the other long-term recording; consequently, 'TIIE PY LOS ROWER TABLETS.
hand, more attention must be they were not kiln-baked. The tab- Three texts of the Pylos An series
given to the role of Mycenaean lets owe their survival to the same refer to "rowers" (r-re-ta).'l In An
and Achaean ships and seafarers fires that hardened them while 610 e-re-ta appears in the damaged
in coastal raiding, mercenary ac- destroying the palaces in which heading, indicating that the docu-
tivities, and colonization. they were stored. Thus, most Lin- ment deals with oarsmen allocated
ear B documents appear to date to from various communities or sup-
The Textual Evidence the last year, and possibly very plied by officials. The text records
near the time of destruction, of 569 or possibly 578 men, but four
Liizrar B their find sites. Archival records entries are missing; J. Chadwick
The Mycenaeans used a form of meant for more permanent storage suggests that originally about 600
archaic Greek that they recorded may have been recorded on mate- men were e n ~ m e r a t e dThese
.~
in a script termed Linear B.' Clay rials that were more expensive, would have been sufficient to man
tablets written in Linear B are such as papyrus or animal skins, a fleet of some twenty triaconters
known primarily from large caches but unfortunately less durable or twelve penteconters.
at Knossos, Pplos, and, to a far than baked clap.' The text is badly damaged, but
lesser degree, from hlycenae and There are many obstacles ill- its pattern is understandable. The
Thebes. The repertoire of Linear I3 volved in defining the chronologi- men are identified by locations.
documents consists mainly of in- cal and geographical distribution In two cases, groups of forty and
ventories and receipts kept by the of the documents.' Differences t w e n t y m e n respectively a r e
Fi,qurc 6.70. Mnrr ~.lappi~~,q 111.. 111711ds
( ? ) O I I t7fislii11xskiff. T w r b I!/ Ipy ( T . 217) o f T I r d ~ s
(I<n~risc+I I ) ( f ~ . o mD n < > i 1927:
c ~ pl. 30, CJ, flrc ~V~fropolrtari Mriwrrrl~of Art, Ncu,York)
cision on the part of the scribe lines .5-.6 record five men "obli- ship has a crescentic hull, identi-
(Hand one = the normally reli- gated to row" and somehow as- cal to the many images of Minoan
able "master scribe" at Pylos) in sociated with the important per- a n d Cycladic vessels discussed in
regard to formatting and the ac- son E-ke-ra,-zuo; line .7 lists one the previous chapter. A semicircu-
tual intormation he was record- man connected with the m-zua- lar construction is located amid-
ing on the tablet. The meanings ke-tn or "military leader"; another ships, and boughlike items extend
of several key lexical items are man is described in line .8. The from the ship's right side (bow?).
not apparent, and the syntax of section pertaining to a-kr-re-wa The central structure finds its clos-
the text is confusing or ambigu- lists individual men, at least one est parallel in the seven vessels
ous. However, it shares vocabu- of whom is associated with the depicted o n a jug from Argos,
lary and place names with PY An e-qe-ta or "followers," who seem- while the boughs are reminiscent
1, and most of its general purpose to be high-level administrative of bow devices o n some Minoan
can be understood. The scribe has officials. Line .14 might have cultic boats (Figs. 5.26; 6.52: A-C).
written clearly identifiable place listed the largest single group of The Argos ships are shown under
names in the first position of lines m i s i n g rowers, ten or more, at oar or paddle.
.I (ro-o-zua),.9 (a-ke-re-em),and .14 the site of ri-jo. Similarly, Linear B ideogram
(ri-jo). Notice that the first and On the reverse the scribe has *259 has a crescentic profile (Fig.
last of these occur in the same drawn what appears to be a sche- 7.4). The mast has a curving line
order on consecutive lines of PY matic image of a ship, comparable on either side of it, perhaps repre-
An 1. These place names divide to a recently discovered ideogram senting a m a s t partner, central
the tablet into sections. Line .1 on a tablet from K n o s ~ o s . ~ structure, o r rigging. The joining
informs the reader that "rowers of several d o c u m e n t fragments
are absent" at the site of ro-o-eua The ship incised o n the back of has this ideogram following the
and line .4 specifies that one of A n 724 is s o m e w h a t surprising word [. . .I-re-tn, perhaps to be re-
these men is a "settler" who is (Figs. 7.2-3).1° A b u n d a n t icono- constructed a s e-re-ta, although
"obligated to row." The subse- graphical evidence indicates what this is not certain."
quent lines continue providing Mycenaean oared s h i p s looked The third and final document of
evidence about missing rowers: like. This is not one of them. The t h e Pylos r o w e r texts is fairly
Figure 7.6. Luli, the king of Sidon, nnd hisfanrily escapefrom Tyre in n mixedfleet ofoared, "round" merchnnt wssels nnd wnrships as Sennncllerib
udvnnccs on the city. All the ships ore biremes and botlz types carry male andfenink pmsenxers (from the pnlnce ofsennnckerib at Ninervh ca. 690
13.c.)@otrr Rnrnrtt 1969: pl. 1: I; courtesy Israel Explorotio~Society)
structed similarly as place names, tian."21Other individuals are de- Ahhiyawa
three of which recall the names of fined as "from Cyprus."" Some Valuable information concerning
coastal sites in the Aegean. Chad- personal n a m e s suggest move- seafaring can be gleaned from
wick offers two alternative inter- ment by sea within the realm of the Hittite documents pertaining to
pretations for these opening terms: Mycenaean world: it is likely that the Ahhiyawa. These chancellery
they m a y r e p r e s e n t e i t h e r t h e such transport took place in Myce- documents, found in the Hittite
ships' names or the ports out of naean hulls. A tablet from Knossos capital at Bo$azk6y, contain sev-
which the ships operated. He pre- mentions m e n of Nauplia, pre- eral names that bear a remarkable
fers the latter explanation because sumably the site in the Argolid; similarity to Greek names men-
of the repetition of one name (do- their arrival at Crete would have tioned in the Homeric poems.
*22-ti-jo) on two texts with differ- required a sea voyage from main- These include the name Ah-hi-yo-
ent pairs of yo-ti-ro." land Greece.?; Similarly, a "Cre- zm(-a), identified with Achaeans,
A comparison with recorded tan" is mentioned at Pylos and a a s well a s forms of the names
names of Classical Greek ships, "Theban" at Knossos. Miletos, Afreus, a n d Efeokles.
however, suggests that this may Groups of women in the Pylos E. Forrer, who was first to note the
actually support their interpreta- Aa and Ab series are defined by similarity, argues that these names
tion as names of ships. Names of ethnics derived from Aegean sites, can be best explained i f the Hit-
fricres appearing in the Athenian primarily along the coast of Asia tites, during their westward ex-
naval lists during the late fifth and Minor: Knidos (ki-11;-di-jrr),Miletos pansion in Anatolia, had encoun-
the fourth centuries R.C. are almost (mi-ro-ti-jrr), Lemnos (la-mi-tzi-jo), tered Mycenaean Greeks, w h o
invariably feminine in g e i ~ d e r . ' ~ Kythera (ku-fe-ra,), as well as the were based in the region of Mile-
Furthermore, about 10 percent of possible identifications of Lycia tos. Since that time, scholarly de-
the ships in the lists are named af- (0-*64-jrr),the Halikarnassos region bate over the identity of the Ahhi-
ter geographical sites, and many ( z c - p u r - r ~and
) the more specula- yawa has been voluminous.
vessels bear the same name at the tive identification of Khios (ki-si- Considerable advances have
same time. wi-jo); others are known simply as been made since Forrer first pro-
If Chadwick's interpretation of "captives" (rrr-wi-j~-ja).~.' Chad- p o s e d the connection between
the Knossos V(5) series is correct, wick suggests that the e t h n i c s Ahhiyawa and the Mycenaean cul-
it further supports the conclusion, probably pertain to the sites of the ture. Main among these are two:
already indicated by the Pylos s l a v e m a r k e t s from which the The realization, indicated by the
rower tablets that, when necessary, women and children had been ac- decipherment of Linear B, that the
Mycenaean palaces were capable quired. Presumably the women contemporaneous Mycenaean cul-
of organizing fleets of galleys. and children had been abducted in ture did indeed speak an archaic
PERSONAL NAMES A N D ETHNIC piratical sea (?) raids, which did form of Greek.
A D J E C T I V E S . Some information not yield, however, similar quan- The discovery of a significant
concerning Mycenaean seafaring tities of adult males. These prob- number of Mycenaean sites in and
m a y be gleaned from different ably would have been dispatched. along the coast of Asia Minor,
types of personal names that ap- This practice is described by Ho- where the Hittites and the Myce-
pear in the Linear B documents. mer: "From Ilios the wind bore me naeans were likely to have met.
These names are often of ambigu- and brought me to the Cicones, to The Ahhiyawa are now gener-
ous significance. A number of per- Ismarus. There I sacked the city ally identified as a part of, or the
sonal names at Knossos and Pylos and slew the men; and from the entire, Mycenaean k o i r ~ eThe
. ~ ~ ar-
derive from roots related to seafar- city we took their wives and great chaeological evidence of Myce-
ing activities and are suggestive of store of treasure, and divided them naean settlements in Asia Minor,
a n i n v o l v e m e n t in s e a f a r i ~ l g . ? ~ among us, that so far as lay in me particularly at Miletos and Iasos,
These include "Fine-Harborer," no man might go defrauded of an fits comfortably into this interpre-
"Fine-Sailing," "Fine-Ship," "Ship- equal sl~are."~' As we shall see, this tation of the written evidence."
Famous," "Ship-Starter," "Ship- accords well with the picture de- Dissenting views to this identifica-
man," and "Swift-Ship." rived from other textual materials, tion are raised by scholars who
Place names from outside the discussed below, which also ~ 1 1 0 ~ 7 identify the Ahhiyawa with other
Aegean occasionally a p p e a r a s a particular interest in file frrkiilx of Aegean ethnic groups, placing
personal names. One shepherd at coy f iacs. them in Anatolia or its outlying
Knossos is n a m e d " t h e E g y p - islands.2s
~ ~ Y C E N A E A NA/ C H A E A N S H I P S @ 1
Mediterranean as early as the four- mercenaries in the employ of the least in part, from the interrelation-
teenth century R.C. Egyptian court at Amarna. ship of ship iconography in the
I11 one of the Amarna tablets, Mycenaean religion. In the Syro-
the king of Alashia seems to be The Archaeological Canaanite littoral and on Cyprus,
answering accusations previously Evidence indigenous s h i p depictions are
made by the Egyptian pharaoh to rare, but anchors commonly ap-
the effect that Alashians had taken During the fourteenth and thir- pear in cultic contexts.'" Anchors
part in attacks 011 Egyptian terri- teenth centuries, Mycenaean influ- d o not appear to have had cultic
tory, made by people of the land ence in the Aegean replaces that of significance for Aegean Bronze
of Lukka. Denying these charges, the mi no an^.^' W h a t h a s been Age seafarers, w h o seem, how-
the Alashian king complained that termed a seaborne "Mycenaean ever, to have had a predilection to
he also suffered from similar raids: expansion" begins,17 and i t is 110 portray ships in circumstances
"Indeed, men of Lukki, year by less profound-perhaps even more suggesting that they had a reli-
year, seize villages in m y ow11 so-than that of the Minoans' in- gious significance.
co~ntry."'~ fluence during tlie previous pe- Geographically, I-Ielladic ship
This "seizing of villages" pre- riod." Some sites suggest actual representations are found in main-
sumably refers to piratical attacks settlement by Mycenaean coloniz- land Greece, the Aegean, and on
on Alashia for the express purpose ers. The homogeneity of the Myce- Cyprus. As the Mycenaeans and
of taking captives. The kit18 of naean pottery at this time indicates the Sea Peoples used basically tlie
Alnsliin's words eclzo flic milieu offlic considerable seaborne intercourse same type of ship and overlapped
Mnddrluwfns text, wifll 7ullicl1,~ i v e t i between the Greek mainland, to a wide degree both chronologi-
its tic7u dnfiti~to tlic lnfr fourfeeiifli Mycenaean Crete, and the outlying cally and geographically, i t is not
crr~fllryKC., flze Atnnrrza docrltticiif is Aegean islands. always clear whether the portray-
tzozu rou8llly coilfet7lporniit~olls.They Later, tvith the destruction of the als discussed here represent Myce-
also better confirm theories as to Mycenaean world at the end of the naean-or Sea Peoplesr-ships."
the origins of foreign women at thirteenth century, fleeing Mycena- In every ship style or rig there
Py10s.'~ e a n s (or Achaeans, a s they are were certain characteristics that
Rib-Addi, the beleaguered king called)-or at least groups making left a lasting impression on the
of Byblos during the Amarna pe- and using Late Helladic IIIC pot- ancient observer and that were
riod, refers repeatedly to the enig- tery-created settlements even far- most commonly emphasized in
matic ttiifii-people who appear to ther afield, in Cyprus and along the depictions of that particular ship
be linked with ship-based war- Canaanite coast."This waterborne type. For example, during the en-
fare."' T. Save-Soderbergh consid- emigration is one of the hallmarks tire Bronze Age when the boom-
ers them early forerunners of the of the Mycenaean culture. I cop- footed rig was in use, i t was invari-
Sea people^.^^ In one Amarna tab- sider this use of ships for the move- ably the multiple lifts supporting
let, of particular interest regarding ment of populations a primary as- tlie yard and boom that seem to
the Shaushgamuwa Treaty, the pect of Mycenaean seataring. have caught the eye and attention
Egyptian king is asked to prohibit of the artists.
rriiii-ships from going to the land The Iconographic Mycenaean ships were no dif-
of Amurru.'" Evidence ferent in this regard. Many of the
From the reign of Ramses I1 on- Helladic s h i p depictions s h a r e
wards, Egypt and other eastern A rich corpus of Mycenaean ship similar elements. One such ele-
l a n d s c o m m o n l y used Aegean images exists consisting primarily ment is the device shaped like a
mercenaries."' However, an illus- of depictions painted on vases, in- water bird, or of a bird head, that
trated papyrus from Amarna in cised in stone, or modeled in terra- often topped tlie ships' stems.'?
the British Museum may depict a cotta. Although of differing detail However, undoubtedly the single
scene of Mycenaean (?) mercenar- and accuracy, these depictions are m o s t characteristic element of
ies actively fighting alongside almost invariably of oared ships, Mycenaean ship architecture-the
Egyptians." Thus, it is not impos- on the decks of whicli occasionally one attribute that most impressed
sible from a historical viewpoint stride armed warriors. the persons w h o portrayed them
that the rniii-ships mentioned in The abundance of ship imagery and that appears on most Helladic
tlie Amarna tablets may refer to bequeathed us by the Mycenaeans ship depictions-is a structure di-
Aegean (Mycenaean?) ship-based a n d their successors results, at rectly above the sheer that looks
d
Indeed, at times, an abbreviated
image of a ship is expressed in its
entirety by a horizontal ladder de-
sign alone, with oars and rigging
added, as for example in the cases
of a schematic graffito of a ship
painted upside down inside a
Mycenaean larnnx, or a s h i p
painted 011 a sherd from Phylakopi
on Melos (Fig. 7.7, 23).3 Clearly, to
understand the depictions of
Mycenaean ships, our first impera-
tive is to determine the ancient art-
ists' intentions in creating this
horizontal ladder design. F i ~ r t r7.7.
~ Tlw elenrerrt o f tlw ~M!ycerra~~orr ship represented by tlrc "/iorizorrfalladder pattern"
To do this, we must begin with sccrrrs to Itnae beer1 so strikirix to tire obsrnlrr tlrnt, at tirrrcs, sketches c!fMycr.ria~arrdrips ro~rsist
oflittle else t h m Hrrs comporrcrrt, sorrr~'tirrrcsivith [Jarsnrrd rigxir~xadded. Orre ~ x a n r y l rof tlris rs
the most detailed and clearest de-
n ship pirrtcd L I ~ S ~ L ~ L ,ii~side
- ~ ~ Ua ZLate
L I IM~i l l ~ ~ f llarnax
ri ( A ) .Reloiv, ir? ( B ) , thr. drip is rci:~~rscd
piction of a Late Helladic ship. This (!Per Grny 1974: G47, Abb. 1 1 )
was discovered by F. Dakaronia at
the site of Pyrgos Livonaton in cen-
tral Greece, which has been iden-
tified as Homeric Kynos.''' Excava-
tions at this Late Helladic IIIC site
have revealed a wealth of ship ico-
nography, including ships painted
on sherds and fragments of terra-
cotta ship models. Warriors, armed
and armored, stand on their decks
and in their forecastles. One gal-
ley, Kynos A, is depicted in par-
ticular detail (Fig. 7.8: A). The ship
is nearly complete. The only parts
missing are the device topping the
stem, the lower part of the stern,
the end of the sternpost together
with the blades of the single quar-
ter rudder, and the two sternmost
oars.
The ship faces left and is di-
vided longitudinally into three
horizontal areas (Fig. 7.8: B: BC,
XB, and AX). Area CB is the ship's
huII, from the keellkeel-plank to
the sheer. Above this is a reserved
132 6
'. SEAGOING SHIPS A N D SEAMANSHIP
hatched screens (Fig. 7.13). In the
second sherd, however, the men's
torsos are hidden; only their arms
and shoulders are visible peeking
out from behind the screens (Fig.
7.14). From the height of their
shoulders, however, we may de-
duce that their heads are hidden
behind the superstructure.
Most writers who have dis-
cussed these three sherds from the
late eighth century R.C. agree on
their interpretation: they show two
levels of rowers, one above the
other, instead of a single level on
either side of the ship. In the Proto-
Attic ship the oars ot the upper
level are actually drawn across the
Fixurc 7.11. Arr onrsnra~rat tire errd ofiris
side of the ship, while on the Late
stroke (Attic l h t c Gcor~rc+ricI ) (@rr Ra~cIr
1987: IGG,&y. 338)
Geometric sherds the oars of the
upper level reappear beneath the Figure 7.13. IVnrslrip with two Dirrks qfc~nrs
ships' hulls, indicating that both depicted O H a slrerd from the Acropolis,
sherd, the artist has enlarged the Athors (cn. 710-700 I L L . ) (nftCrMorrisott
depictions represent two levels on
nrrd IYillin~trs1968: pl. 7 : / )
height of the rowers' gallery so the near (port) side of each ship.
that the entire torso and head of It is generally accepted that the
the rowers in the lower level are ships of the Geometric period are ment continues to appear promi-
depicted, and the rowers are vis- developed from Mycenaean ships. nently on Greek-oared ships of the
ible in the openings between the Since this "horizontal ladder" ele- Geometric period and later, it is
reasonable to assume that i t rep-
resents the same structural ele-
ment in these later depictions.
From the above considerations
we may conclude that the "hori-
zontal ladder motif" on Myce-
naean ship depictions, as on their
Geometric descendants, repre-
sents an open rowers' gallery in-
tersected by vertical stanchion^.'^
Sometimes the stanchions have
been omitted and, in one case,
descussed below, the oars are at-
tached at the height of the upper
deck, indicating that these ships
could be and were rowed from
deck level, as were warships of
the Late Geometric period. At
Kynos, then, we have our first
clear glimpse of the prototype ship
that would eventually develop
into the classical tradition of war
galleys. As we shall see, ships of
Figirrt. 7.72. IVarship with tzoo bnnks qf oars on a Proto-Attrc slrrrdfrottr Phnleron (@r virtually identical appearance were
W i l l i n t ~ ~1959:
s 160fi'y. 7 ) also used by the Sea people^.^^
/
X ~ Y C E N A E A N ACHAEAN SHIPS fl" 133
stem meets the keel but lacks a hori-
zontal projection is identical in
shape to the bows of the Sea Peoples'
ship depicted repeatedly at Med-
inet Habu (Fig. 8.10). The keel is
somewhat rockered and abuts an
oblique stem. A model from Phyla-
kopi shows how this type of fine
bow may have appeared three-di-
mensionally (Fig. 7.42).
The castles are composed solely
of groups of three inverted nestled
angles, perhaps indicating that
they were little more than an open
framework, unenclosed by plank-
ing. The upper part of the stem
bears numerous short lines ex-
tending from its inboard surface.
These projections appear normally
Fi,yure 7.14. W n r s l ~ i pwith tluo lmnks qf o m dcpictcd oil n shcrtlfro~r~
the Acropolis, A t h w (cn. with bird-head stem devices, indi-
710-700 R.c.)(nffer.M o r r i s o ~rwd ~ Willintiis 1968: pl. 7: c) cating that this stem was topped
in the same manner (Figs. 7.15-17,
19,28; 8.61: A-D).
Returning to the Kynos A ship, head indicates that the rig repre- Another depiction from Kynos
note that the figure a t the bow sented is of the newly introduced consists solely of such a bird-head
stands on a raised deck in the fore- brailed design.""The only rigging stem ornament, the torso of an
castle. The warrior standing be- shown is a single forestay and two armed warrior, and what may be
hind the mast suggests that the slack lines that appear behind the the upper railing of the castle or
ship was at least partially decked mast, seemingly looped through open bulwark (Fig. 7.15). A row of
longitudinally. The helmsman, one of the mast cap's sheaves. projections runs along the upper
manning a single quarter rudder, The sharp manner in which the end of the beak, over the head, and
is positioned in the sterncastle. H e
wears no armor, although he does
seem to be wearing a (feather?)
helmet similar to those worn by
the two previous warriors. H e
holds the loom of the quarter rud-
der with both hands. No tiller is
depicted, but two joining semi-
circles, perhaps indicating a con-
trol mechanism, are drawn on the
fore side of the loom.
The ship has a single pole mast
situated somewhat forward of
amidships. This is probably trace-
able more to the artist's desire for
sufficient room to display the
warrior behind the mast than to
any real structural meaning. All
other Helladic ship portrayals
show the sail planted squarely
amidships. The sail and yard have
been stowed. The circular mast- Fix~rrc7.15. Kyiio> ship R ( L u k Hclli~dicIIIC) (corri.tcsy F. Dnkoroi~in)
Figure 7.17. ( A ) Decoration OH n pysisfourrd in f l forrrb at Trqqanfl, Pylos (Latr Helladic 111C); (8)detail ofship (Jrottr KorrB 1989: 200)
p r e 7.18. ( A )A rcconsf rri cf cd~olddi n d m forrrrd it1 Trcricir IY-31 rlt Pylos brarir~xa ship 7uitlr a bird-lrend stcnr orrranrcrrl; ( B ) &ail oj'firc ship
7er BIexr~rret d l . 1973:fip. 108: d [,rcorrsfrrrclcd by Piet dc 1011x1)
qrire 7.19. Ship depicted on the side o f u larnaxfrom Gazi (Lair Mirlour~IIIR) (pl~otoby the author)
down the bird's neck. The warrior ing on the forecastle is drawn back represents a schematic duplication
carries a shield and throwing jav- behind his head, a convention of a bird's head and upcurving
elin. The stem's extremities are used in many cultures to depict the beak or a primitive form of subsid-
missing, but its central, remaining, draw of a composite-but not a iary spur (prne~irbolioiz).~'
part is either vertical or very nearly simple-bow (Fig. 8.1)."' The up- The sternpost rises from the
so. Similar stems appear on other per tip of the bow is visible be- keel in a graceful curve, terminat-
Helladic ship depictions as well as neath the beak of the bird-head ing in an acorn-shaped device. The
the Sea Peoples' ships at Medinet stem d e ~ i c e . ~
More
' recently, a castles have open balustrades,
Habu (Figs. 7.8: A, 16-19, 21, 29: sherd bearing the stern portion of similar to those on tlie first Kynos
A, 30: A). this ship depiction was found." On ship. The Tragana ship carries a
A third ship drawing from it, a helmsman works a single single quarter rudder, the tiller of
Kynos portrays what appears to be quarter rudder, and the ship is which seems to be held in place by
the same ship type, sketched by a shown to have a recurving stern- a linchpin connected to the
less-skilled hand (Fig. 7.16). It has post, similar to that of the Skyros The ability to remove the tiller
a long, narrow hull and a stempost ship (Fig. 7.21). The galley's mast from the loom would have been
surmounted by a bird-head device has been retracted. desirable when the mechanism
with a strongly recurving beak. A ship painted on a Late Hel- was stored.
Twelve small projections protrude ladic IIICl pysis from Tholos Tomb The mast cap has only two
from the inner side of the bird's 1 at Tragana near Pylos reveals shealles, indicating that the ship
head and beak. striking similarities to the Kynos employed the newly introduced
The hull is also divided length- ships (Fig. 7.17: B).h7The vessel brailed sail. The sail billows out
wise into three sections as on the from Tragana has a continuous, forward of the mast. A single
first ship, although the open bul- thick line representing the hull forestay leads from the mast to the
wark, perhaps with its screen low- from the sternpost to the short forecastle. Three lines, probably
ered, is no more than a line. At the horizontal s p u r at the bow.h" representing the backstay and the
bow a warrior stands on three ver- Twenty-four vertical stanchions, two halyards, lead from the top of
tical lines, representing a structure placed at fixed intervals, connect the mast to the sterncastle. In this
at the bow, although its surface is the hull with a second narrow respect, the Tragana galley is simi-
level with the deck.hL Here, as well horizontal line. I take the latter to lar to a depiction from Phylakopi
as on other Bronze Age depictions, represent the line of the wale, (Fig. 7.25). A fourth line brought
the stanchions have been omitted, beams, and central longitudinal half astern, although seemingly
perhaps to prevent confusion with deck, all of which are seen in pro- attached to the mast, may indicate
the slanting oars. This is identical file. The stanchions form twenty- either bunched brails or a brace.
to the fashion in which warships five rowers' stations, suggesting Two zigzag lines rise from the
are shown during tlie Late Geo- that the artist depicted a pente- quarter rudder. A palm tree and
metric period: the stanchions are conter. three more zigzag lines-one ver-
omitted when the ship is por- The bow consists of two verti- tical and two horizontal-are
trayed with tlie rowers working cal lines joined by a zigzag line and shown in the panel that separates
their oars from the lower level."2 rising above the spur. Behind it is the ship's bow from its stern (Fig.
To my knowledge, this illustra- a forecastle that serves as the base 7.17: A).7J
tion is unique to Mycenaean ship of an emblem that has been previ- Another ship portrayal with a
iconography in that it portrays ously identified as a fish."The dis- prominent bird-head stem device
oars continuing up to deck level, covery of several additional sherds was found at nearby Pylos (Fig.
suggesting that the ship was being of the py.xis shows that this device 7.18).'j Embossed on a gold dia-
rowed from the upper deck. This is a water bird with a recurving dem, it finds its closest parallels in
development is significant because beak.'" A line jutting out midway the Skyros ship and in the em-
rowing these ships from the upper up the stem is reminiscent of the bossed bird-boat ornaments pre-
level was the first step toward cre- bow projection in the same posi- valent in Urnfield art (Figs. 7.21;
ating a two-banked ship.&' tion on Kynos ship A (Fig. 7.8: A). 8.30).
Three warriors are arrayed on In the Tragana ship, however, this The cutwater bow, or spur, seen
the forecastle and deck. The two bow projection does not continue on the Tragana ship appears ear-
on deck bear javelins and shields. tlie line of the possible wale as on lier on a ship painted on a Late
The right arm of an archer stand- the first Kynos Perhaps it Minoan IIIB 1arnn.x excavated at
Gazi, on Crete, and now eshibited pretations or this, none of which I protect the rowers at night, simi-
in the Archaeological Museum at find entirely satisfactory: lar to those used on galleys from
Iraklion (Fig. 7.19).'" Although this The rowers' galleries on both the seventeenth century A.v."
is the largest known depiction of sides of the ship are depicted as if There are, however, n o known
an Aegean Late Bronze Age craft they were on one side, as in the contemporaneous parallels for this
extant today, several of its details Geometric ship on the British Mu- interpretation.
are enigmatic. seum bowl." Alternately, this element may
The artist used three horizontal The lower area is the open row- represent decorations hanging
lines to compose the ship's hull ers' gallery, while the upper area from the rigging similar to those
and superstructure. The lowest of is the o p e n b u l w a r k with the borne on one of the Theran ships
these represents the ship's hull LIP screen removed but the stanchions (Fig. 6.27). Similar decorative de-
to the sheer. Twenty-seven verti- supporting it still in place. Unfor- vices hang from the stays on two
cal lines, one of which is the con- tunately rowers, who might have galleys depicted on Late Geomet-
tinuation of the mast, rise from it. elucidated the ship's structure, are ric sherds from Khaniale Tekke,
The s t a ~ ~ c h i o form
n s twenty-eight lacking.'" near Knossos (Fig. 7.20)."'
rowers' stations; presumably, the The Gazi artist seems to have The bow of the Gazi ship con-
artist intended to draw a pente- had a liberal attitude with upright tinues past the stempost in an
conter. lines: an additional row of verticals upcurving s p u r . The stempost
A median horizontal line bisects connects the uppermost horizon- rises at an angle from the keel and
the reserved area lengthwise, as if tal line with the lowest pair of di- is topped by a stylized zoomorphic
we are seeing two banks of row- agonal lines, which run from the head with a number of short ver-
ers' stations, one above the other. masthead to the ship's extremities. tical lines rising from it. The fig-
There are several possible inter- L. Basch identifies it as a screen to urehead is longer than the hori-
~ I Y C E N A E A/ NA C H A E A N S H I P S &* 139
newly introduced loose-footed
brailed sail. Rigging represented is
limited to a single forestay a n d
backstay.
An oared ship painted on a Late
Helladic IIIC stirrup jar from Asine
is so schematic that scholars even
disagree as to which side of the
ship represents the bow and which
the stern (Fig. 7.22). G. S. Kirk and
R. T. Williams consider the long,
thick projection
. .
to the left to be a
ram, with the ship subsequently to
be facing left.sh L. Casson, G. F. stempost (it facing right) corre- ture consist of two parallel lines
Bass, and Basch believe the ship to s p o n d to those painted o n the joined by six narrower vertical
be facing right." The following stempost of a contemporaneous lines. In this much-abbreviated
considerations support the latter nskvs ship model from Cyprus (Fig. form, the artist has captured the
view: 7.48: A). salient aspect of a Helladic galley:
In some ship graffiti the quar- The ship has a cutwater bow. an o p e n rowers' gallery inter-
ter rudders are occasionally strung Eleven short vertical strokes that sected by stanchions. Beneath the
out directly behind the ship as on begin around the center of the hull hull are seven oars, shown at the
the Asine ship (Fig. 7.19).8q and bisect the keel line probably beginning of the stroke, and a
If the thick vertical line in the represent oars. The sail is deco- single large quarter rudder, de-
center of the hull is the mast, as rated with a net pattern, suggest- picted in an unusual manner, with
Williams logically concludes, then ing that the original was con- its blade angled toward the bow.
the sail is billowing toward the structed from a number of small The ship has stowed its sail and
right. panels sewn together (compare has two lines (presumably stays)
The horizontal projections on Fig. 6.21). running fore and aft from the mast.
the inboard side of the ship's A schematic-almost telegra- Parts of two other ships, of Late
phic-depiction of an oared galley Helladic IIIC date, are painted on
comes from Phylakopi, on the is- several sherds from Phylakopi. Of
land of Melos (Fig. 7.23).n"The one galley only part of the hull,
are with five oars and a quarter rud-
r LI c- der, remains (Fig. 7.24). A vertical
1-10 H S E E I \ G O I N GS H I P S A N D S E A h I A N S H I F
line above the hull may represent (Fig. 7.26:A).91The rowers face left,
the ship's mast. Here also the oars suggesting that the galley faces
are angled toward the bow. right. The hull is drawn as a single
Of a third ship, only the posts, broad horizontal band. The two
mast, and rigging remain (Fig. bands beneath it, according to
7.25). The stem ends in a zoomor- L. Morricone, encircle the jar and
phic device, perhaps a bird head are therefore not related to the ship.
(Fig. 8.36).90A palmette-shaped An angular structure, with a
apparatus surmounts the stern- vertical line rising from it, is lo-
post. The rigging includes one cated to the left of the rowers. Per-
forestay and three lines running haps these are the decorated stern-
from the tip of the mast to the post and sterncastle. To the right
sternpost. As on the Tragana ship, of this vertical is a line in the form
these are best identified as a single of a compound curve. The stern-
backstay and two halyards tied to castle, if it is indeed such, seems
cleats located in the stern. to be an open frame covered with
Some of the Helladic ships dis- hides. It bears similarities to castles
cussed are portrayed under oar. appearing on the ship depictions
Representations of oarsmen, how- from Tragana and Kynos as well
ever, are rare. A Late Helladic IIIC as to the castles on the ships of the
sherd from the Italian excavations Sea Peoples from Medinet Habu. tion (Fig. 7.26: B). The sail seems to
at the Seraglio in Cos depicts two Remnants of a second ship, to- be billowing toward the crewman,
rowers and the oar, as well as the gether with the head of a figure, suggesting that the ship is facing
lower arms and left (?) leg of a appear on another Late Helladic left. A wavy line runs diagonally
third as they strain at their oars IIIC sherd from the same excava- down from the masthead. The man-
ner in which this cable is drawn the bow, although its top does not sisted of pairs of sheaves, like
finds an exact parallel in tlie han7- protrude above deck level. The those on tlie Theran ships, which
ser used to raise a stone anchor on stem of tlie left ship is curved and served to hold the multiple lifts
a ship portrayed on a later Cypriot fitted with a water-bird device; and the halyards (Fig. 6.13). The
jug (Fig. 8.41: A). At left is a semi- that of the ship at the right is miss- hulls, however, have apparently
circular element with a reserved dot ing, but presumably it ended in the been altered considerably by the
at its center: this may represent the same manner. artist.
top of a bird-head device, the re- The curving sternposts are deco- All four men "below" tlie deck
served dot being its eye. rated with sets of volutes some- stand in the same manner, facing
On both of the Cos sherds, the what reminiscent of tlie stern de- each other in pairs. O n tlie deck
figures are wearing helmets that vice o n a s h i p depiction from above them are two antithetical
have been interpreted as feather Phylakopi (Fig. 7.25). The masts warriors wearing helmets and
helmets like those worn by some of rise amidships and are drawn as mantles. They carry swords in
tlie Sea Peoples on the Medinet "bumpy" lines that may indicate scabbards that end in ~7a17ylines.
Habu reliefs. This raises tlie ques- decorations or wooldings. The In all these elements, down to the
tion of tlie ethnic identity of the men masts are stepped in small tri- fringes on the scabbards, they are
(and of the ships) depicted at C O S . ~ ~angles, perhaps representing mast- identical to the warriors on shore
A Late Minoan IIIC sherd from steps or tabernacles (compare Fig. in the miniature frieze from Thera
Phaistos bears a graffito of an 8.41: A-B). Although no rigging is (Fig. 6.7). On either side of the ship
oared ship (Fig. 7.27).93The hull depicted, the artist has supplied us on the left, a warrior dressed in the
consists of a single thick horizon- with evidence to suggest that these same maliner faces the ship. The
tal line with a curving stempost ships from the thirteenth century helmeted head and sword pommel
and a raking sternpost; the vessel's R.C. continued to use the boom- are all that remain of the figure on
extremities are missing. The line of footed rig for the mast cap. It con- the left. The men standing in, on,
tlie hull continues past the junction
with the stem, creating a Iiorizon-
tal spur. A quarter rudder, held by
a helmsman facing aft, descends
diagonally abaft the sternpost.
The ship is being rowed: six
oars appear beneath the hull. Four
lines lead off from the mast. The
upper two appear to be a yard with
downcurving ends, and the lower
pair seem to be stays (compare Fig.
8.41: B). A small, pointed projec-
tion at the junction of the sternpost
and hull is reminiscent of the min-
iature stern spur on two of the Sea
Peoples' ships (Figs. 8.11: E, 12: A).
Two ships appear on a Late
Helladic IIIB krater from Enkomi
(Fig. 7.28: A).'%dditional sherds
belonging to this krater bear por-
tions of the figure standing to the
left of the scene and the top of a
whorl-shell (Fig. 7.28: B-C), while
the top of the mast and part of the
figure standing to the right on the
B - c
142 L
& SEAGOING SHIPS A N D SEAMANSHIP
and next to the ships all face each
other in heraldic patterns. Thus,
the men below deck are positioned
in that manner owing to artistic
considerations and not because the
action in which they are involved
requires them to be arranged thus.
The figures' posture is convention-
alized and therefore does not elu-
cidate what they are doing.'"
The ship at right, apart from its
missing stem, is identical in all re-
spects to the better-preserved ves-
sel on the left. Its hull is slightly
narrower, and the sternpost has an
additional pair of volutes. The fig-
ure to the left of the ship is por-
trayed in the same manner as the
men below deck but wears a hel-
met, implying that all these figures
also had a military function. The
preponderance of fighting person-
nel, lack of any cargo in the hull,
and the similarity of certain ele-
ments of these ships (such as the
bird insignia and stern decoration)
to those appearing on other repre-
sentations of Late Helladic IIIB-C
galleys all suggest that these craft
depict galleys with a more military
than mercantile purpose and that
they are taking part in a water-
borne procession of the sort de-
picted at Thera."'
A schematic ship graffito of Late
Cypriot 111date is carved on a stele
at Enkomi (Fig. 7.29: A).'%ssum-
ing that the ship faces right, then
the graffito makes perfect sense as
a warship in the Helladic tradition.
But is the ship facing right? The
ship seems to be under sail-and
the sail appears to be billowing to
the left. If this is correct, then the
ship itself must also face left, result-
ing in a rather odd-looking craft i n g in several incomplete a n d furled sail. Thus, in Figure 7.29: B,
somewhat reminiscent of Aegean missing lines to the right of the line A represents the vessel's mast;
longships, a type of vessel never mast.lO"Since this depiction dates B, the yard; C, a single forestay; D,
depicted with a mast and not oth- to the twelfth century or later, it the halyard or brails; E, a backstap;
erwise recorded in the eastern Med- would have carried a brailed sail. and F, a brace. Triangles BHI and
iterranean since the end of the third With this in mind, I suggest that BGA are portions of the furled sail.
millennium (Figs. 5.14).q" the ship is indeed facing right and The resultant rigging is identical to
The graffito is damaged, result- that it carries a brailed rig with a that appearing on ships of later
M Y C E N A E A NI I \ C H A E A N S H I P S 143
yond it is a horizontal line, crossed
by a second line and with two oth-
ers rising vertically from it. This
device is reminiscent of the bow
projection located midway down
the stempost on the Tragana ship
(Fig. 7.17: B). Later parallels in-
clude the two bow projections on
both of the Late Geometric ship
depictions from Khaniale Tekke as
well as a forked object projecting
from the bow of a ship depicted on
a sherd from the Heraion at Argos
(Fig. 7.20).""
The graffito's stern was first fin-
ished with a vertical post that was
later altered into a curving stern-
post by the addition of several
lines. Both angular (Figs. 7.22, 27)
and curving (Figs. 7.16-19,21,28:
A ) sternposts appear on Helladic
ship representations. Several lines
in the stern may indicate a castle.
The mast is stepped in a massive
triangular tabernacle.
Five rough graffiti of ships are
incised on two parts of a broken
rectangular pillar from a pillaged
tomb near the village of DrAmasi,
a site identified with Homeric
Hyria (Figs. 7.30-31).'f12 The tomb
dates to the end of the Middle
Helladic or the very beginning of
the Late Helladic period. The hulls
of all five ships are crossed by a
series of vertical lines. Here the
open rowers' galleries have been
enlarged by the "artist" at the ex-
pense of the ships' 11~11s.'~~
Even the most detailed ship is
crudely made (Fig. 7.30: A). The
ship appears to be facing to the
right. The hull from the keel to the
sheer, as well as the open bulwark,
are little more than two deeply en-
graved lines joined by a row of ver-
ticals. The hull is rectangular. Al-
date shown with their sails furled tightly furled as at the yardarms though theexact number isdifficult
(Figs. 7.29: C; 8.41: B). Further- (Figs. 23-42; 8.3-4, 6-8, 10-12). to determine, it appears to have
more, the furled sails of the Egyp- The hull continues into a spur, about twentp-two "windows" in
tian and Sea Peoples' ships at A large forecastle nestles in the what appears to be the open row-
Medinet Habu show that the cen- bow. h4idway down the castle's ers' gallery. Given the crudeness of
tral portion of the sail was not as forward side and extending be- the depiction, this may suggest that
3; 4
/ 2-'
//'
j;;
Fixurc 7.44. Froxnrentary terra-cotta ship niodclfrom Oropos, Attica (Late Helladic [?I) (after
i v &f=
~rarrDoorfrirrck IYSZR: 281 fiX 6: B )
Figure 7.53. Tcrra-cottrl ship rnorfelfror~rArgos (Lnte Helladrc period) (irfter Palaiolo~ori1989.
227)
M Y C E N A E A N / A C H A E A N SHIPS @ 153
Discussion many of the trade items on board tempted to consider the 1,046 ki-
the Uluburun ship.138 lograms of metal (bronze or cop-
Trade The Cypro-Minoan marks made per) mentioned in PY Ja 749 as the
INTERREGIONAL TRADE. Some on Mycenaean pottery in the Argo- arriving cargo of a seagoing trader,
artifacts inscribed with Linear B lid may indicate the presence of were it not for the consideration
inscriptions point to interregional Cypriot traders who organized at that this document is believed to
trade within Mycenaean Greece. least some of the trade between represent the total of all metals
Vases bearing inscriptions con- their homeland and the Myce- listed in the J n series (with the ex-
taining Cretan place names have naean city- state^.'^' ception of PY Jn 829).Id2
been found on mainland Greece, INTERNATIONAL TRADE. DOCU- Indeed, it is this "deafening si-
indicating sea contact between mentation of international trade is lence" concerning international
mainland Greece a n d Crete.131 conspicuously absent in the Linear trade that argues against any sim-
Neutron activation analysis of B documents. Even Amnisos, the plistic conclusions based on the
these vessels confirms that, for the main port-presumably the pri- evidence-or, more correctly, the
most part, they were made in cen- mary maritime entrance for for- lack thereof-from the Linear B
tral and western Crete. Fifty-six eign goods to reach Knossos and tablets. At Ugarit, texts dealing
inscribed sealings suggest the which appears repeatedly in the with international affairs and trade
transfer of livestock or their prod- Knossos documents-is never were stored in separate archives
ucts from sites in Euboea to Boeo- mentioned in relation to maritime from those containing administra-
tian Thebe~.l.+~ Bronze tripods at activitie~.'~~ tive texts.'" A. Uchitel notes that
Pylos are identified as "of Cretan The reasons for this phenom- other Near Eastern archives some-
workmanship" and were presum- enon are ~ ~ n c l e a r A
. ' ~palace
' like times employed separate lan-
ably made on that island.'"TThus, Pylos, which was capable of raising guages and different materials for
either the items o r the artisans the fleet(s) mentioned in An 610 and recording "economic" versus
who made them had been trans- An 724, clearly had the technical, "chancellery" material^.'^^ At the
ported by ship over the sea. economic, and administrative abil- Hittite capital of Bo$azkoy, for
Thirty-two p a i r s of chariot ity to carry out significant overseas example, literary texts and docu-
wheels at Pylos are defined as of trading ventures had it wished to ments treating international rela-
"Zakynthian" type.I3%n 610 lists d o so. The question is whether it, tions were written on clay tablets
seven rowers with the same eth- and other Mycenaean palaces, did. that were later baked and thus pre-
nic identity, and a "Zakynthian" is International trade may have served. The economic texts, how-
mentioned in a text from Mycenae. been in the hands of independent ever, were probably written on
Assuming that Zakynthos is to be traders who were not responsible wooden tablets (perhaps similar to
identified with the Ionian island of to the palace; they would therefore the diptych found at Uluburun) in
that name (which is probable but have been invisible in the myopic the Luwian hieroglyphic script
not certain), this suggests close view of the Linear B administra- and have not survived.'" Simi-
contacts between Zakynthos and tive texts, which were concerned larly, at Nineveh the chancellery
Pylos. solely with aspects of palace man- materials were recorded in cunei-
Trade items identified in Linear agement. Such an economic sce- form script on baked clay tablets
B by Semitic or Anatolian terms, or nario seems implausible, however, and thus have been preserved,
by words of unknown origin, im- given the degree of palace control while documents dealing with
ply that the materials themselves exhibited in the texts. economic matters were probably
were derived from afar. These Trade w a s obviously taking written in Aramaic on perishable
goods, however, cannot identify place: whether international trade materials that have long since dis-
the principal carriers who brought was carried out entirely by inde- appeared. If a similar situation ex-
them to the Aegean world. The pendent Mycenaean merchants, isted in Mycenaean palaces, it
items include spices (cumin and non-Mycenaean sea merchants, or would go a long way toward ex-
sesame), ivory, blue glass paste, a combination of both (and was plaining the lack of references to
gold, and garments, as well as thus completely outside the con- international and mercantile af-
words of unknown origin such as trol of the palace), we could legiti- fairs in the Linear B tablets. If this
bronze, purple dye, boxwood and mately expect at least echoes of the scenario is correct, then it is impos-
false ebony, alum, and terebinth arrival of foreign goods to be re- sible to determine (based on the
resin.137Note that this list includes flected in the texts. One might be Linear B evidence) whether Myce-
/
M Y C E N A E A N A C H A E A N SHIPS @* 155
rowing, depicted also in Late Geo- the angle varies: it may be vertical were then added to form a curv-
metric paintings, was an impor- (Figs. 7.16-18, 30: A, 45, 48: A, 49); ing stern (Fig. 7.29). At Hyria a
tant step in the development of the rake forward (Figs. 7.19, 21,27-28, vertical and a curved sternpost are
~lierrs.'.~'
This detail may also be 30: B, 44); or slope aft (Figs. 7.8: A, depicted on two ships, presum-
revealed on a model fragment 22, 29: A, 48: B, 51-52). A few ship ably created by the same artist (Fig.
from Tiryns (Fig. 7.46). models have a curving bow (Figs. 7.30: A-B). This may indicate that
Often, to emphasize the rowers' 7.39, 41, 43, 50); several indicate a the two types of stern existed con-
gallery s o peculiar in the Late fine bow (Figs. 7.43-4550-52). Sev- temporaneously.
Bronze Age to Mycenaean / Acha- eral models and at least one painted Kynos ship A bears the clearest
ean /Sea Peoples' galleys, this ele- depiction suggest that in those depiction of an open bulwark cov-
ment takes up the entire height of ships lacking a spur at the bow, the ered with a screen at deck level
the ship. The hull from the sheer stem formed a pronounced gripe to (Figs. 7.8: A, 7.8: R: Area AX). The
to the keel is relegated to a narrow which the hooding ends of the screen was apparently removable,
line, a peculiarity that has caused strakes were joined (Figs. 7.8: A, 42- however: the "area" above the
considerable confusion in inter- 43,49,51-52, 54 [?I). stanchions of the open rowers' gal-
pretation. On the stems of some ships, the lery is often portrayed as no more
With few exceptions, the mod- post bears a lattice design (Figs. than a narrow line, and at times
els portray hulls that were long and 7.17, 48: A-B, 49). It is not clear warriors are seen standing on it
narrow. Of the linear depictions, what the artists intended to repre- (Figs. 7.16-17, 28).
some hulls are shown with straight sent in this manner, for it makes Raised castles nestled in the
keels (Figs. 7.16-19, 23-24, 26: A, the stempost assembly appear ex- bow and stern were a standard fea-
27, 30: A, 33: A, F-L, 0 4 , T-U). ceptionally flimsy. Perhaps they ture (Figs. 7.8: A, 17, 22 [?I, 26 [?I,
Other ships have rockered keels are implying that the bow con- 29: A, 30: A, 31: B-C, 42 [?], 44,49).
(Figs. 7.8: A, 21-22,28,29: A, 30: B, struction contained ligatures, a They are consistently depicted as
31, 33: B-C, E (?), M-N, R-S, V). phenomenon known from both frameworks of light construction.
The models, however, illustrate Egyptian Nile boat models as well In some cases forecastles (?)end at
ships primarily with rockered keels as from the construction of the deck height (Figs. 7.16, 28: A, 30:
(Figs. 7.39, 41-42, 44-45, and par- fifth-century KC. Maagan Michael A). The significance of this is un-
ticularly 50-52). Only in three mod- shipwreck.lj3Arguing against this clear, but this detail is repeated
els-the Cypriot askoi-are the interpretation is the consideration with sufficient frequency to sug-
ships' bottoms rendered as straight that these parallels are distant in gest that it is not traceable to art-
lines (Figs. 7.48: A-B; 8.47). This both time and space from the ships ists' error.
may result more from the conven- under discussion. The stems, when A deck is s h o w n o n several
tions of the nskoi than from an ac- not missing, are normally topped ships (Figs. 7.8: A, 16, 28). It is
curate reflection of their proto- with a water bird or, more com- likely that this was a central deck
types. monly, with a bird-head device that ran the length of the vessel but
In a few models, the keel is (Figs. 7.15-19, 21,25,26 [?I, 28,41, was omitted along the sides, as
more pronounced on the interior 45, 50-52 [?]).Is4 was apparently the case with the
of the hull than on its exterior The ships normally end in a ships of the Sea Peoples depicted
(Figs. 7.39,41,46 [?I). The best ex- curving stern, which presumes a at Medinet Habu as well as with
ample of this phenomenon is on a scarf connection between the keel Late Geometric warships.
model from Kynos. This detail may and the sternpost (Figs. 7.16-19,21, Ships dating to the thirteenth
be indicative of a keel that pro- 28,30: B, 39,41,44,48: A-B, 51-52; century on which the rigging can
truded upward and inside the cen- 8.47). In the Asine ship the stern is be determined or inferred use the
tral part of the hull instead of partially hidden by the trailing boom-footed rig with its attendant
downward below the gar board^.'^^ quarter rudder, but the sternpost multisheaved mast cap (Figs. 7.19,
Some ships have a pronounced does appear to curve (Fig. 7.22). 28). Those d a t i n g to the Late
gripe (Figs. 7.8: A, 22, 42, 48: B). There are several exceptions to Helladic IIIC consistently depict
Other depictions show the keel ex- this rule, however. The Phaistos the double-sheaved mast cap in-
tending into a short spur (Figs. ship has an angular sternpost/keel dicative of a brailed rig (Figs. 7.8:
7.17, 19,27,29: A, 30: A, 36: A, 44- joint (Fig. 7.27). The Enkomi graf- A, 17, 21, 29). This change from
45,48: A). fito originally ended in a vertical boom-footed to brailed rig is also
The stem is usually angular, but sternpost, b u t additional lines confirmed a t Medinet H a b u ,
156 @. S E A G O I N G SHIPS A N D S E A M A N S H I P
where both the Sea Peoples' and ing merchantmen may have ex- tion (Figs. 7.17, 19, 29, 45). These
Egyptian ships are outfitted with isted but have not been considered ornaments would be damaged if
brailed rigs. It seems that the as suitable, or worthy, for depic- the projection was intended as an
brailed rig made its appearance in tion. Alternately, the Mycenaeans effective ram.
the Aegean ca. 1200 B.C. map have relied solely on sailing Finally, during the thirteenth
Most linear ship depictions galleys, like those portrayed in through eleventh centuries, some
show the ships with their masts their ship image^, for t r a n ~ p 0 r t . I ~ ~galleys have a projection while
stepped; masts are missing in others do not. As Casson notes, the
nearly all of the Mycenaean mod- In summary, although there is ram "was a weapon like the naval
els, however. It is likely that masts a tendency to interchange the vari- gun-once one fleet had it, all had
were retractable on Mycenaean ous elements of these oared war- to have it."'jx
ships as was the case on Late Geo- ships, when studied together they The spur's function must be
metric ships. Indeed, one of the form a cohesive class of craft. As sought in terms of the ships' archi-
Kynos ships is now shown to be they a p p e a r in the thirteenth tecture. The horizontal bow projec-
without a mast (Fig. 7.16). through eleventh centuries B.c., tion appears at this time on galleys.
Mycenaean ships were steered these galleys are in a stage of ex- Furthermore, there is contempora-
with a single quarter rudder (Figs. perimentation that will stabilize neous historical evidence to sug-
7.8: A, 17,19,21-24,27,30: A-B, 33: into Greek Geometric war galleys. gest that such galleys saw use by
0-P, 36: A). This may hark back to both the Mycenaeans and the Sea
third millennium longships. This is The Horizontal Peoples in acts of war and pirati-
an interesting characteristic, be- Row Projection cal attacks.
cause contemporaneous (as well as A number of the ship depictions It is likely that when attacking
earlier) Mediterranean ships used have at the bow a projecting hori- coastal settlements, these ships
two steering oars placed over the zontal or upcurving spur that con- were rowed bow-first, straight up
quarters (Figs. 2.26; 3.3; 8.10, 12). tinues the line of the keel forward on to the beach, in order to con-
By the Late Geometric period the of the stem (Figs. 7.17, 19, 22, 27, serve time and to sustain the ele-
use of a pair of rudders became 29-30, 33: P, 36: A, 4445, 48: A, ment of surprise. This form of
common, although not exclu- 49). The appearance of this projec- beaching is illustrated in the min-
sively tion raises the question of whether iature frieze at Thera and is de-
There is evidence for several this feature represents a nautical scribed by Homer (Fig. 6.7).Ii9With
types of oared ships, primarily weapon: a true waterline ram. If these considerations in mind, Kirk
penteconters and triaconters, but it is not a true ram, then what was proposes the following scenario for
ships of ten and twenty oars also its function? And what relation- the gradual invention of the ram:
probably existed. The repeated ship does it have to the rams ap-
appearance of approximately pearing on Late Geometric war When the Bronze Age ship-
twenty-five rower stations in the galleys? builder first turned from the con-
open rowers' galleys on the ship There are several reasons to struction of the merchant-ship
depictions from Kynos, Gazi, and conclude that the horizontal bow type, with its curved stem and
Tragana suggests that these ships projection does not represent an stern formed by a direct prolon-
represented penteconters. The actual ram on Late Bronze Age gation of a curving keel, to the
thirty men listed on PY An 1were ships: building of narrow, shallow-
probably the complement of a With only one possible excep- draught vessels which, to reduce
single triaconter that was being tion, discussed below, the depic- water-resistance, had to have a
sent to Pleuron. Homer mentions tions of ships' bows on which the narrow upright cutwater, he
twenty-oared ships, fifty-oared spur appears show no hint of the must have found that a simple
penteconters, and larger craft; he hull-strengthening necessary to joint between the ends of two tim-
does not include triaconters, but permit a ramming ship to be able bers set more or less at right
Herodotus mentions that they to withstand the shock of impact. angles-keel and stem-was too
were used in the early colonization The Tragana and Gazi ships, as weak to stand the shock of a head
of Thera.ljh well as the Enkomi ship graffito sea or of beaching at speed. To
Little evidence exists for Myce- and a terra-cotta ship model from protect this joint from horizontal
naean round-hulled merchant Tiryns, carry stem decorations that shocks, and to prevent damage to
ships driven solely by wind. Sail- jut out over the horizontal projec- the base of the stem, the keel and
Unless we accept that raising a battles and piracy. Thi5 equation row of oar-ports on either side of
fleet requiring six hundred rowers of "oared ships" with "warships" the hull."
was a normal occurrence at Pylos, seems so obvious that little consid- Oared ships could also be used
the rower tablets strongly suggest eration has been given to alterna- in expeditions of colonization or
that something out of the ordi- tive reasons for the massing of for mass forced migrations when
nary-something exceptional- oared ships. insurmountable forces threatened.
was taking place at Pylos just There are other, nonmilitary, In Classical times, penteconters
tefore its demise.' This impression contexts where we might expect to were used to transport entire
is further strengthened by textual find records of numerous rowers. populations and their movables
references to the collection (and For example, Hatshepsut seems to when danger threatened. Mil-
scarcity) of metal to make weap- have required about a thousand tiades escaped from Tenedos be-
ons, the possibility of human sac- rowers just for the towboats pull- fore the approaching Phoenicians
rifice, and particularly the o-kn tab- ing her obelisk barge from Aswan in five galleys (trieres) laden with
lets, which refer to "watchers" to Karnak.' Many paddlers, or his possession^.^
who are guarding the coast.' To rowers, would have been required Undoubtedly, the most infor-
these considerations must be added for flotillas taking part in pageants mative example of this phenom-
one final and obvious one: soon af- or races during cultic festivals, as enon is Herodotus's description of
ter these tablets were written, the at T11era (Figs. 6.4647). And since the Phocaean escape from Ionia
palace of Pylos was indeed de- trading was also done on merchant before the advancing Persian
stroyed. galleys, fleets of oared ships would army: "The Phocaeans launched
Assuming for the moment that have also required enlisting many their fifty-oared ships, placed in
the rower tablets do indicate a state rowers (Figs. 2.2, ll).' them their children and women
of crisis at Pylos in anticipation of Herodotus relates that the Pho- and all movable goods, besides the
a danger approaching from the caeans used penteconters in their statues from the temples and all
sea-a view that is held by some voyages of exploration and trade.' things therein dedicated save
but not all Linear B scholars-what In doing so, he emphasizes the bronze or stonework or painting,
purpose might the fleet of galleys commercial aspects of this ex- and then themselves embarked
have served? tended navigation by his reference and set sail for Chios; and the Per-
The large numbers of men men- to Tartessus, the Biblical Tarshish, sians took Phocaea, thus left un-
tioned in An 610 and An 724 have a site noted by Ezekiel for its met- inhabited."'"
been interpreted by some scholars als.h Assyrian reliefs frequently Sennacherib describes a similar
as evidence of the mustering of a depict Phoenician trading galleys waterborne flight, this time from
Pylian war fleet. Fleets of oared (Fig. 7.6).' An Iron Age Cypriot the viewpoint of the invader:
ships bring to mind thoughts of terra-cotta model depicts a deep "And Luli, king of Sidon, was
Troy, Salamis, and Actium, of and round merchant galley with a afraid to fight me (lit. feared my
battle) and fled to Iadnana (Cy- make sense if these documents was burned: t ~ o nt sitlxlc rnetnl vcs-
prus), which is in the midst of the record an act of overseas migra- scl ofvnllle was discavcred in the yal-
sea, and (there) sought a refuge. In tion, in which the rowers a r e nce.Ii Explaining this "houseclean-
that land, in terror of the weapons among those migrating to the new ing" as the work of invading pil-
of Assur, my lord, he died. Tuba'lu location. If so, such a situation lagers is possible, but I believe it
I placed on the throne of his king- would parallel that of the Pho- does not account for the fact that
dom, and imposed upon him my caeans as described by Herodotus. strata that have been destroyed
royal tribute."" This explanation also fits well and, presumably, pillaged in the
In his palace at Nineveh, Senna- into what we know of the Myce- process will normally still contain
clierib's artists recorded Luli, to- naean world at the end of the thir- some valuables. Pillagers are not
gether with his retinue, escaping teenth century R . C . In the Late infallible. And although metal
Tyre by ship from Sennacherib's Helladic IIIC period, a s their hoards-at least some of which
superior forces (Fig. 7.6).12Lulirs world fragmented, Mycenaeans must have been interred for safe-
fleet consists of warships with fled their cities, establishing nu- keeping with the intention of later
waterline rams as well as round merous colonies and settlements recovery-are a particularly com-
merchant galleys. The heads of abroad. mon feature of Mycenaean sites in
men and women passengers peek- The fact that the oarsmen in An the thirteenth century B.c., n o
ing out from above the bulwarks 610 and An 724 are differentiated hoclrds werefortnd clf Pylos.Ih
suggest that both types of ships into "new settlers" and "settlers" The vast majority of artifacts
were used in this waterborne mi- seems to presume the previous recovered consists of large
TIan-
gration. establishment of a site. Perhaps the tities of pottery, abandoned in the
The prophet Ezekiel, in the lam- documents refer to the enlarge- palace pantries in mint condition."
entation for Tyre in which he com- ment of a preexisting Pylian settle- The vases, which had been stacked
pares that city to a merchant ship ment or region, already organized neatly according to type, collapsed
rich in cargo that has sunk to the and controlled by the palace at in groupsas the fire that swept the
bottom of the sea, includes both Pylos. palace burned away the wooden
oarsmen and soldiers among the In archaeological terms, what shelves on which they were stored.
ship's crew.'The prophet may be might we expect to find at Pylos if Pottery, easily made from local
speaking here of either--or both- it had been abandoned and de- clay at any given destination, is
types of ships in Sennacherib's re- stroyed by its inhabitants instead unlikely to have been allotted
liefs, for both fit the bill, being of attacked and pillaged by in- valuable (and limited) shipboard
oared biremes that carried sol- vaders? space.
diers. It is reasonable to assume that No struggle would have taken
the migrants would have attempted place. The invaders, if and when
Which of these explanations best to take their most valuable posses- they arrived, would find the pal-
fits the evidence of the rower tab- sions with them, together with ace abandoned, empty of valu-
lets at Pylos? Do they refer to a those items and livestock most ables, and perhaps even burned to
military fleet, a cult ceremony, a needed to begin life in a new loca- the ground. Despite the massive
massive trading venture, or per- tion. Items of lesser importance excavations at Pylos and the many
haps an act of flight and migra- would have been left behind be- skeletal remains retrieved there,
tion? cause of the lack of space on board m f a sirrxle bone cart be idcrlfified ns
PY A n 610 and A n 724 may the transports. Furthermore, flee- Irrrr~~arr,leading the excavators to
record preparations for a ship- ing inhabitants, realizing there conclude that the inhabitants had
borne emigration-at least of the was no return, might themselves escaped Pylos before the burning
upper levels of Pylos's stratified destroy as much as possible of of the palace.lx
society-to escape a n expected what they had to leave behind to Thus, the archaeological evi-
overwhelming attack. Most of the prevent it from falling into enemy dence fits well with the inter-
oarsmen of PY An 610 are classi- hands. pretation of Pylos having been
fied as "settlers," "new settlers" or A study of the artifacts found on abandoned instead of destroyed
"immigrants," while one of the the acropolis indicates that all the by external enemies. The ease with
men absented in PY An 724 is de- valuable metal vessels listed in the which the later Phocaeans took to
fined as a "settler who is obligated Linear B documents had been re- their ships to leave their homeland
to row."14 Such terms could also moved from the palace before it when threatened by superior mili-
160 69 APPENDIX
tary forces suggests that they were hnae originall!/ left sorne-rohere. To do vants, belongings, and livestock,
not the first in the Aegean world so, therefore, required at least to the new location.'"
to choose this option in times of some form of bureaucratic organi- If the above working hypoth-
crisis. This interpretation of events zation and preparation. The Pylos esis for the meaning of the rower
at Pylos might aid in explaining rower tablets may reflect one- tablets-and with them, for the
the psychological and organiza- palace-oriented and therefore last days of Pylos-is correct, it
tional mechanisms at work behind highly organized-form of prepa- would have a profound effect on
the phenomenon of mass seaborne ration for a seaborne migration. our understanding of the other
Aegean migrations to the eastern Given the size of the estimated Linear B documents found there.
Mediterranean at the end of the population of the kingdom of But perhaps the most intriguing
Late Bronze Age, of which Pylos Pylos, the expedition registered on question that would arise if the
may be a microcosm. An 710 a n d An 724 probably people of Pylos abandoned and
Indeed, the "northwesterners" would have been only one (and perhaps torched their own palace
who settled in Cyprus, Syria, and perhaps the last) of many such ex- before sailing off into the horizon
Israel (whether for the short term peditions required to transport is this: where did they go?20
or for the long) during the upheav- even a small portion of the people
als of the twelfth century B.C. nzust of Pylos, together with their ser-
The Ships
of the Sea Peoples
The Late Bronze Age ended in these battles graphically on his from the following considerations:
cataclysmic upheavals caused by mortuary temple at Medinet Habu, O n his outgoing voyage from
mass migrations, at least some of near modern-day Luxor. His carved Egypt, Wenamun's ship put in at
which were seaborne, A variety of relief of the naval battle is an in- Dor, which belonged to the Sekell
ethnic groups emerged that were valuable source of information on Sikila. Had this Sea Peoples' group
collectively termed "Sea Peoples" a type of vessel used by the Sea been engaged in brigandage at
by the literate cultures upon whom Peoples. that time, it is unlikely that the
they preyed. Appearing first as sea Other iconographic sources, ship would have stopped there.
raiders in the fourteenth century mainly rough graffiti and terra- In fact, Dor of the Sekel/Sikila
B.c., these groups were the Late cotta models, supply additional appears to have been a "safe ha-
Bronze Age equivalent of the Huns information about these vessels ven." Wenamun had no trouble in
and the Vikings combined. By the and suggest that the Sea Peoples' presenting his case before Reder,
late thirteenth century, their raids vessel-type represented at Medi- the Sikila prince.' Indeed, when
had been replaced by full-scale net Habu follows an Aegean tradi- Wenamun later "liberated" thirty
land and sea migrations. The Myce- tion. Furthermore, the bird-head debejz of silver from a ship off Tyre,
naeans, the Hittites, and many of finials capping the ships' ends im- apparently belonging to the Sikila,
the Syro-Canaanite city-states fell ply a distinct connection with reli- he was clearly acting outside the
before this onslaught, never to re- gious beliefs prevalent in central 1aw.j
cover. Europe at the e n d of the Late Important information con-
Only Egypt, protected by its Bronze Age and during the Iron cerning the tactics used by the Sea
peculiar geography and located at Age. Peoples in their seagoing ships
the southern end of the advance, and the organization of their fleets
was able to repulse the invad- has been uncovered at Ugarit.
The Textual Evidence
ers-but at a terrible cost to itself. There, texts dating to the very last
Ramses 111 managed to stop the From their first appearance the Sea days of Ugarit were t o ~ ~ nThese
d.
approaching Sea Peoples in two Peoples, like the Ahhiyawa, were documents include maritime as-
major battles: one on land, the described as raiders or mercenar- pects of the deteriorating political
other on water. He claims to have i e ~In. ~this they followed an age- situation caused by the advance of
later resettled them as mercenaries old Aegean tradition.' the Sea people^.^ Two of the tab-
on Egypt's borders. More likely, After their settlement on the lets are of particular interest.
after being repulsed by Egypt, southern coast of Palestine in the One document is a copy of a
they took advantage of her weak- twelfth century, the Sea Peoples dispatch sent by the king of Ugarit
ened position to resettle areas that appear to have become traders. to the king of Alashia. In it, the
they themselves had previously Nowhere is there absolute proof Alashian ruler is informed that cit-
ravaged.' Ramses commemorated for this view, but it may be inferred ies belonging to Ugarit have been
destroyed by a flotilla of seven fore the local military can engage coasts of Europe profitably for
enemy ships, presumably belong- them in a pitched battle. two centuries. Their main assets
ing to a marauding group of Sea Finally, ships used in these were the ships and the "com-
Peoples.' The king of Ugarit in- raids must have been able to move mando" tactics these enabled
cludes a request to update him, on when necessary under their own them to use. Appearing "out of
the enemy's naval movement. This propulsion: that means they must the blue," the shallo\v-draft ves-
appeal was acted upon: a dispatch, have been swift galleys. As the sels would land tht'~r crews on
sent by the chief prefect of Alashia method of attack was based on hit- any suitable beach to carry out a
to the king of Ugarit, contains in- and-run tactics, these ships could quick raid and be away before
formation of enemy movement^.^ not depend for locomotion solely any proper defence could be or-
In another text Ibnadugu, a man on the vagaries of the wind. ganized."
of Ugarit, was required to appear Questions remain. Where does
before the Hittite king to report on this event fit into the "microu-his- Change only the names, and
the Sikila (Sikala) from whom he tory of Ugarit's last days as seen this same text accurately describes
had escaped.'These Sikila are ap- through the kiln texts? What rela- what we know of the Sea Peoples
parently the same group of Sea tionship, if any, did the Sikila who at the close of the Late Bronze Age
Peoples referred to in Egyptian captured IbnaduGu have to the i n the eastern Mediterranean.
texts as the Tjeker okrzu), as in the seven enemy ships that terrorized There can be no doubt that their
Tale of Wenamun, in which they Ugarit's coastal cities in RS 20.238? swift-oared ships were a major
inhabit the coastal site of Dor.lo How did IbnaduGu escape from asset in the comrnai~do-styletac-
The Hittite king wishes to inter- the Sikila? In the general picture tics used by the Sea Peoples, as
view IbnaduSu concerning the for- that emerges from the encounters were the ships of the Vikings.
eign invaders who "live on ships." of the Sea Peoples with the major, Probably, like the later Vikings,
This is certainly a fitting descrip- literate Late Bronze Age cultures, the Sea Peoples used a variety of
tion for an ethnic group belonging there is much that is reminiscent of ships for different purposes.
to the "Sea Peoples." Also of inter- the emergence and expansion of The warlike, almost barbarian
est is the abduction of an Ugaritian the Vikings in the ninth to twelfth character of the Sea Peoples as
by the invaders, an event reminis- centuries A.D. The mechaiucs of the they appear in the textual evidence
cent of the taking of prisoners that two expansions have similarities. m a y be somewhat misleading.
appears in other contemporane- For example, A. E. Christensen N. K. Sandars notes that "there is
ous texts." notes: a sense in which literacy actually
These texts allow several rel- distorts the archaeological record,
evant conclusions: The background of Scandina- for while it illuminates the centers
The number of enemy ships in vian expansion in the Viking Age of civilization, it makes the dark-
any given group is relatively small is complex and not fully ex- ness surrounding even darker."li
(seven and twenty), particularly plained. Pressure of population The material culture of the groups
when compared to the 150 ships at home was considerable, and it of Sea Peoples that settled on the
that Ugarit is requested to provide is widely accepted that it was present-day Mediterranean coast
in another text.I2 chiefly 011 this account that the of Israel a t the end of the Late
On occasion, Syro-Canaanite Vikings set out on their voyages. Bronze Age reveals a very high
ships were pressed into service in A fact that is often overlooked is cultural level that is not apparent
the Sea Peoples' naval comple- that a large percentage of the Vi- from the written record.lh This is
ment. This suggests that the fleets kings were peaceful settlers in hardly surprising, considering the
of the Sea Peoples were more poly- search of land. The reason for the records were written by inhabit-
glot than one would assume from tactical superiority of those who ants victimized by the Sea Peoples.
the Medinet Habu relief. preferred plunder to tillage, Again, this is akin to our under-
The tactics used by the Sea however, is still not clear. h4ost standing of the Vikings, who u11-
Peoples take the form of piratical of the bands were small and often ti1 recently were considered rough
coastal raids by small flotillas of loosely organized. When they met barbarians-mainly on the basis of
ships.I3 They arrive at a seaside regular Frankish or Anglo-Saxon the literary records of the people
settlement, pillage it, and set it to troops in battle they frequently upon whom they preyed. Now,
the torch, disappearing without a lost the contest. Nevertheless, the however, other less warlike as-
trace usually (but not always) be- Vikings managed to harass the pects of their culture are being re-
164 @ S E A G O I N G S H I P S 6: S E A h d A N S H I P
vealed, mainly through the ar-
chaeological record.
The Archaeological
Evidence
The introduction, cledrly by sea, of
a foreign c u l t u r e w i t h s t r o n g
Aegean affinities in Cyprus, along
the Israeli coastal plain, as well as
at Hama in Syria indicates a major
use of ships within the mechanism
of this mass migration."
The Iconographic
Evidence
Mcdinct Habu:
Thc S h i p of the Sea Peoples
The most important iconographic Fixurc 8.3. Ship AT. 7 (photo by R. Rrmdle)
evidence for the ships used by the
Sea Peoples is Ramses 111's relief This scene is instructive concern- ambush that took place in a closed
depicting the naval battle in which ing ship-based warfare before the b o d y of water: "The countries
h e defeated a coalition of Sea introduction of the ram as a nauti- which came from their isles in the
Peoples including the Pelesliet, cal w e a p o n . ' V h e Sea Peoples' midst of the sea, they advanced to
Sikila, Denyen, and Sheklesh in his ships are stationary in the water: Egypt, their hearts relying upon
eighth regnal year (ca. 1176 R.L.). their oars are stowed and their sails their arms. The net was made ready
The relief appears on the outer furled. Apparently the invaders for them, to ensnare them. Entering
wall of his mortuary temple at were caught at anchor. Indeed, the stealthily into the harbor-mouth,
Medinet tlabu (Fig. 8.1). accompanying text alludes to an they fell into it. Caught in their
166 &
"' SEAGOING SHIPS & SEAMANSHIP
It is to be expected that the art-
ists stereotyped the Sea Peoples'
ships into only one form, in keep-
ing with their generalizing por-
trayal of the naval battle (Figs. 8.3-
8, 10-12, 14). We need not assume
that this was the only kind of ship
in their service.
T h e s a m e h o l d s t r u e of the
Egyptian ships. An inscription on
the Second Pylon at Medinet Habu
indicates that on the Egyptian side,
at least three classes of ships took
part in the battle.22Only one Egyp-
tian ship type, depicted four times,
appears in the relief, however. Evi-
dently, the relief contains five
representations of the s~zltzt.Sea
place, they were dispatched and various phases of the battle (Fig. Peoples' ship instead of depictions
their bodies stripped."I9 8.2)."The beginning of the battle is of five diffcreizf ships.
H. H. Nelson has noted that the portrayed by Egyptian ship E. 1 Nelson emphasizes the vivid
scene is organized around three and Sea Peoples' ship N. 1. The n a t u r e a n d uniqueness of the
conceptual elements: spatial, ideo- middle phase is represented by Medinet Habu reliefs, which de-
logical, and temporal." It gives a ships E. 2 and N. 2, while E. 3 and part to a degree from conventional
feeling of a vigorous water battle, N. 3 signify the end of the battle. A Egyptian art:
almost as if it is a snapshot taken final time element is indicated by The artist has indicated not
during the battle. Within the frame- ship E. 4, which is loaded with merely the accessory elements of
work of this scene, however, the shackled prisoners and is heading dress and weapons incident to
artists have skillfully intertwined for the victory celebration. this or that foreign nation, but the
Frxlrw 8.8.Ship A'. 2 (rlrtailfiortr Nrlsori cl nl. 19.31):pl. 3 9 [ H . H . Nelsorr e t a]., Medinet Ilahu 1: Earlier llistorical Records of Ramses 111,
Ilrrio~~rsity
of C l ~ i c n pltrlrodrrctiorr
, 0 1930 by thc Ll~iirrrrsilyof C l i i c i ~ pill1
, r i x l ~ l sr e s ~ w e r lPrrbli.shcri
. ]uric, 19301)
T h i s i s o n e w a y t o explain w h y
s o m e elements on the Sea Peoples'
F~,yriw8 . 1 4 . Ship N . 3 (iielntl.frorn N d s o i ~c t nl. 1930: pl. 39 [ H . H . A'rlmir pt nl., Medinct I Iabu I: Earlicr I Iistorical Records of Ramses 111,
Llrriiwsit!y qf Clricngo. lrrtrc~rlirctiotr8 19.30 by the Lli~iilersityctf C h i c n p , nll rights r(wrzred. Piiblisl~cd/rrtw, 19301)
ships are not represented consis- originally they did have tillers, pare this to the two-handed man-
tently. Presumably, the same detail which were represented in paint ner in which the helmsmen on the
may have been applied in paint only and have long since vanished. Egyptian craft are maneuvering
in some cases a n d carved (and This is evident from the manner in their steering oars. All four hold
painted) in others. which the helmsman of ship N. 4 the tiller with their left hand; two
Sadly, many details of the ships grasps the loom of his quarter rud- also hold the loom with their right
have been lost, along with the der in his right hand while his left hand.
paint. The relief that remains is hand is clenched around a now The Sea Peoples' craft have gen-
only the skeleton of the original nonexistent tiller (Fig. 8.9). Com- tly curving hulls ending in nearly
work. Furthermore, plaster was
used extensively to cover up de-
fects in the masonry and to make
corrections (Fig. 3.36: B-D).2h In
some cases, only the original draft
of the design is left. The final draft
had been carved into plaster that
has long since disappeared.
There are numerous "disap-
pearing" elements. Note, for ex-
ample, that on ship N. 2 the brails
appear on the left side of the mast
only and that the bird head at the
stern of ship N. 5 is eyeless while
the head capping the stem has a
carved eye (Figs. 8.8, 12).27
The quarter rudders on the in-
vaders' ships n o w lack tillers; Figiirr 8.1.5. Tlre hurhontnl lirzcs orr ship N. 3 (dreutr b y tlrc uirfhor)
S H I P S O F T H E S E A PEOJ'LES @ 171
perpendicular posts capped with Egyptian s h i p s that represent, A).3"His left leg disappears behind
bird-head devices facing outboard. from top to bottom, the border of the hull in area BC, but his foot, B,
Raised castles are situated at both a light bulwark protecting the row- reappears in area XB. Similarly,
bow and stern. The actual struc- ers, the caprail, and ship's bottom body C is "folded over" area AX;
ture of these ships may be derived (Figs. 2.35-42).2Q closer study, its abdomen is visible in area XB
from a careful study of the hori- however, indicates that this is not while the torso emerges below line
zontal parallel lines that appear on the case. The following observa- A. The leg of another body, D, dis-
the ships and the manner in which tions clarify this matter: appears behind area AX and reap-
the live warriors and dead bodies Warriors standing in the center pears in area XB, passing outside
are positioned relative to them. of the ship are covered by line A the ship's hull over lines B and C .
Care must he taken when inter- a t varying heights from shin to These three independent clues
preting this evidence, however. thigh level; dead bodies bent over indicate that area XB must repre-
The hulls of four of tlie Sea line A cross lines B and C (Figs. 8.8: sent an open space. The only ex-
Peoples' ships-N. 1, N. 2, N.4, C, 10: A, 11: A, 12: E [note also 12: planation for this space is that it
and N . 5-are defined by three C, F]). These figures reveal that the served as a11 open rowers' gallery
horizontal lines that we shall term, areas between lines A, B, and C all through which oars were worked,
from top to bottom, A, B, and C represent the ship's sheer view. located between the caprail and
(Fig. 8.13). At first glance, these They d o not denote the deck area the light bulwark. If line X is added
seem to correspond to the three in plan view. to ships N. 2 and N. 4, the position-
horizontal parallel lines on the Line B appears as a baseline ing of the figures in relation to
with bodies appearing directly them becomes immediately clear.
above it. I11 ship N. 2, the warrior Originally, line X may have been
being skewered at the bow is rest- painted on ships N. 1, 2, 4, and 5,
ing oil line B (Fig. 8.8: A). This is as perhaps were the stanchions
not accidental since his left foot is that would have been required to
placed on the same line. To the support the light bulwark.
right of A, his companion, B, is fall- These ships find their closest
ing headfirst. His body crosses line contemporaneous parallels in the
A, but his left arm seems to disap- Late IIelladic galleys discussed in
pear behind line B. Similarly, in the previous chapter. In particular,
ship N. 4 the helmsman and a dead they are virtually identical in
warrior appear directly above line nearly all s u r v i v i n g details to
B (Fig. 8.11: C-D). The dead man Kynos A (Fig. 7.8: A).
is being held by his companion, R, Artists' errors appear on the
w h o is standing above him and representations of Sea Peoples'
behind line A. This indicates that, ships at Medinet Habu. Note that
in addition to the raised decks in the mast mistakenly crosses area
the castles, the craft must have AB in ship N. 2 and area AX in ship
been at least partially decked.?' N. 3 (Figs. 8.8, 14), althougl~it is
Ship N. 3 differs from the other depicted correctly in ships N. I, N.
Sea Peoples' ships by having an 4, and N. 5.
additional horizontal line between Although the hand of a master
lines A and B (Fig. 8.14). We shall artist appears to have guided the
term this line X (Fig. 8.15).The key wall relief, the work was evidently
to understanding the three hori- carried out by artists of varying
zontal areas (AX, XB, and BC) ~ a p a b i l i t i e s .Some
~' of the artists
formed by these four lines is to made errors in depicting the ships'
studv tlie manner in which the construction. Note, for example,
the figure in ship E. 1 bending over
to grasp a sword from the floating
Mote llrr ziiortrr's I L . , ~ visible brtzocol tlrr them. body of an enemy warrior (Fig.
~ ~ / n rnrrd
l h 1 1 1 hrrll
~ (Fifth D p n s f ! y ) (from The ship has capsized. One war- 2.36: A: A). Unlike the two other
5Iri1rdorf/197.3: Tl!f. 120) rior lies on keel line C (Fig. 8.14: soldiers plausibly portrayed lean-
ing over the screen, the u p p e r
body of the former is placed in a n
impossible manner, leaning over
the line that represents the sheer-
line and the screen. To best under-
stand correctly lvhat the Egyptian
artist(s) had in mind w h e n por-
traying a ship, therefore, it is im-
portant to have several indepen-
dent clues corroborating the same
details. Happily, such is the case in
N.3. The bodies disappear behind
the screen and then reappear on
the other side in proper perspec-
tive. The method used here by the
artist to display the three bodies
woven a r o u n d elements of the
vessel's structure on ship N. 3 is
not unique in Egyptian art, al-
though it is exceedingly rare.
Another example of a h u m a n
figure disappearing behind an ob-
ject and then reappearing, as d o
the bodies in ship N. 3, exists in the
Fifth Dynasty mastaba of Ti a t
Saqqara, where a plank is being
Figilr~,8.18. (below) ( A )Tmtatir:r isometric Figure 8.17. The deck structirre qfGreek Geornetricgnlleys: ( A ) - f i g u r e sstnnd o n the rozuers'
recorr.itrirctior~t f n Sen Peoples' ship b o ~ c h e si n nrr nren thnt is rrut covered b y n dtack; ( B ) the legs ofnfigiirp sitting nt deck leriel npprnr
depictir~gt h rrrnirl
~ ~ rlcmerits ?[the ship's through n "7uit1doru" o J t h opeti ~ r o z u m ' g n l l e r y ( A nfter Morrisoir aird IVilliarrrs 1968: pl. l e
nrchitecti,rc ns irldicntcd b y the bodies of the [Gcorn. 21 nrrd Cnssor~1 9 9 5 A : f i g . 68; B nfter iMorriwrl rind Willianrs 1968: pl. 7 b [Geotrr. 381)
d ~ n dzoarriors ( B ) Terrtntizie sheer. z~it,ztio f n
i p thi' three bodies of
Sen P ~ ~ o p l e s ' s h zt!ith
uiarricirs irr ship N 3 orfdi~dto k t t e r illristrotc
constrrrctiorrol dt'tnils (drnzoirrgs by F. M.
Hacker. Courtesy q f t h lrrstitirte ofiVnr1ficnI
S H I P S OF T H E S E A P E O P L E S SS 173
fitted to a hull in a scene of ship This feature connects the Sea Note that the bodies are depicted
construction (Figs. 8.16; 10.16- Peoples' vessels to the Aegean tra- to a scale larger than that of the
17).j2One worker is supporting the dition of galleys as it appears on ship.
hull with a short rope. Next to him Mycenaean and Greek Geometric The Sea Peoples, i t appears,
another m a n kneels behind the warships. Planking m u s t have brought with them to the eastern
plank and hammers i t down with been nlissing along the sides of the Mediterranean tlie concept of the
a small cylindrical weight. The Kynos A ship to allow the rowers' oared warship with an open row-
man's right leg disappears behind h e a d s to disappear behind the ers' galIery supported by vertical
the plank, but his foot reappears in screen (Figs. 7.8: A, 9); L. Casson stanchions. From the twelfth cen-
the space between the plank and notes that in some fighting scenes, tury R.C, onward, the development
the hull. The foot could be mis- warriors are shown standing 011 of warships in the Aegean and
taken for a tenon were it not for its the rowers' benches at a point that along the Phoenician coast fol-
red skin color that is still visible."' was not covered by the raised deck lowed separate lines of develop-
The men depicted in the ships and that the part left undecked ment from a common ancestor,
suggest that the deck on the Sea must have been along the sides resulting ultimately in the Greek
Peoples' ships ran the full length where the rowers sat (Fig. 8.17).'-' d i ~ r e sand the Phoenician bireme.
of the hull, from the forecastle to Figure 8.18: A is a tentative isomet- This explains the appearance of
the sterncastle. The intertwining of ric reconstruction of a Sea Peoples' bird-head devices on later Phoe-
bodies in the manner shown in ship illustrating the basic elements nician warships (Fig. 8.53).
ship N. 3, however, would be im- discussed above. Figure 8.18: l3 is Perhaps the prototype of the Sea
possible if the deck had extended a tentative sheer view of a Sea l'eoples' ships depicted at Medinet
the entire width of tlie ship. This Peoples' ship with the three war- Mabu was a penteconter. While in
means that planking must have riors' bodies added to better illus- the water battle relief we see their
been left out along the sides. trate the constructional details. shipssolely in their fighting mode;
these same ships may also have
been used at times to transport the
famiIies of combatants, as well as
their movables, during the water-
borne migrations. Indeed, this may
explain w h y , as w e have seen
above, the Hittite king defines one
group of Sea Peoples, the Sikila, as
those "who live on ships."
The Sea Peoples' ships carry
two (Figs. 8.10, 12), one (Figs. 8.8,
ll), or no (Fig. 8.14) quarter rud-
ders. Of the ships with two quarter
rudders, N. 1 has both placed on its
nationality (and even this assump- bronzes" found in the Laganda t h e i n v a d e r s ' s h i p s (Fig. 8.23).
tion is open to argument), by de- tomb at Cos certainly suggest the Bird-head finials in a myriad of
fining the crew, we can identify the presence of northerner^.^' Similar forms served as symbolic and pro-
ship. The Mycenaean/Cycladic helmets with multiple protrusions phylactic devices o n Mediterra-
warriors connected with the ships (feathers?) are worn by warriors nean ships, beginning no later than
depicted on the Late Helladic IIIB on the Kynos ships (Figs. 7.8: B, 15, the second millennium.
krater from Enkomi suggest that lh)." Are the crews and the ships In later times bird-head devices
these craft a r e Aegean (Myce- depicted at Cos a n d Kynos Sea were the hallmark of Roman cargo
naean) (Fig. 7.28). The vessels of Peoples' galleys? ships. These were depicted as a
the northern invaders s h o w n at long-necked bird-head stern mech-
Medinet Habu belong, of course, Bird-head Devices anism, usually facing aft (Figs.
to the Sea Peoples. orz Meditevrarzean Ships 8.24-25: D). On occasion, however,
Sandars has identified as feather One of the most striking elements this stern device could face for-
helmets the headgear of rowers of t h e five d e p i c t i o n s of a Sea ward (Fig. 8.25: G). Together with
a n d other figures portrayed o n Peoples' craft at Medinet Habu is these naturalistic representations,
sherds from Cos (Figs. 7.26; 8.22).j0 the water bird-head devices cap- a n abstract form of a horizontal
T h e slightly e a r l i e r " n o r t h e r n ping the stem- and sternposts of stern bird-head device facing for-
S H I P S OF T H E S E A P E O P L E S @' 183
has disappeared, and the head has
become stylized. The final, abstract
phase appears on ship C, where the
sternpost has become little more
than a complex curve. Even if this
progression is the result of nothing
more than the abstraction of the
bird head by the artist(s) who cre-
ated these three ships, the bird-
head devices on these vessels show
a clear and obvious connection.
This cyclic development of the
bird-head ornaments was repeated
constantly on ships in antiquity,
judging from the iconographic evi-
dence. Natural depictions gave
way to stylized representations.
These evolved into totally abstract
forms that are little more than a
complex c~rve.~"he forms are re-
peatedly followed by a "rejuvenat-
ing" trend to return to the natural
rendering of an actual bird's head.
If only the final, abstract phase
of this constantly evolving bird-
head form is studied outside of the
Figfir(,8.42. Ship dt,oirtjs in the forrrr of birds: ( A )bird-stem ornn~ncntor7 a ship kratcrfrotn context of the entire cycle, the
Etrkorni (Late Hslladic IIIR); (8)ship's bird-stet11ornnnrent on n pyxisfrom Tragnna (Lotc curved beak of these Mediterra-
Hcllndic IIIC); ( C )bird ort1atnetrt or? the s t r ~ nof 11 ship dcpictcd on n Geometric Attic skyphos
nean vessels may be-and has
(cir. 73.5-710 N.c.);( D ) bird orr1ntnort portrayed twice on thc strrnpost of the snrnc ship shown
on n Geornctric Attic krntrr. (ca. 7.35-770 H.c.) ( A after Sjoqoist 1940:fig. 20: 3; I3 nffer Korris
been-misinterpreted as repre-
1989: 200; C-D nffer Cusson 7995A: 30, 6 5 - 6 6 ) senting an animal's horn or other
symbolic figure."' Each phase of
f - this cycle blends into the next, and
at times we find two different
stages of development on the same
ship representation. These bird-
head devices may point inboard,
outboard, up, or down. On the
same ship they can appear at both
extremities, as on the Sea Peoples'
ships, or at only one end. The per-
mutations are virtually unlimited.
The evidence for bird-head de-
vices decorating the stem- and
sternposts of Mediterranean craft
suggests that they originated in the
Aegean. The earliest known ex-
ample of a bird-head ornament is
of Middle Helladic date (Fig. 5.25).
Ornaments represeiiting entire
Figure 8.43. Birds on !he stem- and s t e r ~ ~ p o sot sf a n Archaic xalley. hrote how the shape ofthe birds also appear on the stems of
sietn device inrilales the bird's hcnd and neck (ca. 700450 E L . ) (aflrr Morrison a d Williams ships, beginning in the thirteenth
1968: pl. 8: d ) century and continuing down into
11
'0 @ S E A G O I N G SHII'S & S E A M A N S H I P
F;x~rrcl8.,56. ( r i g h t ) ( A ) Bird-/ic7mf >tcJrrr
dcwr17tiorrs 011 G r d wflrdrips (rfl. ,53045'0
H i . ) ; ( H ) stcPrriqfilir Arclrnrc- xrrlicy oti nii
icwr!y p i f l q ~ i c ~ f r o ~the
t i Terirpie of A r t e r ~ i k
O r t l r i n irr Spnrtn (m. 6 3 - 6 0 0 E.L.);( C - D )
sterrr dotorntioir orr ilrrlrnir A t t i c b i i l r l i j i ~ i t r e
( C ) t d ~ i t ckri7tcr
, m d ( D ) /i!jdrin ( r 600- ~
550 ! i . i . ) ( A i$er Cnssorr 1 9 9 , i A : f i i . 90; H-
S H I P S OF T H E S E A I'FOI'LES @ I91
Figure 8.58. Sixth-century H.C. sterr? bird-head dcz~icrson Archaic galleys. h'ote that in C the dmice has dfi~cloycdirrto mr inzuard-curr~ingoollrtc
(A-R sa. 570 KC.; C-D cu. 520480 e s . ; E ca. 5.30480 HL.; F cu. 500-550 13.c.)( A to E nffer Morris011 arld Williarns 1968: yls. 78: a, b; 21: b, d;
16: c; F Fffrr Cnssort 7995A:fix. 8 3 )
Figrrre 8.60. Row d t w i c ~of~ n Soliiira cniror
s l r n p f like an nbsfrnctfrigate bird n r d otht-r
nrotifs (Solornotr lslnnds) (nftcr Hnddon
1937: 8 8 f i ~ 59:. bj
Figure, 8.61. Bird, or bird-lirnd, dcorces ioitli rrinny projjrctions, lackirrg ntly sfructural purpose,
t ~ ~ f ~ r r d i~rirugf f r o n !/re
r upper or lourcr sui:fncc o f the b e d ( A ) Rird-/rend o n ship pitrted o n !/re
Gazi lnriza.~( L n f eiMir~oarzIllB); ( 6 ) l r c d i!f bird dcziice oil the bow of n urnrslrip depicted 011 n
pyxisfioin Trngnrra (Lotc Hcllmfic [[LC);( C - D ) bird-head stem devices on ship rlcpictiotrsfioin
Kyrros ( L n f eH d l n d i c 111C); ( E ) stern ofslrrpfiorn Kynos. T h e stem's upper part /ins been broken
off, b u t !he beginning ($17 crrrne nrrd flrr prof~rberarzcrson the stem's inbonrd side rer~enlflrnf i f
71!m oripirraUy capped by o bird heod ( L a f c Hellndic 111C) ( A nfter plloto by tire nrrthor; R nffcr
Figure 6.65. Stern devices on modern Greek boats at Ayia Galini, Crete (photos taken in 1980 by the author)
century on Indian craft, as wit- Finally, what are we to make of Corm resembling roughly the head
nessed by Hornell's drawing of the this curious ship, sighted and de- and neck of a bird preparing to
decorated bow of a Ganges River scribed by W. J. Childes in this cen- strike. Upon the mast, hanging
cargo boat at Benares (Fig. 8.66). tury? from a horizontal yard, was set a
The same design in a degenerated single broad square-sail, and un-
form is found on the bow of a knlla A sight of this kind I watched der the arching foot could be seen
dhorzi recorded at Point Calimere, one summer evening on the coast the black heads of rowers, five or
South India (Fig. 8.67). The rela- of the Black Sea, when a long boat, six men on either side, and a bare-
tionship, if any, of these modern whose bow was shaped like a legged steersman placed high
decorative motifs to the bird-head swan's breast, put off from the above them in the stermS5
devices of antiquity remains to be shore. Her stern projected above
determined. the hull and was curved into a
Shelley Wachsmann makes the in- independently from h-ophcivrl (A), Since a crow's beak is not mark-
teresting suggestion that Homer's this would support Wachsmann's edly curved, Indo-European words
phrase "beaked (?)" ships d e - idea that the ships' curved devices for "crow" probably reflect the ono-
scribes the abstract bird-head de- themselves originated as birds' matopoeic root kor. The English
vices he himself has detected at the beaks. "crowbar" preserves the sense of
stems and sterns of ships of the However, ~ o p h v q(A) and (B) "bent" and has no connection with
Bronze Age, the Geometric, and must be dissociated etymologi- the bird.
other periods. This depends on the cally. Both Latin and Greek show Where does Homer's adjective
meaning of the adjective h-opwvig two distinct roots, korlcor, one (A) ~opwvig,used of ships, fit in? If de-
used of ships in formulae such as meaning "crow" and another (B) rived from the noun ~op(Jvq(B), it
m p a vlluoi xopwvior(v). A stan- "curved." Words tor "horn" often should mean curved-but how?
dard etymology derives this adjec- exhibit a root korlcor, as well.HI The objects called ~opCjvr1( R ) al-
tive from the nou n xopcrjvrl, a sea- classify related Greek and Latin ways represent curved extremi-
bird, perhaps a shearwater, with words as in Table 1. ties, added onto something that
reference to its curved beak.'
Ilomer applies the adjective
mpcuvic only to ships.' The noun
xopuivq, from which it probably de-
rives, has two distinct meanings:
either (A) a seabird or a crow;' or
TABLE 1
(B) a curved extremity of various
types. Both senses occur in Homer.
A R C
Of type B, tIomer has a d o o r - .- -. -
-
handle and the golden tip of a
Other, later usages of this "crow" "curved" "l~orn"
type include the tip ot a plow-pole,
any tip, a crown, or a culmination
of a festival."ratus once uses
K-ophvrlto describe a ship's stern.'
The Greek lexicon considers the
latter-named ( t y p e R) uses of
~-op(hvll
as secondary, derived from
the similarity of each of these ob-
jects to a bird's curved beak.' If
Homer's h-opwvig likewise derives
they cap or " ~ r o w n . " 'Thus,~ the still evoke ~ o p w ' v q(A), a "sea- sense of "bent." In both Greek and
adjective ~ o p w v i gimplies some- bird."19 But etymologically, its Latin, other words for door han-
thing more than the natural pro- closest connection is with ~ o p u i v q dles, ~ o p a 5and cornix, are the
longation of a ship's stem- and (B), which we must consider same as those for "raven."25This
sternposts. The epithet probably further. After Homer, we find shows some semantic overlapping
refers to curved elements crown- ~ o p w v i used
g as a noun to indicate between the two roots I have dif-
ing the ships' stems and sterns. various curved e ~ t r e m i t i e s . ~ ~ ferentiated as (A) "crow" and (B)
That is, besides meaning "curved," The Greek and Latin words "curved," as in the English "crow-
it seems to embody a sense of a listed above under "curved" have bar." This would provide indirect
crowning element such as a head sometimes been taken to mean support for Wachsmann's connec-
or horn, which have virtually hom- "bent" but must originally have tion of Homer's ~ o p w v i g with-
onymous Indo-European root^.'^ meant "circular." It is easier to de- as commonly assumed-~opuivq
Homer also calls ships "straight- rive a sense of "curved" or "bent" (A), or "seabird," "crow."
horned"15 and uses ~ o p v p p a a, from "rounded" or "circular" than The basic meaning of ~ o p w v i g
word derived from "horn," for the vice ~ e r s a . The
~ ' meaning "bent" may be "with curved or rounded
"projecting terminal elements at has resulted from an improper extremities," so it probably refers
the stem and/or stern of a ship."16 derivation of ~ o p u i v q(B) from a to curved ornamental devices such
As noted, Theocritus uses ~ o p w v i g supposedly curved beak implied as those Wachsmann has identi-
for (probably) "horned."17Homer's in ~opuivq(A). Its Latin cognate, co- fied.26The exact derivation of the
word, too, might imply "horned." rona, or "crown," always desig- word itself from ~ o p h v q(a bird)
The lexicographer Hesychius nates a circular crowning orna- is, as indicated, difficult or am-
once equates ~ ~ p a(apparentlyig a ment,22 and the Greek noun biguous with respect to Indo-Eu-
"horned" bird) with ~ o p w ' v q ~ o p w v i gwhen
, first attested, means ropean etymology. The word
( " c r ~ w " ) .If' ~there is no strict ety- "garland" or "wreath."23 Later ~ o p w ' v q(A), "shearwater" or
mological connection between Greek uses, as noted above, main- "crow," is homonymous with
"horn" and "crow" (columns C tain the sense of "crowning" but ~ o p h v q(B), "a rounded or curved
and A of Table I), the semantic without requiring a circle. projecting element." The Greeks,
connection he draws shows that Homer's uses of ~ o p u i v q(B), a like modern readers, sometimes
the two may be conflated, or con- bow-tip and a door handle, are conflated words with similar
fused, in ordinary usage. Simi- best seen as secondary usages roots, either by imagining a com-
larly, our example of ~ o p w v i may g from an original meaning of "a mon etymology or by semantically
exhibit some overlapping between round crowning element," instead assimilating words of similar
types A a n d B ("crow" a n d of from ~ o p u i v q(A), "crow." The roots. Even when we distinguish
"curved") in the above table, be- ~ o p u i v qby which (in Homer) a the etymologies (as above) they
sides (as already discussed) B and door is pulled closed,24which has sometimes blur, and we cannot
C ("curved" and "horn"). been imperfectly understood, may always tell what resonances a
Thus, there is some room for indeed be a circular ring. But word held for Greek ears or for a
ambiguity. Homer loved word- equally, it may already reflect the great poet such as Homer.27
play, and poetically ~ o p w v i gmay
200 69 APPENDIX
APPENDIX:
Additional Evidence
In recent years, additional depic- Geometric period ships (Figs. 7.17, legs is another curving line, which
tions of ships of Aegean Bronze 28: A; 8.4243). The latter possibil- may perhaps represent either the
Age tradition have come to the at- ity seems unlikely, however, judg- curving profile of a shield (com-
tention of scholars. These are valu- ing from its size relative to the pre- pare Figs. 7.8: A, 15) or the arm of
able contributions to our corpus of served legs of a m a n standing a bow (compare Fig. 7.16)."
ship representations. upon it. Warriors are often depicted on
The post is decorated with single Aegean ships standing in the fore
Ashkelon, Israel zigzag lines along its upper and and sterncastles adjacent to the
lower edges. Similar ornamenta- posts. Such is the case at Medinet
A sherd uncovered at Ashkelon tion appears on the vertical bow of Habu on ships N.l-2,4 and 5 (Figs.
bears a ship's post ending in a the Tragana ship (wavy and zig-
bird-head device (Fig. 8A.1).' Al- zag lines are also shown rising sky-
though found in a fill, the sherd's ward from this ship's steering oar),
fabric is typical of Late Helladic on a terra-cotta ship model from
IIIC l b ware found at Ashkelon Tiryns, on three Cypriot ship askoi,
and is believed to have been made as well as on a fourth askos from
at the site. The painting on the the Athenian Acropolis, and on the
sherd is a fragment of a larger bird-head device from Maroni
scene that originally must have (Figs. 7.17, 45,48: A-B, 49; 8.48).
contained at least one ship. T h e muscular legs of a m a n
The post-it is not possible to standing on the post have been
determine whether this is a stem preserved u p to thigh level. The
or sternpost, or whether it faces figure's legs are slightly bent at the
inboard or outboard--essentially knees and, assuming a frontal
is horizontal at its extremity. The view, the heel of his left foot is
bird-head device c a p p i n g t h e planted forward, on top of the
sternpost is formed by a simple bird-head device, while his right
circle, with the eye represented by foot is placed behind it, on the
a central dot. The beak continues post. The left foot has a line rising
the curving lower line of the post. vertically from it near the toe. If
Theoretically at least, this could the artist's intention was to depict F i ~ i i r c8 A . l . Late H~llmiiclllC I b sl~rrd
frorrl Ashkc.lcrn d c p i c t i r ~n~bird-ltend post
also represent the head and neck footwear curving a t the toe-
orrtnrnent with the l o u w portiotrs o f thr legs
of a device in the shape of a bird, known from the Aegean as well as ctf a man who is standbtx on it ( d r a w i r t ~by
as on the ship depictions from Asia Minor-that attempt was un- P. Sibella. Courtesy o f L . E. Stnxer nrtd t h ~
Tragana and Enkomi as well as on s u ~ c e s s f u lBehind
.~ the figure's Lcon L c q Expedition to Askkclorr)
8.34, 6-8, 10-12). Warriors are
situated at the bow on all three of
the ships from Kynos described
above (Figs. 7.8: A, 15-16). Addi-
tionally, men facing outboard at
the bow and the stern appear on a
ship from Phaistos (Fig. 7.27). The
closest parallels for figures actu-
ally standing on post ornaments
come from a depiction of an Attic
Geometric galley dating to the
middle eighth century B.C. and a
seventh-century B.C. Beotian
bronze fibula found in Crete.4
The appearance of a ship with a
bird-head device on a Late Hell-
adic IIIC l b sherd from Ashkelon
is dramatic evidence that the ships
used in the waterborne invasion of
Egypt continued to be used by the
Sea Peoples /Philistines after their
settlement along the Canaanite
coast.5
Nahal ha-Me'arot,
Carmel Coast, Israel
In 1967 E. Wreschner and M. W.
Prausnitz discovered a number of
rock graffiti at Nahal ha-Me'arot,
next to the Carmel cave^.^ Among
these, they noted a graffito of a
ship near the top of the valley's
northern bluff.7 More recently,
during a regional survey carried
out to complement her excava-
tions at Tel Nami, M. Artzy and
her team located numerous other
boat representations there, and an-
other near the entrance to Nahal
Oren, a large valley situated five
kilometers north of Nahal ha-
Me'arot.=
Preservation varies among the
graffiti. Some are badly eroded,
while others are clearly visible. .
.
.
.
Artzy defines three types of ves- C
sels. Based on what appear to be
bird-head devices on their stems
Figure 8A.2. Ship graffitifrom Nahal ha-Me'arot ( N T S ) (after Artzy 1994: 2-3)
(?), Artzy compares one group of
these ship graffiti to the Sea Peoples'
ships portrayed at Medinet Habu
(Fig. 8A.2: A; compare also Fig.
202 d APPENDIX
F i ~ i i r r8A.3. Grl!fitto c?f nrr Arxcvrl-stylr (Mycer~nr~nrrlSpa l a rock at Tccieida, iri fhr Oasis of D ~ k h l a Egypt
Proplcs?) ship c n r ~ moti , (@cr Rrrsdr
7.41). She notes that all the known of this ship remained unpublished stem, where w e might expect to
ship graffiti of this type have a bird until recently, when L. Basch, in a find a bird-head device, is broken.
head at only one extremity, and that penetrating study, pointed out the At left, a large quarter-rudder de-
in all cases the bird-head faces the distinct similarities this vessel has scends from the sternpost in a
Mediterranean in the west. with the Aegean ship tradition manner reminiscent of that found
A second group she parallels to (Fig. 8A.3).'" in a ship depiction from Phaistos
the Aegean ship representations The ship faces right and is por- (Fig. 7.27).
on the altar from Acco, as well as trayed with a straight keel/keel O n and around the ship, how-
at Kition (Fig. 8A.2: B; compare plank, a vertical stem and a diago- ever, are at least nine figures. Next
Figs. 7.33-35, 8.20). A third group nal sternpost. The line of the keel/ to four of these are what Basch has
bears more than a passing resem- hull continues past the stem as a reasonably identified as model
blance to an Aegean ship type with ram-like cutwater. It has a mast in boats (Fig. 8A.4).The models have
a straight hull, stem projection, the center of the hull. A two-level a straight hull, with vertical stem
vertical stem post and recurving forecastle is nestled behind the and sternposts. A single vertical
stern (Fig. 8A.2: C). Compare these stem (compare Fig. 7.28: A). A di- line rising from each of the hulls
elements to similar ones on the agonal Iine from the sternpost to presumably represents the model
ship representations appearing, the mast top may represent a hal- ships' masts. Each of the models'
for example, in Figs. 7.7: B, 17, 19, yard. Unfortunately, the top of the stems is crossed by a single hori-
21,27, 29,30: A, 36: A.
The documentation and future
thorough publication of the Nahal
ha-Me'arot ship graffiti will be a
valuable contribution to our grow-
ing corpus of Aegean ship repre-
sentations.
Shipwrecks
The development of SCUBA fol- three distinct concentrations of sides of the cape as resulting from
lowing World War I1 introduced a pottery dating to a late phase of the a single shipwreck. Complete ex-
new dimension into the study of Early Helladic I1 period were cavation and publication of the
ancient seafaring. For the first time, found at depths ranging from Dokos site will hopefully supply
archaeologists were able to go un- eight to twenty-six meters. answers to this and other ques-
derwater and study the remains of Vessel shapes found at Dokos tions.
ancient shipwrecks, their cargoes, include jugs, bowls, amphoras, C A P E IRIA. A collection of pot-
and their accoutrements on the cups, jars, askoi, and pithoi, along tery, primarily of Cypriot origin
seabed. Even though Bronze Age with supports for household clay and dating to the end of the thir-
shipwrecks remain rare, nautical spits, braziers, and clay hearths. teenth century B.c.,was located at
archaeology has revealed and clari- Cycladic elements have been noted Cape Iria, south of Asine, in the
fied aspects of ancient ships and in the pottery. The site also con- Argolid Gulf.3 First surveyed in
their purposes to an astounding tained grinding stones and frag- 1974 by Throckmorton and a team
degree. Two articulated ship- ments of a lead bar (ingot?) that of Greek divers, the site, which is
wrecks in particular, found off the may also be related to this complex. located at a depth of seventeen to
southern coast of Turkey at Cape Bowls, amphoras, and spouted twenty-five meters and over a
Gelidonya and Uluburun, have sauceboats in a variety of shapes length of thirty meters, contained
contributed immensely to o u r and sizes predominate at the site. three pithoi and many pottery
understanding. At the same time, Apparently cultic in nature, these sherds. Most of the sherds belong
they have raised many new ques- terra-cotta vessels are believed to to coarse-ware domestic types:
tions. The known Bronze Age Med- have originated in Attica. Interest- pithoi, amphoras, deep basins, a
iterranean sites are summarized ingly, Dokos is located on the pre- pitcher, and a Mycenaean stirrup
below by country and in chrono- sumed sea route between south jar. The Cypriot ceramics raised
logical order.' Euboea and the Saronic and Ar- from the Cape Iria site may con-
golid gulfs, one end of which is at stitute one of the largest assem-
Shipwreck Sites Lerna. blages of Late Cypriot transport
To date, no timber has been re- containers found to date in the
Grecce ported from this site, raising the Aegean region. A stone anchor
DOKOs. In 1975 P. Throckmor- question of whether this is indeed was discovered near the site at a
ton discovered quantities of Early a shipwreck. Furthermore, addi- depth of six meters.'l
Helladic pottery adjacent to the tional Early Helladic pottery was
southern side of Cape Myti Ko- recovered from offshore on the Turkey
meni at the northeast corner of the izortheriz side of Cape Myti Ko- S H E Y T A N D E R E S I . In 1973 a
Ray of Skindos on the island of meni. It is difficult to interpret the Bronze Age wreck site was found
Dokos.' During a 1977 survey, concentrations of pottery on both at a depth of thirty-three meters off
Sheytan Deresi on the southwest- meters, a depth far beyond that of male figurine found during the
ern coast of Turkey."The site was normal sport diving. This factor 1992 expedition." Her extremities
excavated in its entirety, but no made the excavation a protracted are covered with gold foil. She
remains of a ships timbers were and potentially dangerous project. wears a fillet in her hair, and a
found, although the sand was suf- The eleventh and final season of multistranded necklace adorns her
ficiently d e e p to preserve 1 1 ~ 1 1 1 excavation took place during the neck. Although nu exact parallels
fragments had the cargo covered summer of 1994 (Fig. 9.1).1° to this figurine are known, Pulak
it. This led G. F. Bass to conclude The Uluburun ship was a mer- notes the similarities that it shares
that the craft may have capsized chantnlan with a valuable cargo. with other bronze artifacts from
or perhaps that it was m a d e of Detailed site plans help to recon- the Syro-Canaanite littoral, as well
skins. The close proximity of the struct the manner in which the a s to a unique gold plaque from
jars and the presence of stones that cargo and other items were stored Lachish.18 H e tentatively con-
could have been ballast may indi- in the hull (Fig. 14.1). The hull is cludes that the Uluburun figilrine
cate that the cargo was not jetti- of pegged mortise-and-tenon join- originated from that region and
soned. A study of pottery distri- ery, pushing back by a millennium that she may be one of a pair of a
bution suggests that a number of our knowledge of the use of this divine couple. Alternately, s h e
artifacts had drifted away from the ship construction technique on may have been a "traveling god,"
surface intact, perhaps meaning seagoing Mediterranean ships." similar to the "Amun-of-the-Road"
that they had been empty when C o n c e r n i n g t h e d a t e of t h e that accompanied Wenamun on
the ship sank. ship's demise, Bass and h l a k note his journey.'" In this case, the tigu-
The Sheytan Deresi pottery, a Late Helladic IIIA: 2e kylix found rine may have belonged to a pas-
which has been dated to ca, 1600 on the wreck. They emphasize, senger.
a.c., has a mixture of Aegean and ho\vever, that i t may have been in A third possibility is that the
Anatolian characteristics. The use for some time before the ship statuette may have been the ship's
modest amount of cargo and the s a n k . T h e Mycenaean p o t t e r y tutelary goddess. In pre-Classical
total lack of personal items suggest found on the wreck dates to the times, the protective deities of
that the craft may have been a small Late Helladic IIIA2 period, about ships appear to have been prima-
vessel that transported pottery be- the time of Akhenaton's reign- rily (if not exclusively) feminine.?"
tween neighboring villages. There but no later than that of Tutan- The figurine was found in Square
are no known contemporary habi- khamen." The excavators origi- G24, near a stone ceremonial ax
tation sites in the cargo's vicinity. nally suggested a date around the head that had originated in the
U L U H U I I U N . Uluburun isa cape end of (or just after) the Amarna Black Sea region (Fig. 14.1).
several kilometers e a s t of t h e period. O n the basis of a gold Among many cultures through-
Turkish town of Kag.hA wreck was scarab of Nefertiti and a cut gold out history the bow was the abode
first sighted there b y T u r k i s h ring found on the wreck, J . Wein- of the guardian goddess, protec-
sponge diver Mehmet Cakir, who stein argues that the ship sank nf- tress of the ship." J. Hornell notes
deqcribed the piles of c o p p e r ter. the Amarna era." He prefers a that in Gerzean ships, the bow was
"oxhide" ingots on the seabed to date in the last quarter of the four- the location of the deity.22Later
the authorities as "metal biscuits teenth century o r t h e o p e n i n g Egyptian depictions of ships show-
with ears."' years of the thirteenth century.I4 ing offerings at the bow suggest
In 1983 C . IM. Pulak surveyed Most recently, a date of 1315 R.C. that it remained the site of the de-
the site, which begins at a depth h a s been assigned to the ship- ity (Fig. 2.9). Such was apparently
of forty-three meters. Excavation wreck on the basis of dendrochro- also the case on Syro-Canaanite
b e g a n t h e next y e a r . T h e site nological analyses of a branch car- ships during the Late Bronze Age.
originally was thought to end at ried on board, perhaps intended as h k n offer incense while standing
fifty-one meters, but it soon be- firewood." before the mast and facing the bow
came apparent that spillage from Concerning the origins of the on two of the ships depicted in the
the shipwreck continues farther vessel, l'ulak notes that a Near
down-slope.The lower end of the Eastern origin for the ship is quite
shipwreck is the bow, the higher likely.lh
end is the stern." The deepest part Of particular interest in regard
of the wreck excavated is located to the identity of the Uluburun
b e t w e e n fifty-three a n d sixty shipwreck is the cast-bronze fe-
m - .
L..
tomb of Kenamun, presumably in ethnic origins proved more prob- campaign was fragmentary at
thanks for the completion of a safe lematic, however. Was she built Perhaps the pieces raised
journey (Figs. 3.3, 5). a n d u s e d by Syro-Canaanites, then were broken fragments of ear-
In the religious texts of Ugarit, Cypriots, Mycenaeans, or people lier cargoes that had been left in
Aslzrr~zt-of-the-St was the name of of some other nationality? Bass the ship's bilge, while the intact
the great goddess, wife of El and notes that the ship's origin was items may either have been moved
mother of Baal ( R e ~ h e p h )As . ~her
~ directly related to that of t h e from the site by the strong local
name implies, she played a signifi- crew.27Based on a study of the per- current or tumbled out when the
cant role as sea-goddess. Interest- sonal finds, he suggests that the ship sank. TWOlarge Late Helladic
ingly, t h e U l u b u r u n s h i p also Gelidonpa wreck was North Syrian. IIIB stirrup jars found about fifty
carried several varieties of gold This opinion did not go unchal- m e t e r s to the s o u t h e a s t of the
pendants bearing symbols that are lenged. The personal gear found wreck site during the 1988 survey
identified in Ugaritic texts with El on the wreck, i t was argued, was seem to have suffered this fate.?"
and his c o n s ~ r t . Might
~" the little c o m m o n t h r o u g h o u t the N e a r These jars, along with the scarabs
Uluburun statuette be a depiction East; the artifacts could have come found on the wreck, appear to con-
of ,4shc~rflt-of-thr-Sm? from Cyprus or from farther south firm a thirteenth-century date for
CAPE GELIDONYA. Another along the Syro-Canaanite littoral.2s it.i7 A single stone anchor w a s
i m p o r t a n t shipwreck h a d been Bass later acknowledged the pos- found near the site in 1994(Fig.
found earlier by a sponge diver off sibility that the s h i p m a y have 12.48: C):"
Cape Gelidonya, on the southern been C y p r i ~ t . G.
~ ' Cadogan and
coast of T ~ r k e y . In
~ ' a landmark J. D. h4uhly identify the wreck as lsri~cl
excavation that marked the begin- My~enaean."~ The Israeli coast has yielded evi-
ning of true scientific archaeologi- Radiocarbon tests of twigs from dence of Late Bronze Age wrecks
cal research on the seabed, the site the dunnage gave a dating of 1200 and cargoes. Because of the shal-
was explored in 1960 by an expe- B.C. f50." Was the shipwreck from low coastal profile and the prima-
dition from the University Mu- the thirteenth century (Late B r o ~ u e rily open coastline, however, most
seum of the University of Pennsyl- Age) or the twelfth century (Iron ships that sank in this area exist
vania under Bass's direction (Fig. Age)? Bass, concluding that the only as scattered cargo sites, mak-
9.2). manufacture of oxhide ingots had ing their interpretation difficult.
The ship apparently sank after c e a s e d a t the e n d of the L a t e CARMEL COAST. In 1981 a
hitting the nearby cliff. The extant Bronze Age (ca. 1200 KC.), suggests g r o ~ ~ofp metal artifacts was dis-
cargo consisted mainly of copper that the ship sank in the thirteenth covered on the seabed off Kibbutz
oxhide and bun ingots (Figs. 9.3- century." H. W. Catling dates the Hahotrim, south of Haifa. The ar-
4). The lay of the cargo on the sea- bronzes, and the ship along with tifacts were scattered around two
bed suggests that the craft had not them, to the twelfth century:" large stone anchors to which they
capsized before coming to rest on On visits to the site in 1987, may or may not be related (Fig.
the seabed. Because of a lack of 1988, 1989, and 1994, Bass and a 13.54)." These consist primarily of
sedimentation in the area little, if team from the Institute of Nauti- scrap metal intended for remelt-
any, of the vessel itself was cal Archaeology found a number ing: a plowshare of a type common
Bass considered artifacts not of artifacts that had been over- at Cape Gelidonya, pieces of bro-
related to the cargo, most of which looked during the 1960 excavation: ken horse bits, chisel(s?)and small
w e r e located in o n e a r e a , t h e two stone balance-pan weights, a fragments of oxhide, and other in-
crew's personal possessions. H e zoomorphic head, metallic tin (the got types."" A lead bun ingot and
proposed that these defined the first such find on the site), several pieces of s e v e r a l o t h e r s w e r e
crew's living quarters. As cabins bronze knives, fragments of cop- found. Two of these bear signs,
are normally located in the stern per ingots, a n d a bronze plow- possibly of Cypro-Minoan origin;
on seagoing ships, it followed that share. A bronze sword was found a third lead ingot fragment from
the find area was the craft's stern. in a crevice on top of a boxcar-like I-lahotrim is of a variety previously
The goods on board the Gelidonya boulder located in the center of the k n o w n solely from Eighteenth
wreck indicated that the vessel had site, implying that the boulder had Dynasty Theban tomb paintings."
voyaged from the Levant and in rested on the sea floor when the Subsequently, additional lead in-
the direction of the Aegean when ship sank.'4 gots with hoIes at their apexes
she sank. Identifying the ship's Pottery found during the 1960 were found opposite Kfar Samir:"
Discussion
On Problems of Shipzureck
Ethnic lderz tific~irtio
Identifying a wrecked ship's
home port is particularly diffi-
cult." The nautical excavator can
date the craft and chart its final
voyage, based on the ship's cargo,
but the freight gives no indication
of the cratt's origin. Only if the
ship's o w n e r s h i p is validated,
however, can the craft a n d its
cargo of information be placed in
the correct economic-historical
backgro~~nd.'~
Documents found on a wreck
are of particular value in this re-
gard. Writing on the now-missing
wax of a wooden diptych found at
Uluburun, for example, could have
answered a number of questions
still pending on that wreck.'"iust
the identity alone of the script used
on the wax could have helped to
identify the traders.
Ideally, one might hope for a
name-device, like the epis~ilorior home port be determined? The On the remains of a small ship
p ~ ~ r a ~ of
~ ~theo Classical
rz period.'" emphasis here is on the wordfinal. in which all of the personal items
Alternatively, shipwright marks, The original construction site may are of a more or less homogeneous
like those on the Cheops ship and not have been the ship's home nature (as at Cape Gelidonya), it
the Punic wreck at Marsala, could port. Ships were bought and sold, seems valid to accept Bass's iden-
help pinpoint the ethnic identity of c a p t u r e d a n d w a y l a i d in t h e tification via personal items found.
the carpenters who built the craft.57 Bronze Age. A ship could have This approach cannot be applied
On a wreck found in the Mediter- been built at Byblos, sold to Ugarit, to a wreck that contains personal
ranean, however, even this has lim- a n d then prized by Egyptian goods of numerous cultures, as at
ited value, for shipwrights could forces. All these actions were pos- Uluburun.
work in foreign dockyards. sible in the Late Bronze Age. How The Mycenaean seals, the globed
Assuming a lack of written evi- would the excavators of such a pin, and pottery articles of every-
dence, h o w can a vessel's final wreck identify its home port? day use suggest the presence of
two Mycenaeans on board.58This each cried fo his god; and they threw to go with them to Tarshish, away
raises an important question: what the wares that were in the ship into from the presence of the Lord."60
constitutes "evidence beyond rea- the sea, to lighten it for them. But The king of Alashia refers three
sonable doubt" that a person or Jonah had gone down into the in- times to his messenger and an
persons of a given nationality were ner part of the ship and had lain Egyptian messenger traveling to-
on board a ship at the time of sink- down, and was fast asleep. So the gether between the two countries,
ing? Can this be determined solely captain came and said to him, presumably by ship.61Whatever
on the basis of nontextual artifacts 'What do you mean, you sleeper? the nationality of their ships, at
found on the wreck? On a ship- Arise, call upon your god! Perhaps least one of the messengers would
wreck, this question is crucial. The the god will give a thought to us, always have been a "foreign pas-
Uluburun ship carried personal that we do not perish.'"59 senger." Similarly, Amanmasha
memorabilia of at least five differ- The personal memorabilia sailed to Egypt, presumably on a
ent cultures when it went down: found at Uluburun may represent Byblian ship, and Wenamun used
Assyrian (Mesopotamian), Egyp- the archaeological expression of a Syro-Canaanite ship (home port
tian, Kassite, Mycenaean, and this phenomenon. Apart from the not stated) on his outgoing trip
Syro-Canaanite. How are these to different cultural identities repre- and a Byblian craft on the first part
be interpreted? sented by these artifacts, they had of his return voyage.62
There are several reasons that numinous significance for their Kidnapping and slaving were
persons of varied ethnic origins owners. That is, they represent additional reasons for foreign
might have sailed on the same ship: faith in different gods and beliefs ethnics to have been on board a
Egyptian tomb paintings give and may, in general terms, be in- shipaa
the impression that the crews of dicative of persons of varying eth-
foreign ships were monolithically nic and religious backgrounds on
ethnic-as if Egyptian ships had board the ship during its final The problem of defining a sea-
only Egyptian crew members and voyage. going ship's ownership remains
Syro-Canaanite ships had only It would be unwise, however, to perplexing. One form of evidence
Syrian or Canaanite mariners. This equate any specific object with an that may reveal a Bronze Age
is probably misleading, resulting owner of like ethnic identity: ob- ship's final home port is her an-
more from a tendency toward jects having prophylactic signifi- chors. This is because, in the
artistic stereotyping than from a cance could have been acquired by Bronze Age, the various countries
reflection of contemporaneous re- anyone. Furthermore, these objects and states used diagnostic forms
alities. Then, as now, sailors of may simply have been collected by of stone anchors. Regardless of
various nationalities could join, or crew members during their trav- where along the ship's route the
be conscripted, onto a single ship. els and have no significance at all anchors were made, they would
This fact of seafaring life is admi- vis-a-vis the ethnic identity of the have been cut to the same charac-
rably illustrated in the story of persons on the ship when it sank. teristic shape. The Karnak anchor
Jonah, when the sailors in their Throughout history, merchant is a good example of this phenom-
desperation pray to diflerenf gods: ships carried paying foreign pas- enon." Unfortunately, it is not al-
"But the Lord hurled a great wind sengers: "But Jonah rose to flee to ways possible to correlate anchors
upon the sea, and there was a Tarshish from the presence of the found in the sea with those found
mighty tempest on the sea, so that Lord. He went down to Yaffo and in stratified land sites.65
the ship threatened to break up. found a ship going to Tarshish; so
Then the mariners were afraid, and he paid the fare, and wenf on board,
Ship Construction
The single most important aspect Primary Materials tises along one edge that nieasure
of seafaring is the ability to build 6 centimeters long, 2.5 centimeters
wssels capable of withstanding H r i l l Renznirzs wide, and 4 centimeters deep (Fig.
the rigors of sea travel, with its of Senpirzg Ships 10.1).
waves, storms, and other dangers. WADI GAWASIS. Several wood Assuming the plank edge has
The little we know about the ac- tragments with mortise scars were not been abraded, these mortises
tual construction of Bronze Age found at the Middle Kingdom Red are exceptionally shallow for ships
seagoing ships comes from the Sea port of Wadi Gawasis.' One of built using the Egyptian unpegged
meager remains of fragmentary the timbers is cedar (Cedrus sp.) mortise-and-tenon technique. The
seagoing hulls-little more than and has been radiocarbon dated to normal depth of mortises on the
bits and pieces of timber-found ca. 1975 ~ . c . ~ T h efragments
se may Dashur boats, for example, is 12-
on the Mediterranean's seabed as be remnants of a ship-assembly 13 centimeters..' Tenons of the
well as on land in Egypt. operation that were subsequently Cheops ship were 10 centimeters
There is, however, much ancil- ~ ~ s as
e dfirewood since some pieces long by 7 centimeters wide and 1.5
lary intormation: Nile ships found are charred. The largest fragment centimeters thick:I This suggests a
interred in various forms of burial, is 38 centimeters long, 14 centime- mortise depth of 5-6 centimeters.
or reuse of their dismembered tim- ters w i d e , a n d 12 c e n t i m e t e r s Therefore, the mortises in these
bers; documents dealing with the thick. It has three rectangular mor- fragments were probably used to
construction and repair of ships
a n d records of dockyards; a n d
wall reliefs depicting scenes of
ship construction.
Although this information is
valuable, it is important to empha-
size that most of it comes from
Egypt a n d relates primarily to
craft that plied the quiet waters of
the Nile rather than to seagoing
ships. Thus, the data can teach us
about local Egyptian traditions but
are of lesser value in interpreting
deep-water vessels.
-1
I KEEL -I
1 ,,
/
S H I P CONSTIILICTION *-
@
ing known to date. That pharaonic
shipwrights did at times pierce the
hull is evident froni the icono-
graphic record, however. Saliure's
ships lia17e ligatures that clearly
pass through holes in the hull
(Fig. 2.3).
ABYDOS. In 1991 twelve planked
boats d a t i n g to the end of the
Predynastic period or the begin-
ning of the Dynastic period were
discovered at the Northern Cem-
etery at A b y d o ~ . The
~ ? boats are
about fifteen to eighteen meters
long. They were buried in mud-
brick coffins and contained pottery
offerings. Following their inter-
ment, the vessels were entombed
under a layer of mud-brick and
plaster. The future excavation ot'
this "fleet" will contribute consid-
erably to o u r understanding of
ship construction in early Egypt.
TIlE TARKIIAN PLANKS.
W. M. F. Petrie uncovered a group
of planks a t Tarkhan in tombs
dated to the First Dynasty." The
timbers bear V-shaped a n d L-
shaped lashing mortises as ivell as
mortise-and-tenon joinery; both of
these elements exist on the later
Cheops ship and the Lisht timbers.
Petrie interprets these timbers as
vessels may have differed radi- ful to create straight p l a n k i n g h a v i n g been p a r t s of w o o d e n
cally from ships that plied the Nile, seams, the ancient Egyptian ship- buildings: he believes that the tim-
these vessels nevertheless d o shed wrights intentionally "joggled" bers had been assembled to form
valuable light on the types of ship their planking edges into jigsaw- a "niched w a l l . " H e s e e s this
construction that existed conteni- like patterns that prevented longi- wooden construction as a proto-
poraneously in ancient Egypt. For tudinal sliding. These features, type of the niched brick architec-
this reason, a short review of this together ~ 7 i t l ai liberal use of un- ture common in the Early Dynas-
evidence is in order here. pegged mortise-and-tenon joints, tic period. H. Frankfort opposes
In antiquity the Egyptians were endowed Egyptian hulls with con- this view, suggesting that the tini-
notorious for doing things differ- siderable structural strength. hers had actually come from Nile
ently from other peoples. This was Egyptian shipbuilders seem to ~atercraft.~,~
certainly true of the techniques have taken pains to avoid piercing S. MI. Vinson concludes that ai-
they used in shipbuilding."' While the exterior of their hulls in any though evidence is lacking to de-
m a n y cultures built "sewn" or manner." Indeed, C. W. Haldane finitively prove that the Tarkhan
"lashed" ships with their planks suggests that this may explain why planks are derived froni ships, i t
held together with ligatures, only p r x ~ c dmortise-and-tenon joinery, would be curious i t they did not
the Egyptians used transverse which had been used in Egyptian because of the similarities they
lashings that did not penetrate the carpentry from early times, was s h a r e with o t h e r hull remains
hull. Furthermore, while the ship- utterly foreign to all of the forms k n o w n from Egypt.'' More re-
wrights of other nations were care- of indigenous Egyptian shipbuild- cently, h o w e v e r , I-Ialdane ex-
F i ~ l t r z10.7. The Cnrrre);ic Daslrrrr boat, sheer viexi (Sesostris Ill) (fro111Patch s r d Huldntle 1990: 2 4 ~I . [ A ~ m i o t 7842-1
l I; plroto by M. 0.
r , hy pcrr~lissiort)
M ~ N n r r x h ~rtscd
of construction / renovation. This you shall see whether there is dence to date for the use of caulk-
word is known also in the fuller there any good lining-wood left ing in any of the ancient hulls u11-
form of Ht-n-um[i, literally "wood over, and you shall distribute (it) covered in Egypt.
of clothing."" A similar term ap- from bow to stern. F."' ELEPHANTINE PAPYRUS COW-
pears at Ugarit. When Byblos sold LEY NO. 26. This fascinating let-
ships to Ugarit, the 1bg.nnyt (liter- T h e use of planks "left over ter, written in Aramaic, dates to
ally, "garment of the ships") was from the bark of the gods" may 412 R.C. It is addressed to Wahpre-
sold separatelyah7 Virolleaud con- refer to surplus timber from pre- makhi, an Egyptian bureaucrat, by
siders this "couverture, revete- vious construction or the salvag- Anani, who served as the chancel-
ment (du navire)" or perhaps de- ing of usable materials from older lor and scribe to Arsames, the Per-
rived from a s h i p class termed craft.7oThe repeated use of ships' sian satrap of Egypt.7hThe letter
lnnSkr4 la-bi-d~.~!' timbers is hardly surprising con- meticulously catalogs all the fur-
PAPYRUS ANASTASI IV. An- sidering Egypt's difficulties in ac- nishings needed for the repairs of
other text discussing the refitting quiring foreign timber suitable for a Nile boat-down to the last nail.
of a ship appears in the Ramesside sl~ipbuilding.~'The guesswork in- Indeed, in comparing this docu-
period Papyrus Anastasi IV. It con- volved in interpreting the many ment to those discussed above,
tains a description of the inspec- technical terms again hampers our note that for the first time metal
tion of an old Nile ship and the understanding of this and the fol- nails are required for the repairs.
steps required for its repair: lowing text. This suggests that this boat was
HERODOTUS O N EGYPTIAN built (or at least was going to be
The scribe of the treasury SHIP CONSTRUCTION. Herodotus, repaired) in a manner other than
Kageb speaks to the scribe lnena writing in the fifth century B.c.,de- the traditional Egyptian ones. The
and the shipwright Amennakhte. scribes a traditional form of ship text reads7'
224 # S E A G O I N G S H I P S 6: S E A M A N S H I P
RECTO
From Arsames to W a l ~ p r e m a k h i .
And now, . . . [. . .] to us, saying: ivlithradates the boatholder thus says: Psamsinei[t . . . orld PN . . . d l
(tuld) twu, thc boutholdi~rsi?fl the Carians, thus said: "The boat ivhich we hold-in-hereditary-leasc-time has
come its N E E D S to d[o]."
[. . .] let it be drawn up onto the dry land and let ( ~ v o r dbe ) sent to the accountants of the treasury. Let them
with [the] t'oreme[n . . . thnt hi~rzt]see and its R E C ~ O N I N Cmake.
; And let (word) be sent to whomever was (in
charge). The M A T E K I A L , its C O A I I N Z and other (things) ivhich [ . . . ] let them give and immediately let its
NLEL)S be done, and other (things) about which from me (word) is sent to them.
About this they sent (word) and [said] thus: "[ . . . or[] the sand which is in front o t the fortress [ . . . 1.
h4ithradates the boatholder showed us the boat (that) we map see (it. The boat) which is in the hands of
IJsamsineit and PN, all (told) two, the boatholders of the Carians, is drawn u p on the dry land and we
showed (it) to Shamashshillech and his colleagues the foremen (and) Shamou so[n] of Konufe, chief of the
carpenters, W H I T E N E R , and thus they said: "Time has come its NEED[S] to do. This is the XIATERIAL which is
necessary its NFFDS to do:
new wood of cedar and 'r:
ti' ten cubits;
<!/II~ [for] b f q eighty cubits by three hand-
breadths
including sx17rl twelve cubits;
$11 fifteen, each one twenty cubits;
sLbl seventy cubits;
!rrrn for the belly three;
qlcs for the ~ ~ A /ROLVS T one;
I
tvood of the D E C ~ sixty cubits;
mooring post for p r r one, two cubits;
stanchion(5) under the DECK five;
bronze and iron nails two hundred.
strong old cedar wood:
And Iet them add onto the wood which will be given:
onto fp in the length, to each, three handbreadths ovmcu.r and onto the width and the thickness two
fingerbreadths;
and o n t o i p in the length, to each, three handbreadths O V E K C U T and onto the width two fingerbreadths;
and onto Sp and the !1n11 in the length, to each, one handbreadth;
and onto s'b1, the wood for the L ~ E C K ,(and the) P A N E L SECTIC)KS, in the length, to each (of these), three
handbreadths OVERCUT and onto the width one fingerbreadth.
The linen CLOTII, the PLATING, the arsenic, the sulphur-in Persian weight are to be given.'
Let (word) be sent, saying: 'This X I A T E R I A L is to be given into the hand of Shamou son of Konufe, chief of
the carpenters, WIIITENER, before our eyes (to do the) NEEDS 011 that boat and immediately let him do (them)
as order has been issued."'
Now, Arsames thus says: "You, do according to this which the accountants say, as order has been issued."
Anani the Scribe is Chancellor. Nabuakab wrote.
Wahpremakhi . . . to be g i v e n . . . according to i t . . . as order has been iqsued [ . . . ] wrote. (DEMOTIC:)
Sasobek wrote.
(DEMOTIC) The boat [ . . . ]
From (scdiiig) Arsames who is in Eg[ypt to Wahpremakhi].
Nabuakab the scribe. On the 13th [of] Tebeth, year 12 ot Dari[us the king].
I --
T h e m o s t striking difference eleven along with a pair of saw- pert shipbuilders from Ryblos, and
between the Anastasi IV and the yers. L. Casson notes that this ship Diodorus Siculus mentions a dock-
Elephantine papyri is the requisi- m u s t have been built "shell-first," yard (fn ncbria) at Ty re.R2
tion of bronze and iron nails: in the based o n the o r d e r in which the Later writers repeatedly relate
latter, a total of 825 nails of vari- timbers were prepared. First the traditions connecting the introduc-
ous types is ordered. Wood is re- planks, m a d e of p e r s e a w o o d , tion of shipbuilding to the Phoe-
ferred to as "new" or "broken." w e r e cut a n d then frames w e r e nician (Syro-Canaanite) coast. Eu-
Perhaps both fresh and used tim- prepared from acacia wood. sebius, in quoting Philo of Ryblos's
ber was to be utilized in the boat's claim that Tyre invented the sci-
repairs. Alternatively, this might The Syro-Caizaanite Coast ence of ship construction, seems to
refer to unseasoned and seasoned SY IIO-CANAANITE SI IIPBUILD- be describing a n~onoxylon:"Then
wood. I N G . At present, very little is known Usoos (Oiiooo< = Ushu) took a
G R A E C O - R O M A N SHIPRUILD- about Syro-Canaanite s h i p con- trunk of a tree, stripped it of its
I N G IN EGYPT. Papyrus Flor. I 6 9 s t r u c t i o n . This s i t u a t i o n c o u l d branches and was the first man to
r e c o r d s t h e s a l a r i e s of s h i p - change dramatically, however, i f dare sail in it on the sea."83 Pliny
wrights a n d sawyers for a period the Uluburun shipwreck proves to ascribes to Hippus of Tyre the in-
of three weeks in the mid-third be of Syro-Canaanite origin."' Byb- vention of the cargo ship and to the
century A.D.'' The vessel referred 10s and Tyre were centers for ship- Phoenicians the invention of the
to m u s t h a v e been a fair-sized building o n the Syro-Canaanite skiff.#$
craft, for it required scaffolding. coast: Ugarit purchased ships from Interestingly, in the description
The number of shipwrights work- Ryblos, although it also had its own of the manner in which the Chil-
i n g o n it v a r i e d f r o m f o u r t o sl~ipbuilders."Ezekiel refers to ex- dren of Israel were to build the
W A lroxxirrx trrrss is ctrrploycd irr n scorrc deyictirrx lhc lnrrricliirrx qf rl lnslrcd-ship 111 tlrc ster'ri, orrc zoorkcr tixhtcrrs n lr~slrirr~
F ~ X I I 10.9, i.idlilt II
prrrrrls or1 n rope batlcrr. From tlrc torlrb q f h ' i ~ f ~i l lr S. n y y n m . Probably Fifllr Dyrrnsty Cfrorrr Morissri orrd Alfcrrrrriillcr 1971
sccorid I ~ I N I nl~parerrtly
I
F I X U ~ Ll(J.l.3.
. Shrp ~ i i ~ ~ s t r ~ scelr~fr~lir
i c t i o ~ ~ the tot1111
1!f T i a t Saqqnra (Fifth D y ~ r a ~ t(fi.ollr
y ) Stci~rdorff1913: Taf. 119)
of the vessel.
Peggcd Moi-tise-arzd-Teizorz
or Treenail Corzstrl~ctiorr?
@
in the now missing central portion
The question has been raised of ankhamen, and on the Byblos that apparently delineates the join
whether several representations of model are in fact keels, two ques- between the round, planked por-
watercraft from the New Kingdom tions must be answered: tion of the hull and the flat blade
depict vessels with keels. If so, What defines a keel? of the stem- sternpost. This line,
these are the earliest indications of Can the represented structures similar to a rabbet line or bearding
a major advance in ship construc- function in this way? line, continues down to the water-
tion. Earlier Egyptian vessels seem I would define a keel as a cen- line in many cases but gradually
to have relied on a keel plank, cen- terline timber, outboard of the approaches the line representing
tral strake, or, as the Cheops barge frames, of sufficient cross-sectional the exterior limit of the hull. The
shows, a broad, heavy bottom area and attachment to the rest of impression is of a keel projecting
made up of three relatively wide, the hull to offer significant longi- below the planking at the ends but
thick strakes. Evidence for the de- tudinal strength and stiffness to disappearing toward amidships.
velopment of the keel in the rest of the vessel. Normally, this means a This interpretation is more or less
the eastern Mediterranean basin is beam at least as deep as it is wide, confirmed by carved models from
lacking until the late fourteenth fastened to either the garboards, the tombs of Amenhotep II and
century B . C . and the Uluburun the frames, or both. Timbers of Tutankhamen, in which the blade
wreck. This site provides archaeo- substantially greater breadth than of the stem- sternpost continues to
logical evidence of a keel, or keel- depth are generally called keel protrude below the planking near
like member, in an isolated bit of planks, since they may offer a the ends but gradually disappears
hull remains thought to lie at the point of attachment for other tim- amidships. A similar effect can be
original centerline of the ship (Fig. bers (such as posts and frames) but seen in medieval cogs, in which the
10.2).1 This keel is a heavy beam of do not possess enough rigidity on hooks, the backbone timbers at the
substantial molded depth, part of their own to qualify as keels. Be- ends, extend below the planking
which projects upward, above the tween keels and keel planks is a but the keel plank projects very
inboard face of the garboards, as gray area, where breadth exceeds little.
do the central strakes of the Dashur depth but depth is still consider- It would be hard to deny that
boats. The difference in thickness ably greater than planking thick- the Punt ships of Hatshepsut have
between the Dashur central strake ness. Keels normally project below some sort of backbone structure
and garboards is in some places the exterior surface of the plank- that includes a centerline member
negligible, however.2 ing and provide resistance to lat- of substantial depth, at least at the
In order to determine whether eral motion (leeway) in addition to ends. I suspect that this timber is
the structure represented on the strength, but this is not always the also quite robust amidships but
relief of Hatshepsut's Punt ships at case. that it projects inboard, like the
Deir el Bahri, on models from the In the case of the Hatshepsut upper portion of the Uluburun
tombs of Amenhotep II and Tut- ships, the artist has shown a line keel and the keel-like timber seen
CHAPTER 11
Propulsion
Anchors
Anchors arc to a ship what brakes origins found in Foreign precincts craft solely by their w c i g h ~Thcsc .
are to a car; and just a s a car needs are a valuable indication of direct anchors may lend to d r a g 0 1 1 a flat
brakes, a seagoing ship must carry sea contact. IJerhaps the most im- and sandy bottom.
some form of anchorii~gdevice. 111 portant contribtrtion of the s t u d y “Composite-anchors" arc hcav-
the eastern Mediterranean during of anchors is the theoretical possi- ier t h a n s a n d - a n c h o r s b u t likc
the Rronzc Age, thcsc consisted of bility of identifying the home port them have additional picrcings for
pierced stoncs. Through thc ages, of a wreck based o n the typology o n e o r t w o wooden "arms." Thcsc
anchors wcrc lcfl on lhc sca boLLom of ils slone anchor^.^ Finally, since anchors hold the bottom with thcir
where, as a result of modern undcr- anchors arc the main security for weight and arms.
water archaeological exploration ;I storm-tossed ship, they have al- A11 datable Early Hronzc Age
and sport diving, they arc now bc- w a y s h a d a cultic significance. anchors are weight-anchors." Com-
ing discovered in large numbers in Stonc anchors f o u ~ t din cultic con- posite- a n d wcight-anchors a r e
some parts of the Mcdi tcrrancan. texts can teach us a b o u t aiicietit found togelher in Middle Rronzc
T h e Rri tish rcscarchcr [ l o n o r religious practices. a i d Late 13ron7.e Age contexts at
Frost first brought attention to the N u m e r o u s a n c h o r sites exist Ugarit a i d I t i o n . 'l'hus, ~ h wcight-
c
sig~iificanccof Lhc pierced sloncs u n d e r Lhc Medilcrrancan in arcas anchor preceded the com posi lc-
~ h a lilter
l the Mediterranean sea- that modern shipping would nor- anchor but continued ill use along-
bed and arc also found o n Lcvan- mally avoid.4 Apparently, thcsc s i d e it. G. K a p i t a n s u g g c s l s a
tine land sitcs.'Shc pointcd out that a n c h o r a g e s w c r c necessary for progression of stone anchors origi-
by s t t ~ d y i n ganchors o n stratified ships that could not sail into the n a t i n g from a m o r p h o u s s t o n c s
land sites, anchors of diagnostic wind and, therefore, were forced lashed to a rope and dcvcloping
shape-found out of archacologi- to wait for following winds. into pierced stones (Fig. 12.1 ).
cal conlcxl on lhc stla floor-can b e Frosl dcfincs three varieties of In this chapter the various kinds
dated and their nationality defined. pierced stone anchors:" of evidence (textual, iconographic,
The s t u d y o f anchors is impor- "Sand-anchors" a r e small, Clal and archacological) for stone an-
tant to nautical archaeology f o r s t o w s w i t h additional holes Cor chors and thcir facsimiles will b e
several reasons. At1 anchor o n the taking w o o d e n pieces that func- discussed. The archaeological evi-
scabt!d assumes the passing of a Lion l i k e t h e a r m s o f t h e l a t e r dcncc i s organized in geographi-
ship.' Thus, i f lht! anchor lype be- w o o d e n a n d m c h l anchors. T h e cal order. 'l'his is followed b y an
longing to a specific nationality stone's wcight is minimal a n d is overview of stone anchors found
can be defined, then finding a trail not an anchoring f a c ~ o rThese . an- 0 1 1 Mediterranean wrecks. Finally,
o f that kind o f anchor in the sea chors a r e particularly s u i l r d for several aspects of anchor study are
must signify a route used by ships graspmg a sandy bottom. discussed.
of that nation. "Weight-anchors" have a single
Similarly, a ~ i c h o r so f definable hole for the hawser; they anchor a
The Textual Evidence KTll 4.689 is an Ugaritic text 'I'hcsc boats cannot move up-
that lists a ship's equipment. stream unless a brisk breeze con-
The Gilgamcsh epic mentions Among the gear is a m$r hdf, a tinue; lhcy arc Lowcd from lhc
"Things of Stone" that were used term that M. Heltzer has tetita- bank; bul downslrcam lhcy are
in s o m e way by Urshanabi, the tively identified a s "a n e w a n - thus managed: [hey havc a raft
b o a t m a n of U l n a p i s h t i m ( t h e chor," as well a s a ropc ([rbl).Y made of tamarisk wood, fastened
Mesopotamian Noah), for crossing 1 lerodotus describes thc usc of together with matting of reeds,
the "Waters of I h ~ t h . Urshanabi
"~ s l o n e anchor-like "braking dc- a d a pierced s t m e of about two
claims that Gilgamesh has broken vices" used by Nile ships in his talents weight; the raft is let go
these objucls. Frost suggests that day: to float down ahead of the boat,
the "Things o f SLonc" a r c stone made fast to it by a rope, and the
anchor^.^ slonc is madc fast also by a ropc
lo lhc after part of the boat. So,
driven by the current, the raft
floats swiftly and tows the "baris"
(which is the name of these boats),
and die stone cirtigging brliind on
the river bottom kccps tlic boat's
course straight."'
The Iconographic
Evidence
Stone anchors appear on represeri-
tations of the seagoing ships of
Sahure and Unas (Figs. 2.5; 12.2:
A-l3).I1 The aiichors have a mark-
edly triangular shape. This has
caused some confusion, and, on
occasion, they havc been mistak-
e n l y identified a s Ryblian a n -
c h o r s . ' T h e y have d o m e d tops,
however, a feature typical of Egyp-
tian anchors. Apical ropc grooves,
another featirre common to Egyp-
tian anchors a s well as to those of
o t h e r lands, a r e riot portrayed.
I'erhaps this is the result of a lack
o f artistic detail.
T h e a n c h o r s of S a h u r e arid
Unas are shown standing upright.
This may be attributable to artis-
tic liccnsc; anchors stationed in thc
bows wcrc (at least 011 occasion)
placed irprigh t, however. The bct-
ter-made large stone anchors often
have flat bottoms. Even in mild
I seas, however, such anchors must
ancient won anchors
I
have been locked firmly into place
med~evoland modern against the ship's shccrstrakcs to
Iron anchors
prevent them from coming Ioosc
The Archaeological
Evidence
E g j ~t )
T h e earliest d a h h l c E g y p l i a ~ an-
i
chors belong to the Fifth 1)ynasty.""
An anclior in tlic mastaba of Keho-
tep a t Abusir acted a s tlie lintel of
the false door (Fig. 12.6: A):'? 'The
anchor's hasc carries ~lic.iollowing
inscrip[ion: "Tlic~sole. iricnd, Llic
bclovcd in ~ l i cprc1sencc>o i [pliar-
d o h ' s n a m e c.rasc.ci], Kc.hotc.p."
O t h e r s t o ~ wanchors havc bee11 rc-
portcd from tlic mastabas of ivlcr-
e m k a a n d I'talilintcp a s well as in
the funerary tcmplc o f the Fifth never used at sea. It weighs 188.5 resented scvcn ships used in the
Dynasty pharaoh Uscrkaf (Fig. kilograms. Another Egyptian an- cxpcdition." She argues that the
12.6: chor was found in thc Temple of anchors' total weight of 1,750 ki-
Egyptian anchors have two di- Baal at Ugarit (Fig. 12.33: 1 1 ).'" lograms would be prohibitively
agnostic characturistics: an apical Anchors of Middle Kingdom heavy for a single ship. Thc an-
ropc groove near the hawser hole date found at the Red Sea site of chors from Naveh Yam and Ulu-
and an L-shaped basal hole for a Wadi Gawasis are important be- burun, however, indicate that
second ropc. Although the rope cause they conclusively establish large ships normally d i d carry
groove is found o n stonc anchors the s t a n d a r d Egyptian anchor many heavy anchors.
of other Bronze Age nationalities, shape. The shrine-stele of Ankhow Two hundred mctcrs west of
the basal hole remains unique to was constructed of scvcn anchors Ankhow's shrine, another anchor
ERY~ t . (Figs. 12.8-1 1 )." Pour anchors, served as the pedestal for the con-
The shape of the typical Egyp- with oval tops and tubular rope temporaneous stele o f Antefoker
tian s t o w anchor was first defined holes, form the base of the shrine; (Fig. 12.12)." This anchor lacks the
by Frost on the basis of a single the three truncated anchors consti- typical L-shaped hole and apical
anchor from thc "Sacred Enclo- tuting the shrine's sides still bear
sure" at Ryblos with a rifr hiero- the L-shaped basal holes. One of
glyph inciscd o n i t (Pigs. 12.7, 28: these is a blind hole (Fig. 12.9: R
21 ).'' Thu rope groove is particu- [upper left]). The anchors weigh
larly deep. Frost notes that the about 250 kilograms each.
chisel marks are so well preserved Frost suggcsts that the seven
that the anchor w a s probably anchors in Ankhow's shrine rep-
Western jamb Eastern jamb
Middle block
14 horizontal hieroglyphic
lines (from right lo k n )
*.
,--:.
$"-- .
I.,, '3
imitate stone anchors, they were nine meters:" I t is unlikcly that ot the lake d r ~ r i n gthe late 1980s,
created with the clear intcnlion of craft on the lake in the Early Bronze however, did not result in the dis-
placing them in the ground. Tlic Age were any larger. Evcw thc ma- covery of any s/$fori-type anchors.
s/rfi'fi)rz
.. found in silu by Bar Adon jority of smaller s/Ififc~riirrl would be T h u s we have the facsiniilc-twl
indicates that they wc!rc not func- too heavy for ~1st.in ~ h c s ccraft. not the prototype. Two s/I/i/(~rr/rrt
tional. Thc use of ancliors and No usahlc. anchors in tlie well- found in tlie water a1 lhc fool ofTcl
d r ~ m m yanchors for cultic purposes cut s l ~ f i j o rs~h a p c havc been re- k i t Yerah probably Tell from h c
is known from a nunibcr of land ported from Yam I<inncrct. The lalid site as iL eroded over Lime. Thc
sitw, both in temples and in kmihs. lake has not been extensively sur- s t o w clnchors discovered in and
'The largest boats on the Kin- veyed by divers because of its poor around tlic Sea of Galilee are in-
ncrct in liistorical times before this visibility. A long-term drougli1 variably small a n d liclvc narrow
century measured about seven to that drastically lowered the level rope
The walls and ceili~lgof a tomb orriirr are at present the earliest da t- cation of the earliest-and latest-
b ~ ~ iinl t the Middle Rro~lzeAge I able anchorlikestones known from cvidcncc for stone anchors or their
at Dcgania "A" a r e constructed the Near East. facsimilcs.
from two s/rfifnrlirrr and four other Interestingly, one s/Ififon was re- ANCf IORS. Israel's Mediterra-
monoliths:-l"hc floor of the tomb cently discovered serving as a reli- nean coast abounds in stone an-
is a cullic basin (Figs. 12.14:A [cen- quary underneath the aItar in the c h o r ~ . Rare
~ ' indeed is the dive in
ter], 18)."' All seven pieces may central apse of a church o n Mount which at least one s l o w anchor is
have originally belonged lo a single Rercnice, above the ancient site of not sighted. Scorcs of ~ ~ n ~ hof ors
Early Bronze Agc cultic installa- Tibetias and overlooking the Sea of varying shapc and size have been
tion that cxistcd in thc immediate Galilec (Fig. 12.19).'' l'he unhewn recorded underwater at Dor alone
arca, perhaps at Tcl Bcit Yerah." bottom of the slififorr h a d been (Fig. 12.20)."1 As opposed to the
The c u p marks o n o n r unfin- hacl<ed away. The church on Mount situation in Bronze Age coastal
ished sl$ififr)ir may imply cullic con- Berenice was built in the sixth cen- sites in Lebanon, Syria, and cy-
notations. tury ~ . vand , cmtinuPd in use un- prus, however, very few anchors
'The s i ~ f i f o r r i r f~o~u n d in t w o til the end 0i the Crusades in thc hdve beell fo11nd on land in Israel.
stratigraphic excavations at Tel thirteenth century. The excavator This n u k e s dating and identifying
Reit Yerah indicate thal Lhr group c o n n e c t s t h e p l a c e m e n t of t h e the sea anchors difficult. Thc fol-
cannot b e d a t e d l a k r Lhan t h e sl!fifiorr in ~ h church
c to the use of Iowing is a briei summary of the
Early Bronze 11 period (ca. 3050- the anchor as a symbol for hope most significant published finds.
26.50 N.c..)." By the Middle Rronzc and security in early Christianity ."I A pair of anchors, each bearing
I, judging from the cavalier man- This is the lalesl example known the incised drawing of a quarter
ner in which these stones were re- to me of a stone-anchorlikc object rudder, was recovered a1 Mcga-
~ s e c lin the Llegania "A" tomb, used in a cultic manner. Thus, the dim (Fig. 12.21).57Thetillers poinl
they were no longer serving their Sea of Galilee seems to have [lie riyxlctively to the right and 11.11,
original purpose. Thus, the shfif- lota able distinction ot bring the lo- perhaps indicating that they wtwl
the ship's (stern?) starboard and
port anchors. K. I<. Sticglitz idcn-
tifies the quarter-rudder picto-
graphs as the Egyptian hieroglyph
y i t ~atid the anchors as Egyptian.
'I'liis classification has been gcncr-
ally accepted.'"
The identification of these an-
chors as Egyptian is questionahle,
in my view. Many stone anchors
found in Israeli waters, prcsum-
ably of Syro-Ca~laaniteorigin, arc
recta~lgularwith a rounded top,
similar to the two Mcg AC1'1111an-
chors discussed here. Thc Mcga-
dim anchors lack the attributes
that dcfinv Egyptian anchors-
parlicularly lhc L-shapccl notch.
The only reason to clclim [ha[ ~ h c y
are Egyptian is the cluarkr-ruddcr
pictograph 011 each. ' h s is, hoiv-
ever, only a single symbol, not a
hieroglyphic inscription: anyone
c o ~ ~ haveld made the signs of a
s h i p ' s q ~ ~ a r t erudder
l- without bc-
ing Egyptian, or without even in-
tending lo represent an Egyptian
hieroglyph."'
T h e s a m e s h i p t h a t left the
"c1uarter-r~1dder"a n c h ~ r smrly
have lcfl behlnd an additional pair
of mscribed anchors at Megadtm.""
One anchor bears an hourglas+
like synibol (Fig. 12.22: H ) . The
companion anchor, which is idcn-
tical in shape to the "quarter-rud-
der" anchors, is an ashlar block
doing secondary i i ~ ~ CISt y an-
chor. It hears part o l an Egyptian
relief o n one of its narrow sides
(Fig. 12.22: A, C). I'resumably the
stone had been removed from a
building in Egypt, although even
this is not definite."' TIic relief does
not make the anchor itself Egyp-
tiall; it lacks the L-shaped notch
and apical groove, and its shape is
compatible with a Syro-Canaanite
origin.
C , q j l i / ~ n i ir ~ d r ~ f o o
t ri i c z of i t s l i i 7 t ' r l J i O sirlc,.;; ( R ) n l i c - l i o r wi/lr 1111 " / r o 1 r r ~ ; l i 7 ~ . : "r i ~ x i , y i i ;(C)r l c f / i 7 i l of S / C I J I C~ I J I L - / I L JI T~ /~I L I C ~ i i i i i l
5,3 17 ( f i ~ l i ~ i
//IL' /.,q!//l/~~71
l'1
~ ' / i i ! f f ~ l i , ~ l t i ~111 i l t/i ~ - / i i l l '/\ l l l i l / 11 . 5 C / l l ' l l i l i ~ ~i (' 'l ' l l ~ ~ - ~ i ' C ~
' 1i ~ l ! f~l 1i l /I,;<
li (llftl'l' (;fl/;/i l l i l l / / ~ 1 1 1 J i ~ / /1'1.3.5:
l~t~ 111. 1 /; i'iliil'/iY!/ /~l'lii'/
/ < ~ I ~ ~ lI L~I S
/ ,I S : 4.1 / i c y , 3, 44 /;,y.s. .i
(1; ~ . I I ~ I ~ / /I. <
YrJ~ i i , /A ~ i l i i / i i i t ; A~ i~i ,t ~
/i~~lit~/) / \ ~ i / i i / i i ii /i 8 s A i i / / ~ ~ v i / ! / )
1 TELL q~
CAWAM I I
I ::1
: lnferred wall
im Stone paving ,
I i D Paving other than sfom
\ ! 8 Squared masonry
I i l Verf/CUl SrOm Or prer
I 0 C!ay oven 1
8 i
logical record, and it is difficull to From the Late Bronze Age to the stratum dating to the sixth and
describe a typology from I Tamil- fourth century r3.c .; the rc.mai~iing fifth centuries R.c.""
ton's stratum plan a n d the ]7ho[os three lacked archaeological con- ANCI-IORS I N I N I A A N I IWATERS. A
discr~sscdby J. Ralcnsi. Recent ex- text.6" Anchors also h a v e heen n u m b e r of stone anchors have
cavatio~isi3t 're11 Abu I-Iawam have found in lhc. Hronzc Agc strata of bccn rcporlcd from Lhe Sea of Ca-
rcvcalcd six additional stone an- Tel A c ~ o . Another
"~ stone anchor lilee, but most of hem lack an ar-
c I ~ o r s . ~ ~ T hanchors
ree were found was discovered In secondary use chaeological conlext. Two stone
in sccol~daryuse in strata dating al Tel Shiqmona near IIaifa in a anchors were founcl in thc Iron
Age strata at Tcl Ein C;ev."VOnc
anchor, made of limestone, is rcct-
angular will1 a rounded lop and
wcighs 41 kilograms. The second
stone is probahly a net weight: it
is made of local basalt and weighs
7.5 kilograms. Two stone anchors,
the first to be discovered and iden-
tified as such in the Sea o f Galilee,
were found together with tuwlty-
nine cooking pols by the Link Ex-
pedition near A4igdal: this complex
probably represents a boat's cargo
and equipment. The pottery dates
from the mid-first century 13.c.to
the mid-second c e n t ~ ~11.1).~"'Two
ry
stone anchors were discovered out
of stratigraphic context, in the vi-
cinity of the Kinneret boat."
TWOother pierced stones, prob-
ably anchors, were found in scc-
ondary mse during the excavation
of Khan Minya (Mamalukc-Otto-
man periods) on the ~ i o r t h w c s t
shore o l the lake.'? I. MacGregor
described a stone at Capernaum
lhal may he the stone stock of a
wooden anchor."
Several stone anchors are Icnown
from the shores of the Dead Sea. A
single stone anchor, apparently of
Koman datc, was rc.ported from
Kujm el Ral~r.71 Four more were
found ncar Ein Gedi." T w o of
these anchors still had remaills of
rope hawsers, the longest being I .h
meters long. I<adiocarbon dating
of the rope sllggests a date around
the f o ~ ~ r tto
l i third centuries ILC.
The rope was found to he double-
stranded. This is ~ h only r rope re-
ported from nonmodcrn stone an-
chors.
In general, it appears that stone
anchors continued to be ~ ~ s on ed
both the Sea of Galilec a n d t h ~ )
Lhad Sea well into Classical timcs
and probably 1atc.r.
LL~~~IIIOH
RYRLOS.Twenty-eight stone an-
chors were locatcd in the excava-
tions of Hyblos.'" Scven were tc)und
in and around the Temple of thc
Obclisks (Fig. 12.28: 14,7-9). They
date from the nineleenlli lo the six-
tccnlh centuries I).L,. Two anchors,
b o ~ l Lriang~~lar,
i are definitely i l l a
sacred context: standing ~ i p r i g h t
o n a bench-shelf against the wall
of the "Amorik~"chapel next to the
Tcniple of the Obelisks. This cha-
pel had votive obelisks, o n e of
which was dedicated to Herchef or
Keshel. Frost assumes that the two
anchors served the same purpose.
Another triangular anchor w a s
found resting 011 the northern side
of t h e t e m e n o s wall t h a t s u r -
rounded the cella.
The lowest step of the stairs
Icading up lo the Tower Temple is
constructed of six chalk "dummy"
anchors set in a row (Fig. 12.28:
23-28).'' This temple dates to the
twenty-third century KC. Only the
top face o f the anchors has been
-
worked: this, along with their find
spot, indicates to Frost that these
were in themselves offerings. She
suggests that the number of an-
chors may reveal the complement
. I U U
4
of anchors carried by a single ship.
1 2 3 Three more anchors, dated to
the twenty-tlii rd through twenty-
first centuries KC.., were also found
in the enclosure (Fig. 12.28: 17-18,
22). Nine other anchors were dis-
covered in secondary t ~ s cin later
strata (Fig. 12.28: 10-16, 19-20).
With the exception of one un-
dated anchor, all those found at
Ryblos are weight-anchors. Frost
defines the typical Byblos anchor
shape as a tall, equilateral stone
slab with one apical hole; above
the liole is a well-defined rope
groove. The hawser liole is round
and biconical: the latter attribute
is best illustrated in an unfinished
anchor with a blind hole (Fig.
12.28: 11). The anchors are of me-
dium size at Byblos; here, the gi-
gantism of the Ugarit and Kition
anchors is l a ~ k i n g . ~The
' ' largest
anchors at i%yblosare calculated to
weigh about 250 kilograms. The
similarity between Ryblian and
Egyptian anchors may result from
t'iyure 72.29. The Narwh Yam anchurs (aflrr Galili 1987: 167fiX.I )
Egyptian influence at IZyblo~.~"
Interestingly, at Ryblos itself the
"Byblian" anchor is not in the ma-
jority. Only six of the large-size
anchors have the characteristic tri-
angular shape (Fig. 12.28: 1, 3 4 ,
15-16, 18). JJerhaps anchors were
normally contributed to the temple
by nonlocal scafarcrs, as, for ex-
ample, must be the case of the
Egyptian anchor fotind at Ryhlos
(Fig. 12.28: 21 ).
Most "Byblian" anchors known
to date come from off the Israeli
Mediterranean c o a ~ t .A ~ "group of
fifteen stone anchors of Frost's
Byblian type was found at Naveh
Yam (Fig. 12.29); anothcr was
found sntith of Dm, bctwccii the
F i ~ u r r12.30. "Ryhliun unchorfr)und h ~ h l ~ ~t .h~islund~
" ~' n of Hofurni und Tufut ut Dor ( ~ ~ ~ U J I I Zislands
X of I.lofami and Tafat at the
by L'. '1'. I'csrr!y; corrrlrsy Isrnc4 Arrliqirilic~sArrllrorily) cntrancc to Tantura Lagoon (Figs.
Syria
UGAKIT. Frost describes forty-
three stone anchorh found at Uga-
rit and its main port, Minct el
H~ida."Of these, twenty-two are
located in or around the 'Temple of
Baal (Figs. 12.33: 1-17).H4The Uga-
ritic anchors have three main
shapes: an elongated rectangle, a
squat rectangle, and a triangle. Four
of the anchors weigh about half a fi,qrrre 12.31. A "Rlybliutr r~rrrlrorfro~rr
" U o r (corrrlcsy Isr~zclAr11iqrritir.s Arrthorit!/)
ton each (Fig. 12.33: 2-3,5-6).
C. F. A. Schaeffer dates the level
of the temple in which the anchors
were found to the reigns of Seso- apical rope groove. It weighs 10.4
stris 11 through Amenemhet 1V. kilograms and is probably a net
Interestingly, the nearby 'Temple weight. In Israel to this day, stones
of Dagon lacked a n y anchors still serve as net weighis for some
whatsoever. I t appears that an- fishermen (Fig. 12.35).
chors were dedicated to s p ~ c i f i c FIALA SULTAN 'I'EKE. A num-
gods, most probably those (like ber of anchors have been found in
Haal) in charge of the weather. the land excavations at Hala Sul-
Two anchors, for which Frost pro- tan Teke and in the neighboring
poses a fifteenth- or fourteenth- underwater site of Cape Kiti (Figs.
century date, were found flanking 12.36-3Y).HHNumerous stone an-
the entrance to a tomb (Fig. 12.33: chors were also discovered off
27-28).H5These anchors find a close Cape Andreas (Figs. 12.4042).8v
parallel in one discovercd under- KITION. The largest single group
water at nor.*' of anchors from an excavated land
site comes from Kition, where
Cyprus some 147stone anchors have been
Cypriot IAateRronxe Age harbor recorded in the temple complexes
sites are rich in stone anchors. (Fig. 12.43)."' Frost notes a "fam-
Many others havc been found in ily resemblance" between the an-
underwater surveys. The earliest chors from Ugarit and those from
published pierced stone from Kition."
Cyprus dates to the sixth millen- At Kition anchors were classi-
nium and was found in Stra turn 111 fied by tithological thin sections.Y2
at Khirokitia (Fig. 12.34).H7The Three anchors were f o ~ ~ n todbe of
stone is roughly triangular with a stone foreign to the s i t c . ' T h e
small biconical piercing and an stone of one anchor was identified
as originating in Turkey or Egypt.
'This, however, docs not neccssar-
ily indicate a foreign ship, for ves-
sels could have picked u p stonc
blanks for their anchors anywhere
and prepared them on board while
under sail.
The Kition anchors arc squat
with rounded corners and range it1
shapu from rectangular to triangu-
la^-.'^ They rescmble Ugaritic an-
chors but contrast markedly with
the triangular Ryblian shapc. A
style of anchor that Frost defines
as regional to Kitioti is composite
a n d h a s a rounded, triangular
shape. This kind of anchor seems
to b e far-ranging. Frost mentions
uxamples found off the island of
Ustica a n d also discovered to-
gcther with a mclal ingot off Cape
Kaliakri, in the Black Sea. Several
of this varicty were also found
underwater at Cape Andrcas, t iala
Sultan Teke, and Cape Kiti (Figs.
1.2.36: A [I-21, 37: C, E, 38: L-M,
41: A-D). Three such anchors bear
the three-line Cypro-Minoan ar-
row sign ( F ~ K12.36: A [I, 3].'"'l'he
Karnak anchor h a s this typical
Cypriot shape but is made of local
limestone (Fig. 12.44).'"
Fifteen of the Kition anchors
h a v e a rectangular s h a p c first
noted o n an embedded anchor (?)
in the tomb of Mcrcruka (Fig. 12.6:
B). Since the Mereru ka anchor pre-
dates those at Kition by nearly a
millennium, this only establishes
t h a t the s h a p e w a s a c o m m o n
Ti!rkt!y
A number of unpublished s l o w
composite- a n d weight-anchors
are exhibited in the courtyard of
the Rodrum Museum of Under-
water Archaealogy."" W e know
nothing of stonc anchors used by
Lale I%ronzeAge Aiiatolian sea-
farers.
- -......
~
. '.-.
I..
-
Q)
blind
-
4. . . . .
* T R
. .
. - .- . - .-. - ._.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 9 1 0
. - .- .-. -.
DEPTHmm, - . - , - . SCALE OF PLAN .........
..... ..................
bccn found 0 1 1 land, apparently tentatively datcd these to the Early suggesting that they had nevcr
becausc anchors were not nor- lielladic period, suggesting that seen servicc in the sea.
mally dcdicatcd in cultic contexts they are derived from a ship from A beaulifully carved pierced
in the Minoan and M y c e ~ ~ a e are-
n that period that had wrecked at the porphyry stonc, decorated with a
ligions.loo site. Since these anchors are of a Minoan-style octopus, was found
M A I N L A N D GREECE. At pres- size, type, and style that continued by A . Evans at Knossos (Fig. '1 2.45:
ent, the typology of Mycenaean in common usc throughout the D).""~The stone weighs twrrnty-
anchors remains unknown. Two Mediterranean into modern times, nine kilograms: Evans believed i t
stone anchors-one round, the this conclusion seems to overstep was a weigh1 for weighing oxhide
other somewhat rectangular- the available evidence. ingots. 'l'his artifact is so elaborate,
were recovered off Cape Stonii at C R E T E . Three Middle Minoan however, that it may havc been i l l -
Marathon I3ay."" A three-holed stone anchors were found at Mallia tended for cultic
composik anchor was discovered (Fig. 12.45: A<)."'" The area where Five pierced stones, originally
off I'oitiL lria near a concentration two of the anchors were found was identified as anchors, were found
of I.ate I lelladic pottery."" originally thought Lo be a stonc- in a Late Minoan 111 cor~textat
IjOKOS. T w o stonr. anchors mason's workshop but has more Kommos (Fig. 12.46:L))."'XI I. Hlit-
were recovered from the Dokos recently been identified as a sanc- zcr later thought that some of these
site."',' The anchors weigh about tuary."" All three of the ancliors stones were weights used in olive
twenty kilograms each and are of havc a triangular shape with a presses instead of anchors."'"
nondescript shape, with small rotindtd top; one has a square rope During the summer of '199.7, two
rope holes. 'l'he excavators havc hole. The stones were freshly cut, Bronze Age stoiie anchors wr.w
discovered within the Minoan
civic buildings a t Kommos (Fig.
12.46: A-C)."" T h e anchors are
composite, with one largc holc at
Lhe apex a n d t w o smaller holes
near the bottom. The larger of the
t w o a n c h o r s i s 74 centimeters
high, 60 ccntimctcrs wide at the
bottom, and 15 ccntimctcrs thick.
It weighs 75 kilograms. This is the
first recorded discovery of Lhree-
h o l e d c o m p o s i t e - a n c h o r s rc-
ported from a l a n d site in the
Aegean. 'l'hc latter two anchors
were reused a s bases for wooden
supports. They date to the Latc
Minoan TTTA I-A2 and were found
together with Canaanite, Cypriot,
a n d Egyptian a s well a s local
Minoan shcrds.
Another broken anchor, per-
haps of Latc Minoan 1H date, was
found at Makrygialos."'
TI IERA. S. Marinatos identifies
a pierced stone found at 'rhcra as
an anchor (Fig. 12.47). 'l'he rope
holc is exceptionally small (about
4 ccntimelers) for the stone's h5-
kilogram weight, and it is difficult
to understand how the stone could
have served a s an anchor without
having some additional form of
binding. The stone is described by
Marinatos a s bcing "roughly oval,
Fi,qurr* 12.4.4. (below) Slorri. izrrclrt~rsin sill1 black trachyte stone, about 60 cm
ut K i t h (lilrotos by tlrt, rrrrtlrr~r) long." I le mentions two additional
pierced stones, found in Scctor A,
but gives no further del:ails."'
MYKONOS. A three-holed com-
posite anchor is exhibited at thc
Aegean Maritime Museum o n the
island of Mykonos.' I.'
KI-IODES. An anchor was found
in Tomb 27 at lalysos.' l 4
A B C D
Arrckorson Shipwrecks
I
, IM. UIJJIRJRUN. Twenty-four stone
anchors h a w been found on the
F i ~ ~ 12.45.
r c (A-H) Stotrc arrt,lrr~rsr.xr:arintcd a t M o l l r o . (.'I. ~rirrc*t~.t.rltlr
c ~ w t r r r yI{.,:. L'.<ti~~rntld Uluburun wreck (Figs. 9.1; 12.48:
7 ~ ~ l ' ~ ,rrhrrirt
~ h t : h r ~ l t y : f i rirlrf
i ~ ~ ,forty
~ k i l o ~ r r r ~ ~ (r ?C; ). .5tr111eurrchrr f r m r Mullicl, c-u. 17.50 1c.c.
A-R; 14.1)."Wost are made of
(D) l J o r p / r ~ / r uy r ~ c - l r ~ ~ r - s l r~~w~ ~i ~~cl(?).
Esti~irutcdrivni,vlrt:.sixty ki10~r11ttrs. ~ri li T l w slorri~ts
rkcorrt~ctlirr rclic:/uiirlr nrr o c l o p s (A-0 17flcr Frosl 1973: 4011Jx. I : 6 )
sandstone; two small anchors con-
sist of hard, white, marblelike
limestone. Eight anchors, includ-
i ~ l gthe lwo smaller ones, had been
carried in the ccntcr of the hull
between t w o stacks of copper ~ ~
FACE 2 SECTION B - B
ANCHOR S 2234 W E I G H T: 7 5 K I L O G R A M S
lower perimeter of the wreck.lIhA quantities of rope for use with the
study of the site plans and photos anchors, although no rope has been
published to date suggests several reported from the excavation. A t
disti~ictions:"~ present the closcst parallels on land
All arc weight-anchors, each sites to the Uluburun anchors, a s a
with a single hole. group, seem to come from Ugarit,
The anchor shapes vary from Kition, and Uyblos.'lHSixof the am
trapezoidal with truncated top to chors that have been weighed var-
roughly triangular with rounded ied between 121 and 208 kilo-
top. grams.IlYBased on their average
At least six of the anchors have wcight, the twenty-four anchors on
square rope holes. (he Uluburunship wcigh over four
No rope groovcs are visible 011 tons!
the plans or in the published pho- CAPE C;hl,ll)ONYA. During the
tos of the anchors. 1960 excavation of thc Cape Geli-
Because anchors in use were car- donya shipwreck, no stone anchors
ried primarily at a ship's how, the were found. Their absence at the
fact that so many anchors wcru site remained an enigma that be-
found at thelower end of rhe wreck came even more remarkable when
supports the conclusion that this is seen i n contrast to the twenty-four
the craft's bow. The ship may have anchors rccovered at Uluburun.
lost some of her anchors attempt- During the 1994 lnstitule of Nau-
ing to avoid the coast. The large tical Archaeology underwater sur-
number of stone anchors carried by vey off Turkey, the team located
the Uluburi~nship seems indica-
tive of both the anchors' expendahil-
ily as well as their unreliability. Pre-
sumably, the ship also carried
Fi,qurc 12.51. Drtnil of n ship's boat ferryillg l r a d ~ g o o d slo the coast a1 Prrnt (Dcir el Rnhri) (from Nn?~i//e
1898: p1. 7 2 )
288 6
9
' SEAGOING SHIPS & SEAMANSHIP
Fixurt 72..52. Stom* r m c h r s (it Kitir~w( 1 . a t ~C y ~ ~ r rIIIA):
ot ( A X ) pairs ofstonc- arrdrors; (D) the. l n r ~ arrrlror
~ ~ t at Krtiorr ( u ~ r g lca.
~ t 1.35 nrvtrir
lorrs); (E) I n r p nndlor (711ci~ht C I I . 7 0 0 kiloxranrs) ( f m r r l'rost 1986C: 297,fiX. 4: 1 4, . 3 0 2 / 1 ~7.: 4 7 )
parcntly an attempt to avoid tlie
inevilable d a m a g e d o n e to this
part of the rope, as well as to seat
the eye.
In antiquity, a short piece of rope
may have been passed through the
hawser hole and splicrd, forming
all eye, or ring. The hawscr M ~ O L I ~ ~
hen he atlaclied to the eye. When
the eye wore O L I i~t ,w o ~ ~ lhave d
b w n tvsily replaced without do-
ing any d a m a g e to the hawser.
Such a n eye is visible o n tlie tria~l-
g ~ ~ l sloncl
ar anchor on a Cypriot
jug (Fig. 8.4'1 : A).''" Composite
stone anchors called si1111(Arabic
for "tooth"), ~ ~ s by e dArab craft in
tlie Persian Gulf, are still altaclicd
i l l this n ~ a n n e r . ~ . "
i l l section. 'The square lioles noted eyes parted, the ancllor W O L I I ~ %till
on anchors from Ugarit, Kition, not be lost. I'erhaps anchors with
and Uluburun n i ~ ~therefore
st have s q ~ ~ a rlioles
t, were ~ l s c dwlicn an-
had a technological rnisorr d'c;lrc'. choring o n a rocky bottom when
rl'hese square holes may have the eye was more likely to chal'e,
resulted from a preference to pass wliilc anchors with round hnles
four or five smaller eyes, instead wcrc reserved fnr sandy bottoms.
of one big eye, t l i r o ~ ~ gthe
l i hole In later times, chafing was avoided
(Fig. 12.56). I f one or two of the by placing the hawscr hnlc on the
narrow side of the a n c h ~ r . "I' n~
support of this explanation, note
that the rope hawser of the stonc
anchor from the I lellenistic period
found near Ein Gedi-the only
hawser yet found in connection
with an ancient stone anchor-was
made of two separate ropes."'"
One type of Cypriot stone an-
chor has an exceptionally large
anchor hole that seems nonfunc-
tional (Fig.;. 12.38: C, C;, 40: C;, E,
57).14"Specimen.; found o n Lhc sca-
bed signify that this anchor type
was indeed used at sea, however.
A n anchor found underwater
near the lighthouse at Cape Kiti
has a blind hole (Fig. 12.39: B). 1
have sccn another unfinished an-
chor on the seabed at llor. These but serving no structiiral p u r - In Ryhlos, a pair of anchors was
two artifacts suggest that slone pose.'" They also appear in tombs, found in the dromos of a tomb (Fig.
blanks were, at least on occasion, near or in wells, and aligned in 12.33: 27-28). This apparel1t cul tic
taken aboard ship and prepared thresholds and walls, normally in connection to a p i r of anchorsmay
while the craft was at sea. sets of two, ~ h r e e ,four, and six be ~raccabluLo the manner in which
(Figs. 12.28: 23-28,58). pairs of anchors were used in the
Arrchors Found Cup marks, presumably indica- sea. AL Dor, two large, virtually
irr Crllfic Conrrofafions tive of cultic practices, are occa- identical anchors were found lying
Anchors found in temples at Byb- sionally found on stone anchors irr s i h o n the seabed in a manner
los, Ugarit, a i d Kition share com- uncovered in Lemplc precincts. thal suggcsk ~ h shipc had lowered
mon fcatures in their position- Frost suggesls that at Ki tion, the the two anchors from one end and
ing.'5"'These features include their anchors were made in and for he had moored belween them.'" Six
use as hrtyls standing over bothroi, temples. Unfinished anchors were of the Kition anchors and eight of
anchors standing upright among found at Byblos, Kition, and among the Ugari tic ones exhibit signs of
other votive offerings, as well as the shjiforrirrr. burning, also apparently caused by
the inclusion of groups of anchors Many anchors at Kition were cultic operatio11s."~
as part of the temple architecture found in pairs (Fig. 12.52: A-C).Iv
A n d ~ o r son the Seuberi wildly over his fragile wooden hull
Why arc so many anchors found in as it was lifted o n board.
certain areas of the Mediterranean Sedimentation may be another Anchors are a major clement for
seabed? Some were no doubt left cause for leaving anchors behind [hestudy of Bronze Age seafaring,
behind when the hawser partcd. on the seabed. On shallow, sandy but anchor research is still in a for-
Also, anchors must have been con- shores, storms can displace enor- mative stage. A l t h o ~ ~ gimportant
h
sidcrcd expendable: some may mous a m o ~ ~ nof t s sand in a rela- strides have been m a d e in the
have had their hawsers cut to a1- tivdy short time. At the end of a study o f Rronze Age anchors,
low a hasty retreat when it was storm, a ship anchored in a "proto- much remains unknown, and a
necessary to escape danger. Rais- harbor" may have found its at]- definitive corpus of all known an-
ing an anclior in the manner por- chors buried so deeply in the sand chors is urgently tieeded. 'l'hcrc
trayed o n the Cypriot jugs would that they could tiot be raised. remain en tire regions that are tr~rra
have been cxtremely dangerous in Some s t o n e anchor g r o u p s ini~o,y~ifa
vis-b-vis stone ailchors.
any kind of sea. Just manhandling found i n the breaker zone may We know almost nothing of the
nil anchor weighing 150 to 200 ki- have been left bchiild because it is anchors of Mycenaean C .re(!ce' or
lograms aboard a ship in quiet impossible t o kedge with stone the Anatolian coast, for example.
waters is difficult enough, as the anchors. Thus, in order to float W h a kind
~ of anchors was ustd by
staff of the Uluburun excavation free, a ship stuck on a sandbank the seafaring merchants of Ura?
came Lo realize (Fig. 12.48: R). No could only resort to ligli~eningher- We d o not know. Similarly, thc
doubt a Bronze Age captain would self. In all likelihood the firs1 ilems typology of Canaanite anchors has
have preferred to cut his hawser to go overboard were the anchors, yet to be defined.
rather than have a quarter-ton as these could be most readily re-
(or more) stone anchor swinging placed.
CHAPTER 13
Navigation
The sailing season in antiquity Cilicia/Norlh Syrian Coast place name, Alashia." Amanmasha
was normally limited to the sum- ( T i * .73.7: 13) is presumably the same Egyptian
mer months, between March and Ugarit carried on all active mari- official who had been previously
November, when northwesterly time trade with Ura (c), which was stationed at U y b l o ~Y.
. ~ L. Holmes
winds prcvail in the caster11Medi- the main Mediterranean port for notcs that liib-Addi is saying that
terranean.' This had a profound the 1littite kingdom. Ura was prob- because of the difficult situation,
effect on the sailing routes plied ably located in Cilicia, p e r h a p s he considered it necessary to send
d i ~ r i n gthe Bronze Age, for the near modern Silifke, or about sixty Amanmasha to Egypt by a route
boom-footed square rig then in kilometers to ~ l i cwest in the re- othcr than the normal coastal route
use w a s intended primarily for gion of Ayd i ncik.? between Ryblos and Egypt."
sailing with a following wind. Al- Now if Alashia is located north
though it was possible to travel a Syro-Carraanik of Hyblos 011 t h e Norlh Syrian
direct path from Europc to Africa, CoastlCypruslE,yypt coast o r in Cilicia a s some schol-
the return voyage had 10 b e m a d e (Fig. 13.1 :C - D ) ars conlend, thcn liib-Addi's ac-
f o l l o w i ~ ~the
g Levantine coastlincr. I11 EA 114, liib-Addi, tliecmbattlcd tions are incomprcheilsible. Not
king of Byblos, reports thal h e is only would Amanmasha be sail-
Sea Routes under land and coastal siege by his ing in the wrong direction, but this
enemy, Azirtr, who h a s taken con- would also require him to sail
The followiiig Mediterranean sea trol of the sea routes."Toward the along the Syrian coast-precisely
r o u t e s a r e d o c u m e n t e d in t h e end of the letter, Rib-Addi cmpha- the area that was under Axiru's
Bronze Age: sizes his isolation by bringing the control and which liib-Addi would
following action to the pharaoh's have wished Amanmasha to avoid
L'xyptlSyro-Cartaunitc attention: at all costs.
Coast (Fix. 73.7: A ) If Alashia is located in Cyprus,
Evidence, discussed above, indi- however, then Kib-Addi's actions
cates the intense usc of the sea arc clear and make perfect sense.
route along the Syro-Catiaanite To avoid Aziru's ships that lurked
coast bctwccii Ugarit and Egypt a s along the coast, Amanmasha's ves-
early a s thc Late Uruk period.' sel would have sailcd across the
Thcsc include voyages to and from open sea from Ryblos to Cyprus
Egypt and intercity contacts, par- (Fig. 10.1: C). From there, with the
ticularly by Syro-Canaanite a n d W. I,. Moran, in his commeii- aid of the predominantly north-
Egyptian ships. tary to this text, notcs that the or- western wind, Amanmasha would
der of the words emphasizes the have thcn sailcd safely across ~ h c
open sea to Egypt (Fig. 13.1: D).' cate the movement of ships be- ter part of the La tc Bronze Age and
H O L legs
~ of the "Alashia route" tween these two lands.I2 that this run was apparently con-
_(Syrian coast-Cyprus, C y p r t ~ s - sidered especially lucrativc."' A
Egypt) musl have been familiar to A~~eanlSyro-Canaanitt! I Ti t t i k vassal treaty with Amt~rru
Rib-Addi for him to send Aman- Coast (Fig. 73.7: E ) d a t i n g to the e n d of the Lakc
masha that way. This text is also 'The earliest evidence for this route Bronze Age also indicates sea con-
notable in that i l is the earliest re- is the appearance of a Caphtorite tact betweeti Ahhiyawa and the
(:ordud open-sea voyage in the (Minoan)at Mari in the early cigh- Syro-Canaanite coast.17
Mediterranean. tccnth century ti.c.'.' On their way This route had a number of
r 3
1here are numerous references to the Levant, the Minoans evi- variations. One of lhese is men-
to Alashians located in Ugarit and dently influenced the indigenous tioned much later in the itinerary
in Egypt."' One Ugaritic text is a Cypriot culture, for the Cypro- of Abbot Nikolris, an Icelander
(partial?) lading of the cargo of an Minoan script derives from Linear w h o made a pilgrimage lo the
Alashian ship docked at Atallig, A.14 The "Admonitions of Ipu- I loly I,and in the twelfth ccntury
onc of Ugarit's ports." Anchors wcr" also may allude to the early A.D.(Fig. 13.2). After crossing [he
add to his evidence. Ugaritic and use of this route." Aegean, his ship appcars to have
I$yblian anchors found underwa- A royal dispensation given to stopped a t Kos, Palara, Kastel-
ter off Cyprus, and what appears Si tlaranu, an Ugaritic mcrchan t, lorizon a n d / o r Kag (Myra), and
to be a Cypriot "basket-handle" reveals that Syro-Canaanites were Capc Cclidonya.IHFrom there thc
anchor uncovered at Ugarit, indi- voyaging to the Aegean by he lat- ship headed sut~theastto h p h o s
Th?Ar:yr.an (Fix.13.3)
A topographical list on the base of
a statue in the forecourt of Amen-
hotep Ill's mortuary temple at
Kom el tletarl contains a list of
Aegean place m lames.^' Ameti-
hotep's name appears in the ccn-
ter of the base's front side above a
s i n 3 sign with two Syro-Canaan-
itcs bound to it. To its right are two
place namcs:
t ' i p r c 13.2. Tlrc roul18of Abbol Nikoldsfrorrr Ituly 10 Awe In t111,rrriii-t~oc4ftlr ccwlrrry A.U.
1) Amnisos 4) Myccnac
irrclrrdcd Ilrc~followirr~ sil1.s: ( a ) Hari, (b) r)uruzzo, ( c ) Corfrd, ( d ) Cqilrnlotrin, ( e )Snpicrrz~?,
2) lJhaistos 5 ) 'I'cgai (I) C a p , M n l m , (g)Mnrlitr Cnrnho, (h) Kos, ( I ) 121101ii~s,(j) K u s t ~ ~ l l o r i ~ o(k)
r r , Pulnrn, ( I ) M y r n ,
3) Kydonia 6 ) Mcsscnia (m) Cnlw Cr*lidri~~yu, ( n ) I ' q h ) ? r , (0)ACCO(njtcr C ' d s i t r p 1972: 15tl/itq I )
NAVIGATION CS 297
juniper are conifers." M~crrrwood
wax imported from the Syrian
coast. Since it is highly unlikely
that conifers grew and were har-
vested in the western delta, Vcr-
coutter logically assumes that the
timber was imported. Because
there is no reason for wood im-
ported from the Syro-Canaanite
coast to arrive via the uwt~,rv~delta,
Vercouttcr suggests that Merikare
is alluding to goods arriving from
the Aegean via the dircct sea route.
Vercouttcr raises a second poinl,
which I believe to be the strongest
evidence available in support of
the Minoans using a blue-water
route o n their way to Egypt. It is
this: the Egyptians always consid-
ered Kcftiu a uwstcrn country.'?
Had thcy known the Minoans only
as arriving by way of the Syro-
Canaanite coast, they would have
thought that Keftiu was located
northeast of Syria.
Minoans may have first reached
Egypt via the Syro-Canaanite
coast. Eventually, however, they
must have realized the advisabil-
~ ~ M ~illrtstrntitr,q
I ' i ~ r r r13.3. I thc sitcs rtierrtiotrcd irr the top,qrn/dric list r,fAcywri rrartres,frr~ttr
ity of sailing straight across the
Anri'tilrotr~1r 111':: rnortrrury torilrle rrt Konr cl I letnti: (.I a i d k) Anriiisos, (h) IYiaistrs, (c)
K~jrllitrin,(cl) Myccvrnc, (t.) 'l'c~grri,( I ) Mvssetrin, ( g ) Nnrrplin, (11) K!jllrc~rn,( i ) 'l'roy (Ilirw), (j)
Mcdilerranean. Theappearance of
Minoans in Egypt at 'Sell el-Dab%
at the time of the 'I'hirteenth Dy-
nasty suggests that thcy wcrc the
first navigators to open this route.'.'
ture) at Tell el Dab'a slrongly sug- his opinion, never got farther than 1x1 charting this course, the Min-
gests that Minoans actually lived the Syro-Canaanite coast, and all oans may have followed bird mi-
therc during the latter part of [he Minoan contacts with Egypt were gration routes; alterizately, the dis-
Second Intermediate period and therefore indirect. covery of a direct route from Crete
that they wcrc in close contact with The obvious sea route from the to Egypt may have occurred from
the ruling class.'7 Aegean to Egypt, however, is di- an involuntary drift A
By which route did the Minoans rectly across the Mediterranean Minoan ship blown off-course by
reach Egypt? Did they follow the with the predominant northwest the Etcsian winds while o n khe
Anatolian a n d Syro-Canaanite winds.'" A western open-water southern coast of Crctc would
coasts in a clockwise route, or did route from Crete to Egypt may be have been carried to Egypt.
they venture south in blue-water indicated in "'l'he 'l'eachings of I'resumcd dircct contact back
voyages across the Mediterranean? Merikare," dated to the end of the and forth between the Minoan cul-
Writing in 1950, A. Furumark as- twenty-second century: "I pacified ture and Libya is difficult to sus-
sumes that in the Late Bronze Age, the entire west, as far as the coast tain because the return journey
ships never left sight of land. He of the sea. It works for itself, as it from Libya to Clrctc would have
believes that all traffic between gives ~ncru-wood,and one may see nearly always required a trip along
Crctc and Egypt went via the Syro- juniper. They give it to J. Vcr- the Syro-Canaanite coast. Pre-
Canaanite coast.2H Minoan ships, in coutter notes that both mrru and dynastic artifacts found in Crete do
not necessarily indicate early trade Cypriot pottery.i2 This pottery the eastern Mediterranean. 'l'his
contacts: a strong argument can be dates to the Eighteenth Dynasty. docs not necessarily imply lack
made for them being brought as The excavator suggests that Bates' of navigational knowledge, how-
"antique" trinkets that arrived in Island served primarily as a way- ever: highly developed naviga-
the Aegean during the Middle station for ships to take on supplies tional systems may havc existed
Minoan 111-Late 111 periods.'? arriving from the Aegean. without leaving any archacologi-
t lomer supplies us with the ear- A Latc Bronze Age ship wishing cal trace, beyond evidence for the
lier literary reference to the open- to return to Cyprus from Egypt open-sea voyages themselves.
sea route from Crete to Egypt. without following the Syro-Cana- Ancient navigation was an art-
Odysseus relates: anitc coast could, theoretically, sail not a science. It depended o n a vast
from the Nile Ilelta to Mersa Mat- and intimate knowledge of posi-
Weembarked and set sail from ruh a n d from there directly to tion-finding factors that were eri-
broad Crctc, with the North Cyprus (Fig. 13.1?). The sailing di- tirely committed to memory.47'l'his
Wind blowing fresh and fair, and rection from Mersa Matruh to the is admirably illustrated by Pacific
ran orr easily as if down stream. western end of Cyprus is northeast navigation. Despite the impressive
No harm came to any of my ships, by east; thus, this route lies nine results of native Oceanic naviga-
but fret' from scathe and from dis- points off the predominant north- tion, no position-finding instru-
rase we sat, and the helmsman west wind. Although feasible in ments were ever taken aboard
guided the ships. theory, there is no evidence that ship.JnThc only navigational aids
0 1 1 thc filth day we came to ships plied this course i n the Bronze were stick charts, and these wcre
fair-flowing Acgyptus, and in the Age The return voyage from Egypt used only as mnemonic devices
river Aegyptus I moored my across the Mediterrancan to Cyprus that wcre not taken to sca."Theo-
curved rhips.lh was possible using a (brailcd) retically, a similar situation may
square rig, as is illustrated by the have existed in the Bronze Age
Elsewhere, Odysseus calls this later voyage of the lsi~.~' Mediterrariean.
route "a far voyage."" Classical Navigational knowledge is usu-
refere~lcesdescribe a three- to Navigational Techl~iques ally a well-goarded secret, shared
four-day crossing from Crete to only by a select cadre of naviga-
Egypt."" "They lookcd at the sky . . . they tors. In Oceania, for example, navi-
Although such goods were rare lookcd at theland," wrote the Ship- gational lore was restricted to a
in the Aegean, the Uluburun ship wrecked Sailor of his drowned privileged few."" 'l'his may result
was laden with Cypriot pottery corn pan ion^.^^ Seafarers in antiq- in the loss of navigational tech-
when she went down.'' Bass and uity must havc had a working niques, as was almost the case in
C. M. I'ulak suggest that this cargo knowledge of navigational tech- Oceania until the work of modern
was not meant for the Aegean rc- niques and meteorology. Lacking investigators.:"
gion but that the ship may have it could prove fatal. When King It is possible that during the
been on a counterclockwise circuit Solomon built ships for the run to Late Bronze Age, also, naviga-
of the eastern Mediterranean, a Ophir, he wisely manned them tional tech~iiyueswere kept secret
trade route previously proposed with Tyrian seafarers who "were and may have been lost during
by Verco~tter.~" familiar with the sea."4" Interest- times of unrest and turbulence.
After d r o p p i n g off its main ingly, when Jehoshaphat later built The Minoans had the navigational
cargo in the Aegean, the s h i p "ships of Tarshish" to r e p e a t knowledge required to use the
would have continued across the Solomon's feat (without I'hoe- open-sea route to Egypt. Perhaps
Medi t t rrancan, possibly reaching nician experts), the ships were the ability to navigate southward
land at the Libyan port of Mersa wrecked at Etzion G c ~ e r . ~ ~ across the Mediterranean was lost
Matruh, the only natural harbor lnformation on seafaring navi- for a time when the autonomous
between Alexandria and Tobruk, gational techniques of the Bronze Minoan culture fell and was never
before continuing o n to Egypt (Fig. Age is limited. With the notable acquired by the Myccnaeans. 'l'his
13.1: F [2]).'"Excavations at the Late exception of sou~idingweights, I is o n e possible reason for the
Hronzc Age site on Bates' Island am unaware of nautical naviga- a pparent cessation of direct trade
near Mersa Matruh revealed Egyp- tional instruments surviving in the links between the Aegean and
tian, Palestinian, Minoan, and archaeological record of any of the Egypt a t the e n d of the Latc
Mycenaean shcrds-but primarily Hronzc Age cultures that peopled Minoan 1H
Soiirrdirr~W t i ~ ts h Wind lioses using that city's alphabclic script.
Keiiamuii's artist depicted look- It is generally assumed that before 'I'he diptych found 0 1 1 the Ulu-
ouls in the bows of two ships mea- the introduction of the magnetic burun shipwreck raises the possi-
s u r i n g t h e river's d e p t h w i t h compass, Mediterranean naviga- bility that at least one person 0 1 1
s o u ~ i d i n gpoles, b u t these woidd tors took their bearings from the board that vessel may havc been
have been useless in coastal navi- winds."Thc invcnlion of the Med- literate.hJ 1 a m not aware of any
gation (Figs. 3.3, 6). Middle King- iterranean wind rose is associated Bronze Age nautical charts.
d o m models sometimes porlray with the I-'hoenicians.'"'Ihe reason- Other navigational systems de-
the lookout holding a s o u n d i n g ingbchind [his kind of "compass" p e n d e d o n the s u n . The points
weight.',' A l a r g e l e a d w e i g h t is that each wind had a different where the s u n rises and scls fluc-
found at Uluburun may have been "signattire" with respect to tem- tuate considerably with tlic sea-
t h e ship's s o u n d i n g lead." T h e perature, moisture, and other char- sons, however. Fixed points were
small pierced stories commonly acteristic~.~~ needed, a n d these could only be
f o ~ m dunderwater along the coasts Homer knew four winds: Roreas supplied by the stars. The original
of the Mediterranean arc generally (the north wind), Euros (the east M e d i t e r r a n e a n w i n d rose m a y
takcn to bc fishnct weights (Fig. wind), Notos (the south wind), and havc hccn based on a sidereal com-
12.35): s o m e of tlicsc m a y h a v e Z e p h u r o s ( t h e west wind). The pass. Since Mcdilerranean seafar-
been used a s s i m p l e s o u n d i n g Greeks later developed this into a11 ing was largely in sight of land,
weigh ts. cighl-wind system, as depicted on however, the need for [his may not
t h e f i rsl-crnlu ry I3.C. A t h e n i a n have arisen.
I3irds "Tower of the Winds" (Ilorolo-
It is likely that birds were used a s gium).""The four additional winds Stellar Naz~i,yation
a l a n d - f i n d i n g m e t h o d in t h e more o r less bisect the angles be- 'The later Creeks arc said 10 have
Rronzc Age Mcdi ~ e r r a n e a nThis .~~ tween the original four. 'l'he Hal- learned stellar navigation from the
land-finding technique, described ians adopted the Greek wind sys- Phoenicians. The Greek poet Ara-
in the slorics of Noah and Utna- tem, g i v i n g t h e w i n d s l t a l i a n tus (ca. 315-240 KC.) notes that the
pishlim, is of g r e a l a n t i q ~ i t y . ~ " names. This w a s later expanded to Phoenicians used the l.lrsa llrinor
Thcrc a r c t w o basic m a n n e r s of twelve, then t o sixteen, a n d fi~ially (Little Rear) conslellatioti, which
tising birds in nau lical navigalioti. to thirty-two w i i ~ d s . contains Polaris ([he Pole star) for
In t h e first, s h i p s sail c a r r y i n g Wind roses are very real tools n a v i g a t i o i ~Clearly,
.~~ Aratus had
caged land birds-such a s doves, in [he "art" of navigation, as is evi- only a hazy concept of slcllar navi-
ravcns, o r swallows-which a r e d e n t f r o m their use by Oceanic gation, for noninslrurnental stellar
incapable o f l a n d i n g on w a l e r . navigators."' I iowever, winds can navigation must b e based 011 the
W h e n t h e direction of l a n d be- be only secondary directional in- knowledge of many stars, as has
yond the horizon is desired, a bird dicators; they must often be com- been demonstrated by D. L e w k h h
is released. Alter gaining height, pared with more reliable phenom- 1f stellar navigation existed in the
il will invariably make a beeline ena. For travel in sight of land, Mediterranean Hrorixe Age, it w a s
for l h c nearesl land-if s u c h is landmarks are sufficient. probably no1 unlike that practiced
sighted. If it finds n o land, the bird In [he Mediterranean, naviga- in C I c e a ~ i i a . ~ ~
h a s n o choice b u l 10 rulurn 10 [he tors no doubt learned visible land-
ship. marks that were given names, like Wcatlier Lore
T h e second manner in which the "Antelope's Nose" men tioncd Bronze Age seafarers must have
birds can be used d e p e n d s o n by Uni.62T h c r c a r c n o know11 developed their own weather lore:
knowing the range of seabirds that Bronze Age parallels, however, to to quote the Shipwrecked Sailor,
feed f a r o u t a t sea but return t o the p r ~ r ~ p l othat
i were used in Clas- "They could foretell a stormwind
their rookeries every evening. Not- sical times.h,'This may be attribu t- before it came and a d o w n p o u r
i n g the direction that the flocks able in part t o a lack of general lit- b e f o r e it h a p p e ~ i e d . " "Both
~ the
lake in [he early morning w h e n eracy in the notialphabetic scripts Psalmist and Ezekiel seem to con-
lhcy leave [heir nesting grounds, in use at that time. ' I ' h e o r e t i ~ a l lat~ sider the easl wind the most d a m
o r in the late afternoon when thcy least, this should not havc been a gerous."" l'resumably, it was also
return home, indicates land. problem for an Ugaritic navigalnr a11east wind that wrecked Wcna-
mun's ship on Alashia's ~ h o r e . ~ " K d sky in t h ttiorniti~, d e s i r e t o utilize l a n d breezes,
J o s e p h u s d e s c r i b e s gale-force Sailors takt~warning. which follow the cooling of the
winds called the "l3lack Norther" K P sky
~ at night, land after sunset. These winds are
that destroyed the Jewish rebel Sailors deli<yht. normally of low velocity and are
fleet at Jaffa in h.11.h7.;11Elsewhere, restricted to the immediate coast-
he notes the destructive southwest 'This weather lore has meteorologi- line, but for a ship using a square
wi~d.~' cal wisdom. The weather flow in rig, land brcczcs would havc been
IJerhaps the best-known ancicnt the northern horse latitudes is gcn- invaluable in allowing the craft to
weather lore appears in the New erally westerly. A red sunset indi- clear the coast to catch tlw offshorc
Testament. When asked t o per- catcs that the next day's weather winds.
form a miracle, Jesus-who must in t h e west is d u s t - l a d e n a n d ,
have had considerable experience therefore, dry.
sailing oti the Sea of Galilee-an-
swers: "When it is evening, yo11 Lurid und Seu Rreeztns Thcrc is ample cvidcncc for Late
say, 'It will be fair weather; for the Land and sea brcczcs wcrc csscn- Bronze Age sea rotitcs in the cast-
sky is red.' And in thc morning, 'It tial for coastal sailing, particularly ern Mediterranean. The mariners
will be stormy today, for tlic sky with a boom-footed square sail. may have had a developed navi-
is red and threatening.' You know W c n a m t ~ ntwice refers to the time gational system that left virttially
how to interpret the appearance of of his ships' departure from harbor: no archaeological trace. The sca-
the sky, but you cannot interpret he left Tyre for Byblos "at crack of f a r i n g capabilities of t h e Late
the signs of the tirne~."~:' dawn," a n d the ship o n which he Bronze Age would seem to sup-
Ilere Jesus is referring to the w a s t o sail back t o Egypt from p o r t this conclusion, although,
well-known sailor's rhyme: Byblos was to lcavc at night.74This with the data presently at o u r dis-
timing m a y havc rcst~ltcdfrom a posal, it cannot b e proven.
CHAPTER 15
War and
Piracy at Sea
War and piracy in antiquity are so the Hittites; this seems to be at vari- always depicted in profile, but the
closely linked that it is not always ance with Shuppiluliuma's sea eye is drawn frontally; a table may
clear when an enemy action de- battle^.^ Apparently, either the be portrayed in profile while the
notes an act of war or one of pi- Alashian fleet did not belong to the necklaces that are actually on it are
racy. Although classical tradition indigenous population but to the drawn as seen from above it; bo-
held that Minos was the first to enemies in the Ugaritic texts, or vines are portrayed in profile, but
fight a battle with a fleet, there is Alashia had switched allegian~e.~ their horns are almost always
evidence for several nautical bat- Ramses 111's relief at Medinet shown frontally.'"
tles that took place in the latter Habu is the only complete Late In like manner, the Medinet
part of the Late Bronze Age.' Bronze Age iconographic repre- Habu artists depicted the ships
sentation of a sea battle. Early in from two different viewpoints. The
War the battle, the Egyptians took ad- ships are always drawn in profile,
vantage of the superiority of their but the mast in each case is por-
A poorly preserved reference on long-range composite bows and trayed frontally." Thus, the Sea
a stele of Ramses I1 from Tanis re- slings over the Sea Peoples' me- Peoples' ships seem to be upright
fers to a successful battle against dium-range throwing spears7 In in the water, when in fact the angles
Shardanu ships in the open sea.2 this way, the Egyptians could dis- of their masts prove that they are
Shuppiluliuma 11, the last Hittite able the crews of the enemy craft listing at varying degrees. Indeed,
king, mentions three sea battles in while staying out of range of their the ships are in the process of cap-
which he bested an Alashian fleet: opponents' weapons. Once the en- sizing.12The following phases of
"My father [ . . . ] I mobilized and I, emy had been neutralized, the this capsizing operation are de-
Shuppiluliuma 11, the Great King, Egyptian ships closed the distance. picted:
immediately [crossed/reached (?)I The only specifically nautical Ships E. 1 and N. 1, signifying
the sea. The ships of AlaSiya met weapon portrayed is a four-armed the beginning of the battle, are por-
me in the sea three times for battle, gra~nel.~ trayed facing each other (Figs.
and I smote them; and I seized How was the grapnel used in 2.35-36: A; 8.3, 10). The mast of
the ships and set fire to them in the battle? To understand this, we N. 1 is upright, ninety degrees
the sea."" must remember that Egyptian art from the horizontal. An Egyptian,
The land-locked Hittite empire is "aspe~tive."~ This permits-in standing amidships before the
lacked a fleet; Shuppiluliuma may fact, often requires-parts of the mast, has thrown a grapnel into
have pressed into service ships of same subject to be represented as the rigging of the enemy mast
the North Syrian and Cilician seen from different directions. The (Figs. 8.10: B; 15.1).It would have
maritime citiesa4The kiln texts Egyptian artist wished to draw the been illogical and quite impossible
from Ugarit indicate that Alashia subject in its clearest, most univer- for him to have thrown the grap-
was its ally, and hence a friend of sal manner. Thus a human face is pling hook from amidships, if the
Figure 15.1. A n Egyptian sailor, standing amidships in ship E. 1, throws a four-hooked grapnel into the rigging of Sea Peoples'ship N. I (detail
from Nelson et al. 1930: pl. 39 [H. H. Nelson et a]., Medinet Habu I: Earlier Historical Records of Ramses 111, University of Chicago.
Introduction O 19.30 by the University of Chicago, all rights resewed. Published Tune, 19301)
Figure 15.2. Sea Peoples' ship N . 3 is capsized by means of the grapnel, attached to the bow of Egyptian ship E. 3 (detailfrom Nelson et al. 1930: pl.
39 [H. H. Nelson et al., Medinet Habu I: Earlier Historical Records of Ramses 111, University of Chicago. Introduction O 1930 by the
University of Chicago, all rights rcwrved. Published lune, 19301)
ships had been facing each other
as portrayed. The ships must have Angle of List of the Sea Peoples' Ships
been parallel in the water. Presum-
ably, once the archers had inca-
pacitated the enemy, the Egyptian o / horizon
ships came alongside the Sea profile
Peoples' craft, allowing the grap-
nels to be thrown into the enemy
rigging.
There then follow three rendi-
tions of the Sea Peoples' ship with
the masts placed at varying angles.
These represent the increasing
angle of the hull's list (Figs. 8.4,
6-8, 11-12 [ships N. 2, N. 4, and
N. 51). To emphasize the slant of
the deck, the fighters in the ships
are shown in unusual poses: fall-
ing forward and backward, hang-
ing onto the mast, and lying on the
side of the hull. To add to the im-
pression of confusion, ships N. 2
and N. 5 are shown listing length-
wise also.
In the final phase, the invaders'
ship has capsized (Figs. 8.5, 14; Figure 15.3. Progressii~clist of Sea Peoples'skips bascd on the angle of the mast fo the profiles of
15.2). Ship N. 3's mast is broken these ships. The mast o f N . 4 is rcivrsed left to right. The angle of N . 3 is based on the upper part
and is floating away at an angle. of the broken mast: ( A )N . 1 (go),( B ) N . 2 (78.59, ( C )N . 4 (65"),( D )N . 5 (56"),( E ) N . 3 (42')
(drawn by the author)
Although the mast is probably
meant to be floating on the water
(zero degrees), interestingly, this
angle (forty to forty-two degrees)
is the most acute of the series. Here
again the grapnel's rope, although
not the grapnel itself, appears. In
this case, however, the rope is con-
nected to the bow of the opposing
Egyptian ship. This suggests that
once the grapnel had caught in the
enemy rigging, the Egyptians ma-
neuvered their ships perpendicu-
lar to the enemy and then back-
watered-causing the rival craft to
capsize.
The following table and figures
15.34 illustrate the ships' varying
lists based on the angle of the mast
to the horizon. Since some of the
ships are listing lengthwise, the
Figure 15.4. P r o p ~ s s i v elist of Sea Peoples'ships based on tkc angle qf the mast to fkc korjzot~
angles of the masts to the hulls' The mast o f N . 4 is reversed left to right. The angle of N . 3 is based on tkc upper part of the
profiles are also supplied. They are broken mast: ( A )N . 1 ( 9 W , ( B ) N . 2 (73.5"),( C )N . 4 (64.5"),( D )N . 5 (479, ( E ) N . 3 (42")
virtually identical. (drawn by the author)
Sea Laws
Maritime mercantile endeavors everything that is on the ship be- ship.hThe law requires the captain
cannot flourish without a code of longs to Esarhaddon, king of to compensate the merchant for
law. Although evidence for nauti- Assyria, but one must not do any the ship and the cargo if the ship
cal laws in the Late Bronze Age is harm to any person on board ship, is wrecked because of negligen~e.~
limited, a code of maritime con- they should li[st] their names and This same principle appears in the
duct apparently existed, at least inform the king of A~syria."~ earlier Law of Eshnunna, where a
along the Syro-Canaanite coast The Bronze Age Tyrian king stipulation protects both the ship's
and Cyprus. appears to have been following a owner and merchants for cargoes
similar ruling. The later treaty carried by a negligent ship captain.
Shipwreck must have drawn the clause from In relating these earlier laws to
an accepted maritime law that was the Ugaritic case, Fensham notes
One Ugaritic text implies a law already ancient when the treaty that it-can only be understood in
dealing with shipwrecks. Here the was written. the light of Mesopotamianlaw. The
king of Tyre informs the king of "man of Ugarit" was probably the
Ugarit that while en route to Willful Shipwreck owner of the ship and perhaps also
Egypt, one of the latter's ships had of its cargo. Shukku was appar-
been partially wrecked in a storm. A fascinating text from Ugarit dis- ently the ship's captain. This is in-
Its cargo was seized by an enig- cusses a court case that was judged teresting because the name is
matic figure termed the rb- tm tt - by Pudehepa, the mother dowager Hittite, and Hittites are not gener-
literally, "lord of killing."' The of the Hittite king, Tudkhaliya IV." ally thought to have engaged in
Tyrian assures his peer that all is The case was between an Ugaritian seafaring. This may also explain
in hand. He had taken the cargo and a person named Shukku. why the case was judged before the
back from the rb-tm tt, and the ship From the terminology of the text, Hittite king instead of the Ugaritic
is now anchored at T ~ r e . ~ it is clear that the ship and the ruler. Perhaps Shukku was one of
The conduct of the king of Tyre cargo belonged to the man of the merchants of Ura mentioned in
is best understood in light of a Ugarit. Thus, Shukku was charged other Ugaritic texts.8
treaty from the seventh century with willfully wrecking the ship Lacking maritime laws of their
B.C. between the Assyrian king after the harbor master swore to own, the Hittites apparently de-
Esarhaddon and Baal I, a later this. pended on legal practices that
ruler of Tyre? One condition of the Two interpretations have been were used throughout the Near
treaty states: "If a ship of Baal or given for this case. F. C. Fensham East. Fensham emphasizes that the
of the people of Tyre is ship- likens it to a law in the Code of decision was seemingly made on
wrecked off (the coast of) the land Hammurabi that deals with the the basis of a legal principle from
of the Philistines or anywhere on responsibility of the ship's captain the Mesopotamian Middle Bronze
the borders of Assyrian territory, to the merchant who hires the Age generally accepted in Late
Bronze Age Ugarit. This example enslavement for defaulting on a ". . . a freighter. I found their deben
of basing a maritime code of laws debt. Evidently, the captain of the of silver in it, and I seized posses-
on the earlier legal principles of ship caught Shukku in the act." sion of it. [I said to the ship own-
other nations is hardly unique. It ers: I have seized possession of]
is comparable to the Rhodian Sea Ziskind suggests that fluctuat- your money. It shall remain in my
Law, which later served as the ing prices may have been a cause possession [unltil you have found
foundation for maritime laws over for Shukku's actions. If prices had [my money or the thief] who stole
considerable space and time.9 dropped on the return of the ship, it. I have not 'robbed but am
Another explanation for this the borrower would not have been (only) going to 'confiscate1 it."I6
text is offered by J. R. Ziskind, who able to repay his loan. He also in- The "law of reprisal" was ac-
argues that the case was judged on terprets KTU 4.338 in light of bot- cepted conduct in Classical times
the principles pertaining to sea or tomry loans.12 Ziskind translates and later." Writes H. Ormerod:
bottomry loans. Known as faenus ZbS. anyf as "the cargo of ships" and
nauticurn or fraiecfifo pecunia in assumes that the text is a memo- Not less dangerous to the
Latin, this law was unique for two randum of a sea loan given to the peace of the seas was the ancient
reasons: the creditor assumed li- king of Byblos with ships and law concerning reprisals, and
ability in the case of a loss of ship cargo hypothecated to the lender, here again the legal terminology
or cargo, and the creditor's right the king of Ugarit. Alternatively, differed little from that which
to demand repayment was linked D. Pardee interprets the same text described the pirate's doings. In
to the safe arrival of the mer- as describing a loan of ships to the fourth century, Demosthenes
chantman with its cargo."' If the Ugarit by the king of Byblos.13 states that owing to the reprisals
security was lost at sea and there undertaken by the Athenian cap-
was no evidence of fraud on the Law of Reprisal tains it was impossible for an
part of the borrower, then the pay- Athenian to go anywhere with-
ment to the lender, both princi- The existence of a "law of reprisal" out a flag of truce. Reprisals
pal and interest, was canceled. is evident from Wenamun's recep- could be undertaken by the state,
Ziskind writes: tion on being shipwrecked in that is to say, a general pennis-
Alashia. From his words to the sion granted to all and sundry to
In this Akkadian text, the de- princess Heteb, Wenamun makes plunder the inhabitants and com-
fendant Shukku (citizenship it clear that by killing him and his merce of another state, just as the
unstated),claimed that the Ugar- Byblian crew the Alashians would Lacedaemonians in 416 B.c., in
itian plaintiff's ship was de- be acting contrary to normal con- reply to continued Athenian dep-
stroyed accidentally when it duct and would be liable, there- redations carried out from Pylos,
struck a wharf. The plaintiff fore, to reprisal by the king of issued a general permission to
claimed that Shukku intention- Byblos. As Wenamun puts it: "If their subjects to plunder Athe-
ally wrecked the ship. The cap- the sea rages and the winds waft nians, without yet declaring war.
tain of the ship was ordered to me to the land where you are, you There are numerous examples of
swear an oath, and Shukku had should not let them take charge similar practises in Hellenistic
to make good the worth of the over me to kill me seeing that I am times, which greatly embar-
ship and its cargo. Shukku had an envoy of Amon. Now look here, rassed the Romans in their endea-
either borrowed money from the as for me, I shall be searched for vours to secure peace and quiet
king of Ugarit or was in the em- until whatevery day (shall come). in Greece.lR
ploy of someone who did in or- Regarding this crew of the Prince
der to undertake a maritime en- of Byblos whom they are seeking Theft in Harbor
terprise in Asia Minor, and when to kill, surely its lord will find ten
it became apparent to Shukku crews belonging to you and kill Wenamun's problems with the
that the obligation would not be them in return."14 Sekels began in the harbor of Dor
met, he tried to sink the ship and The Sekel ships that Wenamun when a crewman from his ship
falsely claim that an accident took found waiting for him at Byblos absconded with Wenamun's gold
place. In this way, Shukku or his were also acting under this law;15 and silver. Following the theft,
employer would be free of the this may have been Wenamun's Wenamun went to Beder, the ruler
obligation to repay the loan, and assumed "legal" basis for "liber- of Dor, and demanded that he in-
they would also avoid possible ating" the silver from the Sekels: vestigate the case: "I got up on that
S E A LAWS 69 325
CHAPTER 17
Concluszons
In the eastern Mediterranean dur- Mediterranean was the need for "assembly kit" organization of the
ing the Bronze Age, international high-quality wood for ship con- Cheops ships illustrates how this
maritime ventures were under- struction and other purposes. Such might have been accomplished.
taken by a variety of peoples who wood was unavailable in the Nile This process emphasizes the in-
had developed or absorbed to valley during the Pharaonic period credible (to our modern minds)
varying degrees the knowledge but common in Lebanon. This was value placed by the ancient Egyp-
required to build and use seagoing apparently the primary, although tians on the commodities available
ships. However, based on its own certainly not the only, reason for in Sinai and Punt. This effort ex-
specific needs and capabilities, Egypt's early trade connections pended in mercantile contacts in
each culture seems to have devel- with Byblos. the Red Sea with Punt is paralleled
oped its own-perhaps unique- Egypt entered the New King- in the later trading practices of
relationship with the sea. dom period using a developed Solomon and Hiram with the
Egypt's interests in the Mediter- version of a seagoing ship that had equally elusive land of Ophir.
ranean were concentrated on the been evolving for over a millen- The excavations at Wadi Gawa-
political and economic subjuga- nium, and perhaps much longer. sis have made a valuable contribu-
tion of the Syro-Canaanite coast. These vessels appear in a state of tion to understanding Egyptian
The Egyptians do not appear to change at Deir el Bahri. They prob- seafaring practices in the Red Sea.
have been explorers. They were ably had a protean, evolving keel Yet much still remains unclear. Of
content to ply three main routes: and were likely to have been one particular interest would be the
in the Mediterranean to the Syro- of the types of ships on which the future investigation of the phara-
Canaanite coast and in the Red Sea Egyptians voyaged into the Medi- onic port identified by W. F.
to Punt and to the southwest coast terranean. The adoption of foreign Albright near Abu Zneima on the
of Sinai. There is no concrete evi- construction techniques seems to southwest coast of in Sinai.
dence at present to indicate that have received a strong impetus The Syro-Canaanitelittoral sup-
Egyptian ships sailed any farther under Thutrnose 111, a result of his plies the clearest picture of a cor-
during the Bronze Age. need for reliable transports to sup- porate trading power that played
Egypt's Mediterranean seafar- port Egypt's Asiatic conquests. a significant-perhaps primary-
ing ended with the demise of its Egypt's ventures into the Red part in Late Bronze Age maritime
domination in Asia. Already evi- Sea required an incredible amount shipping, particularly during the
dent in the tale of Wenamun, this of effort even before the sea voy- fourteenth to thirteenth centuries.
trend was to continue into later age itself began. The ships were There are repeated references to
times, when the Egyptians hired built o n the Nile, dismantled, ships with valuable cargoes. Syro-
Phoenicians to do their seafaring hauled overland through the East- Canaanite ships sailed to Egypt,
for them. A main incentive for the ern Desert, and rebuilt o n the Cyprus, Cilicia, and the Aegean.
Egyptians to venture out into the shores of the Red Sea. The near The smattering of evidence for a
code of maritime conduct along may have played a crucial role as a new type of ship came into use
this coast further enhances this middlemen between Egypt, the in the Aegean. And although
view. So, also, do the clearly mer- Syro-Canaanite coast, and the never shown with the sail raised
chant nature of the ships depicted Aegean world during the Late during the Early Minoan III-
in Egyptian tomb paintings and Bronze Age. The Amarna tablets Middle Minoan periods, these ves-
the repeated connection in the strongly support this conclusion if sels did use a sail. Little can be said
texts to Syro-Canaanite ships bear- Alashia equates with Cyprus, as of this class beyond noting that to
ing valuable cargoes of trade seems to be indicated by EA 114. carry a sail without an outrigger,
goods. Even without this document, how- it must have been greater in beam
The Kenamun wall painting is ever, there is a strong argument for than the earlier longships. Pre-
the most detailed extant depiction considerable sea trade by Cypriots sumably these craft are the ances-
of a Late Bronze Age Syro-Cana- at that time. tral prototypes for the large Min-
anite seagoing ship; yet, it leaves The Karnak anchor indicates oan/Cycladic ship type depicted
much to be desired. We can guess that Cypriot seafarers were reach- at Thera.
at-but never be quite sure of- ing Egypt in pharaonic times; The Minoans were, it seems, the
the Egyptianizing elements with Cypro-Minoan texts found at Uga- marine explorers par excellence of
which the artists have saturated rit suggest a Cypriot presence the Late Bronze Age. Although
these vessels. there. Furthermore, Cypro-Minoan their first contact with Egypt prob-
Probably, the artists of Kena- signs incised on Mycenaean pot- ably took place along the Syro-
mun and Nebamun worked from tery on the Greek mainland may Canaanite coast, the Minoans likely
copybooks. They sought to create indicate Cypriot merchants, lo- deserve credit for opening the trade
a wall painting based on accepted cated in Greece, controllingat least routes between the Aegean and
art forms and were not making an some of the trade with their home- both the Syro-Canaanite coast and
ethnological study of contempo- land. The large quantities of an- Egypt. If so, they may have been the
rary seacraft. Created under strict chors found on Cypriot land sites, earliest seafarers to intentionally
art canons, the depictions of the many of which are dedicated in cross the Mediterranean on an open
Egyptian artists were pleasing to temples, further emphasize the sea route (from Crete to Egypt) on
their contemporaries but lack the importance of seafaring in Late a regular basis.
accuracy that the modern student Bronze Age Cyprus. The Theran material is unusu-
might wish. Furthermore, the art- The three ship models from ally rich and clarifies other repre-
ists seem to have lacked a technical Kazaphani and Maroni, if my sentations of Minoan ships. The
knowledge of the ships them- reading of them is correct, repre- waterborne procession at Thera
selves. Keftiu ships were appar- sent an indigenous type of beamy, must be studied in the context of
ently Syro-Canaanite craft on the planked, seagoing merchant ship. its Minoan/Cycladic milieu. The
run to the Aegean: perhaps the Most of the ship images from Theran scenes, and with them vir-
Uluburun shipwreck, if future re- Cyprus, however, represent for- tually all iconographic materials
search reveals it to be from the eign ships, mainly of Achaean (Sea depicting Minoan ships (or ships'
Levantine coast, is a vessel of this Peoples?) origin. parts), are directly connected to
sort. The primary class of craft de- Minoan cult practices in combina-
The ship models found at Byb- picted in iconography during the tion with cultic ship races /proces-
10s are copies of Egyptian ships or Aegean Early Bronze Age was a sions. These are the same kinds of
ship models. Previous identifica- narrow longship with a high stem ships, it is reasonable to presume,
tions in which the Byblian models and a low stern. Lacking a sail and that played a crucial role in the
were considered to represent Syro- propelled by rows of paddlers, this relationships between Minoan
Canaanite ships emphasize the craft first appears after it had al- Crete and its neighbors, whatever
dangers of labeling iconographic ready evolved considerably. Of the political and economic reality
representationsbased on their find the vessels used to bring Melian reflected in the archaeological
locations. The Iniwia ships are obsidian to the mainland in the record. There may have been (and
imaginative creations made up of Upper Paleolithic and Mesolithic probably were) some differences
an amalgamation of elements de- periods and of the ships used to between Cycladic ships and Min-
rived from different sources that colonize Crete in the Neolithic pe- oan ships, but at the present level
never existed on their own. riod-the record is a blank. of information it is not possible to
Ships and traders of Cyprus In the Early Minoan I11 period, pinpoint specific differences.
CONCLUSIONS 69 329
were probably not even aware of strakes. Because of problems of in- oped from a type of pegged sewn
why they used this symbol in its terpretation, however, many of the construction. Alternatively, it may
myriad forms or what it originally other technical terms in the ancient have developed directly from un-
represented. Certainly a modern texts treating ship construction re- pegged mortise-and-tenon join-
Greek Orthodox boat owner would main obscure. There is much room ery-although judging from the
be horrified to learn that his vessel here for future cooperation be- Egyptian evidence, this seems un-
carries the symbol of a pre-Chris- tween nautical archaeologists and likely.
tian earth deity! linguists in interpreting these The boom-footed rig used dur-
The multiplicity of the bird's texts. ing the Bronze Age may have de-
beak may have strengthened the Egyptian ships traveling on the veloped on the Nile in Predynastic
magic inherent in the stem and Red Sea were of necessity trans- times. The rig used by seagoing
stern devices. This would explain versely lashed. Although we can- ships in Egypt and the Syro-Cana-
why the aphlaston developed from not be entirely sure, it is very likely anite littoral seems to have been
a multiple-beaked bird head. that Egyptians also sailed the virtually identical. The sail was
That some connection existed Mediterranean in lashed ships, at spread by raising the yard to the
between the Sea Peoples and the least until the reign of Thutmose masthead with a pair of halyards.
Urnfield cultures is self-evident, 111. The facts that Hatshepsut's The yard and boom were sup-
but the nature of this relationship ships were lashed and that they ported on a system of lifts; the
requires additional elucidation. continue a class of ships used dur- boom was lashed to the mast. It
One important avenue of research ing the Old Kingdom on the Medi- was an awkward rig at best that
would be a serious review of the terranean strongly support this only worked well with the wind
Urnfield level at Hama. conclusion. nearly astern. The Aegean rig,
The ability to reach shipwrecks If this were not true, then what while also boom-footed, seems to
on the seabed has opened up a new form of construction might the have been a variant with several
dimension in the research of sea- Egyptians have used in their Medi- peculiarities. The use of this square
faring. The significant contribution terranean vessels? They employed rig had a profound effect on the
of the Uluburun wreck is an ex- mortise-and-tenon joinery in their capabilities of ship movement and
pression of this. Already it has Nilotic ship construction, yet only defined the use of sea routes.
given us a hitherto undreamed-of adopted the system of locking the Perhaps the most interesting
view of the lading and workings mortise-and-tenon joinery with aspect of the Late Bronze Age rig
of a large open-water Late Bronze wooden pegs very late. Without is the lack of shrouds for lateral
Age merchant vessel. locking the tenons, this form of support on seagoing ships. In their
The problem of the Uluburun joinery could not be used on open- place, there evolved a system of
ship's ethnic identity, and for that water craft. It seems that, at least cables that secured the lower part
matter of all Bronze Age wrecks, before Thutmose 111, the Egyptians of the mast and which were an-
remains the single most difficult did not need to use pegged join- chored in some manner laterally
question to solve in shipwreck ar- ery. Unpegged joinery sufficed for inside the hull. A form of this rig-
chaeology. The interpretation of their Nilotic craft, and lashed craft ging existed on Old Kingdom sea-
personal objects vis-a-vis ethnic could be used in the Mediterra- going and river craft. In the Late
character is particularly problem- nean, as they were in the Red Sea. Bronze Age, evidence for these
atic. The Uluburun wreck, which Perhaps pegged joinery evolved cables is found on the seagoing
is maddeningly eclectic in per- in Syro-Canaanite ship construc- ships of Egypt (Deir el Bahri), the
sonal finds, raises the question of tion. If so, this technique, along Syro-Canaanite littoral (Kena-
what evidence is acceptable in with other elements of Mediterra- mun), and Cyprus (the Kazaphani
identifying its home port. nean construction, may have ar- and Maroni models). Lateral sup-
rived in Egypt as early as the reign port and leeward drift are most
Concerning the general outlines of of Thutmose 111. The appearance of pronounced when the wind is
the various facets of the art and pegged mortise-and-tenon joinery abeam a vessel. The lateral cables
functions of seafaring in the Late at Uluburun suggests that by the used in place of shrouds, along
Bronze Age, several considera- Late Bronze Age, this technique with the possible introversion of
tions are worthy of mention. One had been introduced for use on the keel on seagoing ships, may
particular Egyptian term, wnh, deep-water ships. Pegged mortise- indicate that Bronze Age sailors,
may mean planks used for hull and-tenon joinery may have devel- with their clumsy boom-footed rig,
330 09 S E A G O I N G S H I P S & S E A M A N S H I P
did not use the sail unless the wind have been an extremely rare phe- from the Aegean and Cyprus to
was directly (or nearly directly) nomenon, the coastal profile may Egypt. Under favorable conditions,
astern. have changed significantly in the the longest open-water route could
M. Liverani, in his usual in- past five thousand years so that be crossed in three to five days.
sightful manner, makes an inter- wrecks are buried in areas not cur- Thus, during this period and in this
esting comment concerning the rently surveyed, or Early Bronze region, the division of seagoing
restructuring of the regional eco- Age seafaring practices were in ships into coasters and open-water
nomy of the East after the cata- some way different from those of craft has little meaning.
clysms that ended the Late Bronze later periods. No artifactual evidence for
Age: "As for sailing techniques, I Ships carried quantities of an- navigational instruments during
personally am not aware of precise chors. At least some of them sta- the Late Bronze Age is known.
innovative elements introduced tioned in the bow could, and were, And yet it is possible, and indeed
about 1200B.C.which could be said carried upright, no doubt locked quite probable, that systems of
to characterize Iron Age I shipping securely into the vessel's super- navigation, which would have left
in contrast to Late Bronze Age structure. This would have pre- no trace in the archaeological
navigation. However, I am strongly vented clutter in the bow and also record, had evolved by that time.
inclined to postulate some such perhaps facilitated their rapid de- All legs of the counterclockwise
innovation, since we get the im- ployment when necessary. Spare Mediterranean circuit proposed by
pression of a sudden widening of anchors were carried in the hold, the excavators of the Uluburun
sea routes and of a technical and where they also served as ballast. wreck are documented in textual
operative freedom."' Stone blanks for anchors could and archaeological evidence. How-
The nautical innovation that have been picked up en route and ever, not all ships sailing from the
Liverani intuitively postulates is, prepared either at the quarry site Levant to the Aegean necessarily
of course, the brailed rig, which or on board ship. continued in a circuit. Sinaranu's
makes its appearance-after a ges- Not all anchors on a single ship ships, for example, are described
tation period-in the eastern Med- were necessarily identical. Thus, at as returning from Caphtor. Pre-
iterranean ca. 1200 B.C.This new Uluburun some anchors have sumably, these are Ugaritic ships
rig allowed for better usage of the square holes, others are biconical. that sailed on the run directly to
wind and propelled the Iron Age At Naveh Yam,some anchors have and from the Aegean.
cultures into new vistas in seafar- apical rope grooves while others The cargo on board the Ulu-
ing, opening up the entire Medi- lack this characteristic. At Wadi burun wreck is perhaps most ex-
terranean and beyond to intense Gawasis, the anchor-stele-base of pressive of the many facets of Late
seaborne traffic. Ankhow's stele lacks the normal L- Bronze Age sea trade. Whatever
Stone anchors are one of the shaped basal hole. Small anchors the identity of the traders on board
most important threads of evi- found together with groups of when she came to grief, this ship-
dence for Late Bronze Age Medi- large ones may be interpreted in wreck represents a l a r g e b u t per-
terranean seafaring. Still, much several ways. At Naveh Yam,Ulu- haps not the largest-type of Late
about them remains enigmatic. If burun, and Wadi Gawasis, they Bronze Age merchant ship. The
shfifonim do actually represent are best explained as spares for the preliminary picture received from
stone anchors, then they assume a ship's boat. Uluburun is that trade was infi-
well-cut stone anchor prototype A typical "Canaanite" anchor nitely more complex than was pre-
that has yet to be found in the Sea remains to be defined and requires viously thought: the ship's cargo
of Galilee. Perhaps shfifonim were study. Based on the many anchors was exceptionally varied. The
patterned after anchors used by on the Israeli seacoast, one might wreck also illustrates the mechan-
seagoing ships in the Early Bronze tentatively suggest a shape with a ics of indirect trade, in which two
Age on the Mediterranean. Inter- flat base, rounded top, and asym- cultures can trade commodities
estingly, no Early Bronze Age re- metrical sides. without ever meeting.
mains are known from Israel's A variety of routes interlaced The identification of the con-
shores despite the large number of the Mediterranean in the Late tents of the closed containers on
wrecks and cargo sites that litter Bronze Age. Most routes followed board through sieving has created
her Mediterranean coast. This may -but probably did not hug-the a new dimension of the under-
result from several factors: sea- coastline: the only truly open-wa- standing of trade. Particularly
faring in the Early Bronze Age may ter routes were the direct runs striking is the large quantity of
This appendix contains revised coastal cities, including Ugarit moist clay tablets that were baked
translations of the most significant (Liverani 1995). Several letters, afterwards. The prefect (Sakinu in
documents pertaining to nautical which must date to the last tumul- Ugaritic) was the most important
matters found at Ugarit. This city- tuous days of Ugarit, give a vivid person after the king and was re-
state, located slightly north of account of these times (see below, sponsible for the city-state's day-
Latakia on the Syrian coast, was a RS 34.129, RS 20.18, RS L.l, and RS to-day management (see below,
major entrep6t during the Late 20.238). The tablets reveal that the RS 34.129).Directly under the pre-
Bronze Age (Fig. 13.1:b). Until the threat that ultimately destroyed fect, various overseers, including
end of that period, Ugarit be- Ugarit came from the sea. an "overseer of the harbor" and an
longed to the Egyptian sphere of Ugarit's palace had five ar- "overseer of the seamen," were
influence, as demonstrated by the chives. Three were administrative, responsible for administration (see
diplomatic correspondence from containing mostly lists of land- below, RS 17.133).
Arnarna (EA 1: 39; 45: 35; 89: 51; owners, persons who received ra- To judge from the texts, Ugarit
98: 9; 126: 6; 151: 55). About 1330 tions or paid taxes, and so on. seems to have had a simple social
B.c., Ugarit came under Hittite su- These documents had titles--such structure. Two groups are distin-
zerainty. as "balance," "list," "food ra- guished: "people of the king," em-
Political stability in Syria guar- tions," or "provisions"-followed ployed by the palace; and free citi-
anteed Ugarit's prosperity through by the persons' names to whom zens, called "sons of Ugarit." This
trade after the reign of its king, they applied. The lists are laconic: two-part division is apparent every-
Niqmaddu 11, and particularly often, even the type of administra- where in the palace administra-
after the brief rule of his son tive action intended is unclear. In tion, which always distinguishes
Arkhalba (on the absolute chro- the "central archive" and the between the guilds on the one
nology for reigns of the kings of "southern archive" were kept, re- hand and the towns and villages
Ugarit, see van Soldt 1991:4446). spectively, the tablets regulating on the other. Mainly concentrated
Following the peace treaty be- the transfer of land inside Ugarit in the city of Ugarit itself, the
tween Egypt and Hatti, quantities and those pertaining to Ugarit's guilds consisted of specialized
of Egyptian goods once more foreign relations. craftsmen who were gold- and sil-
found their way to the city. The documents were written in versmiths, scribes, soldiers, priests,
This relatively peaceful period the Ugaritic and Akkadian lan- house builders, shipbuilders, cart-
lasted for over a century but came guages. Ugaritic, a cognate to He- wrights, and bowmakers, among
to an abrupt end at the beginning brew, is a branch of West Semitic others.
of the twelfth century B.C. with the that was written with an alpha- The population in the towns
invasion of the Sea Peoples. This betic script of thirty cuneiform and villages apparently repre-
attack spelled sudden annihilation signs. Normally, as with Akka- sented the nonspecialized segment
for most of the Syro-Canaanite dian, Ugaritic was inscribed on of society: the farmers and the
herders. While the "people of the 1-3 To the king of Ugarit, my 4. Instead of kl klhm (all that be-
king" were economically depen- brother, speak: Message of the longed to them) in 1.21, one could
dent on the palace, which pro- king of Tyre your brother.' possibly read w.]aklhm (= and their
vided them with rations and land, 4-9 May you be well. May the food; cf. KTU).
the free citizens were independent gods guard and preserve you. 5. For the translation of 'yt with
in this respect. Here with me it goes well. Is every- "is unloaded," see Lipidski (1967:
Ugarit's importance on the in- thing going well with you there? 283 n. 5). Cunchillos's (1986: 135,
ternational political level during Answer me, please. 141; 1989:356-57) translation "has
its heyday is evident from numer- 10-25 As to a ship of yours that returned is less probable. Lines
ous documents concerning inter- you sent to Egypt, that (ship) is in 24-25 (w.anyk.ftby.%y.'yt) can also
national relations. Ugarit's strength Tyre. Serious damage happened be translated, "A second ship of
lay in its trade; its military capac- to it in a torrential rainstorm. They yours is in Acco, naked, i.e. hav-
ity was negligible. were found, and the rb tmtt2took ing lost its sails" (Pardee with
The comprehensive terminol- all their grain from them.3 But I Cunchillos 1989: 357; cf. also
ogy that existed in Ugarit for dif- took all their grain (and)the crew, Dietrich and Loretz 1985: 507;
ferent types of ships, as well as the all that belonged to them,4 from Aboud 1994: 102).
numerous references to nautical the rb tmtt, and I gave it back to
matters, indicate the importance of them. And another ship of yours KTU 2.39
its maritime connections. Ships is unloaded5 in Acco. Let my Send copper
sailed to and from Egypt, to the brother not be troubled about any- Virolleaud 1965: 84-86; Sasson 1966:
other city-states along the Syro- thing. 133; Dijkstra 1976; de Moor 1979: 651;
Canaanite coast, to Cyprus, Cilicia, Pardee 1981; Hoftijzer 1982.From the
and to the Aegean. Notes kiln.
1. This is an Ugaritic translation
Texts in Ugaritic of an original letter sent by the 1-2 Message of the Sun to Ammu-
Alphabetic Script king of Tyre (cf. however Millard rapi, speak:'
1995: 120) that deals with two 3 4 With the Sun2 everything is
The following texts are translated ships, not two parts of a fleet, as extremely well.
in the order in which they are pub- Cunchillos (1986; 1989:351-52 n.9.; 5-10" At the fe[et of the lolrd, the
lished in KTU. Some of them were cf. also Tropper 1994A: 467) sug- Sun, his lord your servant truly re-
found still in the kiln in which they gests, nor does it deal with one ship sides, verily he is his se[rvant], his
were being baked when Ugarit (against e.g. Dietrich and Loretz , ~ the [ . . . of his lord] he pro-
~ g l tand
was overrun (against the idea they 1985:507; Renfroe 1992:68; Aboud tects [or: through the { . . . of his lord)
were found in a kiln, cf. Millard 1994: 102).The text makes it prob- he is protected?]and my lord will lack
1995: 119).These texts must there- able that there was a kind of inter- no [ . . . ],5 I really acknowledge him
fore date to immediately before national entente whereby ships of [sc. as my o~erlord].~
Ugarit's downfall, ca. 1185B.C.Not various nations and their cargoes 11-167 Now, [if you are] his ser-
every text concerning ships, ship- were respected in time of peace vant, his sglt for the Sun your lord,
ment, and related matters in (Sasson 1966: 137). now if you verily acknowledge the
Ugaritic alphabetic script has been 2. The rb tmtt is probably a high Sun your lord, why didn't you come
translated here (for a description Tyrian official in charge of salvage with the Sun your lord for already
of Ugarit as a naval power, see operations (Sasson 1966: 137) one, two year^?^
Linder 1981; Artzy 1987). against Dietrich and Loretz (1966: 17-30 As to the tablets concerning
132) and Cunchillos (1986: 138; food [/grain] that9you sent to the Sun
KTU 2.38 1989: 354), who consider him the your lord, because there was no food
Your ship was damaged head of the ship's crew, and anymore in your realm,"' the sun"
Virolleaud 1965: 81-83; Sasson against Virolleaud (1965: 82), who may perish, if I will come. . . [rest too
1966: 137; Lipidski 1967: 283; Hof- suggests that he was a pirate. damaged to be translated].
tijzer 1979: 383-88; Dietrich and 3. The & in 11.17and 19is trans- 31-35 The enemy is over us [ . . .
Loretz 1985: 507; Cunchillos 1986; lated as "grain"; a translation of and] there is no copper12[ . . . ] purify
1989: 349-57; Aboud 1994: 101- "crew" is possible but seems less copper, . . .I3 search [for it], whereveri4
102. Found in the kiln. probable (Hoftijzer 1979: 387-88; you can get it and send it to me.
Aboud 1994: 102).
a9 APPENDIX
Notes 11. It is improbable that SpS, Now he has sent [or [I]have sent] [ . . .]
1. This is probably the transla- "sun," in 1.21 indicates the sun as and the king may make inquiry into
tion of an original letter sent by the an epithet of the Hittite king, be- these [ . . . ] them and their ships [ . . . ]
Hittite king to Ammurapi, the last cause it is the subject of a feminine this merchant and I say [ . . . ] the king
king of Ugarit (cf.however Millard form of the verb. The addresser is may seek ships and I [?, . . . ] and I [?]
1995: 120). instead saying that he prefers the will carry out the transaction and the
2. "The Sun" is the epithet with perishing of the sun to his going king may send [?I to [ . . .
which the Hittite king refers to to . . . (the rest is lost) (Hoftijzer
himself. 1982: 385; against Tropper 1994A: Notes
3. Lines 5-10 are probably a 467). 1. Amenhotep 111(Nimmuriya)
quotation from a letter king Am- 12. For spr in 1. 32 meaning is mentioned in 1.9 (see Virolleaud
murapi sent to the Hittite king "bronze," see Hoftijzer 1982: 386- 1965: 15), making this text one of
(Hoftijzer 1982: 383). In 11. 5-10, 87; Dietrich and Loretz 1986. For the oldest found in Ugarit (contra
King Ammurapi underlines his the translation with "copper" in Rainey 1974: 188).Thus, the tablet
faithfulness. These lines are dam- this text, see Zaccagnini 1970:322- must date to the first half of the
aged and are difficult to restore. 24. On the use of "bronze," see fourteenth century B.C. It was sent
4. The sglf indicates the vassal Zaccagnini (1 990). from an Ugaritic official to the king
of whom the overlord may expect 13. I know of no convincing in- of Ugarit. It is unnecessary to pre-
complete dedication, but also the terpretation for adm in 1. 33. The sume, as does Lipihki (1977: 214),
vassal who because of this may interpretation with "a man," "any- that this is a copy of a letter sent
expect the complete protection one" (cf. Pardee 1981: 152, 156; by a high Egyptian official at
of his overlord (Hoftijzer 1982: Verreet 1988: 123: "the man") Ugarit to the pharaoh.
381-82). seems less convincing. The writer's name is not in-
5. Of what there is no shortage 14. On air, see Rainey (1978:65); cluded. This absence of the name
remains unclear. The restoration Dietrich and Loretz (1984: 62); Is- is understandable if there was only
d[t' (cf. KTU) (grain) remains com-
- rael (1995: 260). one functionary of this stature at
pletely uncertain. any given time. The suggestion to
6. Yd'indicates here a vassal's KTU 2.42 read it as rb mi(hd) is attractive
loyalty to his overlord (Huffmon The king may seek ships (Heltzer 1976: 82 n. 28; Liverani
1966; Huffmon and Parker 1966). Virolleaud 1965: 14-15; Sasson 1966: 1979B: 499), particularly if it re-
7. Lines 11-16 are the Hittite 134; Lipihski 1977; Pardee 1987: 204- ferred to M&adu, Ugarit's main
king's response. The tone of the 209. For the archaeological context of port. Concerning Mahadu, see
latter is extremely rude (contrast the room in which the text was found, Astour 1970: 113-22; Guzzo Ama-
KTU 2.46, below). There are no see van Soldt (1991: 88). dasi 1982; Saad6 1995. This would
pleasantries; note the stress laid on also fit the context of the letter that
the fact that it is very good with 1-3 To the king [my] lo[rd] speak: speaks of merchants and vessels.
the addresser (11. 3f. and else- Message of the chief o f . . . [ . . . your Pardee (1987: 206), preparing his
where). servant]:' new edition of the text, could not
8. The visit mentioned in 11. 15f 4-9 At the feet of my lord from afar find the fragment of 1.3 that reads
is an official one that the king of seven times and seven times [I bow (')bdk, "your servant." Concerning
Ugarit ought to pay to his overlord down]. I declare to Baal [ . . . ],2 to the this fragment, see Virolleaud 1965:
to indicate his allegiance. This is eternal Sun, to Astarte, to Anat, to all 14; Pardee 1987: 206.
not necessarily a visit he had to the gods of Alashia? Nimmuriya is 2. The first deity mentioned in
pay after his accession to the king f ~ r e v e r . ~ 1. 6 probably was Baal-Sapon
throne (Hoftijzer 1982: 379-80; 10-13 The king my lord, the land (Liverani 1979A: 1303; Pardee
Cunchillos 1989: 400). [ . . . ] he will get in arrears [??I5and to 1987: 206-207).
9. See Parker (1967: 75) for ky my lord [ . . . ] ten times I have 3. It is not unusual to find "all
used as the introduction of a rela- sent [ . . . ] and my lord. . . [ . . . ] the Gods of Alashia (Cyprus)"
tive clause (1. 17) against Pardee 14-19 [ . . . ] ten [or twen{ty)]. . . h e mentioned in 1. 8, for Ugarit had
(1977: 7), Verreet (1988: 197-98). may put [ . . . ] the city of the k[ing] important trade relations with
10. For hwf indicating "realm" [...]inthemand[...] Cyprus, and this text is clearly con-
or "country," see Herdner (1969: 20-28 I will give [or you may cerned with trade. Concerning Ala-
132). give?Ihsi[lver . . . ] I will send [ . . . ] shia, see above, pp. 6142,29596.
338 e9 APPENDIX
If so, this text has nothing to do lated here as "trowel," see Renfroe Yadudanu, . . . a br-vessel of Purikallu
with ships or cargoes. 1992: 79. the shipowner which is in the hand of
2. There is a stroke between 11.3 Abira[m~].~
and 4, indicating that there is no KTU 4.394
connection between the persons A ship with copper is lost Notes
mentioned in the two lines. Virolleaud 1965: 132. Found in the kiln. 1. Concerning the br-vessel, see
3. The translation of qtn in 1.35 KTU 4.81 note 2.
as "fine objects" (Heltzer 1982: 88) 1 4 hundred tenltwenty . . . cop- 2. The presence of a Carian em-
remains highly uncertain. per is lost in a ship.' phasizes Ugarit's international
4. The difficult snr at the end of 5 20 for the people from Umd. contacts.
1. 45 (which I left untranslated) is 6 10 for K~tilana.~ 3. This text indicates that, be-
perhaps a personal name added to sides the royal fleet, there were
the list (Virolleaud 1965: 95). Notes also private shipowners in Ugarit.
Gordon's (1965: no. 2177) sugges- 1. One must see the loss of this The significance of one man's
tion to translate this as "pipe" is ship against the background of ship being "in the hands of" an-
less reasonable. Moreover, the shortage of ships mentioned in other man is unclear. The latter is
reading of the r is uncertain, and KTU 2.39 and KTU 2.46. Line 4 is evidently not the lawful owner,
after it there originally existed one destroyed. but whether the vessel in question
or more additional signs (Dietrich, 2. Lines 5 and 6 are also prob- was entrusted to him by the owner
Loretz, and Sanmartin 1974A: 35). ably concerned with copper. as the ship's captain or whether it
came into his possession in some
KTU 4.390 KTU 4.421 other way cannot be determined.
A ship from Alashia Another list of ships It is also unclear why this text was
Virolleaud 1965: 74. Virolleaud 1965: 75. stored in a royal archive.
340 @ APPENDIX
thographic variant of da-nu-ni and to read '"kur.dur.meS = nakrutu 29-32 In connection with this mat-
translates it "maliciously." The ahlitu, "alien enemies" (Izre'el's ter, His Majesty has sent Aliziti, the
context requires such a meaning. translation). One could also think king's attendant: and Kunni. (It is a
The translation chosen here takes of a phonetic indicator (KUto en- matter of) life and death! Send them
into account that the statement is sure the reading kur). In that case, quickly on (their) way
intended to put the blame on however, one would expect KU in 1'-3' Bring [ . . . ] and give (it) to
Shukku. front of PAP instead of after it. their elder^,^ be it in [Mukish] or in
6. Apparently to vindicate the 3. ME^ after KUR could be an another country. . . . Give, (it is a mat-
claim of the man from Ugarit. ideogram marker (for which phe- ter of) life and death!
nomenon see Izre'el 1991 [I]: 30)
RS 20.1 62 or a plural marker. A plural, how- Notes
Do not withhold information ever, can hardly be translated into 1. Since the writer appears to be
Letter from Parsu of Amurru to the English. a mediator between the Hittite
king of Ugarit. Published as Qaritica 4. The change of person (third king and the king of Ugarit, one
5: no. 37, fig. 27. See Linder 1970: 66- to second) is unexpected. expects him to be the king of Car-
69; Steiner 1989: 407; Izre'el 1991 (2): chemish.
98-100. From the house of Rap'Bnu. RS 20.212 2. Literally, "The Sun"; see line
A large shipment of grain 21, *utu-Su.
1-3 Speak to the king of the land of Letter from the king of Carchemish(?) 3. The form 'el-te-pu-US can
Ugarit: thus says Parsu, your servant. to the king of Ugarit. Letter concern- hardly be anything but a first-per-
4-5 I fall at the feet of my lord. May ing the shipment of barley to Urd. Pub- son singular.
you be well. lished as Ugaritica 5: no. 33, fig. 42. See 4. Or this part belongs with
6-8 My lord, has the king of Berger 1969: 287; Linder 1970: 32-37; what follows: "(Remember:) he
Amurru not spoken1to you in the fol- Heltzer 1977: 209. From the house of has exempted you."
lowing terms: Rap'anu. 5. Probably nothing after "'"u-ra-
8-11 "As soon as you hear a report a-a-'ul. I prefer Nougayrol's read-
about the enemies: write to my coun- 1-4Thus says (. . . I ) . Speak (to.. . ), ing over Berger's a-k[a-(an-)nu].
try ."3 king of Ugarit: (ruling) 6. See above, p. 41; Heltzer 1977:
11-16 But now, why has my lord 5-6 With His Majesty2everything 209-10.
not written to us as soon as you had is very well. 7. The exact sphere of activities
learned about the e n e m i e ~ (ruling)
?~ 7-11 The king has exempted you of the Sa r& Sbrri is not clear. See
17-19 Furthermore, my lord, the from service obligations and, when he Oppenheim 1973; Heltzer 1974.
land%f Amurru and the land3 of sealed and gave you the documents, 8. Berger 1969: 287. The same
Ugarit are one! did he not say because of that, "He will expression is attested in RS 34.133:
20-23 If you, my lord, hear a report obey and carry out whatever they 14,20; RSO 7: no. 36.
about the enemies, then my lord write him (to do)"? (ruling) 9. Literally, "fathers."
should write to me. 12-18 But now, why have you not
23-24 My lord, herewith I am writ- camed out what they write you [to do]? RS 20.255A
ing to you: Just as I have carried ouP all the things A complaint
25-27 I will surely send the ships that the king, your lord, has ordered me The names of sender and addressee
which are with us, for your inspection. (to do) (and) he has exempted [me]: are broken off. Published as Ugaritica
My lord should know (this)! (ruling) you must also do whatever the king, 5: no. 30, fig. 44. See Linder 1970: 73-
your lord, writes you (to do). 76. From the house of Rap'anu.
Notes 19-22 Now, the people from Urd5
1. A number of verbal forms in have requested food from His Majesty 1'-3' May you be well. May the
this text (lines 8,13, and 23) have (and) His Majesty has assigned to gods keep you in good health. (ruling)
to be interpreted as third person, them two thousand (measuresh of) 4'-8' Have I not written about the
although they are actually first- barley from Mukish. 'algabatul and the kabdu2(which are to
person forms. 23-28 And you, give them one big be sent) to me, my son? But you have
2. The exact reading of ship and (its) sailors in order to trans- not sent me (anything)!
'%ur.~u.meSis not clear. Accord- port this barley to their country; they 9'-12' Now, my son should send
ing to Berger 1970: 288 (followed will bring (it)in one or two turns. You me the 'algabatu and the kabdu. (ruling)
by Izre'el 1991 [2]: loo), we have must not deny them the ship! 13'-16' Furthermore, come with
@ APPENDIX
3. The reading of the name is not RS 20.18 who read it-fa-dli-li. The sign TU
certain. A report on enemy movement can be defended on the basis of the
4. Interpreted as "The Sidonian" Letter from Eshuwara, chief prefect of copy and the photo. However,
by Malbran-Labat.Note, however, Alashia, to the king of Ugarit. Pub- unless the form refers to the en-
that the name of the city of Sidon lished as Ugaritica 5: no. 22 and fig. 31. emies in general, the masculine
is always spelled Sidunu at Ugarit. Berger 1969: 217; Linder 1970: 6346; plural would remain unexplained.
5. Unless the person comes from Dietrich and Loretz 1982-85: 509; Therefore, one could also consider
outside Ugarit (as, for example, Steiner 1989:408-409. From the house a reading it-ta-la-ka',"(And where)
from Emar), the name cannot be of Rap'anu. they are heading." For LA with two
read Du-abi. Zu'abu was probably horizontals at the beginning, see
responsible either for all the afore- 1 4 Thus says Eshuwara, the chief line 20. Only one horizontal is
mentioned ships or just for the prefect of Alashiya. Speak to the king found in lines 3, 15,18,24.
ship of Sidanayu. of Ugarit: (ruling)
RS L.1
6. For the spelling, see KTU 5-6 May you and your country be
Make preparations
4.655:2, krws. well. (ruling)
Letter from the king (of Alashia) to
7-13 As for the matter concerning
Ammurapi, king of Ugarit. Published
Correspondence those enemies: (it was) the people
as Ugaritica 5: no. 23 and fig. 29. See
Concerning a Seaborne from your country (and) your own
Berger 1969: 219; Linder 1970: 69-72;
Invasion ships (who) did this!' And (it was) the
Dietrich and Loretz 1982-85: 510;
people from your country (who) com-
Yamada 1992. From the house of
RS 34.129 mitted these transgression(^).^ (ruling)
Rap'anu (?).
Report of an abduction 14-15 So do not be angry with me!3
Letter from the Hittite king to the pre- (ruling) 1 4 Thus says the king.' Speak to
fect of Ugarit. Published as RSO 7, no. 16-24 But now, (the) twenty enemy Ammurapi, king of Ugarit: (ruling)
12. Photo: Ugaritica 7: pl. 11. See ships-even before they would reach 5-7 May you be well! May the gods
Dietrich and Loretz 1978; 1982-85: 508; the mountain (shore)4-have not keep you in good health! (ruling)
Lehmann 1979; Rainey in Wachsmann stayed around but have quickly 8-14 Concerning what you wrote
1982: 304 11.1. See above, pp. 128-30, moved on, and where they have to me: "They have spotted enemy
164. Unstratified. pitched camp we do not know.5 ships at sea"; if they have indeed spot-
25-28 I am writing you to inform ted ships, make yourself as strong as
1-4 Thus says His Majesty,' the and protect you. Be aware! (ruling) possible.
Great King. Speak to the prefect: (rul- 14-21 Now, where are your own
ing) Notes troops (and) chariotry stationed? Are
5-14 Now, (there) with you, the 1. This translation is more or they not stationed with you? If not,
king your lord is (still too) young. He less prompted by lines 12-13. The who will deliver you from the enemy
knows nothing. And I, His Majesty, sender of the letter seems to refer fo~ces?~
had issued him an order concerning to a previous confrontation during 22-28 Surround your towns with
IbnaduSu, whom the people from which the people from Ugarit may walls; bring troops and chariotry in-
Sikala2-who live on ships-had ab- have suffered damage. The -ma in side. (Then) wait at full strength for
ducted. (ruling) line 9 points to a contrast with the the enemy. (ruling)
15-30 Herewith I send Nirga'ili, enemies in line 7.
who is kartappu with me, to you. And 2. The word iteqtu is not known Notes
you, send IbnaduSu, whom the people from other sources. 1. RS 20.238 is an answer to this
from Sikala had abducted, to me. I will 3. I tentatively take the form te- letter. Yamada 1992:437-39 claims
question him about the land !kkala,3 ze-em-me as a mistake for tezenne that the king of Carchemish is the
and afterwards he may leave for (from zenli). The same interpreta- sender of the letter. However, the
Ugarit again. (ruling) tion was followed by von Soden, subject matters in RS L.l and RS
AHw S.V.zemli. 20.238 are very similar, despite
Notes 4. The translation is tentative. Yamada's reservations. I therefore
1. Literally, "(My) Sun." Read perhaps in line 19: it-ta[l-k]a- follow Nougayrol, who identified
2. See, in general, Lehmann ni-me. See Ugaritica 5: photo, fig. 31. the "king" with the king of
1979. 5. The reading of the verb in line Alashiya.
3. Note the differencein spelling. 23 is difficult. I follow Nougayrol, 2. The translation is based on a
344 09 APPENDIX
NOTES
N O T E S T O P A G E S 24-39 d 347
rial culture that was quite different from its Bronze 27. LAE: 14546.
Age ancestors (Mazar 1990: 35557; 1992: 296-97). 28. Ibid.: 150.
2. See above, chap. 2 n. 6; Muhly 1970. 29. Goedicke 1975: 51.
3. Sasson 1966; Rainey 1967: 87-90; Astour 1970; 30. See below, p. 337.
IIeltzer 1977; 1978: 12,150-56; Linder 1970; 1981. The 31. Linder 1970: 16-19,98. See below, p. 126.
texts deal with various aspects of maritime activity 32. Heltzer 1982: 188-90.
and are discussed in the appropriate chapters and in 33. Professor J. R. Steffy, personal communication.
an appendix; see below, pp. 333-44. On the various 34. See below, RS 20.212, p. 341. On the location of Ura,
Ugaritic terms for ships and their equipment, see see below, p. 295. An Akkadian letter from Ugarit
Stieglitz in press. found at Tel Aphek mentions a shipment of 250-1 / 3
4. CG: 7678,16447; Bass 1973; 1991; in press; Sasson kor of wheat sent to Jaffa (Owen 1981: 8,12). It is not
1966. Bernal(1987) in Black Athena I notes that racial clear whether the wheat had been shipped from
prejudices may have caused Classical scholars of the Ugarit or was transferred locally.
last century to deemphasize Semitic and Egyptian 35. Nougayrol1960: 165; Astour 1965: 255; Linder 1970:
influences on early Greek civilization. 36,98; Casson 1995A: 36 n. 17.
5. Gonen 1984; 1992: 216-19. 36. The ship went down in the northern Aegean off the
6. For the historical background, see Astour 1981; island of Alonisos carrying a load of wine amphoras
Redford 1992: 125-229; Singer 1991. (Rose 1993; Hadjidaki 1993; 1995).
7. Harden 1962: 157; Linder 1981. See below, pp. 333-34. 37. Frost 1991: 369. See below, pp. 288-89.
8. Concerning a ship depiction from Tell el Dabca, the 38. Frankfort 1924: 118-42; 1941.
site of ancient Avaris, see below, p. 42. 39. Frankfort 1941; Kantor 1992: 14-17; Redford 1992:
9. ANET3:554-55. 17-24; Mark 1993; in press. Concerning these colo-
10. Ibid.: 239. nies, see most recently Oates 1993 and the additional
11. EA 101: 16-18,105: 20-21; Rainey 1967: 89 n. 144. bibliography there.
12. EA 168: 7-10. 40. Yannai 1983: 68-70. Concerning figurines of smiting
13. EA 245: 28-30. The term for ship used here is a-nu-yi gods found outside of the Syro-Canaanite littoral,
(in Ugaritic, any). see PM 111: 477-80; Harden 1962: 314 fig. 93; Ver-
14. Rainey 1967: 87-88; Linder 1970: 114-16. Astour meule 1964: 302,406 pl. 48: D; Negbi 1976: 3740,
(1970: 117-18) suggests that the Ashdodians had 168-69; Rutkowski 1986: 59 fig. 60,182 figs. 264-65,
settled in Ma'kadu, the main harbor of Ugarit (Minet 184, 185 fig. 268, 199.
el Beida). 41. Porada 1984: 486 ill. 1, pl. 65 fig 1. Concerning the
15. KTU 2.38 and KTU 4.394; see below, pp. 334,339. Uluburun figurine, see below, pp. 206,208.
16. ANET': 557; Rainey 1995: 483-84. 42. Porada 1984.
17. KTU 2.47; see below, pp. 336-37. 43. Bietak 1984; Redford 1992: 102,114-15.
18. Heltzer 1977: 210 (text Bo 2810); Tammuz 1985: 61-65. 44. Daressy 1895; Basch 1987: 63 figs. 111-12,65 fig. 115.
19. Heltzer 1988. See below, RS 16.238 + 254, p. 340. For 45. Davies and Faulkner 1947.
a general overview of Ugarit's connections with the 46. Wachsmann 1987: 12-25.
Aegean, see Astour 1973. 47. This Egyptian tendency to exaggerate ships'
20. Chadwick 1976: 66. sheerlines perhaps stemmed from a desire to show
21. Ventris and Chadwick 1973: 135-36,225-31; as much of the craft as possible above the water-
Chadwick 1973A: 441; 1976: 119-20,144; Palaima line.
1991A: 278-79. Traces of cumin have been found on 48. Davies and Faulkner 1947:41. Similar lacing appears
the Uluburun shipwreck. See below, p. 305. Kupairos on a hull in the Iniwia relief (Figs. 3.24,3.30: A).
and the "Phoenician" spice were used in the 49. Glanville 1972: frontispiece, 1fig. 1, 14 fig. 13, pls. 1:
Mycenaean world in the manufacture of perfume a, 3: b.
(Shelmerdine 1984: 82; 1985: 17-18,20-23,25,99). 50. Basch (1987: 63,65 fig. 115) notes a widening
22. Ventris and Chadwick 1973: 221-22 texts 99,100; stempost top on one of the ships in Daressy's publi-
Chadwick 1973: 441; 1976: 121. The amounts of cation. He compares it to those on Phoenician ships
"Phoenician" spice mentioned in the two texts total portrayed in Assyrian reliefs.
eight kilograms. 51. The concave tops are somewhat reminiscent of the
23. Ventris and Chadwick 1973: 319-20,34546,558,580; bifurcated posts on Micronesian canoes from the
Chadwick 1976: 144; Palaima 1991A: 278 n. 24,279. recent past (Dodd 1972: 69).
24. Van Soldt 1991: 96 fig. 9,110-14. See below, KTU 52. Landstrom 1970: 114 figs. 352-53,138 fig. 405.
2.38,2.39, 2.46,2.47,4.338, 4.352,4.366,4.370,4.394, 53. See below, p. 217.
pp. 334-39. 54. Tillers are lacking on the large ships at left.
25. On the conditions for change, see Liverani 1987. 55. Save-Soderbergh 1946: 56-57; Davies and Faulkner
26. See above, p. 12. 1947: 41.
350 d N O T E S T O P A G E S 54-69
Johnstone 1973: 3 4 ; Johnston 1982: 1;Diamant 1979: 20. Bass 1972: 17.
217. Concerning early seafaring exploration and 21. Woolner 1957; Casson 1995A: 36.
settlement in the Aegean, see Cherry 1990: 158-71; 22. Johnston 1982: 2; Basch 1987: 85.
Davis 1992; Jacobsen 1993. For a comprehensive 23. Broodbank 1989: 329.
bibliography of Franchthi Cave, see Tzalas 1995: 24. For summaries of the argument, see Johnstone 1973:
459-62. Broodbank (1992; 1993)believes that the 6-11; Johnston 1982; Basch 1987: 84-85.
development of settlement on the Cyclades was a 25. Casson 1975: 9.
result of definable patterns of colonization. He pro- 26. Casson 1995A: 31. When did the monoxylon develop
poses the existence of specialized trading colonies in in the Aegean? Basch (1987: 77) notes that the earliest
the Cyclades during the Bronze Age, arguing that known European dugout dates to ca. 6000 B.C. and
their choice of location was based primarily on con- suggests that the coniferous forests that once cov-
trol of the local sea lanes. ered Crete make it a prime candidate for the site of
Tzamtzis (1987)suggests that these early craft may the dugout's Aegean origin.
have resembled papirella, primitive reed rafts still 27. Higgins 1967: 54. Coleman (1985: 204) believes the
constructed on Corfu. In the summer of 1988, an ex- frying pans to have had no cultic significance.
perimental papirella six meters long was successfully 28. Basch 1987: 86 fig. 177.
paddled by a crew of five from Lavrion, on the south- 29. See below, pp. 108-11.
west point of Attica, to the island of Melos (Tzalas 30. Bishop 1938: 415-24.
1989; 1995; Troev 1989; see also Johnstone 1973: 4 4 ) . 31. Broodbank 1989: 326-32.
Basch (1987: 76-77) notes that Paleolithic craft may 32. Ibid.: 332-34.
have been made of skins or were rafts supported by 33. Bishop 1938: pl. 4, fig. 8; Hornell 1936: 211 fig. 141;
leather bags. Hutchinson (1962: 91) presumes that the Dodd 1972: 71,104.
Neolithic colonization of Crete was carried out in 34. Broodbank 1989; 1993: 327.
monoxylons and notes that such craft still existed in 35. Broodbank 1989: 333-34 fig. 6.
this century on Lake Prespa in Macedonia. 36. Casson 1995A: 34-35; Bass 1972: 28 n. 14; Basch 1975:
Recent research seems to prefer an interpretation 201; 1987: 132.
that the agriculture arrived in Greece from the Near 37. Marinatos 1933: 175 and pl. 15: 27; Gottlicher 1978:
East as part of the cultural baggage of a migration 318 and Taf. 25 (no. 321); Basch 1987: 147 fig. 308.
(Cherry 1981; Hansen 1992; Davis 1992: 702 n. 8 and 38. Casson 1995A:35.
the additional bibliography there). Such a migration 39. Hornell 1950: pl. 24: 2; 1970: 210; Basch 1975: 202-203
could have been seaborne. fig. 4.
Broodbank and Strasser 1991. 40. Haddon 1937: 177-78.
Renfrew 1967: 5; 1972:318,356-57, fig. 17: 7 and pl. 41. Hornell 1936: 295 figs. 212-13.
28: 3 4 ; Casson 1995A: 4142. 42. Casson 1995A: 85,331, figs. 137,145,147,176-77,
Casson 1995A: 41; Basch 1987: 78-79. 182,191-92. The Kinneret boat probably had a
Renfrew 1967: 5, pl. 3: 15-16. cutwater bow, like that on a boat in a mosaic from
Coleman 1985. the nearby site of Migdal (Steffy 1987: 328 fig. 3;
Casson 1995A: 30-31. For photos of all twelve ships, Steffy and Wachsmann 1990; Wachsmann 1988: 31;
see Basch 1987: 80-81 figs. 15947. 1995B: 156-58).
Coleman 1985: 203-204. 43. Buchholz and Karageorghis 1973: 118,119 fig. 40,
Coleman (1985: 196) argues that these are only of 121,393 pl. 1409d, and the additional bibliography
secondary importance. Nevertheless, their appear- there.
ance cannot simply be dismissed. 44. Chadwick 1987% 57-61.
See also Basch 1987: 8%91 figs. 183-88. 45. Olivier 1975; Sakellarakis 1979: 30-31; Basch 1987:
Petrie 1896: pls. 66: 3, 6, 10, 67: 13-14; 1921: pl. 34: 46, 13637 fig. 285.
45s; Bishop 1938: pl. 4 fig. 8; Raphael 1947: pl. 31: 3; 46. Haddon 1937: 88.
Hornell 1970: 279 fig. 68. 47. Basch 1986; 1987A; Coates 1987.
Wachsmann 1980: 288-89; 1995B: 14; Basch 1987: 84. 48. Deilaki 1987: 123.
Doumas 1967: 118-19 figs. 49-50,121-23 figs. 54-55; 49. Theocares 1958: 18.
1970. 50. Vermeule 1964: 259 fig. 43a; Morrison and Williams
PM 11: 240 fig. 137; Basch 1987: 83 figs. 170-71. 1968: 7,9, pl. la.
Marinatos 1933: 184 fig. 1. 51. Casson 1995A: 42 n. 4.
This does not necessarily require the blunt end to be 52. Bass 1972: 20.
the bow, as some scholars have assumed. See Casson
1975: 9 n. 17. The much-later Kinneret boat also Chapter 6: Minoan / Cycladic Ships
reaches its widest beam abaft amidships (Steffy 1987: 1. The arguments in support of raising the date of the
328 fig. 3; 1990: 40, foldout 2). abandonment of Thera, and with it the latter part of
the Late Minoan IA, to ca. 1628 B.c., are compelling 9. See particularly articles in Thera; Thera I; Thera 11;
(Kuniholm 1990).If this high date is accepted, it MT; Barber 1981; Doumas 1982; Wiener 1987; 1990:
would have profound significance for Aegean chro- 145-50; Davis 1992.
nology. 10. Branigan 1981.
Paradoxically, Egyptian chronology, to which 11. Furumark 1950: 15043; Mee 1982: 81.
Aegean chronology is inescapably linked, has moved 12. Wiener 1984,1990.
in the opposite direction. Thutmose III's reign must 13. Wooley 1953: 76-77; 1955: 228-32 pls. 36-39.
now be placed at 1479-1425 B.c., a full quarter-cen- 14. Niemeier 1991: 196 n. 67.
tury later than previously thought (Kitchen 1987). 15. Ibid. and the additional bibliography there. Also,
Chronological links indicate that the transition from note the appearance of conical cups and pumice in a
Late Minoan IB to Late Minoan I1 took place in the cultic context later, at thirteenth-century B.C.Tel
latter part of Thutmose III's reign (Wachsmann 1987: Nami, on Israel's Camel coast (Artzy 1991A).
127-29). Consequently, the end of Late Minoan IB 16. Niemeier 1991: 198-99.
must have occurred during the third quarter of the 17. Wooley 1953: 157-58 pl. 17: b; 1955: 191,294-95 pl.
fifteenth century B.C.This is problematic, as it results 79. The lamp was found discarded in a pit in Level I1
in the "stretching" of Late Minoan IB-previously (thirteenth century B.c.)but is believed to have come
allotted a mere half-century-to a period of from 160 from an earlier level.
to 185 years. 18. Wooley 1955: 295. Interestingly, a variant of Nuzi
Several solutions have been proposed to resolve pottery found in Level I1 at Alalakh and termed
this dilemma. One is to ignore the Egyptian evidence "Atchana Ware" exhibits Minoan motifs such as a
and to raise the Late Minoan IB /I1 transition to the tree that incorporates double axes and stylized papy-
sixteenth century, as S. W. Manning (1988A) has rus plants (Wooley 1955: 350,397 pls. 102-103,105,
done. Alternately, one may place inordinate weight 107; Evans 1936).Wooley (1953: 156)proposes that
on the Egyptian links and argue that they require the the motifs were derived from a single Minoan vessel
total abandonment of a seventeenth-century date for that had been preserved as an heirloom.
Thera's destruction, as J. D. Muhly (1991) has pro- 19. Niemeier 1991: 199 n. 91 for additional bibliography;
posed. Gordon 1954: 126-27.
Neither of these scenarios is satisfactory in my 20. Dussaud 1937: 234; Parrot 1937: 354; 1958: 109;
view. One solution that merits further investigation Kantor 1947: 31,77; Dossin 1939: 111-12; Smith 1965:
is that Late Minoan IB, together with the final por- 18,96-106.
tion of the Late Minoan IA that postdates the aban- 21. Parrot 1953: figs. 112-13; Smith 1965: 99-100 fig. 128.
donment of Thera, did indeed last longer than 22. Lloyd and Mellaart 1965: 33, 62; Lloyd 1967: 81.
previously thought (Manning 1991: 249 and the 23. DD: 13; Bietak 1992; 1995; Hammond 1993; Hankey
additional bibliography there). M. Popham (1990), 1993; Dickinson 1994: 244,24647 pl. 7.1; Morgan
on the basis of an analysis of pottery styles, allots a 1995. Bietak notes two distinct periods of contact,
mere twenty-five years (one generation) for Late one during the early Thirteenth Dynasty (early eigh-
Minoan IB, with an additional fifteen years for the teenth century B.c.) and a second that spans the end
end of the Late Minoan IA after the destruction of of the Second Intermediate period, as well as the
Thera, resulting in a total of only forty years. In the beginning of the Eighteenth Dynasty (latter part of
accompanying discussion, however, W. D. Niemeier the sixteenth century B.c.). He proposes that the
emphasizes that, since Late Minoan IB pottery is earlier group of frescoes may have resulted from a
known only from the destruction level and not from royal marriage between the Hyksos and Minoans.
tombs, it is possible that earlier pottery within this 24. Vercoutter 1956; Wachsmann 1987 and the addi-
period is missing. tional bibliography there. Most recently, concerning
2. Malamat 1971. the clothing worn by Aegeans depicted in the Eigh-
3. The Middle Bronze Age date of this text precludes teenth Dynasty tombs, see Rehak 1996. On evidence
the Caphtorite being a Mycenaean. The name Keftiul for the importation of decorated cloth from the
Caphtor continued to refer to the Aegean after the fall Aegean to Egypt, see Barber 1991: 311-57.
of the autonomous Minoan culture at the end of the 25. Wachsmann 1987: 127-29. This synchronism does
Late Minoan IB. See below, pp. 297,340. not require the abandonment of a seventeenth-cen-
4. Rainey 1967: 89 n. 168. tury date for the destruction of Thera as Muhly
5. Chadwick 1973A: 394-95; 1987B: 50-52; Palaima (1991) has argued. See above, note 1.
1989A: 4041; 1989B. See also Hooker 1985. 26. Marinatos 1974: 19-31 color pl. 2.
6. See below, pp. 297-98. 27. Ibid.: 19-32; Televantou 1990: 309.
7. KTU 1.6.52; Caquot, Sznycer, and Herdner 1974: 97, 28. Marinatos 1974: cover, 34-38 fig. 4, pl. 85, color pl. 6;
99,270. Marinatos 1984: 35-38 fig. 18; Doumas 1992: 52-55.
8. Thucydides 1: 4,8; Herodotus 1: 171; 3: 122. 29. Marinatos 1984: 4 W 6 fig. 26. Televantou (1990: 313)
374 @c N O T E S T O P A G E S 307-13
the iconographic evidence. Horses and bulls appear 13. Ormerod 1978: 13.
as items of tribute/ trade brought by Syro-Canaanites 14. Thucydides I: 5: 1.
to Egypt in many Egyptian tombs: Rechmire (T. 100): 15. Ormerod 1978: 18.
Davies 1943: pl. 23; Menkheperresonb (T. 86) and 16. Ringler 1980: 20.
Amemnose (T. 42): Davies and Davies 1933: pls. 7, 17. See above, p. 130
34-36; Amunezeh (T. 84): Davies and Davies 1941: 18. Ormerod 1978: 69-70.
pl. 13; Thannuny (T. 74): Mekhitarian 1978: 99; 19. Morrison 1980: 132.
Nebamun (T. 90): Davies 1923: pl. 28; Huy (T. 40): 20. Ziskind 1974: 137.
Davies and Gardiner 1926: pl. 19; and two unnamed 21. Ormerod 1978: 31.
tombs (Ts. 91 and 119):Wreszinski I: 291,340. See 22. RS 20.238 and RS 20.18; see below, pp. 34344.
also Fig. 14.3. 23. Christensen 1972: 165. See above, pp. 166,168.
137. Pulak 1989: 8. 24. Marinatos 1974: color pl. 9; Ernstson 1985: 319 fig. 4;
138. See also Redford 1992: 221, 223. Doumas 1992: 78.
139. Ezekiel 27:13; Odyssey XIV: 285-98; XV: 440-84; 25. Odyssey X: 28-30; Ormerod 1978: 4445.
Herodotus I: 1; 11: 54. 26. Ormerod 1978: 43.
140. Davies 1927: 57. 27. EA 101: 11-13; 105: 11-17.
141. Mekhitarian 1978: 33,35, 64,67, 94, 112, 127, 136. 28. EA 114: 15-20.
142. Brothel scenes also appear on the "erotic papyrus" in 29. See above, pp. 10,3940,313.
Turin (Peck 1978: 94 fig. 21). 30. See above, pp. 208,307.
143. EA 113: 14; 155: 68. 31. Concerning the introduction of the ram on Greek
144. EA 105: 14-17. galleys, see above, pp. 157-58.
145. See above, pp. 311-12.
146. Note, however, that the stele of Antefoker makes Chapter 16: Sea Laws
repeated reference to the construction of "ships" for
the voyage to Punt (Sayed 1977: 170). See above, p. 1. Gordon (UT 19: 1443) considers the rb-tmtt to be the
238. epithet of a war god, such as Reshef or Mat. Rainey
147. See above, pp. 4244. (1967: 87 n. 118) identifies him as a "supervisor of
148. Malamat 1971: 38. See below, KTU 4.647, p. 339. prisoners." Virolleaud (1965: 82) considers him a
149. PM 11: 309; Buchholz 1973; Allen 1994, and the addi- pirate chief. Linder (1970: 46) recognizes in him an
tional bibliography there. official of the king of Tyre, generally in charge of
salvage but who had defected for some undeter-
Chapter 15: War and Piracy at Sea mined reason. Gordon's identification seems to fit
the context best.
1. Pliny, Nut. Hist.: VII: 58: 209. 2. See below, KTU 2.38, p. 334. Linder 1970: 44.
2. Sandars 1978: 50 n. 14 and additional bibliography. 3. Katzenstein 1973: 267-76; Linder 1981: 33 n. 14 and
The reference to Tunis 11 should be to pl. 2, no. 78. additional bibliography.
3. Giiterbock 1967: 78. 4. ANET Suppl.: 98.
4. Presumably these were from the cities of Ugarit, Ura, 5. See below, RS 17.133, pp. 34041.
and elsewhere. Compare RS 20.212 and RS 26.158, 6. Fensham 1967.
but note that the ship captain in RS 17.133 has a 7. Compare the Rhodian Sea Law 3: 10 (Ashburner
Hittite name. See below, pp. 323-24,34042. 1909: 91).
5. Giiterbock 1967: 80. 8. On the location of Ura, see above, p. 295.
6. I thank Professor Lionel Casson for suggesting the 9. Fensham 1967: 224; Ashburner 1909. The Rhodian
latter interpretation to me (personal communication). Sea Law may have formed the basis of the code of
7. Yadin 1963: 251-52. Only two northern warriors are maritime laws of Oleron, enacted in the twelfth
depicted carrying throwing spears. They stand to the century A.D. by Eleanor of Aquitaine, who later mar-
left of the mast in ships N. 2 and N. 5 (Figs. 8.4, 7,8, ried Henry I1 of England (Oleron).The law code was
12). This weapon may have been in use at Ugarit also introduced to England by their son, Richard I, in
(Rainey 1967: 90). 1190. In 1336 it was codified in the "Black Book of
8. Casson 1995A: 38. the Admiralty."
9. Brunner-Traut 1974. 10. Ashburner 1909: ccix-ccxxxiv.
10. Schafer 1974: 169 fig. 159; Wachsmann 1987: 56 n. 100. 11. Ziskind 1974: 136. The person who swore the oath
11. Strictly speaking, the masts cross the yards, indicat- was the harbor captain, not the captain of the ship as
ing that they are being viewed from the stern. Ziskind would have it (Nougayrol 1956: 118-19).
12. Nelson (1929: 34) was the first to suggest that the 12. See below, pp. 337-38.
grapnel was "thrown into the enemy rigging either to 13. Pardee 1975A.
tear the sail or to overturn the light craft of the foe." 14. LAE: 155.
N O T E S T O P A C E S 31S24 69 375
15. Ormerod 1978: 74-77. 22. LAE: 143.
16. LAE: 145. 23. Rhodian Sea Law 3: 13 (Ashburner 1909: 94).
17. Ashburner 1909: cxlv-cxlvi. 24. LAE: 145 and above, p. 40.
18. Ormerod 1978: 6 2 4 3 .
19. LAE:144. Chapter 17: Conclusions
20. Ibid.
21. Compare the Rhodian Sea Law 3: 3 4 (Ashburner 1. Liverani 1987: 70.
1909: 81-84).
abaft (prep.): behind. belaying pin (n.): wooden pin for the temporary attach-
aft (adv.): toward the stern. ment of the free end of an element of the running rig-
amidships (adv.): in the middle of the vessel, midway be- ging.
tween bow and stern or at the widest part of the vessel. bireme (n.): a rowed vessel with two banks of oars on each
aphlaston (n.): curving ornament at the head of the side. In ancient biremes, the two banks were set at dif-
sternpost; such an ornament is typical of Classical war- ferent levels.
ships. boom (n.): spar used to spread the foot of a sail.
apical rope groove (n.):groove found at the apex of a stone boom-footed rig (n.): type of square rig, common on cer-
anchor, used to seat the anchor rope. tain ships of the Bronze Age, in which the foot of the
astern (adv. or prep.): behind the vessel. sail is attached to a boom.
athwartships (adv.): lying or running in a direction across bow (n.): the end of the vessel toward the normal direc-
the vessel, at a right angle to the centerline. tion of travel; the "front" end.
backstay (n.):a stay (q.v.) running aft from the head of the bow patch (n.): circular, spoked device seen on the upper
mast to provide longitudinal support to the mast. The hull at the bow of Geometric ship representations.
stay can be belayed on the centerline, often by attach- brace (n.): element of the running rigging (q.v.) attached
ment to the sternpost, or it can lead to one side. If the to the yardarm (q.v.)to adjust the angle of a square sail
latter, there are normally pairs of backstays to balance to the wind. They are used in pairs, one on each yard-
the lateral stress. arm.
baldachin (n.): a simple canopy, normally consisting of a brail (or brailing line) (n.): line used to gather up a sail. In
curved roof supported on four pillars, typically found ancient square rigs, a number of brails were used to con-
on Egyptian craft, where they are often used to shelter trol the shape of the sail and trim it to suit the point of
important persons. The baldachin may be fixed or por- sail and existing wind conditions.
table. brailing fairlead (n.): ring, grommet, eye, or loop attached
ballast (n.): dense material, typically stone, placed low in to the yard or sail to guide a brailing line.
the hold of a vessel to lower the center of gravity and bulwarks (n.): the topsides above the deck: may consist of a
increase stability. planked continuation of the side or may be only lightly
batten (n.): thin strip of wood or fiber placed against the planked or open.
inner surface of planking at a seam, either to cushion butt end (n.): squared, unscarfed end of a timber, such as a
seam ligatures or to act as caulking. plank or beam.
beam (n.): (1)width of a vessel amidships or at the widest butt joint (n.): joint between the ends of two members in
point. Extreme beam is the overall width to the outside which neither member is scarfed or notched to receive
of planking, wales, rubrails, and so on, while molded the other; the timbers meet at butt ends.
beam is the width to the inside surface of the planking. caprail (n.): a railing atop the sheerstrake or bulwarks,
(2) A transverse timber, straight or crowned, fastened normally defining the upper edge of the side of the
at its ends to the sides of the hull: beams can act as vessel.
thwarts or support decks. carling (n.): a longitudinal timber fixed to the beams but
beam shelf (n.): a stringer (q.v.) that supports the ends of not to the sides of the vessel. It may be continuous or
deck beams. consist of short pieces between adjacent beams.
ceiling (n.):planking over the inboard surface of the frames. forestay (n.):stay (q.v.) running forward from the head of
chine (n.): angular join of bottom to side instead of a the mast to provide longitudinal support to the mast. It
rounded bilge. is often attached at its lower end to the stem.
clamp (n.): a heavy stringer (q.v.) normally set opposite a frame (n., also timber): a transverse reinforcing member,
wale. A clamp often supports deck beams, in which case made up of one or more components, fastened to the
it may be called a deck clamp. See also beam shelf. interior surface of the exterior hull planking and some-
cleat (n.): (1)small block of wood, nailed to the surface of times to the keel.
another timber either as a fastening or a stop. (2) A block furl (v.): to bundle up a sail when it is not is use. Square
of wood with horns or ears, used for the belaying of sails are often folded or rolled up and tied to the yard.
running rigging. galley (n.): large seagoing vessel propelled primarily by
clew (n.):either corner at the foot of a square sail (q.v.) or oars.
the after corner of a fore-and-aft sail (q.v.). gangway (n.):a narrow deck running either along the side
coracle (n.): small boat of wicker frame covered with ani- of the vessel or down the centerline to connect small
mal hide. decks at the ends of the ship. It is often used on vessels
crow's nest (n.): small platform attached to the mast near with open holds or oared ships to allow the sailing crew
its head, used by lookouts, archers, or slingers as a van- to move around the ship.
tage point. garboard (n.):the strake nearest the keel, or the lowest side
crutch (n.):stanchion or prop that supports long spars, such strake in some flat-bottomed vessels, such as the Cheops
as mast and yard, when they are not in use. ship.
cutwater bow (n.): bow with a projecting forefoot some- gripe (n.):a projecting fin, either part of or attached to the
what resembling a waterline ram but not normally used forward face of the stem below the waterline.
as a weapon. grommet (n.): loop made of rope or leather. It has many
deck (n.): approximately horizontal platform across the uses, such as for oarlocks or brailing rings.
interior of the hull, normally constructed of a layer of halyard (n.): line for hoisting and lowering a sail: can be
longitudinal planks fastened to or resting on a series of attached either directly to the sail or to a spar, such as a
transverse beams. yard.
deck beam (n.): a beam that supports a deck. hawser (n.):heavy rope, normally used for mooring.
d i e m (n., Greek): an oared vessel rowed by two groups of head (of a sail, n.): the upper edge of a sail.
men: normally assumed to be synonymous with bireme helm (n.): the apparatus for steering the ship, as well as
(q.v.1. (more abstractly) the steering quality of the ship.
dovetail joint (n.): rigid joint, frequently used where two helmsman (n.): the crew member steering the vessel. This
members join at a right angle, in which the end of one may be an official rank or position, or it may be just one
member is formed into a flared, shouldered face tenon of the many tasks performed by all members of a small
that fits into a matching face mortise in the longitudi- crew in rotation.
nal edge of the second member. hog (n. and v.): vertical distortion of the hull in which the
dowel (n.): a wooden rod. In structural terms, it is used to ends droop and the middle rises.
align two timbers, normally edge-to-edge. hogging truss (n.): an arrangement of ropes (and some-
dugout (n.): a vessel carved from a solid log, normally in times props) connecting the ends of the ship and pull-
one piece. Extended dugouts have pieces, such as side ing them up, to counteract hogging.
planks, added to the dugout base; expanded dugouts hull (n.): the body of the vessel, consisting of the struc-
are broadened by softening and spreading the sides of tural timbers that give the ship its shape and strength
the hull. but excluding rigging, fittings such as windlasses, and
edge-joined (adj.):joined edge-to-edge. Refers here to sev- the contents of the hold.
eral methods of ancient Mediterranean hull construc- interscalmiurn (n. Latin, "between tholes"): the distance
tion in which adjacent planks were fastened to each between thole pins or oarlocks in a rowed vessel.
other, either by lashing or wooden tenons, passing joggle (v.): to cut a step, or a series of steps, in a timber to
through their common edges. fit another; commonly used in ancient Egyptian ship
floor (n.):-thebottom of the vessel amidships. construction.
floor timber (n., sometimes abbreviated to floor): the cen- kedge (v.): to pull a vessel through the water by carrying
tral component of a frame that crosses the keel (thus an anchor away from the vessel, dropping it, and haul-
spanning the floor). ing the vessel up to the anchor. This is most commonly
foot (of a sail, n.): the lower edge of a sail. done when the vessel is becalmed or in an attempt to
fore (adj.): pertaining to the bow or closer to the bow. free a grounded vessel. In later times, some vessels car-
fore-and-aft rig (n.): a sailing rig in which the sail or sails ried a special anchor, called a kedge anchor, designed
are set with the plane of the sail parallel to the centerline specifically for this purpose.
of the ship instead of athwartships. keel (n.): central backbone timber, of sufficient cross-
forecastle (n.):a raised structure built at the bow of a vessel. sectional area to offer significant longitudinal strength
378 d GLOSSARY
to the hull. In most cases, a portion of it projects below the highest position of the uppermost sail or yard. This
the bottom planking and offers lateral resistance. area is used for the attachment of stays and other rig-
keel plank (also plank keel, n.): centerline strake, often ging.
thicker than the adjoining garboards but not stiff enough mast partner (n.): a structure at deck level (or above the
to be considered a true keel. step in undecked vessels) to support the mast. The part-
keelson (n.): an internal centerline timber lying atop the ner is primarily a transverse support but can also be
frames, of sufficient length, cross-sectional area, and used as a longitudinal support. The partner, combined
rigid fastening to add significantly to the longitudinal with the rigging, transmits most of the driving force of
stiffness of the hull. The maststep may be cut into the the sail to the hull.
keelson, or it may be a separate timber fastened to the maststep (n.): a mortise to house the heel of a mast and/or
upper surface of the timber. the timber into which it is cut.
L-shaped lashing mortise (n.): a lashing mortise (q.v.) in midships (adj): located or pertaining to amidships, as in
which one end of the mortise exits the interior plank the midships section.
surface and the other exits the plank edge. monoxylon (n.): a dugout (q.v.) carved from a single tree.
lanyard (n.): (1)a length of light-to-medium line used for moor (v.): to secure a vessel, temporarily or semiperma-
tightening stays. (2) A short length of light line attached nently, either by anchoring or by tying to other struc-
to a small, portable object to prevent its being lost. tures, such as a pier or wharf.
lashed construction (n.): the joining of structural compo- mortise-and-tenon joint (n.):an edge-to-edge planking fas-
nents by wrapping them with several passes of rope or tening commonly used in the ancient Mediterranean.
cord. This is also applied to a style of Egyptian ship- Each joint consists of a free tenon housed in mortises in
building in which planks are fastened to each other by opposing edges of a seam: in its fully developed form,
several turns of heavy cord passing through a common the tenon is locked into each plank by a wooden peg
mortise or series of common mortises. See sewn con- driven through plank and tenon.
struction. nuggar (n.): a small to medium-sized Nile vessel of the his-
lashing mortise (n.): a mortise, open at both ends, through toric period characterized by edge-fastened planking
which lashing ropes or cords pass. and the absence of internal framing.
lateen rig (n.): a fore-and-aft rig (q.v.) in which a triangu- oar (n.): a long, narrow piece of wood having a broad
lar sail is set on a diagonal yard raised on a mast. blade at one end and a handle at the other, supported
launch (n.): a small boat, often used as a ship's boat. in a fixed mounting, such as a thole (q.v.) or oarlock
leech (n.): the leeward edge of a sail. On a fore-and-aft sail (q.v.), and used to propel a vessel by pulling or push-
it is always the after edge, but it may be either edge of a ing the handle, causing the blade to push against the
square sail, depending on how the sail is trimmed. water.
leeward (adv.): the side of a vessel or object that is away oarlock (n.): a mounting for an oar characterized by a ver-
from the wind. tical member both before and abaft the oar. In modern
lift (n.): a line supporting the weight of a yard or a boom, vessels, the oarlock is a U-shaped casting that pivots
normally running from the masthead to the yardarm, with the oar, but in older watercraft an oarlock can be
but may run to another part of the yard. See running as simple as a pair of thole pins.
lift, standing lift. oculus (n.): device in the form of an eye, often used as a
line (n.): rope or cord, especially a piece of cordage set up decorative or apotropaic element on watercraft.
to do a specific job on board ship. outrigger (n.): any structure that extends off one or both
loom (n.): the part of an oar, usually square or cylindrical sides of a vessel. Such structures may support pontoons
in section, between the blade and the handle. for added stability, as on Polynesian canoes, or tholes,
luff (n.): the leading or windward edge of a sail. On fore- as on modern rowing shells.
and-aft sails it is always the forward edge, but it may papyriform (adj.): having the shape of a bundle of papy-
be either edge of a square sail, depending on how the rus reeds: normally used to describe Egyptian wooden
sail is trimmed. (v.): to sail too high into the wind, so vessels built in the same general shape as Nilotic reed
that the leading edge (luff) of the sail ceases to work rafts.
effectively and starts to tremble or flap. penteconter (n.): an ancient Greek warship rowed by fifty
mast (n.): vertical spar fixed to the hull to carry sails, ei- men, arranged in twenty-five pairs on a single level.
ther directly or attached to other, movable spars. port (adj. or adv.): left side when facing forward.
mast cap (n.):a fitting attached to the head of the mast and protokeel (n.): a longitudinal centerline timber having some
supporting a number of sheaves, slots, or rings for rig- of the characteristics of a true keel (such as substantially
ging, such as lifts (q.v.).Such fittings were used on some greater scantlings than the adjoining planking) but lack-
Bronze Age vessels to handle the large number of lifts ing others (such as firm attachment to the rest of the
and other lines associated with certain versions of the hull structure).
square rig. See truck. quarter (n.): the side of the vessel at the stern.
masthead (n.): the uppermost portion of the mast, above quarter rudder (n.):a rudder (q.v.)instead of a steering oar
GLOSSARY 69 379
(q.v.)fixed to the side of the hull at the stern; i.e., on the twisting ropes strung between two fixed points.
quarter (q.v.). spinnaker (n.): a large, baggy, triangular sail on modern
refit (v.): to repair or overhaul a vessel in a thorough, sys- yachts, set forward when sailing before the wind.
tematic way, often incorporating modifications and square sail (n.): a sail, normally set on a yard (q.v.) at right
improvements. angles to the centerline of the vessel.
rigging (n.): the system of cordage fitted to spars and sails stanchion (n.): a vertical post supporting a load above.
to support and control them. standing lift (n.): a lift (q.v.) of fixed length that supports
rowlock (n.): see oarlock. the weight of a yard or boom in only one position, gen-
running lift (n.): a lift (q.v.) that can be adjusted to support erally when the yard is lowered.
the weight of a yard or boom at any position. standing rigging (n.): rigging of more or less fixed length,
running rigHng (n.): lines attached to spars and sails that used to support a spar in a certain position. Although it
can be easily hauled or slacked to adjust the height and may be adjusted slightly in use, it is not commonly
attitude of sails and spars. hauled, slacked, or belayed with every change of sail.
scarf (n.): a joint in which timbers with parallel axes over- starboard (adj. or adv): right side when facing forward.
lap longitudinally. stave (n.): one of the long, narrow pieces of wood used to
sewn construction (n.): any of a number of construction build a cask or barrel. The term also applies to wooden
methods in which adjacent planks are fastened together members used in other forms of similar construction.
by fiber stitching. The stitching may be continuous stay (n.):an element of the standing rigging (q.v.) that sup-
along the seam (in the manner of garment sewing), or it ports a mast. See forestay, backstay, shroud.
may consist of individual ligatures (in the manner of steering oar (n.): an oar used for steering. It pivots on a
medical sutures). thole or oarlock and is used by sweeping it through the
sheave (n.): a pulley, set either in a separate housing (a water to push one end of the vessel across the line of
block) or in a slot in a spar or hull component. travel. It is less efficient than a rudder.
sheer (n.): the upper edge of the uppermost continuous stem (n.): the upright backbone timber rising from the for-
strake of exterior planking. In many smaller vessels, this ward end of the keel or keel plank. It may denote either
is the upper edge of the side. In larger vessels, the sheer, the specific timber into which the plank hooding ends
sometimes called the planksheer, may be below the bul- are rabbeted in a complex assembly or the entire as-
warks and other upper works. See sheerstrake. sembly.
sheerstrake (n.): the uppermost continuous strake of struc- stern (n.): the end of the vessel away from the normal di-
turally significant planking; on vessels with light bul- rection of travel; the "back end.
warks, the sheerstrake may actually be at deck level. sternpost (n.): the upright backbone timber rising from the
sheet (n.): line attached to the clew (q.v.) of a sail and used after end of the keel (keel plank). It may denote either the
for trimming the sail. specific timber into which the plank hooding ends are
shell-based construction (n.):hull construction methods in rabbeted in a complex assembly or the entire assembly.
which the shell of planking plays the primary role in strake (n.): a continuous run of planking, made up of one
determining the shape of the hull and provides the or more planks joined or butted end-to-end.
greater share of structural strength. Most ancient meth- stringer (n.): a heavy longitudinal timber, such as a clamp,
ods of construction were shell-based. on the interior of the vessel.
shell-first construction (n.): hull construction methods in sweep (n.): a long, heavy oar, typically operated by two or
which the shell of planking is the first major compo- more men.
nent erected, generally after the keel. The finished hull tabernacle (n.): a mast partner (q.v.) designed to allow the
may be shell- or skeleton-based. mast to be stepped and struck by leaning it forward and
shroud (n.): a stay (q.v.) that provides transverse support backward, respectively.
to a mast; it runs from the masthead to the vessel's side. tenon (n.): a tongue on the end of a member, or a separate
sidereal compass (n.): a method of determining direction element, designed to be housed in a mortise and used
from the positions of rising and setting stars. to join components.
skeleton-based construction (n.):hull constructionmethods thole (n.): a fixed pivot point for an oar, generally consist-
in which an internal framework, usually consisting of ing of a pin or hook fixed to the side of the vessel. The
frames and stringers (q.v.),plays the primary role in de- oar may rest either before or abaft the thole.
termining the shape of the hull and provides the greater thole bight (n.): a grommet of rope or leather to attach an
share of structural strength.Most ancient methods of con- oar to a thole. It can serve either to transmit the force of
struction evolved toward skeleton-based methods. the oar to the hull (if the oar lies before the thole) or
skeleton-first construction (n.):hull construction methods simply as a keeper, to prevent the oar from being lost if
in which an internal framework is the first major com- it is let go.
ponent erected, generally after the keel. Such hulls are thole-board (n.): a strake or other longitudinal timber into
usually, but not always, skeleton-based. which the tholes or oarlocks are fitted.
Spanish windlass (n.): a device for exerting tension by through-beam (n.): a beam (q.v.) that passes completely
380 @ GLOSSARY
through the sides of the vessel so that the ends are vis- hull together or to provide a point of attachment for a
ible from outboard. This is often done in an attempt to truss.
fasten the beam securely to the side by notching it over tumble-home (n.): hull shape in which the upper parts of
a wale. the hull lean inward, toward the centerline.
thwart (n.):a simple seat, consisting of a board set athwart- V-shaped lashing mortise (n.): a lashing mortise (q.v.) in
ships. In some vessels, the thwart may also act as a beam which both ends of the mortise exit the same surface of
(q.v.)if properly fastened to the sides. the plank.
tiller (n.):a straight or curved piece fixed at an angle to the wale (n.): an exceptionally heavy strake.
head of the rudder to give the helmsman leverage or to waterline (n.): the imaginary line on the hull that marks
allow him to steer when the rudder head is out of nor- the level of the water surface when the vessel is afloat.
mal reach. Some vessels have a waterline painted on or inscribed
toggle (n.): a short wooden bar, often with swelled ends, in the hull.
seized or spliced into the end of a rope to allow another webbing (n.): a woven or plaited strap used in place of
rope, with a loop in its end, to be rapidly attached. several turns of lashing in some ancient Egyptian hulls,
transom (n.): (1)a transverse timber in the stern, crossing such as the one at Lisht.
the inner face of the sternpost assembly and holding wind rose (n.):a diagram of geographic directions in which
the sides together. Sometimes called a transom timber a series of points corresponds to the origins of known,
to distinguish it from the flat, transverse plane forming prevailing winds. Common wind roses in the West are
the stems of some vessels. (2) A flat, transverse plane derived from ancient wind systems that divided the
forming the stern of the vessel. compass into eight or twelve points.
treenail (n.): a wooden peg of substantial size used to fas- windlass (n.): a mechanical device for multiplying human
ten together two members, such as a plank and a frame. force in hauling in ropes. It consists of a horizontal bar-
trieres (n.):Greek oared warship rowed by three groups of rel of circular or polygonal section set in a fixed mount-
oarsmen, probably set at three levels. ing, which is turned by bars set in holes in the barrel.
truck (n.): a sheave (q.v.), slot, or ring in the head of the woolding (n.): a binding used to hold together a mast of
mast to take a line for raising and lowering something. composite construction.
See mast cap. yard (n.): a spar set athwartships on a mast to support a
truss (n.): an element designed to exert tension in a struc- square sail.
ture and provide it with rigidity. In ancient ships, rope yardarm (n.): the end of the yard, outboard of the sail,
trusses were sometimes run between the ends of the where controlling lines such as braces (q.v.) are at-
hull, either to compress the entire hull and thus increase tached.
its strength and rigidity through preloading or to pull
the ends up and reduce hogging. See hogging truss.
truss girdle (n.): a girdle of ropes around a hull to hold the
GLOSSARY c9 381
BIBLIOGRAPHY
dSP BIBLIOGRAPHY
ceedings of the Third International Symposium at the RSO = Ras Shamra-Ougarit
Swedish Institute in Athens, May 31-June 5, 1982.) SAC1 = Stone Anchors from the Coast of Israel. Sefunim 3
R. Hagg and N. Marinatos, eds. Stockholm. 1984. (1969-71): 92, pl. 9.
NASN = Nautical Archaeology Society Newsletter SAOC, 0 1 = Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilization, The
NC = La Nouvelle Clio Oriental Institute. Chicago.
NEAEHL = The New Encyclopedia of Archeological Exca- SBT = Studien zu den Bogazkoy-Texten
vations in the Holy Land 1 4 . E. Stem, ed. Jerusalem. SC = Sociitb et Compagnies de commerce en Orient et dans
1993. l'oce'an Indien. (Actes du huitieme Colloque inter-
NG = National Geographic national d'histoire maritime, Beyrouth, 5-10 sep-
NGR = National Geographic Research tembre 1966). M. Mollat, ed. Paris.
OA = Opuscula Archaeologica SCABA = Sanctuaries and Cults in the Aegean Bronze Age.
OAth = Opuscula Atheniensia (Proceedings of the First International Symposium at
OCSS = The Oxford Companion of Ships and the Sea. Oxford. the Swedish Institute, Athens, May 12-13, 1980.) (Acta
1976. lnstituti Athensiensis Regni Sueciae, series in 4", 28.)
Odyssey = The Odyssey. 2 vols. Reprint. Loeb Classical R. Hagg and N. Marinatos, eds. Stockholm. 1981.
Library. A. T. Murray, trans. Harvard. 1974-75. SDL = Studi in onore di Professor Doro Levi. Antichita Cretesi
OEDZ= The Oxford English Dictionary. 2d ed. Oxford. I (Universita di Catania, Instituto di Archeologica).
1989. 1973. Catania. 1973.
O L A = Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta S l M A = Studies in Mediterranean Archaeology
OLD = Oxford Latin Dictionary. P. G. W . Glare, ed. SIMAL = Studies in Mediterranean Archaeology and
Oxford.1982. Literature
Oleron = OCSS: s.v. Oleron, the Laws of SKHC = Scenes of King Herihor in the Court: The Temple of
Or = Orientalia Khonsu I: Plates 1-110. (UC, OIP 100). By the Epi-
O r A = Oriens Antiquus graphic Survey. Chicago. 1979.
PAP = Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society SPB = Sewn Planked Boats: Archaeological and Ethnographic
PCA = Pylos Comes Alive: Industry + Administration in a Paper Presented to a Conference at Greenwich, November
Mycenaean Palace. C. W . Shelmerdine and T. G. 19%. (BARIS 276.) S. McGrail and E. Kentley, eds.
Palairna, eds. New York. 1984. Oxford. 1985.
PEQ = Palestine Exploration Quarterly SSCAZ= Second Symposium on Ship Construction in Anti-
PGP = Problems in Greek Prehistory. (Papers Presented at quity. (Summaries of lectures.) Delphi. 1987.
the Centenary Conference of the British School of SSCA3 = Third Symposium on Ship Construction in Anti-
Archaeology at Athens, Manchester, April 1986.) E. B. quity. (Summaries of lectures.) Athens. 1989.
French and K. A. Wardle, eds. Bristol. SSCA4 =Fourth Symposium on Ship Construction in
PM = The Palace of Minos I-IV. A. Evans. London. 192144. Antiquity. (Summaries of lectures). Athens. 1991.
PPS = Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society SSCA5 = Fifth Symposium on Ship Construction in Antiquity.
PRU = Le palais royal d'Ugarit (Summaries of lectures.) Nauplion. 1993.
PZ = Prahistorische Zeitschrift Thalassa = Thalassa: ~ ' ~prihistorique
~ i e et la mer. (Actes de
QDAP = Quarterly ofthe Department of Antiquities in la troisieme Recontre 6g6enne internationale de
Palestine l'Universit6 de LiPge, Station de recherches sous-
K A =Revue archeologique marines et ockanographiques [StaReSO], Clavi, Corse
RAssyr =Revue d'Assyriologie [23-25 avril19901.)R. Laffineur and L. Basch, eds.
RB =Revue biblique Liege. 1991.
RBCC = The Relations between Cyprus and Crete, ca. 2000- Thera = Thera and the Aegean World. (Papers Presented at
500 B.C. (Acts of the International Archaeological Sym- the Second International Scientific Congress,
posium at Nicosia, April 1622, 1978.) Nicosia. 1979. Santorini, Greece, August 1978.) C. Doumas, ed.
RDAC =Report of the Department of Antiquities, Cyprus London. 1978.
R~'E =Revue d'igyptologie Thera I1 = Thera and the Aegean World 11. (Papers and Pro-
Res Mycenaeae = Res Mycenaeae. (Akten des VII. Inter- ceedings of the Second International Scientific Con-
nationalen Mykenologischen Kolloquiums in Niirn- gress, Santorini, Greece, August 1978.) London. 1980.
berg vom 6.-10. April 1981.)A. Heubeck and G. Thera 11111 = Thera and the Aegean World 111. (Papers and
Neumann, eds. Gottingen. 1983. Proceedings of the Third International Congress,
RH = Revue de histoire de la philosophie et d'histoire ginirale Santorini, Greece, September 3-9,1989.) Vol. 1:
de la civilisation. N.S. Archaeology. D. A. Hardy, ed. London. 1990.
RIA = Reallexikon der Assyriologie. Berlin. 1928- Thera 111/ 3 = Thera and the Aegean World 111. (Papers and
RRS = Archiologie au Levant. Receuil Roger Saidah. Siries: Proceedings of the Third International Congress,
Collection de la Maison de 1'Orient miditerranken XII, Santorini, Greece, September 3-9,1989.) Vol. 3:
Serie archiologique lX.Lyon. 1982. Chronology. D. A. Hardy, ed. London. 1990.
BIBLIOGRAPHY @ 385
Treasures = Treasures of Tutankhamun. Trustees of the Abramovitz, K. 1980. Frescoes from Ayia Irini, Keos. Parts
British Museum. London. 1972. 2 4 . Hesperia 49: 57-85, pls. 3-12.
Trupis I = (Proceedings of the First International Sympo- Aharoni, Y. 1979. The Land of the Bible: A Historigraphical
sium on Ship Construction in Antiquity, Piraeus, Geography. 2nd rev. and emended ed. A. F. Rainey,
August 30-September 1,1985.) H. Tzalas, ed. Athens. trans. and ed. London.
1989. Ahlberg, G. 1971. Fighting on Land and Sea in Greek Geomet-
Tropis I1 = (Proceedings of the Second International ric Art. (Acta lnstituti Atheniensis Regni Sueciae, series in
Symposium on Ship Construction in Antiquity, 4", 16.) Stockholm.
Delphi, August 27-29, 1987.)H. Tzalas, ed. Athens. Aitken, M. J. 1988. The Thera Eruption: Continuing
1990. Discussion of the Date: I: Resume of Dating. Archae-
Tropis I11 = (Proceedings of the Third International o m e t y 30: 16549.
Symposium on Ship Construction in Antiquity, Akerstriim, A. 1975. More Canaanite Jars from Greece.
Athens, August 24-27,1989.) H. Tzalas, ed. Athens. OAth 11:186-92.
1995. Albenda, P. 1972. A Syro-Palestinian (?) City on a Ninth
Tropis IV = (Proceedings of the Fourth International century KC. Assyrian Relief. BASOR 206: 4248.
Symposium on Ship Construction in Antiquity, Albright, W. F. 1948. Exploring in Sinai with the Univer-
Athens, August 29-September 1,1991). H. Tzalas, ed. sity of California African Expedition. BASOR 109: 5-20.
Athens. 1996. Aldred, C. 1970. The Foreign Gifts Offered to Pharaoh.
Tropis V = (Proceedings of the Fifth International Sym- JEA 56: 105-16.
posium on Ship Construction in Antiquity, Nauplion, Alexiou, S. 1970. Mikrai Anaskaphai kai Perisulloge
August 2628,1993.) H. Tzalas, ed. Athens. In press. Arxaion eis Kreten. Praktika tes en Athenais
TUAS = Temple University Aegean Symposium 7. (Sym- Archaiologikes Etaireias: 252-55, pls. 354-55. (In Greek.)
posium sponsored by the Department of Art History, ,1972. Larnakes kai Aggeia ek Taphou Para to Gazi
Temple University, with the theme "Trade and Travel Irakleiou. AE: 8&98. (In Greek.)
in the Cyclades during the Bronze Age," March 5, . 1973. Nea Parastasis Ploiou epi Minoikis Lar-
1982.) nakos. In Anatupon ek tou a Tomou ton Pepragnzenon tou
T v A = Teva va Aretz. (English series.) Gama Diethnous Kritologikou Sunedriou, En Rethumno,
T U A T = Texte aus der Umwelt des Alten Testaments 18-23 September, 1971, Athens: 3-12 pin. 1-2. (In Greek.)
UC,OIC = The University of Chicago, Oriental Institute n.d. Minoan Civilization3.Heraclion.
Communications Allen, S. H. 1994. Trojan Grey Ware at Tel Miqne-Ekron.
-
UC,OIP The University of Chicago, Oriental Institute BASOR 293: 39-51.
Publications Alpozen, 0.1983. The Bodrum Museum of Underwater
UF = Ugarit-Forschungen Archaeology. Museum 35: 6143.
U R = Ugarit in Retrospect: Fifty Years of Ugarit and Ugaritic. Alt, A. 1951. ;igyptisch-Ugaritisches. AfO 15 (1945-51):
G. D. Young, ed. Winona Lake. 1981. 69-74.
UT = Ugaritic Textbook. ( A 0 38). C. H. Gordon. Rome. Amiet, P. 1961. La glyptique mesopotamienne nrchaYque.
1965. Paris.
V S = Valcamonica Symposium (Actes du Symposium Amiran, R. 1972. A Cult Stele from Arad. IEJ 22: 86-88,
International &Art Prkhistorique, Capo di Ponte pls.14-15.
[Edizioni del Centro]). 1970. Artzy, M. 1984. Unusual Late Bronze Age Ship Represen-
W A = World Archaeology tation from Tel Akko. M M 70: 59-64.
W O = Die Welt des Orients . 1985. Merchandise and Merchantmen: On Ships
Wreszinski = Wreszinski, W. Atlas zur altigyptischen and Shipping in the Late Bronze Age Levant. In Acts of
Kulturgeschichte 1-11. Leipzig. 1923-35. the Second International Cyprological Congress. T . Papa-
Z A = Zeitschriftfir assyriologie dopoullos and S. Chatzestylli, eds. Nicosia: 13540.
Z A S A = Zeitschrift fiir agyptische Sprachen und Alter- . 1987. On Boats and Sea Peoples. BASOR 266: 75-84.
tumskunde . 1988. Development of WarJFighting Boats of the
ZDPV = Zeitschrift des Deutschen Palastina-Vereins Second Millennium B.C. in the Eastern Mediterranean.
RDAC: 181-86.
. 1991A. Conical Cups and Pumice, Aegean Cult at
References
Tel Nami, Israel. In Thalassa: 203-206, pls. 52-53.
Abercrombie, T. J. 1977. Egypt: Change Comes to a . 19918. Cultic Ship Representation in Late Bronze
Changeless Land. NG 151: 31243. Age Mediterranean. In SSCA4.
Aboud, J. 1994. Die Rolle des Konigs und seiner Familie nach 1994. On Boats, on Rocks, and on 'Nomads of the
den Texten von Ugarit (= Forschungen zur Anthropologie Sea.' C.M.S. News 21: 2-3.
und Religionsgeschichte, Band 27.) M.L.G. Dietrich and Ashburner, W. 1909. The Rhodian Sea Law. Oxford.
0 . Loretz, eds. Miinster. Astour. M. C. 1964. Greek Names in the Semitic World
386 69 BIBLIOGRAPHY
and Semitic Names in the Greek World. JNES 23: 193- from the Interpretation of Representations of Ancient
201. Ships. M M 62: 231-33.
1965. New Evidence of the Last Days of Ugarit. 1976C. Le navire cousu de Bon PortC. Cd'AS 5:
AJA 69: 253-58. 3742.
. 1970. Ma'hadu, the Harbor of Ugarit. JESHO 13: . 1978. Le navire mnS et autres notes de voyage en
113-27. Bgypte. MM 64: 99-123.
1973. Ugarit and the Aegean. AOAT 22: 17-27. 1981A. The Sewn Ship of Bon-PortC. M M 67: 244.
. 1981. Ugarit and the Great Powers. In UR: 3-29. 19818. Carthage and Rome: Tenons and Mor-
1995. La topographie d u royaume d'ougarit. In tises. M M 67: 245-50.
La pays dt0ugarit autour de 1200 av. J.-C.:Histoire et 1983. Bow and Stern Appendages in the Ancient
arch6ologie. (Actes du Colloque International, Paris, Mediterranean. M M 69: 395412.
28 juin-l-juillet 1993 = Ras Shamra-Ougarit 11.) M. . 1985A. The lsis of Ptolomy I1 Philadelphius. M M
Yon, M. Sznycer, and P. Bordreuil, eds. Paris: 5571. 71: 129-51.
Aubert, C. 1995. Nouvelle interpretation du decor de la . 1985B. Anchors in Egypt. M M 71: 453-67.
larnax de Gazi no 18985. In Tropis 111: 3142. . 1986. The Aegina Pirate Ships of c. B.C. 1700. M M
Baines, J. 1990. Interpreting the Story of the Shipwrecked 72: 415-38.
Sailor. JEA 76: 55-76. . 1987. Le mus6e imaginaire de la marine antique.
Bakr, M. I., and A. Nibbi. 1991. Three Stone Anchors Athens.
from Tell Basta. R ~ ' E3-10,
: pl. 1. . 1987A. The Interpretation of Ship Representa-
1994. A Stone Anchor Workshop at Marsa tions in Profile. The Case of the Aegina Ships of c. KC.
Matruh. Discussions in Egyptology 29: 5-22. 1700. MM 73: 198-200.
Baldacci, M. 1989. Review. BiOr 46: 110-20. 1994A. Un navire grec en Bgypte L'Cpoque de
Balensi, J. 1980. Les fouilles de R. W. Hamilton a Tell Ulysse. Neptunia 195: 19-26.
Abu Hawam: Niveaux IV et V. 3 vols. (Ph.D. thesis, 1994B. Some Remarks on the Use of Stone
University of Strasbourg.) Anchors and Pierced Stones in Egypt. IJNA 23: 219-27.
Balfour, H. 1890. On the Structure and Affinities of the Basch, L., and M. Artzy. 1985. App. 2: Ship Graffiti at
Composite Bow. IRA1 26: 210-20. Kition. In Kition: 322-36.
. 1921. The Archer's Bow in the Homeric Poems. The Bass, G. F. 196041. A Bronze Age Shipwreck. Expedition
Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain. 3: 2-11.
London. 1961. The Cape Gelidonya Wreck: Preliminary
Ballard, G. A. 1920. The Sculptures of Deir el-Bahri. MM Report. A J A 65: 267-76.
6: 149-55,162-74,212-17. 1965. Cape Gelidonya. In MAdPT: 11940.
1937. Egyptian Shipping of About 1500 B.C. M M . 1972. The Earliest Seafarers in the Mediterranean
23: 103-105. and the Near East. In HSBUA: 12-36.
Barber, E. J. W. 1991. Prehistoric Textiles: The Development 1973. Cape Gelidonya and the Bronze Age
of Cloth in the Neolithic and Bronze Ages with Special Maritime Trade. AOAT 22: 29-38.
Reference to the Aegean. Princeton. . 1976. Sheytan Deresi: Preliminary Report. l J N A 5:
. 1994. Women's Work: The First 20,000 Years. New 293-303.
York. . 1985. Bronze Age Shipwreck. . . The Oldest and
Barber, R. L. N. 1981. The Late Cycladic Period: A Most Valuable Ever Excavated in the Mediterranean.
Review. ARSA 76: 1-21. NG 167: 2-3.
Barnett, R. D. 1956. Phoenicia and the lvory Trade. 1986. A Bronze Age Shipwreck at Ulu Burun
Archaeology 9: 87-97. (Ka?): 1984 Campaign. AJA 90: 269-96, pl. 17.
. 1958. Early Shipping in the Near East. Antiquity . 1987. Oldest Known Shipwreck Reveals Bronze
32: 220-30, pls. 21-24. Age Splendors. NG 172: 693-733.
. 1969. Ezekiel and Tyre. Eretz lsrael9: 6-13, pls. 1 4 . 1988. Return to Cape Gelidonya. INAN 1512
. 1973. New Data on Ancient Shipping in the (June): 2-5.
Levant. (Unpublished lecture given at the First . 1989A. Civilization under the Sea: Treasures and
Archaeological Congress, August 1973, Jerusalem.) Secrets Long Lost Are Now Being Returned to Land.
Basch, L. 1969. Phoenician Oared Ships. M M 55: 13942, Modern Maturity (April-May): 5844.
22745. 1989B. The Construction of a Seagoing Vessel of
1972. Ancient Wrecks and the Archaeology of the Late Bronze Age. Tropis I: 25-35.
Ships. IINA 1: 1-58. 1990A. Cape Gelidonya-Once More. l N A N 1614:
. 1975. Another Punic Wreck in Sicily: Its Ram, 1. 12-13.
A Typological Sketch. IJNA 4: 201-28. 1990B. A Bronze-Age Writing-Diptych from the
1976A. Radeaux minoens. Cd'AS 5: 85-97. Sea off Lycia. Kadmos 2912: 16849.
1976B. One Aspect of the Problems Which Arise . 1990C. Proceedings: The Interpretation of
Bronze Age Shipwreck. Archaeology 14: 78-87. Messenia I: The Buildings and Their Contents. Pt. 2:
Baumbach, L. 1983. An Examination of the Evidence for a Illustrations. Princeton.
State of Emergency at Pylos c. 1200 BC from the Blegen, C. W., M. Rawson, L. W. Taylor, and W. P.
Linear B Tablets. Res Mycenaeae: 2 W 0 . Donovan. 1973. The Palace ofNestor at Pylos in Western
Beal, R. H. 1992. The Location of Cilician Ura. AS 42: 6573. Messenia 111: Acropolis and Lower Town Tholoi, Grave
Beaux, N. 1990. Le cabinet de curiositb de Thoutmosis 111: Circle, and Chamber Tombs Discoveries outside the Citadel.
Plantes et animaux du <<Jardin botaniques>de Karnak. Princeton.
OLA 36. Leuven. Boardman, J. 1967. The Khaniale Tekke Tombs, 11. ABSA
Belger, C. 1895. Deck, Ruderbanke und Mastbefestigung 62: 57-75, pls. 7-17.
an agyptischen Schiffsmodellen. Z A S A 33: 24-32. . 1970. Greek Gems and Finger Rings. London.
Ben-Arieh, R. 1994. A Wall Painting of a Saint's Face in Bodenheimer, F. S. 1949. Animal Life in Biblical Lands:
the Church of Mt. Bernice. BA 57: 134-37. From the Stone Age to the End ofthe Nineteenth Century I.
Bennett, E. L., Jr., and J.-P. Olivier. 1973. The Pylos Tablets Jerusalem. (In Hebrew.)
Transcribed I. (Incunabula Graeca 51.) Rome. Borchardt, L. 1907. Das Grabdenkmal des Konilqs Ne-User-
Bennett, E. L., et al. 1989.436 raccords et quasi-raccords Rec. Leipzig.
de fragments inedits dans KT 5. Minos 24: 199-242. . 1913. Das Grabdenkmal des Konigs S'a3hu-re' 11.
Bennett, J. 1939. The Restoration Inscription of Leipzig.
Tut'anchamiin. JEA 25: 8-15. . 1981. Das Grabdenkmal Des Konigs Sa3hu-reL: Band
Benoit, F. 1961. Fouilles sous-marines: L'6pave du Grand 11: Die Wandbilder, Text. Osnabriick. (Reprint, 1913.)
Conglout?a Marseille. (XIVe suppl6ment B Gallia.) Boreux, C. 1925. ~ t u d e de
s nautique ilqyptienne: l'art de la
Paris. navigation en ~ g ~jusqu'a~ t elafin de lrAncien Empire.
Benson, J. L. 1961. A Problem in Orientalizing Cretan (MIFAO 50) Cairo.
Birds: Mycenaean or Philistine Prototypes. JNES 20: Bound, M. 1985. Early Observations on the Construction
73-84, pls. 3 4 . of the Pre-Classical Wreck at Campese Ray, Island of
. 1975. Birds on Cypro-Geometric Pottery. In The Giglio. In SPB: 49-65.
Archaeology of Cyprus. N. Robertson, ed. Park Ridge: . 1991. The Giglio Wreck. (Enalia Supplement 1.)
129-50. Athens.
Berger, P. R. 1969. Die AlaSia-Briefe Ugaritica 5, Noug. . 1995. Das Giglio-Wrack. In IPR: 63-68.
Nrn. 22-24. UF 1: 217-21,357. Bouzek, J. 1985. The Aegean, Anatolia and Europe: Cultural
Berger, P. R. 1970. Zu den "akkadischen" Briefen In terrelations in the Second Millennium B.C. (SIMA 39.)
Ugaritica V. UF 2: 285-93. Goteborg.
Bernal, M. 1987. Black Athena I. New Brunswick. . 1994. Late Bronze Age Greece and the Balkans: A
Betancourt, P. P. 1987. Dating of the Aegean Late Bronze Review of the Present Picture. ABSA 89: 217-34.
Age with Radiocarbon. Archaeometry 29: 4.549. Braemer, F., and J. Marcad6.1953. Ceramique antique et
Betts, J. H. 1968. Trees in the Wind on Cretan Sealings. pi6ces d'ancres trouvkes en mer B la Pointe de la
A J A 72: 149-50. Kynosoura (Baie de Marathon). BCH 77: 139-54.
. 1973. Ships on Minoan Seals. In MA: 32538. Branigan, K. 1967. Further Light on Prehistoric Relations
Bietak, M. 1984. Problems of Middle Bronze Age Chro- between Crete and Byblos. AIA 71: 117-21.
nology: New Evidence from Egypt. A J A 88: 471-85. . 1981. Minoan Colonialism. ABSA 76: 2S33.
. 1988. Zur Marine des Alten Reiches. In Pyramid Breasted, J. H. 1917. The Earliest Boats on the Nile. JEA 4:
Studies and other Essays Presented to I. E. S. Edwards. J. 174-76,255, PIS. 33-34,54.
Baines, T. G. H. James, A. Leahy, and A. F. Shore, eds. . 1948. Egyptian Servant Statues. New York.
London: 3.540, pls. 5 9 . Broodbank, C. 1989. The Longboat and Society in the
388 @ BIBLIOGRAPHY
Cyclades in the Keros-Syros Culture. A J A 93: 319-37. Carpenter, R. 1958. Phoenicians in the West. A J A 62: 35-
. 1992. Colonization and Culture in the Neolithic 53.
and Early Bronze Age Cyclades. A J A 96: 341. Carter, H. 1933. The Tomb of Tut-Ankh-Amun 111. London.
. 1993. Ulysses without Sails: Trade, Distance, Caskey, J. L. 1964. Investigations in Keos, 1963. Hesperia
Knowledge and Power in the Early Cyclades. W A 24: 33: 314-35.
315-31. Casson, L. 1950. The lsis and Her Voyage. APATP 81: 43-56.
Broodbank, C., and T. F. Strasser. 1991. Migrant Farmers . 1964. lllustrated History of Ships b Boats. Garden
and the Neolithic Colonization of Crete. Antiquity 65: City.
23345. . 1966. Studies in Ancient Sails and Rigging. In
Brown, L. M. 1979. The Ship Procession in the Miniature Essays in Honor of C. Bradford Welles ( A S P 1): 43-58.
Fresco. In Thera: 62944. . 1975. Bronze Age Ships. The Evidence of the
Brug, J. F. 1985. A Literay and Archaeological Study of the Thera Wall Paintings. IJNA 4 : 3-10.
Philistines. (BAR lnternational Series 265.) Oxford. . 1978. The Thera Ships. l J N A 7: 232-33.
Brunner-Traut, E. 1956. Die altagyptischen Scherbenbilder. . 1989. The Periplus Maris Eythraei. Princeton.
Wiesbaden. . 1990. Documentary Evidence for Graeco-Roman
. 1974. Aspective. In J. Schafer, Principals of Egyp- Shipbuilding (P. Flor. I 69). BASP 27: 15-19.
tian Art. J. Baines, trans. Oxford: 42146. . 1992A. The Nautical Imagery in Anthologia Graeca
Brunton, G., and G. Caton-Thompson. 1928. The Badarian 10.23. CQ 12: 555-57.
Civilization and Predynastic Remains near Badari. London. . 1992B. Odysseus' Boat (Od. 5.244-53). l J N A 21:
Bruy&re,B. 1933. Rapport sur lesfouilles de Deir el MPdineh 73-74.
(1930). Cairo. . 1995A. Ships and Seamanship in the Ancient World.
Buchanan, B. 1966. Catalogue of Ancient Near Eastern Seals Baltimore. (Reprint with Addenda and Corrigenda.)
in the Ashmolean Museum I. Oxford. . 1995B. Merchant Galleys. In Conway's History of
Buchholz, 11.-G. 1959. Keftiubarren und Erzhandel im the Ship: The Age of the Galley. London: 117-26.
zweiten vorchristlichen Jahrtausend. PZ 37: 1 4 0 . Catling, H. W. 1964. Cypriote Bronzework in the Mycenaean
. 1967. The Cylinder Seal. In CG: 148-59. World. Oxford.
. 1973. Grey Trojan Ware in Cyprus and Northern . 1969. The Cypriote Copper Industry. A V 2: 81-88.
Syria. In Bronze Age Migrations in the Aegean. R. S. . 1970. Cyprus in the Neolithic and Chalcolithic
Crossland and A. Birchall, eds. London: 17947. Periods. In CAH*: 539-56.
Buchholz, H.-G., and V. Karageorghis. 1973. Prehistoric . 1973. The Achaean Settlement of Cyprus. In
Greece and Cyprus. London. MEM: 34-39.
Buck, R. J. 1989. Mycenaean Human Sacrifice. Minos 24: Caubet, A., and F. Poplin. 1987. Les objets de matihe
131-37. dure animale. ~ t u d du e matkriau. In Ras Shamra-
Cadogan, G. 1969. Notices of Books: Bass (G. F.) and Ougarit I11 (Le centre de la ville: .?8"'44"'"' campagnes
Others. Cape Gelidonya: A Bronze Age Shipwreck. [1978434]. Dir. M. Yon.): 273-306.
JHS 89: 18749. Chadwick, J. 1958. The Decipherment of Linear B. Cam-
. 1972. Cypriot Objects in the Bronze Age Aegean bridge.
and Their Importance. In Praktika First Cypriot . 1972. The Mycenaean Documents. In MME: 100-16.
Congress. Nicosia: 5-13. . 1973A. Part 111: Additional Commentary. In M.
. 1973. Patterns in the Distribution of Mycenaean Ventris and J. Chadwick, Documents in Mycenaean
Pottery in the Eastern Mediterranean. In MEM: 166-74. Greekz:385-524.
1978. Dating the Aegean Bronze Age without . 1973B. A Cretan Fleet? In SDL: 199-201.
Radiocarbon. Archaeometry 20: 209-14. . 1976. The Mycenaean World. London.
. 1979. Cyprus and Crete c. 2000-1400 B.C. In . 1979. The Minoan Origin of the Classical Cypri-
RBCC: 63-68. ote Script. In RBCC: 13943.
Caminos, R. A. 1954. Late-Egyptian Miscellanies. (Brown . 1987A. The Muster of the Pylian Fleet. In Tractata
Egytological Studies 1.) London. Mycenaea. (Proceedings of the Eighth lnternational
Campbell, E. F. 1964. The Chronology of the Amarna Letters. Colloquium on Mycenaean Studies, Ohrid, September
Baltimore. 15-20, 1985.) P. H. Ilievski and L. Crepajac, eds.
Campbell, R. W. 1957. The Killick in Newfoundland. MM Skopje: 75-84.
43: 158-59. . 19878. Linear B and Related Scripts. Berkeley.
Canney, M. A. 1936. Boats and Ships in Temples and . 1988. The Women of Pylos. In Texts, Tablets and
Tombs. In Occident and Orient: Gaster Anniversary Scribes: Studies in Mycenaean Epiqaphy and Economy
Volume. B. Schindler and A. Marmorstein, eds. Offered to Emmett L. Bennett, Jr. (Minos, supp. no. 10.)
London: 50-57. J. P. Olivier and Th. G. Palaima, eds. Salamanca: 43-95.
Caquot, A., M. Sznycer, and A. Herdner. 1974. Textes Chantraine, P. 1970. Dictionnaire Ptymologique de la langue
ougaritiques I: Mythes et lkgendes. Paris. grecque 11. Paris.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 6
' 389
Charlton, W. H., Jr. 1995. The Rope. INAQ 2212: 17. lettre ougaritique du roi de Tyr au roi d'Ugarit (KTU
1996. Rope and the Art of Knot-Tying in the 2.38). Sefarad 46: 13341.
Seafaring of the Ancient Eastern Mediterranean. (M.A. . 1989. Correspondance: Textes ougaritiques 11:
thesis, Texas A&M University). Textes religieux, rituels, correspondance. Paris: 241421.
Chen, A. 1989. The Thera Theory. Discover 1012: 76-83. Dakoronia, F. 1990. War-Ships on Sherds of LH I11 C
Cherry, J. F. 1981.Pattern and Process in the Earliest Colon- Kraters from Kynos. In Tropis 11: 117-22.
ization of the Mediterranean Islands. PPS 47: 41-68. . 1991. Kynos . . . Fleet. In SSCA4.
. 1990. The First Colonization of the Mediterranean . 1993. Homeric Towns in East Lokris: Problems of
Islands: A Review of Recent Research. J M A 3: 145-221. Identification. Hesperia 62: 115-27.
Christensen, A. E. 1972. Scandinavian Ships from Earliest . 1995. War Ships on Sherds of LH 111 Kraters from
Times to the Vikings. In HSBUA: 159-80. Kynos? Editor's Note. In Tropis 111: 14748.
Clamer, C. 1980. A Gold Plaque from Lachish. Tel Aviv 7: . 1996. Kynos . . . Fleet. In Tropis IV: 159-71.
15242. Danelius, E., and H. Steinitz. 1967. The Fishes and other
Clarke, S. 1920. Nile Boats and other Matters. AEg: 2-9, Aquatic Animals on the Punt-Reliefs at Deir El-Bahri.
40-51. JEA 53: 15-24.
Clarke, S., and R. Engelbach. 1990. Ancient Egyptian Daressy, G. 1895. Une flotille phhicienne d'apres une
Construction and Architecture. (Unabridged repub., peinture Cgyptienne. R A 27: 286-92, pls. 14-15.
1930).New York. Davaras, C. 1976. Guide to Cretan Antiquities. New Jersey.
Cline, E. 1987. Amenhotep I11 and the Aegean: A Reas- . 1980. Une ancre minoenne sacrke? BCH 104: 47-71.
sessment of Egypto-Aegean Relations in the Four- Davies, N. de G. 1900. The Mastaba of Ptahhetep and
teenth Century KC. Or 56: 1-36, pls. 1-4. Akhethetep at Saqqara I: The Chapel of Ptahhetep and the
1990. An Unpublished Amenhotep I11 Faience Hieroglyphs. London.
Plaque from Mycenae. JAOS 110: 200-12. . 1901. The Mastaba at Ptahhetep and Akhethetep at
1991A. Orientalia in the Late Bronze Age Aegean: Saqqara 11: The Mastaba. The Sculptures of Akhethetep.
A Catalogue and Analysis of Trade and Contacts London.
between the Aegean and Egypt, Anatolia and the Near . 1902. The Rock Tombs of Deir el Gebriwi 1-11.
East. (Ph.D. diss., University of Pennsylvania.) London.
University Microfilms: Ann Arbor. . 1905A. The Rock Tombs of Amarna 11: The Tombs of
. 1991B. A Possible Hittite Embargo Against the Panehesy and Meryra 11. London.
Mycenaeans. Historia 40: 1-9. . 1905B. The Rock Tombs of Amarna 111: The Tombs of
Clowes, G. S. L. 1932. Sailing Ships: Their History and Huya and Ahmes. London.
Development as Illustrated by the Collection of Ship 1908. The Rock Tombs of El Amarna V :Smaller
Models in the Science Museum. London. Tombs and Boundary Stelae. London.
Coates, J. F. 1985. Some Structural Models for Sewn . 1920. The Tomb of Antefoker. London.
Boats. In SPB: 9-18. . 1922. The Tomb of Puyertrre at Thebes 1-11,
. 1987. Interpretation of Ancient Ship Representa- NewYork.
tions. h4M 73: 197. . 1923. The Tombs of Two Officials of Thutmose IV.
Coldstream, J. N. 1977. Geometric Greece. London. London.
Coleman, J . E. 1985. "Frying Pans" of the Early Bronze . 1927. Two Ramesside Tombs at Thebes. New York.
Age Aegean. A J A 89: 191-219, pls. 33-37. . 1930. The Egyptian Expedition: The Work of the
Conwell, D. 1987. On Ostrich Eggs and Libyans: Traces of Graphic Branch of the Expedition. BlMMA 25 (pt. 2,
Bronze Age People from Bates' Island, Egypt. Expedi- December): 2942.
tion 2913: 25-34. . 1933. The Tomb of Neferhotep at Thebes. New York.
Coulton, R. L. 1977. Preserved Aboriginal Canoes in . 1935. The Egyptian Expedition 1934-35: The
Western Canada. M M 63: 248-52. Work of the Graphic Branch of the Expedition.
Cowley, A. 1923. Aramaic Papyri of the Fifth Century K C . B M M A 30 (sect. 2, November): 46-57.
Oxford. . 1943. The Tomb of Rech-nri-re' at Thebes 1-11, New
Crossland, R. A. 1980. The Mystery of Ahhiyawa. ILN 268 York.
(no. 2986, September): 85-86. . 1948. Seven Private Tombs at Kurnah. London.
Culican, W. 1970. Problems of Phoenicio-Punic Iconogra- Davies, N. de G., and A. H. Gardiner. 1915. The Tomb of
phy: A Contribution. AJBA 113: 28-57. Amenemhet (no. 82). London.
Cunchillos, J. R. 1983. Le pronom demonstratif hn en . 1926. The Tomb of Huy: Viceroy of Nubia in the
Ugaritique. Son existence, son histoire, ses rapports Reign of Tut'ankham~n(no. 40). London.
avec les autres dCmonstratifs et avec I'article. AuOr 1: Davies, N. de G., and R. 0 . Faulkner. 1947. A Syrian
15545. Trading Venture to Egypt. JEA 33: 4046, pl. 8.
. 1986. Par une pluie torrentielle la moitie dela Davies, N. M., and N. de G. Davies. 1933. The Tombs of
flotte se trouva & Tyr et l'autre moiti6 B Akre. Une Menkheperresunb, Amenrtrose and Another. London.
1941. Syrians in the Tomb of Amunedjeh. J E A 27: . 1990. Schiffshandel und Schiffsmiete zwischen
96-98, pl. 13. Byblos und Ugarit (KTU 4.338: 10-18). UF 22: 89-96.
Davies, W. V. 1987. Catalogue ofEgyptian Antiquities in the Dietrich, M., 0 . Loretz, and J. Sanmartin, 1973. Zur
British Museum VII: Tools and Weapons I : Axes. London. ugaritischen Lexikographie (VII). UF 5: 79-104.
. 1995. Ancient Egyptian Timber Imports: Analysis . 1974A. Zur ugaritischen Lexikographie (XI). UF
of Wooden Coffins in the British Museum. In EAL: 6: 19-38.
146-56, PIS. 31-32. . 19748. Zu PRU 5,106 (= RS 18.25), 10-15. UF 6: 473.
Davis, J. L. 1980. Minoans and Minoanization at Ayia . 1975A. Die keilalphabetischen Belege fiir bcr I
Irini, Keos. In Thera 11: 25740. und bcr 11. UF 7: 554-56.
1992. Review of Aegean Prehistory I: The Islands . 19758. Guer urgaritischen Lexikographic (13). UF
of the Aegean. A J A 96: 699-756. 7: 15749.
De Boer, J. 1991. A Double Figure-Headed Boat-Type in Dijkstra, M. 1975. Does Occur the Verb hbLt in C T A
the Eastern Mediterranean and Central Europe during 4.III.21? UF 7:56345.
the Late Bronze Ages. In Thracia Pontica IV (Sozopol, 1976. Two Notes on PRU 5, no. 60. UF 8: 437-39.
October 6-12,1988). Sofia: 43-50. . 1989. Marginalia to the Ugaritic Letters in KTU
De Cervin, G. 8. R. 1977. The Thera Ships: Other Sugges- (11). UF 21: 141-52.
tions. M M 63: 150-52. Dijkstra, M., and J. C. de Moor. 1975. Problematical
. 1978. A Further Note on the Thera Ships. M M 64: Passages in the Legend of Aqhstu. UF 7: 171-215.
15&52. Dikaios, P. 1969. Enkomi I: Excavations 1948-1 958: The
Deilaki, E. 1987. Ship Representations from Prehistoric Architectural Remains, The Tombs. Mainz.
Argolis (MH Period). In Tropis 11: 123-26. . 1971. Enkomi 11: Excavations 1948-1958: Chronol-
Demargne, P. 1964. Aegean Art: The Origins ofGreek Art. ogy, Summary and Conclusions, Catalogue and Appendi-
London. ces. Mainz.
de Moor, J. C. 1971. The Seasonal Pattern in the Ugaritic Dodd, E. 1972. Polynesian Seafaring. (The Ring ofFire 11).
Myth ofRaCluAccording to the Version of llimilku. New York.
Neukirchen-Vluyn. Dossin, G. 1939. Les archives 6conomiques du palais de
. 1979. Contributions to the Ugaritic Lexicon. UF Mari. Syria 20: 97-113.
11: 639-53. Dothan, T. 1982. The Philistines and Their Material Culture.
de Morgan, J. 1895. Fouilles a Dahchour, mars-juin 1894. Jerusalem.
Vienne. Dothan, T., and M. Dothan. 1992. People of the Sea: The
. 1903. Fouilles a Dahchour en 1894-1895. Vienna. Searchfor the Philistines. New York.
Desborough, V. R., d'A. 1964. The Last Mycenaeans and Doumas, C. 1967. Le Incisioni Rupestri di Nasso, nelle
Their Successors: A n Archaeological Survey c. 1200&c. Cicladi. BCCSP 3: 111-32.
1000 U.C. Oxford. . 1970. Remarques sur la forme du bateau 6g6en a
. 1972. The Greek Dark Ages. London. l'sge du Bronze Ancien. In V S : 285-90.
Desroches-Noblecourt, C. 1963. Tutankhamen. Boston. . 1982. The Minoan Thalassocracy and the Cy-
DeVries, K., and M. L. Katzev. 1972. Greek, Etruscan and clades. AA: 5-14.
Phoenician Ships and Shipping. In HSBUA: 3&64. . 1983. Thera: Pompeii of the Ancient Aegean. London.
Diamant, S. 1979. A Short History of Archaeological . 1989. Santorini: A Guide to the lsland and Its
Sieving at Franchthi Cave, Greece. JFA 6: 203-17. Archaeological Treasures. Athens.
Dickinson, 0.1994. The Aegean Bronze Age. Cambridge. . 1992. The Wall Paintings of Thera. A. Doumas,
Dickson, H. R. P. 1959. The Arab ofthe DeserP. London. trans. Athens.
Dietrich, M., and 0 . Loretz. 1966. Zur ugaritischen Driver, G. R. 1932. The Aramaic Papyri from Egypt:
Lexikographie (I). BiOr 23: 127-33. Notes on Obscure Passages. JRAS: 77-90.
. 1977. Eine Matrosenliste aus Ugarit (KTU 4.40), Duel, P., et al. 1938. The Mastaba ofMereruka 11. Chicago.
zu ug. jr "Gesarntheit" und jr ON. UF 9: 332-33. Dunand, M. 1937. Fouilles de Byblos I: 1926-1932 (Atlas).
1978. Das "Seefahrende V o l k von &la (RS Paris.
34.129). UF 10: 53-56. . 1939. Fouilles de Ryblos I: 1926-1932 (Text). Paris.
. 1984. Ugaritisch 'ir, air, airyt und a_trt.UF 16: 5742. . 1950. Fouilles de Byblos 11: 1933-1938 (Atlas). Paris.
. 1985. Historisch-chronologischeTexte aus Alalah, . 1954. Fouilles de Byblos 11: 1933-1938 (Text). Paris.
Ugarit, Kamid el Loz/Kumidi und den Amarna du Plat Taylor, J. 1967A. The Stone Objects. In CG: 126-30.
Briefen. In TUAT 1Rechts- und Wirtschaftsurkunden. 19678. The Basketry and Matting. In CG: 16042.
Historisch-chronologische Texte. Giitersloh: 505-20. du Plat Taylor, J., M. V. Seton Williams, and J. Waechter.
. 1986. Akkadisch siparru "bronze," ugaritisch spr, 1950. The Excavations at Sacke Gozii. lraq 12: 53-138.
i p r t und Hebraisch spr, <prt.UF 17: 401. Dussaud, R. 1914. Les civilisations prihelliniques. Paris.
. 1987. Die ugaritischen Gefassbezeichnungen ridn . 1937. L'influence orientale en Crete. Syria 18:
und kw. UF 19: 27-32. 233-34.
BIBLIOGRAPHY @ 391
Eccles, E. 193940. The Seals and Sealings. In R. W. Harbour Excavation Project 1980-1985 11: The Finds and
Hu tchinson, Unpublished Objects from Palaikastro the Ship. J.P. Oleson, ed. (BAR International Series
and Praisos, 11. ABSA 40: 4349. 594). Oxford: 163-223, pls. 2944.
Edel, E. 1966. Die Ortsnamenlisten aus dem Totentemple . 1996. Continuing Study of the Uluburun Ship-
Amenophis 111. Bonn. wreck: Laboratory Research and Analysis. l N A Q 231 1:
Edgerton, W. F. 1922-23. Ancient Egyptian Ships and 7-9.
Shipping. AJSLL 39: 109-35. Foster, K. P. 1988. Snakes and Lions: A New Reading of
. 1926-27. Ancient Egyptian Steering Gear. AJSLL the West House Frescoes from Thera. Expedition 3012:
43: 255-65. 10-20.
Edwards, I. E. S. 1972. The Pyramids of Egypt. Har- Foucart, G. 1924. La belle ftte de la vallie. (BIFAO 24.)
mondworth. (Reprint, 1947.) Frankel, D. 1974. A Middle Cypriote Vessel with Mod-
Egberts, A. 1991. The Chronology of Tke Report of Wenamun. elled Figures from Politiko, Lambertis. RDAC: 43-50.
IEA 77: 5747. Frankfort, H . 1924. Studies in the Early Pottery of the Near
Eiseman, C. J., and B. S. Ridgway. 1987. The Porticello East I: Mesopotamia, Syria, and Egypt and Their Earliest
Shipwreck: A Mediterranean Merchant Vessel of 415-385 Interrelations. London.
N . C . College Station. . 1926. Egypt and Syria in the First Intermediate
El Baz, F. 1988. Finding a Pharaoh's Funeral Bark. N G Period. J E A 12: 80-99.
173: 512-33. . 1939. Cylinder Seals. London.
Elgavish, J. 1968. Arckaeological Excavations at Shiqmona I: . 1941. The Origin of Monumental Architecture in
Tke Levels of the Persian Period: Seasons 1963-1965. Haifa. Egypt. AISLL 58: 329-58.
Emanuele, P. D. 1977. Ancient Square Rigging, with and Freedman, L. R. 1977. Studies in Cuneiform Legal
without Lifts. l J N A 6: 181-85. Terminology with Special Reference to West Semitic
Emery, W. 1954. Excavations at Sakkara: Great Tombs of the Parallels. (Ph.D. diss., Columbia University.)
First Dynasty 11. London. Freschi, A. 1989. Note techniche sul relitto greco arcaico
Envig, 0 . T., and P. Astrom. 1975. Hala Sultan Teke 11: The di Gela. In Atti della IV r a s s e p a di archeologia
Cape Kiti Survey. ( S I M A 45: 2). Goteborg. subacquea. Giardini Naxos 1989: 201-10.
Erman, A. 1927. The Literature of the Ancient Egyptians. Frey, D. A. 1993-94. Treasures of the Sponge Divers:
London. Twenty Years Later, the INA Still Follows Turkey's
Emout, A., and A. Meillet. 1967. Dictionnaire etymologique Sponge Divers to the Wrecks of Antiquity. Sea History
de la langue latine. 4th ed. Paris. 68: cover, 18-22. (Reprinted with additional color
Ernstson, J. 1985. The Ship Procession Fresco: the Pilots. photographs in Aramco World 44/3[1993]: cover, 2-9.)
l J N A 14: 315-20. Fritsch, C. T., and I. Ben-Dor. 1961. The Link Expedition
Evans, A. 1900-1901. The Palace of Knossos: Provisional to Israel, 1960. B A 24: 50-58.
Report of the Excavation for the Year 1901. ABSA 7: 1-120. Frost, H. 1963A. From Rope to Chain: On the Develop-
. 1925A. The Ring of Nestor. ABSA 45: 1-75, pls. 4-5. ment of the Anchor in the Mediterranean. MM 49: 1-20.
. 19258. The Early Nilotic, Libyan and Egyptian . 19638. Under the Mediterranean. London.
Relations with Minoan Crete. IRA1 55: 199-228. . 1964. Egyptian Anchors. M M 50: 242.
. 1936. Some Notes on the Tal Atchana Pottery. . 1966. Stone-Anchors as Indications of Early
JHS 56: 133-34, PIS. 6-7. Trade Routes. In SC: 5541.
Faulkner, R. 0.1940. Egyptian Seagoing Ships. J E A 26: 3- . 1968. Review: Cape Gelidonya: A Bronze Age
9 and pls. 2 4 . Skipwreck by G. F. Bass. M M 54: 423-24.
. 1964. A Concise Dictionary of Middle Egyptian. Oxford. . 1969A. The Stone Anchors of Ugarit. Ugaritica 6:
Faure, P. 1968. Toponymes crkto-myckniens dans une 23545.
liste d'AmCnophis 111. Kadmos 7: 13849. . 19698. The Stone Anchors of Byblos. In Mklanges
Feliks, J. 1968. Plant World of the Bible. Ramat Gan. (In 45: 42542.
Hebrew.) . 1970A. Some Cypriot Stone-Anchors from Land
Fensham, F. C. 1967. Shipwreck in Ugarit and Ancient and from the Sea. RDAC: 14-24, pl. 6.
Near Eastern Law Codes. O r A 6: 221-24. . 19708. Bronze-Age Stone-Anchors from the
Fevrier, J. G. 1935. Les origines de la marine phenicienne. Eastern Mediterranean: Dating and Identification.
RH10: 97-125. M M 56: 377-94.
. 1949-50. L'ancienne marine phenicienne et les . 1973. Anchors, the Potsherds of Marine Archaeol-
decouvertes recentes. N C 1-2: 12843. ogy: On the Recording of Pierced Stones from the
Filgueiras, 0 . L. 1995. Some Vestiges of Old Protective Mediterranean. In M A : 397406.
Ritual Practice in Portuguese Local Boats. In Tropis 111: . 1979. Egypt and Stone-Anchors: Some Recent
14946. Discoveries. M M 65: 137-61.
Fitzgerald, M. A. 1994. The Ship. In The Harbours of . 1980. Egypt and Stone-Anchors ( M M 65: 2), a
Caesarea Maritima: Results of the Caesarea Ancient Correction. M M 66: 30.
392 6
' BIBLIOGRAPHY
. 1981. Cordage. In Lilybaeum: 93-100. Galili, E., K. Raveh, and S. Wachsmann. 1982. Stone
1982A. On a Sacred Cypriote Anchor. In RRS: Anchors from the Megadim Coast. H A 80-81: 9-10. (In
161-66. Hebrew.)
1982B. The Birth of the Stocked Anchor and the Galili, E., J. Sharvit, and M. Artzy. 1994. Reconsidering
Maximum Size of Early Ships: Thoughts Prompted by Byblian and Egyptian Stone Anchors Using Numeral
Discoveries at Kition Bamboula, Cyprus. M M 68: Methods: New Finds From the Israeli Coast. 11NA 23:
263-73. 93-107.
. 1984A. Chapitre 15: Khirokitia: Une pierre Galili, E., N. Shmueli, and M. Artzy. 1986. Bronze Age
d'ancrage. In Khirokitia: 125-26, pl. 30. Cargo of Copper and Tin. 11NA 15: 25-37.
. 19848. Gilgamesh and the "Things of Stone." Gardiner, A. 1961. Egypt of the Pharaohs. Oxford.
RDAC: 96-100. . 1969. Egyptian Grammar. London.
. 1985. Ancient Egyptian Anchors: A Focus on the Gardiner, A. H., and T. E. Peet. 1952. The lnscriptiorrs of
Facts. MM 71: 348. Sinai I : lntrodllction and Plates. London.
. 1986A.Stone-Anchors: Criteria for a Corpus. In . 1955. The inscriptions of Sinai 11: Translatiorrs and
Thracia Pontica 111(Sozopol, October 612, 1985). Sofia, Commen f a y . London.
1986: 354-69,520. Gardner, P. 1891A. Boat-Races among the Greeks. JHS 11:
1986B. Comment on "A Group of Stone Anchors 90-97.
from Newe Yam" (IJNA 14: 143-53). I J N A 15: 65-66. 18918. Boat-Races at Athens. JHS 11: 315-17.
. 1986C. App. 1: The Kition Anchors. In Kition: Gargallo, P. 1961. Anchors of Antiquity. Archaeology 14:
281-321, pls. A-N. 31-35.
. 1989. Where Did Bronze Age Ships Stow Their Garstang, J. 1907. The Rurial Customs of Ancient Egypt.
Anchors? In SSCA3. London.
1991. Anchors Sacred and Profane: Ugarit-Ras Garstang, J., and 0. R. Gurney. 1959. The Geography of the
Shamra, 1986: The Stone Anchors Revised and Hittite Empire. London.
Compared. In Ras Shamra-Ougarit VI: Arts et industries Gaster, T. H. 1938. A Phoenician Naval Gazette: New
de la pierre. Paris: 355410. Light on Homer's Catalogue of Ships. PEQ 70: 105-12.
. 1993. Stone Anchors: A Reassessment Reassessed Gatty, H. 1958. Nature 1s Your Guide. London.
( M M , 79,1[1993],!%26). MM 79: 449-58. Gelsinger, B. E. 1972. The Mediterranean Voyage of a
. 1995. Where did Bronze Age Ships Keep Their Twelfth-Century Icelander. M M 58: 155-65.
Stone Anchors? In Tropis 111: 167-75. Gianfrotta, P. A., and P. Pomey. 1980. Archeologia sub-
Furumark, A. 1941. The Mycenaean Pottery: Analysis and acquea: storia, techniche, scoperte e relitti. Milano.
Classification. Stockholm. Giddy, L. L. 1987. Egypt Oasis: Rahariya, Dakhla, Farafra
. 1950. The Settlement of Ialysos and Aegean and Kharga During Pharaonic Times. Warminster.
History ca. 1550-1400 B.C. O A 6: 150-271. Giescke, H.-E. 1983. The Akrotiri Ship Fresco. l J N A 12:
Gail, E. 1974. Osiris-Amenophis 111 in Ugarit ( n my mlk 12343.
'lm). In Stlrdia Aegyptiaca I: Recueil d'etudes dediies a Gillmer, T. C. 1975. The Thera Ship. MM 61: 321-29.
Vilmos Wessetzky b I'occasion de son 652 annizwsaire. L. . 1978. The Thera Ships: A Re-analysis. MM 64:
Kakosy, ed. Budapest. 125-33.
Gaballa, G. A. 1976. Narrative in Egyptian Art. Mainz. . 1985. The Thera Ships as Sailing Vessels. MM 71:
Gadd, C. J. 1936. The Stones ofAssyria: The Surviving 401-16.
Remains of Assyrian Sculpture, Their Recovery and their Gimbutas, M. 1972. Pre-Hellenic and Pre-Indo-European
Original Positions. London. Goddesses and Gods: The Old European Pantheon. In
Gale, N. H. 1980. Some Aspects of Lead and Silver ACTA2: 82-98.
Mining in the Aegean. In Thera 11: 161-95. 1989. The Language of the Goddess. San Francisco.
1991. Copper Oxhide Ingots: Their Origin and Gjerstad, E., et al. 1934. The Swedish Cyprus Expedition I:
Their Place in the Bronze Age Metals Trade in the Finds and Results of the Excavations in Cyprus 1927-1931:
Mediterranean. In BATM: 197-239. Text and Plates. Stockholm.
Galili, E. 1985. A Group of Stone Anchors from Newe Gladwin, T. 1970. East Is a Big Rird. Cambridge.
Yam. IJNA 14: 143-53. Glanville, S. R. K. 1931-32. Records of a Royal Dockyard
. 1987. Corrections and Additions to "A Group of of the Time of Thutmose 111: Papyrus British Museum
Stone Anchors from Newe-Yam" ( I J N A14: 143-53). 10056. ZASA 66: 105-21; 68: 7 4 1 .
lJNA 16: 167-68. . 1972. Catalogue of Egyptian Antiquities in the British
Galili, E., and K. Raveh. 1988. Stone Anchors with Museum 11: Wooden Model Boats. R. 0 . Faulkner, rev.
Carvings from the Sea off Megadim. Sefunim 7: 4147, London.
pl. 5. Goedicke, H. 1971. Re-used Blocks from the Pyramid of
Galili, E., and N. Shmueli. 1983. Notes and News: Israel. Amenetnhet 1 at Lisht. (Publications of The Metropolitan
IINA 12: 178. Museum of Art, Egyptian Expedition 20.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY @ 393
. 1975. The Report of Wenamun. Baltimore. the degree of Master of Science in Bioarchaeology of
Gonen, R. 1984. Urban Canaan in the Late Bronze Period. the University of London in 1986; Institute of Archae-
BASOR 253: 61-73. ology, London.)
1992. The Late Bronze Age. In The Archaeoiogy of . 1988A. Boat Timbers from El-List: A New
Ancient Israel. A. Ben-Tor, ed. New Haven: 211-57. Method of Ancient Egyptian Hull Construction.
Goodenough, W. H., and S. D. Thomas. 1987. Traditional Preliminary Report. M M 74: 141-52.
Navigation in the Western Pacific. Expedition 2913: 3-14. . 1988B. The Ulu Burun Wreck. NASN (January).
Gordon, C. H. 1954. Ugarit and Caphtor. Minos 3: 12632. . 1990A. Egyptian Hulls and the Evidence for
. 1956. Ugaritic Guilds and Homeric Caulking. IINA 19: 135-36.
DHMIOERGOI. In ANE: 13W3. . 1990B. Shipwrecked Plant Remains. Biblical
. 1965. Ugaritic Textbook. (Especially the glossary.) Archaeologist 53 / 1: 5540.
Rome. 1991. Organic Goods from the Ulu Burun Wreck.
Giittlicher, A. 1978. Materialien fiir ein Korpus der INAN 1814: 11.
Schifsmodelle im Altertum. Mainz am Rhein. . 1992A. The Lisht Timbers: A Report on Their
Gow, A. S. F., ed. 1950. Theocritus I. 2d ed. Cambridge. Significance. In D. Arnold, The Pyramid Complex of
Gray, D. 1974. Seewessen. (Archaeologia Homerica 1G). Senwosret at Lisht: The South Cemetaries at Lisht. (Publi-
Giittingen. cations of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, Egyptian
Green, J. N. 1973. An Underwater Archaeological Survey Expedition 25.) New York: 102-12, pls. 115-33.
of Cape Andreas, Cyprus, 1969-70: A Preliminary . 1992B. "A Pharaoh's Fleet": Early Dynastic Hulls
Report. In M A : 141-78. from Abydos. INAQ 1912: 12-13.
Greenhill, B. 1966. The Boats of East Pakistan. (2d reprint, . 1993A. Ancient Egyptian Hull Construction.
with additional notes [I9661 from M M 4312-3.) (Ph.D. diss., Texas A&M University.)
. 1976. Archaeology of the Boat. London. . 1993B. Direct Evidence for Organic Cargoes in
Griebel, C., and M. C. Nelson. 1993. Post-Mycenaean the Late Bronze Age. W A 24: 348-60.
Occupation at the Palace of Nestor. A J A 97: 331. Haldane, C. W., and D. D. Haldane. 1990. The Potential
Gurney, 0 . R. 1990. The Hittites. London. for Nautical Archaeology in Egypt. INAN 1711: 22-25.
Giiterbock, H. G. 1967. The Hittite Conquest of Cyprus Haldane, C. W., and C. W. Shelmerdine. 1990. Herodotus
Reconsidered. JNES 26: 73-81. 2.96.1-2 Again. C Q 40: 535-39.
. 1983. The Hittites and the Aegean World: Part 1. Haldane, D. D. 1984. The Wooden Anchor. (M.A. thesis,
The Ahhiyawa Problem Reconsidered. A J A 87: 133-38. Texas A&M University.)
1984. Hittites and Akhaeans: A New Look. PAP Hallager, E. 1987. The Inscribed Stirrup Jars: Implications
128: 114-22. for Late Minoan IIIB Crete. AJA 91: 171-90.
Guzzo Amadasi, M. G. 1982. I1 vocabolo rnhzlmhz in 1988. Aspects of Aegean Long-Distance Trade in
Ugaritico e Fenicio. Materiali lessicali ed epigrafici I: 31- the Second Millennium B.C. In Momenti precoloniali nel
36. mediterraneo antico. E. Acquaro, L. Godart, F. Mazza,
Hadas, G. 1989. 'Ein Gedi Shore. H A 94: 68. (In Hebrew.) and D. Musti, eds. Rome: 91-101.
. 1989-90. 'Ein Gedi Shore. Excavations and Surveys Halpern, M. D. 1985. The Origins of the Carolinian Sidereal
9: 80-81 Compass. (M.A. thesis, Texas A&M University.)
. 1992. Stone Anchors from the Dead Sea. 'Atiqot Hamilton, R. W. 1935. Excavations at Tell Abu Hawam.
21: 55-57. Q D A P 4: 1 4 9 and pls. 1-39.
1993A. A Stone Anchor from the Dead Sea. IJNA Harnmond, N. 1993. Newsbriefs: Minoans in Egypt.
22: 89-90. Archaeology 461 1: 20.
. 19938. Where was the Harbour of 'En-Gedi Hankey, V. 1979. Crete, Cyprus and the South-Eastern
Situated? IEJ 43: 4549. Mediterranean ca. 1400-1200 KC. In RBCC: 144-57.
Haddon, A. C. 1937. The Canoes of Melanesia, Queensland 1981. The Aegean Interest in el Arnarna. I M A A 1:
and New Guinea. (RMSP 28.) C O . 3849.
Hadjidaki, E., 1993. Excavation of the Classical Ship at . 1987. The Chronology of the Aegean Late Bronze
Alonnesos. In SSCA5. Age. In HML: 39-59.
. 1995. Ein Schiffswrack aus klassischer Zeit vor . 1988. Review: Aegeans in the Theban Tombs, by S.
der Insel Alonnisos, Griechenland. In IPR: 69-71. Wachsmann. JHS 108: 26041.
Haldane, C. W. 1984A. The Dashur Boats. (M.A. thesis, 1993. Egypt, the Aegean and the Levant. Egyptian
Texas A&M University.) Archaeology 3: 27-29.
. 1984B. A Fourth Boat from Dashur. A J A 88: 389, tlansen, J. 1992. The Introduction of Agriculture into
pl. 54. Greece: The Near Eastern Evidence. A J A 96: 34041.
. 1986. The Contributions of Archaeobotanical Hansen, 0.1994. A Mycenaean Sword from Bogazkoy-
Analysis to the Interpretations of Shipwrecks. (Report Hattusa Found in 1991. ABSA 89: 213-15.
submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for Harden, D. 1962. The Phoenicinns. New York.
394 ~9 BIBLIOGRAPHY
Har-El, M. 1981. Orientation in Biblical Lands. B A 44: 19- 1990B. Fine Tuning: An Analysis of Bronze Age
20. Potmarks as Clues to Maritime Trade. l N A N 1711: 1S21.
Hareuveni, N. 1984. Tree and Shrub in Our Biblical Heri- Hirschfeld, Y. 1992. A Guide to Antiquity Sites in Tiberias.
tage. 11. Frenkley, trans. Kiryat Ono. Jerusalem.
Harris, H. A. 1972. Sport in Greece and Rome. Ithaca. . 1994. The Anchor Church at the Summit of Mt.
Hartmann, B., and J. Hoftijzer. 1971. Ugaritic hnk-hnkt Berenice, Tiberias. B A 57: 122-33.
and a Punic Formula. Le Muse'on 85: 529-35. Hocker, F., and T. G. Palaima. 1990-91. Late Bronze Age
Hassan, S. 1946. Excaoations at Giza VI: I: The Solar-Boats of Aegean Ships and the Pylos Tablets Vn 46 and Vii 879.
Khaffa, Their Origin and Development, Together with the Minos 25-26: 297-317.
Mythology ofthe Universe Which They Are Supposed to Hockmann, 0.1995. Some Thoughts on the Greek
Traverse. Cairo. Pentekonter. In Tropis 111: 207-20.
Hassan, S. 1954. The Causeway of Wnis at Sakkara. ZASA Hoftijzer, J. 1979. Une lettre du roi de Tyr. UF 11: 383-88.
80: 136-39, Tafs. 12-13. . 1982. Une lettre du roi Hittite. In Von Kanaan bis
Hayes, W. C. 1953. The Scepter of Egypt I. New York. Kerala. Festschriftfiir Prof: Mag. Dr. Dr. J. P. M . v.d.
. 1980. Egypt: Internal Affairs from Thutmose I to Ploeg O.P. zur Vollendung des siebzigsten Lebensjahres
the Death of Amenophis 111. In CAH: 313416. ( A O A T 211). Neukirchen-Vluyn: 379-87.
Heimpel, W. 1987. Das untere Meer. Z A 77: 22-91. . 1983. Ugaritische brieven uit de tijd van de
Heltzer, M. 1974. On the Akkadian Term ri%u in Ugarit. ondergang van de stad. In Schrijvend Verleden.
Israel Oriental Studies 4: 4-11. Documenten uit het Oude Nabije Oosten vertaald en
. 1976. The Rural Community in Ancient Ugarit. toegelicht. K. R. Veenhof, ed. Leiden-Zutphen: 94-99.
Wiesbaden. Hoftijzer, J., and W. H. van Soldt. 1991. Texts from Ugarit
. 1977. The Metals Trade of Ugarit and the l'rob- Concerning Security and Related Akkadian and West
lem of Transportation of Commercial Goods. lraq 39: Semitic Material. UF 23: 189-216.
203-1 1. Holmes, Y. L. 1969. The Foreign Relations of Cyprus
. 1978. Goods, Prices and the Organization ofTrade in during the Late Bronze Age. (Ph.D. diss., Brandeis
Ugarit. Wiesbaden. University.) University Microfilms: Ann Arbor.
. 1979. Some Problems of the Military Organiza- 1973. Egypt and Cyprus: Late Bronze Age Trade
tion of Ugarit (Ugaritic hrd and Middle Assyrian and Diplomacy. AOAT 22: 91-98.
iprl~du).O r A 18: 245-53. . 1975. The Foreign Trade of Cyprus During the
. 1982. The Internal Organization ofthe Kingdom of Late Bronze Age. In The Archaeology ofcyprus: Kecent
Ugarit: Royal Service System, Taxes, Royal Economy, Developments. N. Robertson, ed. Park Ridge: 90-110.
Army and Administration. Wiesbaden. Hood, S. 1971. The Minoans: Crete in the Bronze Age. London.
. 1988. Sinaranu, Son of Siginu, and the Trade . 1978. The Arts in Prehistoric Greece. Norwich.
Relations between Ugarit and Crete. Minos 23: 7-13. Hooker, J. T. 1976.Mycenaean Greece. London.
Hencken, H.1968A. Tarquinia, Villanovans and Early . 1985. Minoan and Mycenaean Settlement in Cy-
Etruscans 1-11. (BASPR 23.) Cambridge. prus: A Note. In Praktika tou Diethnous Kypriologikou
. 19688. Tarquinia and Etruscan Origins. New York. Synedriou (Leukosia, 20-25 Apriliou 1982.)Nicosia: 175-79.
Hemessy, J. B., and J. du Plat Taylor. 1967. The Pottery. Hopkins, C. 1955. Oriental Evidence for Early Etruscan
In CG: 122-25. Chronology. Berytus 11: 75-84.
Henrichs, A. 1980. Human Sacrifice in Greek Religion: . 1957. Oriental Elements in the Hallstatt Culture.
Three Case Studies. In Le sacrifice duns l'antiquite'. J. A J A 61: 333-39, pls. 97-100.
Rudhardt and 0 . Reverdin, eds. Geneva: 195-235 Hornell, J. 1936. The Canoes ofPolynesia, Fiji, and
(236-242 = discussion). Micronesia. (BMSP 27.) CO.
Herdner, A. 1963. Corpus des tablettes en cune'iformes 1937. Egyptian Shipping of about 1500 B.C. M M
alphabe'tiques de'couvertes b Ras Shamra-Ugarit de 1929 a 23:105-107.
1939. Paris. . 1938A. Boat Processions in Egypt. Man 38: 14546
. 1969. Review: Syria 46: 130-32. and pls. I-J.
Herscher, E., and A. Nyquist. 1975. A Site of an Ancient . 1938B. The Outrigger-Nuggar of the Blue Nile.
Anchorage? In Nala Sultan Teke 11: The Cape Kitti Antiquity 12: 354-59, pls. 1-2.
Survey ( S I M A 45: 2) by 0.T. Engvig and P. Astrom. . 193940. The Frameless Boats of the Middle Nile
Goteborg: 22, figs. 4849. 1-11. MM 25: 417-32; 26: 12544.
Higgins, R. 1967. Minoan and Mycenaean Art. London. 1943A. The Prow of the Ship: Sanctuary of the
Himmelhoch, L. 1990-91. The Use of the Ethnics a-ra-si-jo Tutelary Deity. Man 43: 121-28, pl. F.
and krr- pi-ri-jo in Linear B Texts. Minos 25-26: 91-104. . 1943B. The Sailing Ship in Ancient Egypt.
Hirschfeld, N. 1990A. Incised Marks on Late Helladic Antiquity 65: 2741.
Late Minoan 111 Pottery. (M.A. thesis, Texas A&M 1945. The Palm Leaves on Boats' Prows of
University .) Gerzian Age. Man 45: 25-27, pl. B.
BIBLIOGRAPHY d 395
. 1946. The Role of Birds in Early Navigation. Ras Shamra-Ougarit 11.)M. Yon, M. Sznycer, and P.
Antiquity 20: 14249. Bordreuil, eds. Paris: 255-62.
1947. Naval Activities in the Days of Solomon Izre'el, S. 1991. Amurru Akkadian: A Linguistic Study 1-11,
and Ramses 111. Antiquity 21: 66-73. Harvard Semitic Studies 41.
. 1950. Fishing in Many Waters. Cambridge. Jacobsen, T. W. 1993. Maritime Mobility in the Prehis-
. 1970. Water Transport. Newton Abbot. (Reprint, toric Aegean: Some Practical Considerations. In
1946.) SSCA5.
Horridge, G. A. 1978. The Design of Planked Boats of the James, B. 1988. The Secrets of a Mummy Unwrapped.
Moluccas. ( M M R 38-1978) Basildon. IHT (Thursday, March 24): 5.
. 1982. The Lashed-lug Boat of the Eastern Archipela- Janssen, J. J. 1961. Two Ancient Egyptian Ships' Logs. Leiden.
goes, the Alcina M S and Lomblen Whaling Boats. ( M M R . 1975. Commodity Pricesfrom the Ramesside Period:
54.) A n Economic Study of the Village of Necropolis Workmen
Huehnergard, J. 1986. Note bri.ve **SanrfliS.R A 80: 191. at Thebes. Leiden.
. 1987. Ugaritic Vocabulary in Syllabic Transcription. Jarrett-Bell, C. D. 1930. Rowing in the Eighteenth
Atlanta. Dynasty. AEg: 11-19.
. 1989. The Akkadian of Ugarit. Harvard Semitic . 1933. Ancient Ship Design: Based on a Critical
Series 34. Analysis of the Twelfth Dynasty Barge. AEg: 101-11.
Huffmon, H. B. 1966. The Treaty Background of Hebrew Jaussen, A., R. Savignac, and H. Vincent. 1905. 'Abdeh.
yada'. BASOR 181: 31-37. RB: 74-89.
Huffmon, H. B., and S. B. Parker. 1966. A Further Note on Jean, C.-F., and J. Hoftijzer. 1965. Dictionnaire des inscrip-
the Treaty Background of Hebrew yrfdac.BASOR 184: tions se'mitiques de l'ouest. Leiden.
36-38. Jenkins, N. 1980. The Boat beneath the Pyramid. London.
Hughes, D. D. 1991. Human Sacrifice in Ancient Greece. Jestin, O., and F. Carraze. 1980. Mediterranean Hull
London. Types Compared 4. An Unusual Type of Construc-
Hult, G. 1977. Stone Anchors in Area 8. In Hala Sultan tion. The Hull of Wreck 1at Bon Porte. IJNA 9: 70-72.
Teke 111: Excaz1ations 1972. ( S I M A 45: 3.) Goteborg: 147- Johnson, J. 1980.Maroni de Chypre. ( S I M A 59.) Goteborg.
49. Johnson, S. B. 1980A. Two Wooden Statues from Lisht.
. 1981. Hala Sultan Teke 7:Excavations in Area 8 in Do They Represent Sesostris I? JARCE 17: 11-20.
1977. ( S I M A 45: 7.) Goteborg. Johnston, P. F. 1982. Bronze Age Cycladic Ships: An
Hunt, A. S. 1911. Catalogue of the Greek Papyri in the John Overview. In TUAS: 1-8.
Rylands Libray, Manchester I. Manchester. . 1985. Ship and Boat Models in Ancient Greece.
Hutchinson, R. W. 1962. Prehistoric Crete. Harmond- Annapolis.
sworth. Johnstone, P. 1973. Stern First in the Stone Age? lJNA 2:
Huxley, G. L. 1968. Achaeans and Hittites. Belfast. (Re- 3-1 1.
print.) . 1980. The Sea-craft of Prehistory. London.
Iakovides, Sp., 1973. Rhodes and Ahhiyawa. In MEM: Johnstone, W. 1977. Biblical Hebrew Wriwim in the Light
189-92. of Phoenician Evidence. PEQ 109: 95-102.
1981. A Peak Sanctuary Ceremony in Bronze Age . 1981. Signs. In Lilybaeum: 191-239.
Thera. In Temples and High Places in Biblical Times. A. Joncheray, J.-P. 1976. L'epave grecque, ou etrusque, de
Biran, ed. Jerusalem: 5440. Bon Porte. Cd'AS 5: 5-36.
Immerwahr, S. A. 1960. Mycenaean Trade and Coloniza- Jones, D. 1988. A Glossay of Ancient Egyptian Nautical
tion. Archaeology 13: 4-13. Titles and Terms. London.
1977. Mycenaeans at Thera: Some Reflections on 1990. Model Boatsfrom the Tomb of Tut'ankhamiin.
the Paintings from the West House. In Greece and the (Tut'ankhamiin's Tomb Series 9.) J. R. Harris, gen. ed.
Eastern Mediterranean in Ancient History and Prehistory. Oxford.
(Studies presented to Fritz Schachermeyer on the Kahanov, Y. 1991. An Investigation of the Ma'agan
occasion of his eightieth birthday.) K. H. Kinz, ed. Berl Michael Ship. C.M.S. News 18: 6-7.
173-91,289-92, pis. A-D. Kahanov, Y., and S. Breitstein. 1995A. A Preliminary
Ingholt, H. 1940. Rapport priliminaire sur sept campagnes de Study of the Hull Remains. I N A Q 2212: 9-13.
fouilles a Hama en Syrie (1932-1938). Copenhagen. . 1995B. Tantura Excavation 1994: A Preliminary
Irwin, G., S. Bickler, and P. Quirke. 1990. Voyaging by Report on the Wood. C.M.S. News 22: 11-13.
Canoe and Computer: Experiments in the Settlement Kaiser, 0.1970. Zum Formular der in Ugarit gefundenen
of the Pacific Ocean. Antiquity 64: 34-50. Briefe. ZDPV 86: 10-23.
Israel, F. 1995. ~ t u d e de
s grammaire Ougaritique. La Kantor, H. 1992. The Relative Chronology of Egypt and
dernisre phase de la langue. In Le pays d'ougarit autour Its Foreign Correlations before the First Intermediate
de 1200 av. J.-C.: Histoire et archiologie. (Actes du Period. In Chronologies in Old World Archaeology. R. W.
Colloque International, Paris, 28 juin-1"juillet 1993 = Erich, ed. Chicago: 3-21.
396 d BIBLIOGRAPHY
Kapitan, G . 1984. Ancient Anchors: Technology and Kitchen, K. A. 1971. Punt and H o w t o Get There. Or 40:
Classification. lJNA 13: 3 3 4 4 . 184-207.
Kaplan, J. 1972. T h e Archaeology and History o f Tel . 1973. The Third Intermediate Period in Egypt (1100-
Aviv-Jaffa. BA 35: 6 6 9 5 . 650 B.c.). Warminster.
Karageorghis, V . 1960. Supplementary Notes o n the . 1978. Review: The Sea Peoples and Egypt, b y
Mycenaean Vases from the Swedish T o m b s at Alessandra Nibbi. J E A 64: 169-71.
Enkomi. OAth 3: 135-53, pls. 1-14. 1 9 8 3 . Review: Ancient Egypt and Some Eastern
. 1976. Kition: Mycenaean and Phoenician Discoveries Neighbors, b y Alessandra Nibbi. PEQ 115: 77-79.
in Cyprus. London. . 1987. T h e Basics o f Egyptian Chronology i n
. 1979. Some Reflections o n the Relations between Relation to the Bronze Age. In HML 1: 37-55.
Cyprus and Crete during the Late Minoan IIIB Klebs, L. 1934. Die Reliefs und Malerein des nuen Reiches.
Period. R BCC: 199-203. Heidelberg.
. 1982. Cyprusfrom the Stone Age to the Romans. Klengel, H . 1974. "Hungejahre" i n Hatti. AF 1: 165-74.
London. Knapp, A. B. 1983. An Alashiyan Merchant at Ugarit. Tel
. 1984. Exploring Philistine Origins o n the Island Aviv 10: 3 8 4 5 .
o f Cyprus. BibAR 1012: 16-28. . 1991. Spice, Drugs, Grain and Grog: Organic
1 9 9 3 . Le commerce cypriote avec l'occident a u Goods i n Bronze Age East Mediterranean Trade. In
bronze recent: quelques nouvelles d6couvertes. CRAl BATM: 21-68.
(avril-juin): 5 7 7 4 8 . . 1993. Thalassocracies i n Bronze A g e Trade:
Karageorghis, V., and J. des Gagniers. 1974. La ce'rarnique Making and Breaking a Myth. W A 24: 3 3 2 4 7 .
chypriote de style$gure', 2ge du Fer (1050-500 Av. 1.-C.) Knapp, A. B., J.D. Muhly, and P. M . Muhly. 1988. T o
1-2. Rome. Hoard Is Human: Late Bronze Age Metal Deposits i n
Karageorghis, V., et al. 1988. Excavations at Maa- Cyprus and the Aegean. RDAC: 233-62.
Palaeolkastro 1979-1 986 1-2. Nicosia. Kochavi, M . 1973. A Built Shaft-Tomb o f the Middle
Katzenstein, H. J., 1973. The History of Tyre: From the Bronze Age I at Degania "A." Qadmoniot 412 (22):50-
Beginning of the Second Millennium B.C.E. until the Fall of 53. ( I n Hebrew.)
the Neo-Babylonian Empire in 538 R.C.E. Jerusalem. Korres, G . S. 1989. Representation o f a Late Mycenaean Ship
Katzev, M. 1989. Voyage o f Kyrenia 11. INAN 1611: 4-10. o n the Pyxis from Tragana, Pylos. In Tropis I: 177-202.
. 1990. A n Analysis o f the Experimental Voyages Kiihne, C., and H . Otten. 1971. Der sau~gamuwa-~ertrag.
o f Kyrenia 11. In Tropis 11: 245-56. (SBT 16.) Wiesbaden.
Kaul, F. 1995. Ships o n Bronzes. The Ship as Symbol in Kuniholm, P. I. 1990. Overview and Assessment o f the
Prehistoric and Medieval Scandinavia. 0.Crumlin- Evidence for the Date o f the Eruption o f Thera. In
Pedersen and B. Munch Thye, eds. (Publications f r o m Thera I11 13: 3: 13-18.
the National Museum, Studies i n Archaeology and . 1996 Aegean Dendrochronology Project December
History 1.) Copenhagen: 59-70. 1996 Progress Report. (The Malcolm and Carolyn
Kenna, V . E. G . 1960. Cretan Seals: With a Catalogue of the Wiener Laboratory for Aegean and Near Eastern
Minoan Gems in the Ashmolean Museum. Oxford. Dendrochronology).
1967-68. T h e Seal U s e o f Cyprus i n t h e Bronze Kuniholm, P. I., et al., 1996. Anatolian Tree Rings and t h e
Age 11. BCH 91: 552-77; 92: 142-56. Absolute Chronology o f the Eastern Mediterranean,
. 1969. The Cretan Talismanic Stone in the Late 2220-718 KC. Nature 381: 7 8 0 4 2 .
Minoan Age. ( S I M A 24.) Goteborg. Kurt, C . 1979. Seemiinnische Fachausdriicke bei Homer.
Kennedy, D. H. 1976. Cable Reinforcement o f the Athe- Gottingen.
nian Trireme. MM 62: 159-68. Kurtz, D. C., and J. Boardman. 1971. Greek Burial Cus-
. 1978. A Further Note o n the Thera Ships. MM toms. Ithaca.
64:135-37. Lacau, P. 1904. Sarcophages ante'rieurs au Nouvel Empire
Kenyon, K. M . 1960. Excavations at Jericho I: The Tombs 1-11. (Cataloguege'ne'raldes Antiquite's e'gyptiennes du
Excavated in 1952-1 954. London. Muse'e du Caire.) Cairo.
Kestemont, G . 1977. Remarques sur les aspects juridiques Laffineur,R. 1983A. Iconographie mycknienne et sym-
d u commerce dans le Proche-Orient d u XIV& siecle bolisme guerrier. Art et fact, Revue des historiens d'art,
avant notre Pre. Iraq 39: 191-201. des arche'ologues, des musicologues et des orientalistes de
Kilian, K. 1988. Ausgrabungen i n Tiryns 1982 / 1983: lfUniversite' de lEtat a Liige 2: 3 8 4 9 .
Bericht z u Den Grabungen. AA: 105-51. 1 9 8 3 B . Early Mycenaean Art: Some Evidence
Killen, J.T . 1983. PY An 1. Minos 18: 71-79. from the W e s t House i n Thera. BlCS 30: 111-22.
Killen J.T., and J.-P. Olivier. 1989. The Knossos Tablets. 1 9 8 4 . Mycenaeans at Thera: Further Evidence. I n
Fifth Edition. (Minos Suppl. 11.) Salamanca. MT: 133-39.
Kirk, G . S. 1949. Ships o n Geometric Vases. ABSA 44: 93- 1 9 9 1 . La mer et l'au-del8 dans l'fig6e prkhis-
153, pls. 3 8 4 0 . torique. In Thalassa: 231-38, pl. 61.
BIBLIOGRAPHY d 397
Lagarce, J., E. Lagarce, A. Bounni, and N. Saliby. 1983. Lipiriski, E. 1967. Recherches Ugaritiques. Syria 44: 253-87.
Les fouilles a Ras Ibn Hani en Syrie (Campagnes de . 1971. ~ ~ i ~ h ade n Baal-Haddu,
ie RS 24.245. UF
1980,1981, et 1982). CRAI (Avril-Juin): 249-90. 3:81-92.
Lallemand, H. 1923. Les assemblages dans la technique . 1977. An Ugaritic Letter to Amenophis I11
egyptienne et le sens originel du mot menkh. BlFAO Concerning the Trade with AlaSiya. lraq 39: 213-17.
22: 77-98. Lipke, P. 1984. The Royal Ship of Cheops. (BARIS 125.)
LaMarche, V. C., Jr., and K. K. Hirschboeck. 1984. Frost Greenwich.
Rings in Trees as Records of Major Volcanic Erup- Lipschitz, 0.1972. Notes and News: Timnca. IEJ 22: 158,
tions. Nature 307: 121-26. pl. 27.
Lambdin, T. 0.1953. The Mi%-People of the Byblian Liverani, M. 1970. Kbd nei testi amministrativi ugaritici.
Amarna Letters. JCS 7: 75-77. UF 2: 89-108.
Lambrou-Phillipson, C. 1991. Seafaring in the Bronze . 1979A. Ras Shamra-Histoire. Supplkment au
Age Mediterranean: The Parameters Involved in Dictionnaire de la Bible 9. Paris, coll. 1295-1348.
Maritime Travel. In Thalassa: 11-19, pl. 1. . 1979B. La dotazione dei mercanti di Ugarit. UF
1993. Ugarit: A Late Bronze Age Thalassocracy? 11: 49.5503.
The Evidence of the Textual Sources. O r 62: 163-70. . 1987. The Collapse of the Near Eastern Regional
Landstrom, B. 1970. Ships of the Pharaohs. Garden City. System at the End of the Bronze Age: The Case of
Lang, M. L. 1969. The Palace of Nestor at Pylos in Western Syria. In Center and Periphery in the Ancient World. M.
Messenia 2: The Frescoes. Princeton. Rowlands, M . Larsen, and K. Kristiansen, eds. Cam-
Latacz, J. 1986. Review of C. Kurt 1979. Kratylos 31: 110-24. bridge: 66-73.
Lattimore, R., trans. 1951. The lliad of Homer. Chicago. . 1995. Le fin d'ougarit: quand? pourquoi? com-
Laviosa, C. 1972. La Marina Micenea. Annuario della ment? In Le pays d'ougarif ailtour de 1200 av. J.-C.:
Scuola Archeologica di Atene 4 7 4 8 (1969-70; n.s. 31- Histoire et arche'ologie. (Actes du Colloque Interna-
32). Rome: 7 4 0 . tional, Paris, 28 juin-1"juillet 1993 = Ras Shanira-
Le Baron Bowen, R. 1960A. Egypt's Earliest Sailing Ougarit 11.) M . Yon, M. Sanycer, and P. Bordreuil, eds.
Ships. Antiquity 34: 117-31. Paris: 113-17.
. 1960B. Man's Earliest Sails. M M 49: 144-46. Lloyd, S. 1967. Early Highland Peoples of Anatolia. London.
. 1962. Egyptian Sails of the Second Millennium Lloyd, S., and J. Mellaart. 1965. Reycesidtan 11. (Occasional
B.C. M M 48: 52-57. Publications of the British institute of Archaeology at
1963. Egyptian Anchors. M M 49: 304. Ankara 8.) London.
Lehmann, G. A. 1979. Die Sikal~jii+in neues Zeugnis Lolos, G., C. Pennas, and G. Vichos. 1995. Der Shiffsfund
zu den "Seevo1kern"-Heerfahrten im spaten 13. Jh. von Kap Iria (Golf von Argos). In IPR: 59-62.
v. Chr. (RS 34.129). UF 11: 481-94. Lolos, Y. 1991. Underwater Surface Investigation of the
Levine, M. 1969. The Tabernacle: Its Structilre and Utensils. Wreck of the Late Bronze Age at Point Iria: Part 2: The
Tel Aviv. Pottery and Its Ramifications. Enalia 3 (1-2): 17-25. (In
Lewis, D. 1975. We, the Navigators. Honolulu. Greek.)
. 1976. "Hokuka" Follows the Stars to Tahiti. N G . 1990. The Gold Chalice from the Late Bronze Age
150: 512-37. Wreck at Akroterion (Ulu Burun) in Lycia. Enalia 1:
Liddell, H. G., and R. Scott. 1953. A Greek-English Lexicon. 8-9.
(Reprint, 1953.) Oxford. . 1995. The 1991 Underwater Survey of the Late
Linder, E. 1970. The Maritime Texts of Ugarit: A Study of Bronze Age Wreck at Point Iria: Part 2: The Pottery.
Late Bronze Age Shipping. (Ph.D. diss., Brandeis Enalia Annual 1991 (English Edition) 3: 9-16.
University.) University Microfilms: AM Arbor. Long, C. R. 1974. The Ayia Triadha Sarcophagus: A Study of
1972. A Seafaring Merchant-Smith from Ugarit Late Minoan and Mycenaean Funerary Practices and
and the Cape-Gelidonya Wreck. l J N A 1: 163-64. Beliefs. ( S I M A 41.) Goteborg.
. 1973. Naval Warfare in the El-Amarna Age. In Loret, V. 1916. Quelques notes sur l'arbre Sch. ASAE 16:
M A : 317-24. 33-51.
. 1981. Ugarit, a Canaanite Thalassocrasy. In UR: . 1949. La r b i n de te're'binth (sonter) chez les anciens
3142. ~ g y ~ t i e n(IFAO,
s. R A 19.) Cairo.
. 1992. Excavating an Ancient Merchantman. Lucas, A. 1931. Cedar-Tree Products Employed in
RibAR 1816: 24-35. Mummification. J E A 17: 13-21.
Lindgren, M., 1973. The People of Pylos: Prosopographical . 1962. Ancient Egyptian Materials and 1ndirstries4.
and Methodological Studies in the Pylos Archives 1-11. J. R. Harris, rev. London.
Boreas (Uppsala Studies in Ancient Mediterranean and Lythgoe, A. M. 1915. Excavations at the South Pyramid of
Near Eastern Civilizations: 3-21 Uppsala. Lisht in 1914. AEg: 145-53.
Liou, 8.1974. Note provisoire sur deux gisements greco- McCann, A. N. 1970. Review: Cape Gelidonya: A Bronze
etrusques (Bon Port6 A et Pointe du Dattier). Cd'AS 3: 7-19. Age Shipwreck, by G. F . Bass. A J A 74: 105-106.
398 @c BIBLIOGRAPHY
McCaslin, D. 1978. The 1977 Underwater Report. In Hala Fifth International Symposium at the Swedish Insti-
Sultan Teke IV. ( S I M A 45: 4). Goteborg: 97-157. tute at Athens, June 26-29,1986.) R. Hagg, N.
McCaslin, D. E. 1980. Stone Anchors in Antiquity: Coastal Marinatos, and G. C. Nordquist, eds. Stockholm: 9-20.
Settlements and Maritime Trade-Routes in the Eastern . 1993. Minoan Religion: Ritual, Image, and Symbol.
Mediterranean ca. 1600-1050 R.C. ( S I M A 61.) Goteborg. Columbia.
McCoy, F. W., and G. Heiken. 1990. Anatomy of an Marinatos, S. 1933. La marine crkto-mycknienne. BCH 57:
Eruption: How a Terrifying Series of Explosions 170-235.
Reshaped the Minoan Island of Thera. Archaeology 431 . 1971. Excaaations at Thera IV (1970 Season). Athens.
3: 4249. . 1974. Excavations at Thera V I (1972 Season), Text
McDonald, W. M. 1967. Progress into the Past. New York. and Plates. Athens.
McDonald, W. A., and R. H. Simpson. 1961. Prehistoric 1976. Excazlations at Thera Vll(1973 Season). Athens.
Habitation in Southwestern Peloponnese. A J A 65: Mark, S. E. 1991. Odyssey 5.234-53 and Homeric Ship
22140. Construction: A Reappraisal. A J A 95: 441-45.
. 1969. Further Explorations in Southwestern . 1993. A Study of Possible Trade Routes Between
Peloponnese: 196448. A J A 73: 123-77. Egypt and Mesopotamia, ca. 3500-3100 R.C. (M.A.
.1972A. Archaeological Exploration. In MME: 117- thesis, Texas A&M University.)
47. . 1996. Odyssey (5.234-53) and Homeric Ship
. 19728. Perspectives. In MME: 24041. Construction: A Clarification. l J N A 25: 46-48.
McCeehan Liritzis, V. 1988. Seafaring, Craft and Cul- . In press. From Egypt to Mesopotamia: A Study of
tural Contact in the Aegean during the Third Millen- Predynastic Trade Routes. (Studies in Nautical Archaeol-
nium B.C. I J N A 17: 237-56. ogy 4.) College Station.
MacGregor, J. 1870. The Rob Roy on the Jordan, Nile, Red Martin, G. T. 1991. The Hidden Tombs of Memphis: New
Sea G Gennesareth, &c. London. Discozleries from the Time of Tutankhamun and Ramesses
Macqueen, J. G. 1968. Geography and History in Western the Great. London.
Asia Minor in the Second Millennium B.C. AS 18: 169-85. Masson, 0.1956. Documents Chypro-Minoens de Ras
. 1986. The Hittites and Their Contemporaries in Asia Shamra. Ugaritica 3: 233-50.
Minor. London. . 1969. Documents Chypro-Minoens de Ras
McWilliams, K. 1992. A Sail for the Kinneret Boat Model. Shamra. Ugaritica 6: 379-92.
INAQ 1913: 7. . 1974. Cyprominoica. ( S I M A 31: 2.) Goteborg.
Maddin, R., T. S. Wheeler, and J. D. Muhly. 1977. Tin in Mazar, A. 1985. The Emergence of the Philistine Material
the Ancient Near East: Old Questions and New Finds. Culture. IEJ 35: 95-107.
Expedition 19: 3547. . 1990. Archaeology of the Land of the Bible: 10,000-
Maiuri, A. 1923-24. Jalisos: Scavi della missione arche- 586 R.c.E. New York.
ologica italiana a Rodi 1-11. Annuario della Scuola . 1992. The Iron Age I. The Archaeology of Ancient
archeologica di Atene: 6-7: 83-341. Israel. A. Ben-Tor, ed. New Haven: 258-301.
Malamat, A. 1971. Syro-Palestinian Destinations in a Mari Mee, C. 1978. Aegean Trade and Settlement in Anatolia
Tin Inventory. IEJ 21: 31-38. in the Second Millennium B.C. AS 28: 121-56.
Manning, S. W. 1988A. The Bronze Age Eruption of . 1982. Rhodes in the Bronze Age: A n Archaeological
Thera: Absolute Dating, Aegean Chronology and Survey. Warminster.
Mediterranean Cultural Interrelations. J M A 1: . 1986. A Mycenaean Thalassocracy in the Eastern
17-82. Mediterranean? In PGP: 301-306.
. 19888. Dating of the Santorini Eruption. Nature Meiggs, R. 1985. Trees and Timber in the Ancient World.
332: 401. Oxford.
. 1989. The Santorini Eruption: An Update. J M A 2: Mekhitarian, A. 1978. Egyptian Painting. S. Gilbert, trans.
30 1-23. New York.
. 1990. The Thera Eruption: The Third Congress Melena, J. L. 1974. KI-TA-NO en las tablillas de CNOSO.
and the Problem of the Date. Archaeometry 32: 91-100. Durius 2: 45-55.
. 1991. Response to J. D. Muhly on Problems of . 1983. Olive Oil and Other Sorts of Oil in the
Chronology in the Aegean Late Bronze Age. J M A 4: Mycenaean Tablets. Minos 18: 89-123.
24942. Mellaart, J. 1968. Anatolian Trade with Europe and
Margariti, R. In progress. The Shipwreck at Sheytan Anatolian Geography and Culture Provinces in the
Deresi and the Minoan Connection in the Eastern Late Bronze Age. AS 18: 187-202.
Aegean. (M.A. thesis, Texas A&M University.) Mellink, M. J. 1983. The Hittites and the Aegean World:
Marinatos, N. 1984. Art and Religion in Thera: Reconstruct- Part 2. Archaeological Comments on Ahhiyawa-
ing a Bronze Age Society. Athens. Achaians in Western Anatolia. A J A 87: 13841.
1988. The Imagery of Sacrifice: Minoan and Merrillees, R. S. 1968. The Cypriote Bronze Age Pottery
Greek. In Early Greek Cult Practice. (Proceedings of the Found in Egypt. ( S I M A 18.) Goteborg.
BIBLIOGRAPHY @ 399
1972. Aegean Bronze Age Relations with Egypt. 1974. The Hittites and the Aegean World.
A J A 76: 281-94. Expedition 1612: 2-10.
1973. Mycenaean Pottery from the Time of . 1991. Egypt, the Aegean and L.ate Bronze Age
Akhenaton in Egypt. In MEM: 175-86. Chronology in the Eastern Mediterranean: A Review
. 1974. Trade and Transcendence in the Bronze Age Article. J M A 4: 4: 23547, 256-62.
Levant. ( S I M A 39.) Goteborg. 1993. Early Bronze Age Tin and the Taurus. A J A
. 1986. Political Conditions in the Eastern Mediter- 97: 239-53.
ranean During the Late Bronze Age. BA 49: 42-50. Miiller, W. 1904. Neue Darstellungen "mykenischer"
. 1987. Alashia Revisited. (CRB 22.) Paris. Gesandter und phonizischer Schiffe in altagyptischen
Meshel, Z. 1971. Southern Sinai. Jerusalem. (In Hebrew.) Wandgemalden. Mitteilungen der Vorderasiatischen
Michael, H. N., and P. P. Betancourt. 1988A. The Thera Gesellschaft 9: 113-80, Tafs. 1 4 .
Eruption: Continuing Discussion of the Date: 11: Naville, E. 1898. The Temple of Deir el Bahri 111: End of the
Further Arguments for an Early Date. Archaeometry 30: Northern Halfand Southern Halfof the Middle Platform.
169-75. London.
. 1988B. The Thera Eruption: Continuing Discus- . 1901. The Temple of Deir el Bahri IV:The Shrine of
sion of the Date: 11: Further Arguments for an Early Hathor and the Southern Hall of Oferings. London.
Date. Archaeomety 30: 180-81. 1908. The Temple of Deir el Bahri VI: The Lower
Millard, A. 1995. The Last Tablets of Ugarit. In Le pays Terrace, Additions and Plans. London.
d'ougarit autour de 1200 av. J.-C.: Histoire et arche'ologie. Naville, E., and H. R. Hall. 1913. The Xlth Dynasty Temple
(Actes du Colloque International, Paris, 28 juin-1" at Deir el-Rahri 111. London.
juillet 1993 = Ras Shamra-Ougarit 11.) M. Yon, M. Negbi, 0 . 1976. Canaanite Gods in Metal: An Archaeological
Sznycer, and P. Bordreuil, eds. Paris: 119-24. Study of Ancient Syro-Palestinian Figurines. Tel Aviv.
Miller, G.I. 1980. Studies in the Juridical Texts from . 1979. The "Miniature Fresco" from Thera and the
Ugarit. (Ph.D. diss., John Hopkins University.) Emergence of Mycenaean Art. In Thera: 645-56.
Miller, P. 1988. Riddle of the Pyramid Boats. NG 173: 534- Negbi, O., and S. Moskowitz. 1966. The "Foundation
50. Deposits" or "Offering Deposits" of Byblos. BASOR
Misch-Brandl, O., E. Galili, and S. Wachsmann. 1985. 184: 21-26.
Finds from the Late Canaanite (Bronze) Period. In Negueruela, I., J. Pinedo, M. Gomez, A. Miiiano, I.
FDS: 7-11 and pls. 1-7. Arellano, and J. S. Barba. 1995. Seventh-Century B.C.
Montet, P. 1928. Byblos et 18~gypte: Quatre campapes de Phoenician Vessel Discovered at Playa de la Isla,
fouilles a Gebail1921-1922-1923-1924. Text and Plates. Mazarron, Spain. l J N A 24: 189-97.
Paris. Nelson, H. H. 1929. The Epigraphic Survey of the Great
Morgan, L. 1988. The Miniature Wall Paintings of Thera: A Temple of Medinet Habu (Seasons 1924-25 to 1927-
Study in Aegean Culture and Iconography. Cambridge. 28). Medinet Habu 1924-28. (UC,OIC 5.) Chicago: 1-36.
. 1990. Island Iconography: Thera, Kea, Milos. In . 1943. The Naval Battle Pictured at Medinet
Thera 11111: 252-66. Habu. JNES 2: 4045.
1995. Minoan Painting and Egypt: The Case of Nelson, H. H., et al. 1930. Medinet Habu I: Earlier Histori-
Tell el Dab'a. In EAL: 29-53. cal Records of Ramses 111. (UC,OIP 8). Chicago.
Morricone, L. 1975. Coo-Scavi e scoperte nel "Serraglio" in Newberry, P. E. 1893. Beni Hassan I. London.
localita minori (193543). Annuario della Scuola Arche- 1894. El Bersheh I: The Tomb of Tehuti-Hetep. London.
ologica di Atene: 50-51 (1972-73; n.s. 34-35): 139-396. . 1938. Three Old-Kingdom Travellers to Byblos
Morris, S. P. 1989. A Tale of Two Cities: The Miniature and Pwenet. JEA 24: 182-84.
Frescoes from Thera and the Origins of Greek Poetry. . 1942. Notes on Seagoing Ships. IEA 28: 64-66.
A J A 93: 511-35. Nibbi, A. 1975A. Egyptian Anchors. J E A 61: 3841.
Morrison, I. A. 1980. Structure under Water: Many Types . 19758. The Sea Peoples and Egypt. Park Ridge.
of Submergence. In AW: 132-33. 1979. Some Remarks on the Assumption of
Morrison, J. S., and R. T. Williams. 1968. Greek Oared Ancient Egyptian Sea-Going.M M 65: 201-208.
Ships: 900-322 6.c. Cambridge. 1984. Ancient Egyptian Anchors: A Focus on the
Moussa, A. M., and H. Altenmiiller. 1971. Old Kingdom Facts. M M 70: 247-66.
Tombs at the Causeway of King Unas at Saqqam: The . 1991. Five Stone Anchors from Alexandria. l J N A
Tomb of Nefer and Ka-Hay. Mainz am Rhein. 20: 185-94.
. 1977. Old Kingdom Tombs at the Causeway of King . 1992. A Group of Stone Anchors from Mirgissa
Unas at Saqqara Excavated by the Department of Antiqui- on the Upper Nile. lJNA 21: 259-67.
ties: Das Grab des Nianchchnum und Chnumhotep. Mainz . 1993. Stone Anchors: The Evidence Re-Assessed.
am Rhein. M M 79: 5-26.
Muhly, J. D. 1970. Homer and the Phoenicians. Berytus 19: Niemeier, W.-D. 1990. Mycenaean Elements in the
19-64. Miniature Fresco from Thera? In Thera 111: 267-84.
400 c
S
' BIBLIOGRAPHY
. 1991. Minoan Artisans Travelling Overseas: The . 1991A. Maritime Matters in the Linear B Tablets.
Alalakh Frescoes and the Painted Plaster Floor at Tel Aegaeum (Annals d'arch6ologie tgiene de 1'Universitt de
Kabri (Western Galilee). In Thalassa: 189-201, pls. 46- Litge) 7: 273-310, pl. 63.
51. . 19918. Textual Background to Fred Hocker's
Nikolaou, K., and H. W. Catling. 1968. Composite Paper at Thalassa '" 11. (Unpublished sheets supplied
Anchors in Late Bronze Age Cyprus. Antiquity 42: to participants of the conference: September 23, 1991.)
225-29, pl. 34. Palaima, T. G., P. B. Betancourt, and G. H. Myer. 1984. An
Nilsson, M. P. 1950. The Minoan-Mycenaean Religion and Inscribed Stirrup Jar of Cretan Origin from Bamboula,
Its Survival in Greek Religion.' Lund. Cyprus. Kadmos 23: 65-73, pl. 1.
Nougayrol, J. 1956. Textes accadiens des archives sud (PRU Palaiologou, H. 1989. Aegean Ships from the Second
IV). Paris. Millennium. In Tropis I: 217-28.
. 1960. Nouveaux textes accadiens de Ras Shamra. Palmer, E. H. 1871. The Desert of Tih and the Country of
CRAI: 163-71. Moab. Palestine Exploration Fund Quarterly Statement 3:
Nour, M. Z., Z. Iskander, M. S. Osman, and A. Y. 3-73.
Moustafa. 1960. The Cheops Boats I. Cairo. Palmer, L. R. 1955. A Mycenaean Calendar of Offerings
Nun, M. 1975. Ancient Anchors from the Sea of Galilee. (PY Kn 02). Eranos 53: 1-13.
T v A 1714: 2628. . 1956. Military Arrangements for the Defence of
. 1977. Sea ofKinneret: A Monograph. Tel Aviv. (In Pylos. Minos 4: 12045.
Hebrew.) . 1963. The Interpretation ofMycenaean Greek Texts.
. 1993. Ancient Stone Anchors and Net Sinkers from Oxford.
the Sea of Galilee. Ein Gev. . 1965. Mycenaeans and Minoans: Aegean Prehistory
Nussbaum, A. J. 1986. Head and Horn in Indo-European. Berlin. in the Light of the Linear B Tablets. New York.
Oates, J. 1993. Trade and Power in the Fifth and Fourth Papathanassopolous, G. 1991. Dokos Excavation '89: The
Millennia B.c.: New Evidence from Northern Meso- Early Helladic Wreck at Dokos and the Prehistoric
potamia. W A 24: 403-22. Settlement. Enalia 1: 34-37.
Obrink, U. 1979. Hala Sultan Teke V: Excavations in Area Papathanasopolous, G., et al. 1992. Dokos: 1990 Excava-
22, 1971-1973 and 1975-1978 ( S I M A 45: 5.) Goteborg. tion. Enalia Annual (English Edition) 2: 6-23.
O'Connor, D. 1987. Egyptians and Libyans in the New Papathanassopoulos, G., Y. Vichos, and Y. Lolos. 1995.
Kingdom. Expedition 29 13: 35-37. Dokos: 1991 Campaign. Enalia Annual 1991 (English
. 1991. Boat Graves and Pyramid Origins. Expedi- Edition) 3: 17-37.
tion 3313: 5-17. Pardee, D. 1974. The Ugaritic Text 147(90). UF 6: 275-82.
Oleson, J. P. 1988. Ancient Lead Circles and Sounding- . 1975A. The Ugaritic Text 2106: 10-18 a Bottomry
Leads from Israeli Coastal Waters. Sefinim 7: 2740. Loan? JAOS 95: 612-19.
Olivier, J.-P. 1975. Le disque de Phaistos: fidition . 1975B. The Preposition in Ugaritic. UF 7: 329-78.
photographique. BCH 99: 5-34. . 1976. The Preposition in Ugaritic. UF 8: 215-322.
Onassoglou, A. 1985. Die ,Talismanischen < Siegel. (Corpus . 1977. A New Ugaritic Letter. BiOr 34: 3-20.
der minoischen und mykenischen Siegel, Beiheft 2.) Berlin. . 1980. La lettre de pnht et de yrmhd 2 leur maitre.
Oppenheim, A. L. 1973. A Note on Sa rGi. The Journal of AAAS 29/30 (1979-80): 23-36.
the Ancient Near Eastern Society of Columbia University . 1981. A Further Note on PRU V no 60, Epigraphic
5: 32534. in Nature. UF 13: 151-56.
Ormerod, H. 1978. Piracy in the Ancient World: An Essay . 1987. Epigraphic and Philological Notes. UF 19:
on Mediterranean History. Liverpool. (Reprint, 1924.) 199-217.
Ory, J. 1946. A Middle Age Tomb at El Jisr. QDAP 11: 31- . 1988. Les textes para-mythologiques de la 242
42, pls. 12-14. campagne (1961) (Ras Shamra-Ougarit IV). Paris.
Otten, H. 1975. Pudu&pa. Eine hethitische Konigin in ihren Park, H. W. 1977. Festivals ofthe Athenians. London.
Textzeugnissen. Wiesbaden. Parker, A. J. 1976. News: Italy, International Congress of
Owen, D. I. 1981. An Akkadian Letter from Ugarit at Tel Underwater Archaeology. I J N A 5: 34748.
Aphek. Tel Aviv 8: 1-17, pls. 1-2. . 1992. Ancient Shipwrecks of the Mediterranean G. the
Page, D. L. 1962. Poetae Melici Graecae. Oxford. Roman Provinces. ( B A R International Series 580.)
. 1976. History and the Homeric Iliad. Berkeley. Oxford.
Palaima, T. G. 1989A. Ideograms and Supplementals and Parker, S. B. 1967. Studies in the Grammar of Ugaritic
Regional Interaction among Aegean and Cypriote Prose Texts. (Ph.D. diss., John Hopkins University.)
Scripts. Minos 24: 30-54. Parkinson, R., and L. Schofield. 1993A. Mycenaeans Meet
1989B. Cypro-Minoan Scripts: Problems of the Egyptians at Last. The Art Newspaper 24 (January): 10.
Historical Context. In Problems of Decipherment . 1993B. Akhenaten's Army? Egyptian Archaeology
(Bibliothtque des cahier de l'lnstitute de Luinguistique de 3: 34-35.
Louvain 49). Louvaine-La-Neuve: 121-87. . 1995. Images of Mycenaeans: A Recently Acquired
BIBLIOGRAPHY d 401
Painted Papyrus from El-Amarna. In EAL: 125-26, pl. 8. Platon, N., 1984. The Minoan Thalassocracy and the
Parrot, A. 1937. Les peintures du palais de Mari. Syria 18: Golden Ring of Minor. In MT: 65-73.
325-54. Pomerance, L. 1975. The Possible R61e of Tomb Robbers
. 1953. Mari: Documentation photographique de la and Viziers of the Eighteenth Dynasty in Confusing
mission archtologique de Mari. (Collection des ides Minoan Chronology. In SDL: 21-30, pls. 4-5.
photographiques 7.) Neuchatel. Pomey, P. 1981. L'kpave de Bon-Port6 et les bateaux
. 1958. Mission arch6ologique de Mari 11: Le Palais: cousus de Mkditerranke. M M 67: 22543.
Peintures murales. Paris. Popham, M. 1988. The Historical Implications of the
Patch, D. C., and C. W. Haldane. 1990. The Pharaoh's Boat Linear B Archive at Knossos Dating to Either c. 1400
at the Carnegie. (The Carnegie Museum of Natural KC. or 1200 KC. Cretan Studies 1: 217-27.
History.) Pittsburgh. . 1990. Pottery Styles and Chronology. I11 Thera
Payton, R. 1991. The Ulu Burun Writing-Board Set. AS 41: 11113: 27-28.
107-10. . 1991. Pylos: Reflections on the Date of Its De-
J'eachey, C. 1990. Taking Conservation Underwater at struction and on Its Iron Age Reoccupation. Oxford
Ulu Burun. l N A N 1713: 10-13. Journal of Archaeology 10: 315-24.
Peck, W. H. 1978. Egyptian Drawing. New York. Porada, E. 1948. Corpus of Ancient Near Eastern Seals in
Pelon, 0 . 1970. Fouilles extcutkes a Mallia 111: Exploration North American Collections I. The Collection of the
des inaisons et quartiers d'habitation (1963-1966). Paris. Pierpont Morgan Library. (The R o h g e n Series 14.)
Pendlebury, J. D. S. 1930. Egypt and the Aegean in the Washington.
Late Bronze Age. \EA 16: 75-92. . 1984. The Cylinder Seal from Tell el-Dab'a. A J A
. 1939. The Archaeology of Crete. London. 88: 48543, pl. 65: 1-3.
Pendleton, M., and P. Warnock. 1990. Scanning Electron Porat, Y., S. Dar, and S. Applebaum. 1985. The History and
Microscopy Analysis of the Ulu Burun Diptych. l N A N Archaeology of Emek Hefer. Tel Aviv. (In Hebrew.)
1711: 26-27. Porten, B. 1968. Archivesfrom Elephantine. Berkeley.
Pennas, H. 1992. Point Iria Wreck. Enalia Annual (English . 1996. The Elephantine Papyri in English: Three Millen-
edition) 2: 3 9 4 1 . nia of Cross-Cultural Continuity and Change. Leiden.
Pennas, H., and Y. Vichos. 1991. Underwater Surface Porten, B., and A. Yardeni. 1986. Textbook of Aramaic
Investigation of the Wreck of the Late Bronze Age at Documentsfrom Ancient Egypt 1: Letters. Jerusalem.
Point Iria: Part I: Underwater Investigation. Enalia 3 . 1993. Textbook of Aramaic Docunientsfrom Ancient
(1-2): 8-16. (In Greek.) Egypt 3: Literature, Accounts and Lists. Winoan Lake.
. 1995. The 1991 Underwater Survey of the Late Porter, B., and R. L. B. Moss. 1960. Topographical
Bronze Age Wreck at Point Iria: Part I: The Underwa- Bibiography of Ancient Egyptian Hieroglyphic Texts,
ter Survey. Enalia Annual 1991 (English Edition) 3: 4-9. Reliefs and Paintings I: 1 The Theban Necropolis: Private
Perpillou, J.-L. 1968. La tablette PY An 724 et la flotte Tombs. Oxford.
pylienne. Minos 9: 213-18. . 1979. Topographical Bibliography of Ancient Egyp-
Persson, A. W. 1938. Tombs. Frodin, O., and A. W. tian Hieroglyphic Texts, Reliefs, and Painting 3. Mem-
Persson, Asine: Results of the Swedish Excavations, 1922- phis. Oxford.
1930. Stockholm: 336431. Poursat, J.-C. 1980. Appendice: Les ancres du quartier
. 1942. The Religion of Greece in Prehistoric Times. Mu. 8.Detournay, J.-C. Poursat, and F. Vandenabeele.
Berkeley. In Fouilles extcuttes a Mallia: Le quartier M u 11: Vases de
Petrie, W. M. F. 1892. Medum. London. pierre et de mttal, vannerie,fiprrines et reliefs d'applique,
. 1896. Naqada and Ballas. London. tltments de parure et de dtcoration, armes, sceaux et
. 1921. Corpus of Prehistoric Pottery and Palettes. empreintes. Paris: 235-38.
London. Power, E. 1929. The Ancient Gods and Language of
Petrie, W. M. F., and G. Brunton. 1924. Sedment I. London. Cyprus Revealed by the Accadian Inscriptions of
Petrie, W. M. F., G. A. Wainwright, and A. H. Gardiner. Amathus. Biblica 10: 129-69.
1913. Tarkhan I and Memphis V. London. Pritchard, J. 6. 1951. Syrians as Pictured in the Paintings
Petrocheilou, A. 1984. The Greek Caves. Athens. of the Theban Tombs. BASOR 122: 36-41.
Petruso, K. M. 1987. Marks on Some Minoan Balance Prytulak, M. G. 1982. Weapons on the Thera Ships? lJNA
Weights and Their Interpretation. Kadmos 1711: 2642. 11: 3-6.
Pieridou, A. 1965. An Early Cypro-Geometric Tomb at Pulak, C. M. 1987. A Late Bronze Age Shipwreck at Ulu
Lapethos. RDAC: 74-111, pls. 10-15. Burun: Preliminary Analysis (198445 Excavation
Pini, I., 1987. Zum "Ring des Minos." In Eilapine: Tomos Campaigns). (M.A. thesis, Texas A&M University.)
timetikos gia tov Kathegett Nikola'u Platona. G. Orphanou . 1988A. The Bronze Age Shipwreck at Ulu
and N. Giannadakis, eds. Hierakleion: 441-55. Burun,Turkey: 1985 Campaign. A ] A 92: 1-37.
Platon, N. 1971. Zakros: The Discovery of a Lost Palace of . 1988B. Excavations in Turkey: 1988 Campaign.
Ancient Crete. New York. l N A N 1514: cover, 13-17.
BIBLIOGRAPHY @ 403
Rothenberg, B., et al. 1988. The Egyptian Mining Temple at . 1983. New Light on the Recently Discovered Port
Timna. (Researches in the Arabah 1959-1 984 1.) London. on the Red Sea Shore. C ~ ' E58: 23-37.
Rouge, J. 1987. La momie contenait-elle les fragments Schaeffer, C. F. A. 1939. The Cuneiform Texts of Ras
d'une voile? In Autopsie d'une momie kgyptienne du Shamra-Ugarit. (The Schweich Lectures of the British
Museum de Lyon. (Nouvelles archives du museum Academy, 1936.) London.
d'histoire naturelle de Lyon 25.) Lyon: 91-96. . 1952. Enkomi-Alashia. Paris.
Rowe, A. 1936. Addendum A: Axe-Head of the Royal . 1962. Fouilles et decouvertes des XVIII' et XIX'
Boat-Crew of Cheops (or Sahew-R3 [?I). In A. Rowe, A campagnes, 1954-1955. Ugaritica 4: 1-150.
Catalogue of Egyptian Scarabs, Scaraboids, Seals and 1973. Remarks and Conclusions. In MEM: 285-89.
Amulets in the Palestine Archaeological Museum. Cairo: . 1978. Remarques sur les ancres en pierre
283-88. dlUgarit. Ugaritica 7: 371-78.
Rutkowski, B. 1978. Religious Elements in the Thera Schaeffer-Forrer, C. F. A. 1978. Ein Steinanker vom
Frescoes. In Thera: 661-64. Mittelmeer auf der Heuneburg? Ugaritica 7: 384-88.
. 1986. The Cult Places of the Aegean. New Haven. Schafer, H. 1908. Priestgriiber und andere Grabfunde vorn
Saad, Z. Y. 1947. Royal Excavations at Saqqara and Helwan Ende des alten Reiches bis zur griechischen Zeit vorn
(1941-1 945). Cairo. Toten temple des Ne-user-re^. Leipzig.
. 1951. The Royal Excavations at Helwan. Cairo. . 1974. Principles of Egyptian Art. J. Baines, trans.
. 1969. The Excavations at Helwan: Art and Civiliza- Oxford.
tion in the First and Second Egyptian Dynasties. Norman. Schliemann, H. 1880. Mycenz: A Narrative of Researches
Saad6, C. 1995. Le port d'ougarit. In Le pays dlOugarit and Discoveries at Mycenz and Tiryns. New York.
autour de 1200 av. 1.-C.: Histoire et archkologie. (Actes du Schneider, H. 1993. The Rediscovery of Iniuia. Egyptian
Colloque International, Paris, 28 juin-1"juillet 1993 = Archaeology 3: 3-5.
Ras Shamra-Ougarif 11.)M. Yon, M. Sznycer, and P. Schoefer, M., D. Cotta, and A. Beentjes. 1987. Les etoffes
Bordreuil, eds. Paris: 211-25. de rembourrage: du chiffon au v@tementet a la voile
Sakellarakis, J. A. 1971. Ivory Boats from Mycenae. AE: de bateau. In Autopsie d'une momie igyptienne du
188-233. (In Greek.) Museum de Lyon. (Nouvelles archives du museum
. 1979. Herakleion Museum: illustrated Guide to the d'histoire naturelle de Lyon 25.) Lyon: 77-80.
Museum. Athens. Schofield, L., and R. B. Parkinson. 1994. Of Helmets and
Sakellarakis, J. A., and E. Sapouna-Sakellaraki. 1991. Heretics: A Possible Egyptian Representation of
Archanes. Athens. Mycenaean Warriors on a Papyrus from El-Arnarna.
Sakellarakis, Y., and E. Sapouna-Sakellaraki. 1981. ABSA 89: frontispiece, 157-70, pls. 21-22.
Drama of Death in a Minoan Temple. NG 159: 20.522. Schulman, A. R. 1967. The Scarabs. In CG: 14347.
Sakellariou, A. 1980. The West House Miniature Frescoes. Schult, H. 1966. Zwei Hafen aus romischer Zeit am Toten
In Thera 11: 147-53. Meer. ZDPV 82: 139-48, Tafs. 26-31.
Sandars, N. K. 1985. The Sea Peoples: Warriors of the Ancient Seltman, C. 1965. Greek Coins: A History of Metallic
Mediterranean 1250-1 150 B.C. London. (Rev. ed.) Currency and Coinage Down to the Fall of the Hellenistic
Sanmartin, J. 1988A. Glossen zum ugaritischen Lexikon Kingdomsz. London.
(V). Studi epigrafici e linguistici 5: 171-80. Servin, A. 1948. Constructions navales egyptiennes: Les
. 19888. Notas de lexicografia Ugaritica. UF 20: barques de papyrus. ASAE 48: 55-88.
265-75. Severin, T. 1982. The Sinbad Voyage. London.
Saramandi, T., and A. Moraitou. 1995. Conservation of . 1985. Constructing the Omani Boom Sohar. SPB:
the Ceramic Finds from the Dokos Wreck. Enalia 279-87.
Annual 1991 (English Edition) 3: 3 W 4 . Shaw, J. W. 1973. Minoan Architecture: Materials and
Sasson, J. M. 1966. Canaanite Maritime Involvement in Techniques. Annuario 49 (n.s. 33). Rome.
the Second Millennium B.C. JAOS 86: 126-38. . 1995. Two Three-Holed Anchors from Kommos,
Save-Soderbergh, T. 1946. The Navy of the Eighteenth Crete: Their Context, Type and Origin. l J N A24: 279-91.
Egyptian Dynasty. Uppsala. Shaw, J. W., and H. Blitzer. 1983. Stone Weight Anchors
1957. Four Eighteenth Dynasty Tombs. Oxford. from Kommos, Crete. IJNA 12: 91-100.
Sayed, A. M. A. H. 1977. Discovery of the Site of the Shaw, M.C. 1980.Painted "Ikrid' at Mycenae. AJA 84: 167-79.
Twelfth Dynasty Port at Wadi Gawasis on the Red Sea . 1982. Ship Cabins of the Bronze Age Aegean.
Shore. (Preliminary report on the excavations of the IJNA 11: 53-58.
faculty of arts, University of Alexandria, in the Eastern Shelmerdine, C. W. 1984. The Perfumed Oil Industry at
Desert of Egypt-March, 1976.) R ~ ' E 29: 140-78. Pylos. In PCA: 81-95.
. 1978. The Recently Discovered Port on the Red . 1985. The Perfume Industry of Mycenaean Pylos.
Sea Shore. JEA 64: 69-71. ( S I M A Pocketbook 34.) Goteborg.
1980. Observations on Recent Discoveries at . 1987. Architectural Change and Economic
WBdi GBw2sis. J E A 66: 154-57, pls. 21-22. Decline at Pylos. Minos 20-22: 557-68.
404 LV BIBLIOGRAPHY
Shick, T. 1988. Nahal Hemar Cave: Cordage, Basketry Stefanski, Y. 1989. Hanot Minim (Khan Minya). H A 93:
and Fabrics. 'Atiqot 18: 3143. 15-17. (In Hebrew.)
Shimony, C., R. Yucha, and E. Werker. 1992. Ancient Steffy, J. R. 1985. The Kyrenia Ship: An Interim Report on
Anchor Ropes from the Dead Sea. 'Atiqot 21: 58-62. Its Hull Construction. AJA 89: 71-101, pl. 21.
Sibella, P. 1995A. The Ceramics. l N A Q 2212: 13-16. . 1987. The Kinneret Boat Project: Part 11. Notes on
. 1995B. Notes on the Architectural Marble. l N A Q the Construction of the Kimeret Boat. l J N A 16: 325-
2212: 13-16. 29.
. 1995C. Ceramics from the First Excavation . 1990. The Boat: A Preliminary Study of Its
Campaign in Tantura Lagoon at Dor, Israel: Fall 1994. Construction. Galilee Boat: 2947.
C.M.S. News 22: 13-14. . 1994. Wooden Ship Building and the Interpretation of
Simmons, A. 13. 1988. Test Excavations at Akrotiri- Shipwrecks. College Station.
Aetokremnos (Site E), an Early Prehistoric Occupation Steffy, J. R., and S. Wachsmann. 1990. The Migdal Boat
in Cyprus: Preliminary Report. RDAC (pt. 1): 15-24. Mosaic. In Galilee Boat: 115-18.
. 1991. Humans, Island Colonization and Pleistocene Steindorff, G. 1913. Das Grab des Ti. Leipzig.
Extinctions in the Mediterranean: The View from Steiner, G . 1989. "Schiffe von Ahhijawa" oder "Krieg-
Akrotiri Aetokremnos, Cyprus. Antiquity 65: 857-69. schiffe" von Amurru im Sau~kamuwa-~ertrag? UF
Simmons, A. H., and D. S. Reese. 1993. Hippo Hunters of 21: 393411.
Akrotiri. Archaeology 4615: 4043. Stieglitz, R. R. 1972-75A. Inscribed Egyptian Stone
Simpson, W. K. 1965. Papyrus Reisner 11. Boston. Anchors. Sefimim 4: 4 2 4 3 and pl. 6: 1-2.
Singer, I. 1983. Western Anatolia in the Thirteenth Century . 1972-75B. An Ancient Terra-Cotta Ship from
B.C. According to the Hittite Sources. AS 33: 205-17. Cyprus. Sefunim 4: 4446.
.1991. Appendix 111: A Concise History of . 1979. Commodity Prices at Ugarit. JAOS 99: 15-
Amurru. In S. Izre'el, Amurru Akkadian: A Linguistic 23.
Study 1-11. Atlanta: 134-95. . 1981. A Physician's Equipment List from Ugarit.
Sivan, D. 1990. Is There Vowel Harmony in Verbal Forms JCS 33: 52-55.
with Aleph in Ugaritic? UF 22: 313-15. . 1984. Long-distance Seafaring in the Ancient
Sjoqvist, E. 1940. Problems of the Late Cypriote Bronze Age. Near East. BA 47: 13442.
Stockholm. . In press. Phoenician Ship Equipment and Fit-
Sleeswyk, A. W. 1980. Phoenician Joints, coagmenta tings. In Tropis V.
punicana. IJNA 9: 2 4 3 4 . Stos-Gale, Z. A,, and C. F. Macdonald. 1991. Sources of
1983. On the Location of the Land of Pwnt on Metals and Trade in the Bronze Age Aegean. In
Two Renaissance Maps. 4 N A 12: 279-91. BATM: 249-88.
Smith, K. C. 1987. '86 in Review: Research of Staff and Stos-Gale, Z . A., and N. H. Gale. 1984. The Minoan
Students Spans Thirty-one Millennia of Maritime Thalassocracy and the Aegean Metal Trade. In MT:
Enterprise. l N A N 1314: 1-6. 59-63.
Smith, S. 1992A. Tribute to a Statesman: Dragon Boat Svoronos, J. N. 1914. Stylides, ancres hierae, stoloi,
Racing in Yueyang, China. The World b I (October): akrostolia, embola, proembola et totems marines.
671-79. JIAN 16: 81-152.
1992B. Friendship through Paddling: East Meets Swiney, H. W., and M. L. Katzev. 1973. The Kyrenia
West on the Water. The World b I (October): 662-69. Shipwreck: A Fourth-Century B.C. Greek Merchant
Smith, W. S. 1958. The Art and Architecture of Ancient Ship. In M A : 339-55.
Epjpt. Bungay. Symington, D. 1991. Late Bronze Age Writing Boards and
. 1965. interconnections in the Ancient Near East. Their Uses: Textual Evidence from Anatolia and Syria.
New Haven. AS 41: 111-23.
Sralver, C. V. 1936. Egyptian Shipping of about 1500 B.C. Tammuz, 0 . 1985. The Sea as Economic Factor: Aspects
MM 22: 430-69. of the Maritime Connections of the Eastern Mediterra-
1961. Egyptian Sea-Going Ships, about 2600 B.C. nean Coastal Populace, from the Amarna Age to the
M M 47: 24-30. Decline of the Assyrian Empire, According to Written
Spencer, J. E. 1976. Junks of Central China: The Spencer Documents. (M.A. thesis, Hebrew University, Jerusa-
Collection of Models at Texas A b M University. College lem.) (In Hebrew.)
Station. Taylor, E. G. R. 1957. The Haven Finding Art: A History of
Sperber, D. 1986. Nautica Talmudica. Ramat Gan. Navigation from Odysseus to Captain Cook. New York.
Stager, L. E. 1991. Ashkelon Discovered. Washington. Taylour, L. W. 1983. The Mycenaeans. London.
. 1995. The Impact of the Sea Peoples in Canaan Televantou, C. A. 1990. New Light on the West House
(1185-1050 R.c.E.).In The Archaeology of Society in the Wall-Paintings. In Thera 11111: 309-26.
Holy Land. T. E. Levy, ed. New York: 33148,583- Theocares, D. R. 1958. Iolkos, Whence Sailed the Argo-
85. nauts. Archaeology 11: 13-18.
BIBLIOGRAPHY d 405
Thomas, C. G. 1993. Myth Becomes History: Pre-Classical techniques. In Au topsie d'une rnomie e'gyptienne du
Greece. (Publications of the Association of Ancient Museum de Lyon. (Nouvelles archives dn museum
Historians 4). Claremont. d'histoire naturelle de Lyon 25.) Lyon: 81-90.
Thompson, D'A. W. 1895. A Glossary ofGreek Birds. Vandier, J. 1969. Manuel d'archtologie e'gytienne V: Bas-
Oxford. (Reprint, 1936.) reliefs et peintures: Sc2nes de la vie quotidienne. Paris.
Thomson, D. F. 1939. The Tree Dwellers of the Arafura Van Doorninck, F., Jr. 1982A. The Anchors. Yassi Ada I: A
Swamps: A New Type of Bark Canoe from Central Sez~enth-CenturyByzantine Shipwreck. G. F. Bass and
Arnhem Land. Man 39: 121-26. F. H. Van Doornink, Jr., eds. College Station, Tex.:
Throckrnorton, P. 1960. Thirty-three Centuries under the 12143.
Sea. NG 117: 682-703. . 1982B. Protogeometric Longships and the
. 1962. Oldest Known Shipwreck Yields Bronze Introduction of the Ram. 11NA 11: 27746.
Age Cargo. NG 121: 697-711. Van Effenterre, H. 1970. Un navire mycenien (?). In SC:
1967. The Discovery. In CG: 14-20. 43-53.
. 1987A. Sailors in the Time of Troy. In HS: 24-33. . 1979. Cretan Ships on Seal-Stones: Some Obser-
. 19878. Shipwrecks and St. Paul. In HS: 7840. vations. In Thera: 593-97.
Tibbetts, G. R. 1981. Arab Navigation in the Indian Ocean Van Nouhuys, J. W. 1951. The Anchor. M M 37: 1747.
before the Coming of the Portuguese. London. Van Seters, J. 1964. A Date for the "Admonitions" in the
Tilley, A. 1992. Rowing Astern: An Ancient Technique Second Intermediate Period. 1EA 50: 1S23.
Revived. I J N A 21: 5540. Van Soldt, W. H. 1989. Labels from Ugarit. UF 21: 37588.
Tilley, A. F., and P. Johnstone. 1976. A Minoan Naval . 1990. Fabrics and Dyes at Ugarit. UF 22: 321-57.
Triumph? IJNA 5: 285-92. . 1991. Studies in the Akkadian of Ugarit: Dating and
Todd, I. A. 1987. Chronology, Foreign Relations and Grammar. ( A O A T 40.) Neukirchen-Vluyn.
Comparisons. In Vasilikos Valley Project 6: Excavations 1994. The Topography and the Geographical
at Kalavasos-Tenta I. ( S I M A 71: 6.) Goteborg: 17-5. Horizon of the City-state of Ugarit. In Ugarit and the
Troev, T. 1989. Sur une barque de papyrus 2 travers les Bible. (Proceedings of the International Symposium on
millenaires. Loisirs en Bulgarie 3: 33-35. Ugarit and the Bible, Manchester, September 1992.) (=
Tropper, J. 1990. Der Ugaritische Kausativstamm und die Ugaritische-Biblische Literatur, Band 1I ) . G. Brooke, A.
Untersuchung zum S-Stamm und zu den unistrittenen H. W. Curtis, and J. F. Healy, eds. Miinster: 363-82.
nichtsibilantischen Kausativstammen des Ugaritischen. (= Ventris, M., and J. Chadwick. 1973. Documents in
Abhandlungen zur Literatur Alt-Syrian-Palastinas, Band Mycenaean Greek.' Cambridge.
2). Miinster. Vercoutter, J. 1951. L ' E ~ cet~l'Orient au deuxiPme
. 1994A. Zur Grammatik der ugaritischen Omina. millknaire av. J.-C. JNES 10: 205-12.
UF 26: 457-72. . 1956. L r ~ g y p tet
e le rnonde +!en prthelle'nique.
. 1994B. Die enklitische Partikel -y im Ugartischen. Cairo.
UF 26: 473-82. Vermeule, E. 1964. Greece in the Bronze Age. Chicago.
Tubb, J. N. 1995. An Aegean Presence in Egypto-Canaan. . 1981. Aspects of Death in Greek Art and Poetry.
In EAL: 13645, pls. 25-30. Berkeley.
Tusa, V. 1973. Ancore, antiche nel Museo di Palermo. In , 1983. Response to Hans Giiterbock. A l A 87: 14143.
BIBLIOGRAPHY d 407
Wente, E. F., and C. C. Van Siclen 111, 1976. A Chronology Worcester, G. R. G. 1956. The Origin and Observance of
of the New Kingdom. In Studies in Honor of George R. the Dragon Boat Festival in China. M M 42: 127-31.
Hughes (SAOC,OI 39). Chicago: 217-61. 1971. The Junks G Sampans of the Yangtze. Annapolis.
Werker, E. 1990. Identification of the Wood. In Galilee Wreschner, E. 1971. Prehistoric Rock-Engravings in Nahal
Boat: 65-75. ha-Me'arot, Mount Carmel. IEJ 21: 217-18, pls. 4647.
Wesselius, J. W. 1980. Some Regularities in the Ugaritic Wright, J. C. 1984. Changes in Form and Function of the
Administrative Texts. UF 12: 448-50. Palace at Pylos. In PCA: 19-29.
West, M. L. 1989. lambi et Elegi Graeci. 2d ed. Oxford. . 1996. Hittite Influences in Mycenaean Architec-
Westerberg, K. 1983. Cypriote Shipsfroni the Bronze Age to ture: Half-Timbering. Abstract submitted for TEXNH:
c. 500 K C . ( S I M A , Pocket-books, 22.) Goteborg. Craftsmen, Craftswornen, and Craftsmanship in the
Western, A. C. 1967. Appendix 2: Identification of the Aegean Bronze Age. (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, April
Wood. In CG: 169-69. 18-21, 1996.)
Whitaker, R. E. 1972. A Concordance of the Ugaritic Litera- Xella, P. 1982. Die Ausriistung eines kanaanaischen
ture. Cambridge. Schiffes. W O 13: 31-35.
White, D. 1986A. Excavations at Bates' Island: A Late . 1990. "Arsenic et vieilles dentelles," encore sur la
Bronze Age Egyptian Trading Station. A J A 90: 205-206. terminologie des textiles 2 Ugarit. UF 22: 467-74.
. 19868. 1985 Excavations on Bates' Island, Marsa Yadin, Y. 1963. The Art of Warfare in Biblical Lands. Jerusalem.
Matruh. JARCE 23: 51-84. Yamada, M. 1992. Reconsidering the Letters from the
. 1990. Proceedings: The Third Season at Marsa "King" in the Ugarit Texts: Royal Correspondence of
Matruh, the Site of A Late Bronze Age Station on the Carchemish? UF 24: 43146.
Northwest Coast of Egypt. A J A 94: 330. Yannai, A. 1983. Studies on Trade between the Levant
Wiener, M. 1984. Crete and the Cyclades in LM I: The the Aegean in the Fourteenth to Twelfth Centuries KC.
Tale of the Conical Cups. In MT: 17-26. (Ph.D. diss., Linacre College, Oxford.)
. 1987. Trade and Rule in Palatial Crete. In The Yardeni, A. 1994. Maritime Trade and Royal Accoun-
Function of the Minoan Palaces. (Proceedings of the Fourth tancy in an Erased Customs Account from 475 B.C.E.
International Symposium at the Swedish Institute in on the Ahiqar Scroll from Elephantine. BASOR 293:
Athens, [une 10-16,1984.) R. Hagg and 67-78.
N. Marinatos, eds. Stockholm: 261-68. Yener, K. A,, and H. Ozbal. 1987. Tin in the Turkish
. 1990. The Isles of Crete? In Thera 111: 128-60. Taurus Mountains: The Bolkardaa Mining District.
(Privately distributed copy with errata corrected; for Antiquity 61: 220-26.
errata see Nestor 18: 8 [November 19911.) Yeller, K. A., and P. B. Vandiver. 1993A. Tin Processing
Wilde, H. 1953. Le tombeau de TI'II: La Chapelle. Premitre at Goltepe, an Early Bronze Age Site in Anatolia. A J A
partie. Le Caire. 97: 207-38.
Williams, R. T. 1959. Addenda to "Early Greek Ships of . 1993B. Reply to J. D. Muhly,"Early Bronze Age
Two Levels." JHS 79: 159-60. Tin and the Taurus." A J A 97: 255-62.
Willies, L. 1993. Appendix: Early Bronze Age Working at Yener, K. A,, H. ~ z b a lA.
, Minzoni-Deroche, and
Kestrel. A J A 97: 262-64. B. Aksoy. 1989. Bolkardag: Archaeometallurgy Surveys
Winkler, H. A. 1939. Rock Drawings of Southern Upper in the Taurus Mountains, Turkey. NGR 513: 477-94.
Egypt 11. London. Yener, K. A., et al. 1991. Stable Lead Isotope Studies of
Winlock, H. E. 1936. Ed Dlfkhleh Oasis: Journal of a Camel Central Taurus Ore Sources and Related Artifacts
Trip Made in 1908. (The Metropolitan Museum of Art, from Eastern Mediterranean Chalcolithic and Bronze
Department of Egyptian Art V ) .New York. Age Sites. JAS 18: 541-77.
. 1955. Models of Daily Life in Ancient Egypt. Cam- Yogev, 0.1985. Degania "A." ESI 4: 20-21.
bridge. Yon, M. 1971. Salamine de Chypre 11: La Tombe T. I du XI""'
Wood, 8 . G. 1991. The Philistines Enter Canaan: Were s. av. 1.X. Paris.
They Egyptian Lackeys or Invading Conquerors? . 1992. Ducks' Travels. In Acta Cypria 2. P. Astrom,
BibAR 17: 44-52,89-92. ed. Jonsered: 394407, pls. 1-2.
Wood, M. 1985. In Search of the Trojan War. New York. Zaccagnini, C. 1970. Note sulle terminologia metallurgica
Wooley, L. 1953. A Forgotten Kingdom: Being a Record of the di Ugarit. O r A 9: 315-24.
Resi4lts Obtainedfrom the Excavation of Two Mounds, . 1990. The Transition from Bronze to Iron in the
Atchana and A1 Mina, in the Turkish Hatay. London. Near East and the Levant: Marginal Notes. JAOS 110:
. 1955. Alalakh: A n Account of the Excaz~ationsat Tell 493-502.
Atchana in the Hatay, 1937-1949. (Reports of the Research Zangger, E. 1995. Who Were the Sea Peoples? Aramco
Committee of the Society of Antiquaries of London, 18.) World 4613: 20-31.
London. Ziskind, J. R. 1974. Sea Loans at Ugarit. JAOS 94: 134-37.
Woolner, D. 1957. Graffiti of Ships at Tarxien, Malta.
Antiquity 31: 60-67.
408 @c BIBLIOGRAPHY
INDEX
Abba, tombs of, 232-35 Amenemhet 11, tomb of, 33,36,238,253 ankh sign, 14
Abdichor, 41 Amenemhet IV, 273 "Annals of Mursilis 11," 129
Abimilki of Tyre, 10,314 Amenhotep 11, 10,45, 8546, 204; tomb Antefoker, 23; stele of, 238, 259
Abiramu, 61 of, 24, 29, 242, 245, 248 aphlaston, 176, 178, 189-91
Abusir, 23 Amenhotep 111, 84, 253, 297, 335, 336 Appolonius of Rhodes, 287
Abu Zneima, 327 Amenmose, tomb of, 310 Arad, 111
Abydos, 218 Ameny, 36,37 Aratus, 199,300
acacia wood, 224,226,227 Ammishtamru, 340 archaeological evidence: on Aegean
Acco, 148,176,203,270 Ammurapi, 34344 ships, 69; on anchors, 258-86; on
Achziv, 152 Amnisos, 154 Cypriot ships, 62; on Egyptian ships,
"Admonitions of Ipu-wer," 10,296,308 Amorite chapel, 271 11; on Minoan/Cycladic ships, 8445;
Adonis River, 11 arnphoroid krater, 98,117-18 on Mycenaean/ Achaean ships, 130;
Aegean double-ended craft, 7 6 7 7 Amun, 11; Temple of, 55,62, 310 on Sea Peoples ships, 166; on Syro-
Aegean longships, 69-76,80,108-10 Amun-of-the-Road, 206 Canaanite ships, 414 2
Aegean Maritime Museum, 281 Amun Userhet, 11 Archaeological Museum at lraklion, 138
Aegean sea routes, 29699 Amurru, 329 archery, 137,356571165
Aegean ships, 69-82,351-52nn1-52; an- "Amurru Vassal Treaty," 129-30 Argos, 80,152-53,186
chors from, 27581; archaeological An 1,41,124, 125, 126,157 Arnuwadas I, 129
evidence on, 69; construction of, 227, An 610,123,124,126, 154,159,160 Arsames, 224
24243; hybridism in, 55-56; icono- An 710, 161 Artacie, 287
graphic evidence on, 69430; propul- An 723,127 Artzy, M., 147,176,202-203
sion of, 251; textual evidence on, 227; An 724,124,125,154,159,160,161 Arwad, 314
waterborne processions / races and, Anani, 224-26 Arzawa, 129
117-20 anchors, 11,26,41,62,255-93,328,36% Ashdod, 329
Aegina, 77-80 70nnl-154; archaeological evidence Asherat-of-the-Sea, 208
agriculture, 76 on, 258436; basalt, 270, 288; basket- Ashkelon, 201-202,329
Ahhiyawa, 128-30,329 handle, 296; brobdingnagian, 288; Asine, 140,151, 156
Akhenaton, 206 composite-, 255, 274, 279, 280; cultic askoi, 140,151-52, 156, 185, 201
Akhihotep-heri, mastaba of, 258 significance of, 130,147,264, 265, 279, Asleifarson, Svein, 320
Akkadian texts, 34043 287438,292; dummy, 262,264,271-73; aspective art, 317
Akrotiri, 83 iconographic evidence on, 25658; in Asphendou, Cave of, 353n96
Alalakh, 84 inland waters, 270-71; iron, 258; lime- Atchana Ware, 3521118
Alashia, 61, 129, 130, 212,317, 328; piracy stone, 270, 281, 286; sacred, 287438; Atchin, 193
and, 320; Sea Peoples and, 163-64; sea sand-, 255; sandstone, 281,283; on the Atet, chamber of, 229
routes of, 29596; trade in, 313. See seabed, 293; from shipwrecks, 208, Athenian Acropolis, 152,201
also Cyprus 281-86; small, 28688; textual evi- Athens Archaeological Museum, 114
Albright, W. F., 33, 327 dence on, 256; weight-, 255, 272, 274, Athlit Ram, 158
Alcinous, 306 283; weight of, 288; wooden, 271,288. Atpas, 129,356n35
Alexandria, 262 See also stone anchors Attarissiyas, 129
Amanmasha, 212,29596 Anemospilia, 117 Avaris, 39
Amarna texts, 40, 61, 130,312,320, 328 Ankhow, stele of, 259,331 awnings, 99
Ayios A~idrionikos,63 Bokhazkoy, 154 Cape Greco, 288
Aziru, 295,312 Bon Port6, 240 Cape Iria, 205
Book of the Dead, 257 Cape Kaliakri, 274
Baal, 336; Temple of, 259,273 boom-footed rigs, 251,254,330-31; of Cape Kiti, 273, 274, 292
Baal 1,323 Mycenaean/Achaean ships, 130,142, Cape Krio, 209,297
backstays, 28, 137, 141, 143 156; of Syro-Canaanite ships, 45,48,49 Cape Lara, 273
Balensi, J., 270 booms, 248,254,330; of Egyptian ships, Cape Myti Komeni, 205
Ballard, G. A,, 26,28,247,253 18,27,28; of Minoan/Cycladic ships, Capernaum, 271
Bar Adon, P., 262,264 96,97,98; of MycenaeanIAchaean Cape Stomi, 279
Barkal Stele, 239 ships, 139; of Syro-Canaanite ships, Capo Graziano, 209
Barnett, R. D., 252 45, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51 caprails, 18, 64
basalt anchors, 270,288 Boreux, C., 258 captives, 128, 130
Basch, L., 45,52-53,62, 66, 67, 69-70,99, boughs, 125 Carmel Coast, 202-203,20%209
102, 103, 105, 106, 138, 139, 140, 145, Bouzek, J., 178 Carnegie Museum, 222
147,148,203-204,239,257,258 bow, composite (archery), 137,356-57n65 Casson, L., 25,29, 69, 73, 106, 107,140,
basket-handle anchors, 296 bows: of Aegean ships, 69,73-74; of 157,158,174,226,252,253
basketwork design, 62 Cypriot ships, 62; horizontal projec- castles: of Egyptian ships, 25,31,38; of
Bass, G. F., 39, 80, 140, 155, 206, 208, 211, tion of, 157-58; of Minoan/Cycladic MycenaeanJAchaean ships, 134,137,
288,297,299,303,307 ships, 94,104; of Mycenaean/ 141,145,147,156; of Sea Peoples
Bates' Island, 262,299 Achaean ships, 137,138,149,150,152, ships, 172,175; of Syro-Canaanite
Bavaria, 178 156,157-58. See also cutwater bows ships, 52,53. See also forecastles
Bay of Antalya, 209,297 braces: of Egyptian ships, 28; of Minoan/ Catling, H. W., 208
beam/ length ratio: of Aegean ships, 69; of Cycladic ships, 96; of Mycenaean/ cedarwood, 9,10,11,19,215,217,364n34;
Cypriot ships, 64; of Egyptian ships, Achaean ships, 143; of Syro-Canaanite Lebanese, 219,227; trade in, 310,312
24; of Minoan/Cycladic ships, 102-103, ships, 45 Chadwick, J., 117, 123, 124, 127, 128
104; of Mycenaean/ Achaean ships, 153 brailed rigs, 251-54,331; of Minoan/ Chalandriani, 76
beams: of Cheops ship, 219,220; of Egyp- Cycladic ships, 96; of Mycenaean/ Champ des offrandes, 54
tian ships, 24,31,222,224; of Minoan/ Achaean ships, 134,140,143,156; of Cheops 1 ship, 216,219-20
Cycladic ships, 105; of Mycenaean1 Sea Peoples ships, 171,175 Cheops 11 ship, 219-20
Achaean ships, 148,150; of Syro- brail fairleads, 251, 253 Cheops ships, 9, 11,14-15,211,312,327;
Canaanite ships, 5 2 , s ; through-, 24, Breasted, J. H., 9,228 construction of, 215,218,219-20,222,
31, 52, 54 breezes, land and sea, 301 224,229,239,245
Beder, 324-25 British Museum, 130 Chicago Museum of Natural History, 222
Beit Yannai, 209 bronze nails, 226 Childes, W. J., 197
Beni Hassan, 248 bronze ship models, 104 Christensen, A. E., 164
Betts, J. H., 99-101,10S104 Broodbank, C., 7.576, 193 Christos, 71
Bey~esultan,85 Buck, R. J., 117 Cilicia, 295
Bietak, M., 12 bulwarks. See open bulwarks Clowes, G. S. L., 22S24
bipod masts, 15,2&27,49,250 butterfly ornaments, 111,112-13 Coates, J. F., 24041
bird boats, 178 Byblos, 130,226,328; anchors from, 271- Code of Hammurabi, 323
birds, navigation and, 300 73,283,288,292; Egyptian ships and, composite-anchors, 255,274, 279, 280
birdslbird-head devices: of Aegean 9, 11,327; Syro-Canaanite ships and, composite bows, 137,35657n65
ships, 77,80,118; double-headed, 178; 40-41,52-54 convoys of trading ships, 314
Homer on, 186,199-201,36142nnl- Byblos ships, 19,224,24142; construc- copper, 11,40,61,206,208
27; magical properties attributed to, tion of, 245,246 coracles, 32,62, 345n2
194-95; of Minoan/Cycladic ships, 99, Cos, 141,142
103,111; multiple beaks on, 190-94, cabins: of Egyptian ships, 34,36,37,38; Crete, 154,27940,298-99,308
330; of Mycenaean/ Achaean ships, of Minoan/Cycladic ships, 94; of crow's nests: of Cypriot ships, 66; of
130, 134, 137, 141, 142, 148, 149, 150, Syro-Canaanite ships, 5 S 5 4 Egyptian ships, 31-32,253; hybridism
151,152,153,156; recent discoveries cables, 248-51,254,330; of Egyptian in, 56; of Sea Peoples ships, 175; of
of, 201-204; of Sea Peoples ships, 163, ships, 15,25; of Syro-Canaanite ships, Syro-Canaanite ships, 4547,51,252
171,172,174,175,177-97,202,329-30, 45,51 Crusades, 265
360n60,361n64; in ship graffito from Cadogan, G., 208 crutches, 28,36, 94, 97, 98
Dakhla Oasis, 203-204 Cairo Museum, 222 Cult of the Dead, 308
Biridiya of Megiddo, 40 Cakir, Mehmet, 206 cults: anchors and, 130,147,264,265,279,
Bishop, C. W., 74,110,116,195 call-up, 126 287-88, 292; fertility, 74, 109, 116, 329;
"Black Book of the Admiralty," 376n9 cannibalism, 116 vegetation, 111-13, 116,329; water-
Blitzer, H., 279 canoes, 98-99 borne processions/ races and, 105,
Boardman, J., 118 Cape Andreas, 273,274 106,107-108,110-17,120-22,328
boat graves, 219 Cape Gelidonya, 39,205,208,211,217, cutwater bows: of Aegean ships, 77; of
Bodrum Museum of Underwater 297,367n43; anchors from, 28345; Mycenaean/ Achaean ships, 140,151,
Archaeology, 274 piracy at, 321; trade on, 307 153; of Sea Peoples ships, 175
410 d INDEX
Cycladic frying pans, 7&71,74, 76, 106, evidence on, 11; construction of, 215- Gaballa, G. A., 12,23
109,193 26,238-39,24142; Cypriot ships Galili, E., 211, 28586
cypress wood, 217,227 compared with, 64; iconographic garboards, 216
Cypriot seals, 66 evidence on, 11-32,227-38; of Middle Gardiner, A. H., 3>36
Cypriot ships, 6147,254,350nn147; Kingdom, 18,32-33,36,52-54; garlands, 88, 101, 119
anchors of, 62,27>74,292; archae- Minoan/Cycladic ships compared Gazi, 13%39,145,148,150, 157,185,191
ological evidence on, 62; iconographic with, 97; MycenaeanIAchaean ships Gela, 240
evidence on, 6247; propulsion of, compared with, 144,156; of New Gerzean ships, 248
250; textual evidence on, 6 1 4 2 Kingdom, 18-32,35-36; of Old Giglio, 240
Cypro-Minoan script, 61,83 Kingdom, 12-18,2425; propulsion Gilgamesh epic, 256
Cyprus, 151-52,185,328,329,330; sea of, 248,251,252-53; Sea Peoples ships Gillmer, T. C., 106, 107
routes of, 295-96; Syro-Canaanite and, 163,16675; size of, 23,3451116; Glanville, S. R. K., 22>24,312
ships in, 49-51; trade in, 313. See also Syro-Canaanite ships and, 10,12-14, Goedicke, H., 40
Alashia 15, 39, 4041, 4247, 47, 49, 52, 53, 241; Gordon, "Chinese," 75
textual evidence on, 9-11,22>26; war Graeco-Roman shipbuilding, 226
Dagon, Temple of, 273 and, 317-19 graffiti: of Aegean ships, 71, 73; of birds/
Dakaronia, F., 131 Eileithyia cult cave, 353n96 bird-head devices, 185,202-203; of
Dashur, 29,22&22,227,245,312 Ein Gedi, 271,292 Egyptian ships, 32-38; of Mycenaean/
Davies, N. de G., 32,44,55,257-58,310, E-ke-ra,-wo, 124 Achaean ships, 143,14445,14748,
313 El, 208 152; of Sea Peoples ships, 176; of Sym-
Dead Sea, 271 Elephantine Papyrus Cowley No. 26, Canaanite ships, 48,49-50
De Cervin, G. B. R., 106 224-26 grain, sheaves of, 111
decks: of Cypriot ships, 62; of Egyptian embalming, 308-10,332,374n90 grapnel, 317,319,332,375n12
ships, 25,29; of Minoan/Cycladic Emery, W., 219 Greek ships, 101,18749,196,328; an-
ships, 94,96,105; of Mycenaean/ Enenkhet, 19 chors from, 279; Mycenaean/ Achaen
Achaean ships, 142, 156; of Sea Enkomi, 50,51, 98, 118, 142, 143,147,155, trade with, 154; wrecks of, 205
Peoples ships, 172,174; of Syro- 156,176,177, 185,201 Grey Minyan Ware, 314
Canaanite ships, 54 Esarhaddon, 323 G ~ n w a l d 178
,
Degania, 265 Eshuwara, 343,360n54 Gulf of Eilat, 11
Deir el Bahri, 1%29, 32, 247, 250,288, Euboea, 209
314,327,330. See also Punt ships Eusebius, 226 Haddon, A. C., 19.>94
de Morgan, J., 220 Evans, A., 83,99,101,106,116,120,279 Hagia Triada sarcophagus, 71,104-105,
Demosthenes, 324 Eye of Horus, 14,24-25 115,120
Deveboynu Burnu, 209,297 Ezekiel, 160,226,227,300 Hahotrim, 209,288
diems, 132-33, 156, 174 Hala Sultan Teke, 49-51,273-74
Diodorus Siculus, 226,239,308 faenus nauticum, 324 Haldane, C. W., 218-19,220,222-23
Dirmil, 186 fanlike devices, 148,176 halyards, 330; of Egyptian ships, 27,28;
Dokos, 205,279 Faulkner, R. O., 24,27,29,31,44,45,238, of Minoan/Cycladic ships, 9697; of
Dor, 48, 163, 164, 209, 265, 266, 272, 273, 248,250 Mycenaean/Achaean ships, 137,141-
292 feather helmets, 142,177 43; of Sea Peoples ships, 175; of Syro-
double-ended craft, Aegean, 76-77 Fensham, F. C., 323 Canaanite ships, 45,47,51
doves, 113 fertility cults, 74, 109, 116, 329 Hama, 17576,178
dragon boats, 74-75,109-10,116,195 Fevrier, J. G., 52, 53 Hamilton, R. W., 267,270
duck ornaments, 196 fire-dog ornaments, 186 Hand One (Pylian scribe), 127
dugouts, 32,229-30,351n26 First Dynasty boat graves, 219 Harkhuf, 19
dummy anchors, 262,264,271-73 fish ornaments, 19, 22, 71, 74, 77, 102 "Harvesters Vase," 115, 120
Dunand, M., 52,53,54 forecastles: of Egyptian ships, 25,38; of Hathor, Temple of, 32
Dussaud, R., 62 Mycenaean/ Achaean ships, 137,144, Hatshepsut, 85, 159,297; obelisk barge of,
147,150,156 26,41,367n15; Temple of, 18,23. See
Eccles, E., 102 forestays, 28, 137,143 also Punt ships
Edgerton, W. F., 11, 14, 228, 239 Forrer, E., 128 Hatti, 333
Egypt: Alashia and, 130; Cypriot ships in, Fortesta, 186 Hattusilis, 129
6142; Graeco-Roman shipbuilding frames, 3641110; of Cheops ships, 220; of hawser weights, 28687
in, 226; Miniature Frieze influenced Mycenaean/ Achaean ships, 148, 149, helmets, 142, 143,177
by, 105106; Minoan/Cycladic con- 150; tripartite, 220 helmsmen, 28,31,132,134,153
tacts with, 85-86; peace treaty with Franchthi Cave, 69 Heltzer, M., 256
Hatti, 333; sea routes of, 295-96,297- Frankfort, H., 218 Hencken, H., 178
99; trade in, 9,308, 31&13,327, 329, Frost, H., 209,255, 256-57,259,271,272, Henu, 19,238
332 273,274,28748,290,292 Herihor, royal galley of, 251,252
Egyptian ships, 9-38,254,327-28,330, frying pans, 7&71,74,76,106,109,193 Hermes Kranaios, cave of, 35511171
345-47nn1-171; anchors from, 11,26, Furumark, A,, 298 Herodotus, 114,157,159,160,223,224,
25642,266,272,288; archaeological 227,256,257,308
INDEX 69 411
Hesychius, 200 interregional trade, 154-55 Khonsu, Temple of, 251
Heteb, 324 Iolkos, 80 Khui, tomb of, 19
hippopotamus ivory, 306,310 Ipy, tomb of, 183,238 Kibbutz Beit Zera, 262
Hippus of Tyre, 226 iron anchors, 258 Kibbutz Hahotrim, 208
Hishulei Carmel, 209 iron nails, 226,23940 Kibbutz Naveh Yam, 209
Hittites, 12S30, 317, 329 Isidis Navigium, 354n132 Kibbutz Shaar ha-Golan, 262
Hocker, F. M., 227 Israel, 201-203,22627,329; anchors from, kidnapping, 212
hogging trusses, 248-50; of dragon boats, 262-71,331; shipwrecks in, 208-209 Killen, J. T., 126
74; of Egyptian ships, 14, 15,18,24, Israel National Maritime Museum, 152 killicks, 275
2526,228,242,346n55; of Hatshep- Italy, 195 Kinneret, 270
s u f s obelisk barge, 367n15; hybridism Kirk, G. S., 140, 157-58
in, 56; lack of on Syro-Canaanite Ja 749,154 Kition, 41,152,176,185,203; anchors
ships, 45; of Punt ships, 246 Ja 829,154 from, 255,272,273-74,283,288,290,
Holmes, Y. L., 295 Jarrett-Bell, C. D., 29, 223, 247 292; graffiti of, 1 4 7 4 8
Holy Tabernacle, 227 Jehoshaphat, 299 Knossos, 61,83,86,154,243; anchor
Homer, 39,95,128,149, 157,186,199-201, Jericho, 241 from, 279; fleet and officers at, 127-28
227,299,300,356n65,358n157,361- Jesus, 301 knots, 28,254; sacral, 120-21
62nnl-27 jewelry, 303-305,306 Kofinas, 105
Hood, S., 116 Johnstone, P., 107 Kolona, 88,94,95,103
Horemheb, 251 Jonah, 212 Kom el Hetan, 84, 297
Hornell, J., 29, 77, 158, 194-95, 197,206, Josephus, 301 Kommos, 279,280
229,239,240 juniper wood, 227,298 Korres, G. S., 185
horse-head devices, 139 Kothar-wa-Khasis, 84
hulls: of Aegean ships, 69,71-73,227; Kabri, 84 KTU 2.38, 334
construction of, 21.523; of Cypriot kalla dhoni, 197 KTU 2.39,334-35
ships, 62,63,64,6647; of Egyptian Kambos, 122 KTU 2.42,335-36
ships, 23-24,29-31,32,33-34,35,36, Kamose, 39,42253,312 KTU 2.46,336
37,38,215-23; of Minoan/Cycladic Kapitan, G., 255 KTU 2.47,33637
ships, 90,94,96,104; of Mycenaean/ Karatepe, 186-87 KTU 4.40,41, 126,337
Achaean ships, 131,137,138,141,142, Karnak, 274,328 KTU 4.81,337
143,14445,148,149,152,153,156; of Kassite seals, 307 KTU 4.338,324,337-38
Sea Peoples ships, 171-72, 176; of Kato Zakro, 243 KTU 4.352,338
Syro- Canaanite ships, 42,44,45,48, Katsamba, 86 KTU 4,370,338-39
49, 50, 51, 54 Kazaphani, 63,66,67,242,250,328,330 KTU 4.390, 339
human sacrifice, 113-l7,354n157,354n159 Kbn ships, 238 KTU 4,394,339
Hungary, 178 Kea, 86,87 KTU 4.421,339
Hutchinson, R. W., 99,101 keel-planks, 216,217,222, 245 KTU 4.647,339
hybridism, 5 5 4 0 keels: of Aegean ships, 69,73; of Cypriot KTU 4.689,41,256,33940
Hyksos, 39,253 ships, 63,64,66; defined, 245; of My- Kynos, 151,153,155,156,157,243; birds/
Hyria, 144, 155, 156 cenaean/ Achaean ships, 134,145,148, bird-head devices at, 185, 186,191,
149,150,151, 153,156,158; proto-, 202; Mycenaean/ Achaean ships at,
Ialysos, 281 242; of Punt ships, 241,242,24546, 131-37
Iappa-Addi, 314,321 367nnl-2; of seagoing ships in Late KynosA (ship graffito), 131-34, 156,172,
IbnaduSu, 164 Bronze Age, 24143; of Sea Peoples 174, 176
iconographic evidence: on Aegean ships, ships, 175; of Syro-Canaanite ships, Kyrenia 11,253-54,367n36
69-80; on anchors, 25658; on Cypriot 45, 52, 53
ships, 6247; on Egyptian ships, 11-32, Keftiu, 51-52, 298,328 Labaia, 40
227-38; on Minoan/ Cycladic ships, Kehotep, mastaba of, 258 Lacau, P., 227
8Eh05; on Mycenaean/ Achaean Kenamun, tomb of, 4245,47,50,51,52, lacing, 44. See also lashings
ships, 130-53; on Sea Peoples ships, 56,57, 60,217,248,253, 300,305,306, ladder design, 131,133,148, 151
166-76; on ship construction, 227-38; 313,314,328,330 Laffineur, R., 95
on Syro- Canaanite ships, 42-51 Kennedy, D. H., 106 Laganda tomb, 177
Idrimi, 40 Keos, 104 Lallemand, H., 227
ikria, 94,96,99, 101, 111, 118 Keros-Syros culture, 70,75 Larnbertis, 62
Ikria Wall Paintings, 101 Kfar Samir, 208,209,267 Lamu Archipelago, 240
incense, 305,306,332 Khaniale Tekke, 138, 144 Landstrom, B., 18, 28, 38, 222, 230, 241,
Indian ships, 194-95,197 Khan Minya, 270-71 242,248
"Indictment of Madduwatas," 129, 130 Khasekhemi, 9 "La Parisienne," 121
Iniwia, tomb of, 5440,328,350n119 Khenty-khety-wer, 238 Lapithos, 151-52
Institute of Nautical Archaeology (INA), Khirbet Kerak, 262. See also Tel Beit Yerah larnax, 131,137-38,139
208,283 Khirokitia, 273 lashings: of Cheops ship, 14-15,219-20;
international trade, 154-55 Khnumhotep, 19,37; tomb of, 231-32 of Egyptian ships, 14-15,27,218,222,
412 d INDEX
224,227,228-29,238-39,330; evolu- Marsala, 227 military significance of processional
tion of pegged mortise-and-tenon mast caps: of Egyptian ships, 27; of ships, 105; piracy scene on, 320;
joinery from, 239,24041; sticks for Minoan / Cycladic ships, 97; of placement of processional ships on,
tightening, 243; of Syro-Canaanite Mycenaean / Achaean ships, 137,139, 87; sailing ship and rigging on, 96-98;
ships, 45 142,156 small craft on, 98-99
lattice designs, 156 mastheads, 27,96,134,330 Minoan artisans, 84-85
Lavrion, 303 masts: of Aegean ships, 80; bipod, 15,26- Minoan / Cycladic ships, 8>122,254,328,
Law of Eshnunna, 323 27,49,250; of Cypriot ships, 66; of 352-55nn1-183; archaeological
law of reprisal, 324 Egyptian ships, 15, 18, 26-27,34,36, evidence on, 8445; iconographic
laws. See sea laws 37,38,49,250; hybridism in, 56; of evidence on, 85105; textual evidence
laws of Oleron, 376n9 Minoan/Cycladic ships, 97,98,105; of on, 8 3 4 4
lead isotope ratio analysis, 303,306,307 Mycenaean/ Achaean ships, 125,132, Minoan seals, 71, 91, 97,98,99-104,111-
lead ship models, 69-70,73,74 134, 140, 141, 142, 143,153,157; pole, 13,118-19,353n66,355n2; and human
Lebanese cedar, 219,227 49,80,251; of Sea Peoples ships, 172, sacrifice, 11516; ships with rigging
Lebanon, 271-73,310,312 176; of Syro-Canaanite ships, 45,47, on, 101-102; significance of ships
Le Baron Bowen, R., 28,248,253 48,49; tripod, 15, 18,250 depicted on, 103-104; talismanic, 99-
Lewis, D., 300 Mataria wreck, 222-23 101,103,119; typology of ships on,
Libya, 105-106,120,298 Medinet Habu, 29-32,52134,137,139, 103
lifts, 330; hybridism and, 60; of Minoan/ 141, 142,144,156-57,163,176,251, Minos, 84,320
Cycladic ships, 96,97, 101-102; of 252,329; birdstbird-head devices at, Mirgissa, 257,260-61
Mycenaean / Achaean ships, 130,142; 177,178,185,201-202; composite bow miSi-people, 130
of Syro-Canaanite ships, 45,47,49,51. in, 357n65; description of relief at, mnS ship, 4749,50,51,217
See also running lifts 166-75; war scenes at, 317-19 Mochlos, 76,101
limestone anchors, 270,281,286 Mediterranean Sea, 9 Moluccas, 71
limestone ship models, 105 "Meeting on the Hill," 88, 89,90, 121, 122 Moran, W. L., 295
Linder, E., 41 Megadim, 26546,266,273 Morgan, L., 96, 99,105, 106, 111,114, 115,
Linear A texts, 296 Melena, J. L., 308 120,122,243
Linear B texts, 119,329; on Aegean ships, Mellaart, J., 85 Morricone, L., 141
227; on Cypriot contacts, 61; on Melos, 69, 76, 86, 105, 183 mortise-and-tenon joinery, 215-16,219,
human sacrifice, 117; on Mycenaean/ Mengebet, 325 220,222,227-28,243,330,363n3,
Achaean ships, 123-28,154-55,159, Menkheperresonb, tomb of, 55,310 3641111. See also pegged mortise-and-
160,161; on Syro-Canaanite contacts, Menna, tomb of, 253 tenon joinery; unpegged mortise-and-
40,41; on trade, 308 Mentuhotep Sankhekere, 238 tenon joinery
Link Expedition, 270 mercenary activities, 129-30 Mount Berenice, 265
Lipari, 209 merchant ships, 129,145,153, 157, 160, Moustafa, Ahmed Youssef, 219
Lisht timbers, 216,218,220,222,239, 212 m tepe, 240
3641111 Mereruka, tomb of, 258,274 Muhly, J. D., 39,208
Liverani, M., 331 Merrillees, R. S., 50, 64, 297 Miiller, W., 45, 47
Lloyd, S., 85 Mersa Gawasis, 260,261,288 mummification, 308
longships, Aegean, 69-76,80,108-10 Mersa Matruh, 262,299 Mycenae, 88
looms: of Egyptian ships, 28,34,36; of meru wood, 298 Mycenaean/ Achaean ships, 12341,176-
Minoan/Cycladic ships, 103; of Syro- Mesopotamian seals, 111 77,35558nnl-165; archaeological
Canaanite ships, 44 metal ship models, 54 evidence on, 130; iconographic
Loret, V., 308 Middle Kingdom Egypt, 18,32-33,36, evidence on, 130-53; textual evidence
lugged axes, 35-36,37 52-54 on, 123-30
Lukka, 130,320 Miltiades, 159 Mycenaeans: culture of, 117-19; human
Luli, 15940 Minet el Beida, 273 sacrifice and, 116, 117
lunates, 132,356n57 Miniature Frieze (at Thera), 83,8699, Mycenaean seals, 211-12
105122,142,157,329; additional Mycenaean sword, 356n29
Maagan, Michael, 156 fragments assigned to, 89; archaic Mykonos, 281
Maa-Palaeokastro, 329 characteristics of processional ships,
MacGregor, J., 271 108-111; cultic significance of Na 568,227
Makai, 114 processional ships, 105,106,107-108, Nahal ha-Me'arot, 202-203
Manapa-Dattas, 356n35 110-17,120-22,328; damage to, 8748; Nahal Hemar Cave, 254
Marathon Bay, 279 description of processional ships, 90- nails, 227; bronze, 226; iron, 226,23940
Mari, 83, 84 95; discovery of, 86; horizontal stern Nauplius, 320
Marinatos, N., 105,114,115,116,120 device on processional ships, 73-74, Naveh Yam, 259,272,285436,331
Marinatos, S., 83, 86, 88, 89,94, 96, 99, 106, 108,109,111; human sacrifice (?) navigation, 295-301,331,370-72nn1-74
105,106,107,109,113-14, 115,120, depicted on, 11S17; interpretation of Naxoq 69-70,71,73,74,108
122,183,28041 processional ships, 10517; locale of Nebamun, tomb of, 4547,50,51,56,217,
Maroni Zarukas, 63-64, 66,67,152,185, processional ships, 105106; "Meeting 253
201,250,328,330 on the Hill" on, 88,89,90,121,122; Nebka, 9
INDEX $9 413
Nefer, tomb of, 228-29 papirella, 351113 Prausnitz, M. W., 202
Neferhotep, tomb of, 251,253 papyri, 22%24,226,313 prefects, 333
Nefertiti, 306 Papyrus Anastasi IV, 224,226 propulsion, 247-54,36748n1-1-51
Nelson, H. H., 16%69,170 Papyrus Harris I, 10 prostitutes, 313
neutron activation analysis, 154 papyrus rafts, 9, 15,243 proto-keels, 242. See also keel-planks;
Newberry, P. E., 238 Papyrus Reisner II,220,22%24 keels
New Kingdom Egypt, 18-3235-36 Pardee, D., 324 Proto-White Painted fabric, 151
Nibbi, A., 9,262 Parsu of Amurru, 341 Proto-White Painted Ware, 66
Nicosia museum, 149 Payeh, 223 P m nfr, 55142,223
Niemeier, W. D., 84, 95 Peet, T. E., 33,34,35,36 Psammetichus I , 232
Nikolds, Abbot, 296 pegged mortise-and-tenon joinery, 216- Ptahhotep, tomb of, 228,243,258
Nile River ships, 9,28,29,215,23940, 17,218,222,227,228,330,366n157; Ptah of Memphis, 11
330; anchors of, 256,257-58; hull evolution of, 23941; examples of, Pudehepa, 323
remains of, 217-23; invasion of, 41; on 235-38 Puimre, tomb of, 243
Miniature Frieze, 105 pegs, 217,227 Pulak, C. M., 155,206,216,217,288,299,
Nilsson, M. P., 120 penteconters: of Mycenaean/Achaean 306,307
Nineveh, 154 ships, 137,138,149,153,157,159; of Punic shipwreck, 211
Niqmaddu 11,333 Sea Peoples ships, 174 Punt ships, 9,32,327,330; construction
Niqmepa, 340 people of the king, 333 of, 216,238-39; hybridism in, 56, 60;
Noah, 300 Pepi I, 9 iconographic evidence on, 1%29;
North House, 116 Pepi II,19 Iniwia ships compared with, 54; keels
North Syrian Coast, 295 Periplus of the Erythraean Sea, 32 of, 241,242,24546,367nnl-2; knots
Nougayrol, J., 41 Persian Gulf, 41 and rope of, 254; Minoan/Cycladic
nuggars, 29,366n168 Persson, A. W., 308 ships compared with, 97; oars of, 247,
Petrie, W. M. F., 218 248; Sea Peoples ships compared
oak, 217,227 Phaistos, 142, 156 with, 176; Syro-Canaanite ships
oared warships, 155-58 Phaistos disk, 77 compared with, 44,45
oars, 24748; of Aegean ships, 80; of Philo of Byblos, 226 Pylos, 61, 97, 154, 329; population of,
Cypriot ships, 67; of Egyptian ships, Phoenician joints, 241 3591119. See also rower tablets
18; of Mycenaean/ Achaean ships, Phoenician ships, l52,18&87,34748nl. pyramids, 220,222
132, 133, 137, 140, 141,148,149, 150; See also Syro-Canaanite ships Pyrgos Livonaton, 131
of Syro-Canaanite ships, 41,42,49,51. Phourni, 112
See also steering oars Phylakopi, 73,94, 134, 14041,145,149, Qaha, tomb of, 235-38,241
oarsmen. See rowers 155,183 Qatna, 84
obelisk barge, 26,41,367n15 piracy, 106,320-21,332,375nnl-31; quarter rudders: of Cypriot ships, 66;
Obelisks, Temple of the, 271 Aegean ships and, 75,76; dragon drawings of on anchors, 265-66; of
Oceania, 299 boats and, 110; MycenaeanIAchaean Egyptian ships, 15,28,31,36; of
oculi, 14,52,149, 195 ships and, 128,129-30,158 Minoan/Cycladic ships, 103; of
Odysseus, 227,299,306,320,356n65, Pirate's Walls, 320 Mycenaean/ Achaean ships, 134,137,
358n157 pithos, 56-57, 77 139,140,142,145, 147,155,157; of Sea
Old Kingdom Egypt, 12-18,24-25 pithos burials, 308 Peoples ships, 174-75,176; of Syro-
open bulwarks: of Cypriot ships, 64-66; Piyamaradus, 129,356n35 Canaanite ships, 44,47,48,51
of Minoan/ Cycladic ships, 96; of Plain White Hand-made Ware, 63
Mycenaean/ Achaean ships, 137,156; planks: of Cheops ship, 219,220; of Rabbu-ken, 342
of Sea Peoples ships, 172,176; of Syro- Egyptian ships, 222,224; of Sea racial prejudices, 348n4
Canaanite ships, 48,49,51 Peoples ships, 174; Tarkhan, 21S19 radiocarbon dating, 208,215,271
opening of the eye (rite), 195 Pliny, 226 rafts, 103; papyrus, 9, 15,243; reed, 9,
Orchomenos, 73 Point Iria, 279 345114
Ormerod, H., 320,324 pole masts, 49,80,251 Rahotep, Chamber of, 229
Oropos, 149-50 poles, 94, 103 rainmaking, 116
Osiris, 336 Politiko, 62 Ramses II,47,55,130,317
overseers, 333 Poplin, F., 196 Ramses 111, 10-11, 27, 29, 31, 47, 50, 163,
oxhide ingots, 209,281,297,303,307, Porada, E., 42 166,204,239,253,317,320,357n6.5
362n7,372n7,372n8,374n77 posts: of Aegean ships, 71,73; of Cypriot Rapi'u, 336
ships, 62; of Mycenaean/ Achaean Ras el Soda, 262
paddles, 24748; of Aegean ships, 71,73, ships, 152; of Syro-Canaanite ships, Rechmire, tomb of, 86,253,310,312
74,75,77,118; of Minoan/Cycladic 54. See also stemposts; sternposts Red Polished 111 Ware, 62
ships, 94,10&108,109 po-ti-ro, 127-28 Red Sea, 9,33,41,238,327,330
Palaikastro, 71-73 pottery, 299; Mycenaean/ Achaen, 123, reed rafts, 9,345n4
Palaima, T. G., 124,126,127,227 130, 132, 147, 153; from shipwrecks, Re of Heleopolis, 11
Palermo Stone, 9 205,206,208,209 Reynolds, C. G., 106
Pandarus, 35657n65 Prasa, 86 Rhodes, 281
416 c9 INDEX
Typhis, 287 Van Effenterre, H., 99, 227 206,212,30~301,310,311-12,314,
Ty re, 226,227 Vathyrkakas, 66 324-25,332,370nl
vegetation cults, 111-13,116,329 Westerberg, K., 62,67
Uchitel, A., 154 Velem St. Vid, 178 West House, 86,87,101, 115,118,243
Ugarit, 253; destruction of, 332; sea Vercoutter, J., 298,299 White Painted I fabric, 151
routes of, 295,296; supplies Versailles effect, 84 White Painted I1 Ware, 62
dragoman for Minoans at Mari, 83; Vikings, 164,320 White Painted IV Ware, 62
Syro-Canaanite ships in, 41,49,51 Villanovan art, 178,183 Wiener, M., 84
Ugaritic alphabetic script, 334-40 Vison, S. M., 218 Williams, R. T., 140
Ugaritic seals, 49 Virolleaud, C., 224 wind roses, 300
Ugaritic ships, 226,255,272,273,274, Vn 865,227 Winkler, H. A., 203
283,290,292 volutes, 178 Wolley, L., 84
Ugaritic texts, 317, 328,33344; in V series of texts, 127-28,227 wood. See acacia wood; cedarwood;
Akkadian language, 34043; on cypress wood; juniper wood; Leba-
Cypriot ships, 61; on Egyptian ships, Wadi Gawasis, 32-33,215-16,238,239, nese cedar; meru-wood; sidder; syca-
224; on Minoan/Cycladic ships, 84; 257,259,260,286,312,327,331 more wood
on Mycenaean/ Achaean ships, 154; Wadi Hammamat, 19,41 wooden anchors, 271,288
on piracy, 320; on a seabome in- Wadi Tumilat, 238 wooden ship models, 44
vasion, 34%; on Sea Peoples ships, Wahpremakhi, 224-26 Wreschner, E., 202
16M4; on shipwreck laws, 323-24; on wales: of Cypriot ships, 63,66; of
Syro-Canaanite ships, 39; on trade, Mycenaean/ Achaean ships, 132,150; Yadinu, 33637
313; in Ugaritic alphabetic script, 334- of Sea Peoples ships, 175 Yam Kinneret, 264
40 Wallace, H., 28647 Yannai, A., 4 1 4 2
Uhhazitis, 129 wall paintings, 84, 85, 97,101, 297-98, yards, 330; of Aegean ships, 80; of Egyp-
Uluburun, 42,44,66, 154,155,205,206, 328, See also specific sites tian ships, 27,28,37,252-53; of
209,211-12,226,243,245, 300, 328, war galleys, 133 Minoan/Cycladic ships, 96-97; of
330; anchors from, 259,28143,285, Warren, P., 116 Mycenaean/ Achaean ships, 130,134,
286,288,290,293,331; construction of warships, 317-19,332,375~1-31; 139,143; of Sea Peoples ships, 175; of
ships at, 21617; evidence of trade dragon boats as, 75,110; oared, 155- Syro-Canaanite ships, 45,47,48,49,
from, 303-308; piracy and, 321; sea 58 51,253
routes of, 297 waterborne processions/ races: in Yarim-Lim, 84
Unas, 12,14,15-18,28,250,256,257 Aegean, 117-20; of Mycenaean/ Yon, M., 196
Uni, 9,300 Achaean ships, 143. See also under
unpegged mortise-and-tenon joinery, Miniature Frieze Zakynthos, 124
215,218,227,228,239,330; examples weather lore, 300-301 Zau, tomb of, 257
of, 229-35 We-da-ne-u, 124 Zawiet el Meitin, 229
Ura, 295 wedged stiches, 24041 Zeus, 116
Urnfield culture, 137, 178,330 weight-anchors, 255,272,274,283 Zimri-Lim, 83
Useramun, tomb of, 312 Weinstein, J., 206 Ziskind, J. R., 324
Userkaf, Temple of, 259 Wenamun, 11,12,4@41,6142,163,164,
Utnapishtim, 300
INDEX d 417