Ceramic Production, Distribution and Consumption in The Mycenaean Palatial Economy of The Late Bronze Age

Mei Lin Lyu Mycenaean Greece Archaeology
Ceramics Production, Distribution, and Consumption in the Mycenaean Palatial Economy

of the Late Bronze Age
I. Introduction
Ceramics, an essential good of everyday social and economic life, has been transacted based on
reciprocity and exchange in the surrounding communities (Pullen 2013, 438). It was not a
particularly high-valued item but left a vast amount of archaeological records. In the context of
palatial involvements, ceramics were used for social events of the palaces and outside the palaces
for rituals, on ships, settlements and beyond (Gilstrap 2005, 16). As such, ceramics is a useful tool
and a „prominent source of information“ (24) to speculate the social organisation, political and
economic trends. Were the ceramics production and distribution interested by palatial institutions,
was the consumption rate of the palaces correlated with production and distribution, and how
potters and ceramic workshops engaged in the transactions with the palaces would be explored in
this essay.
Generally, palatial economy co-existed with a non-palatial sector, the production of crafts would
require certain levels of specialisation or divisions of labour, which was the necessary environment
for legitimising political control (Gilstrap 2005, 19). There could be two different definitions of
treatment of specialisations, on one hand, the „prestige goods“ model involves specialisations for
the accumulation of wealth in political processes, either production or distribution is in sponsorship
or control of the elites (Day et al. 2010, 208-209). On the other hand, the „commercial/economic
growth“ model concerns with specialisations emerging independently of some specific targeted
stimulation by a political authority, in order to achieve utilitarian or economic needs to maximise
efficiency (209). We would like to discuss, therefore, whether the central political authority was
considerably involved in the emergence of craft specialisations, ceramics in specific, and how
pottery was valued and consumed in the wider social-economic settings.
II. Palatial Political Economy and Linear B Documents

The important evidence of organisational and structural characteristics of the political economy is
directly supplied by Linear B, which is „the administrative script of the Mycenaean
palaces“ (Nakassis 2010, 127). The term „palace“, rather than a physical presence of architecture,
1 of 23
refers to a particular social entity that „focused on a single centre with some degree of control over
subordinate settlements within a more or less extensive territory“ (Shelmerdine (Ed.) 2008, 290).
Such a palatial social entity emerged in the Early Mycenaean period and became stabilised in
LHIIIA, which was organised more formally by an office-holder, the wanax (290). The hierarchical
organisation of these states could be distributed vertically from the wanax, through several levels of
elites, down to farmers and craftsmen. Such hierarchy could also be arranged horizontally in
towns, villages, and hamlets of different sizes (291). From a traditional understanding of the
political economy, it requires a „central authority“ (Day et.al 2010, 208), however, it should be
stressed that the understanding with socio-economic processes of political institutions would
depend on specific historical settings and contexts (208), which are of particular importance to this
essay.
The Mycenaean palaces were broadly categorised by many scholars as redistributive centres,
whereby commodities move from the territory to the centre in the forms of „taxes, obligatory
donations, trade, and gifts“ (Shelmerdine (Ed.) 2008, 291). While some goods were stored at the
centre, others were monitored without physically brought to the centre, as such, this form of
economy where palatial transactions were documented is also termed as „command
economy“ (Shelmerdine (Ed.) 2008, 292). Specifically, the systems of movement of commodities
are termed as „mobilisation“ (Halstead, referenced by Nakassis et.al 2011, 181), where the goods
flow upward to finance the palatial elites and the political power of the palace would also be
consolidated (181) by the palatial mobilisation. Further, the materialisation (consumption) of
political organisations played a similar role with that of the market economy with the surplus of
mobilisation goods. Wanax would conduct rituals that revolved around „feasting, sacrifice and oral
poetic performance“ (Shelmerdine (Ed.) 2008, 291), rewarded services by giving fine craft goods
and diplomatic gifts were exchanged abroad (Halstead 1992, 75). The patterns of craft goods
exchange existed also between the palace and other polities, which the „guest gifts“ (Halstead
1992, 71) of palatial craft goods were in exchange for imported raw materials. Between the palatial
and non-palatial sectors, the palace would purchase goods and services in exchange for prestige or
subsistence goods, grant of lands or tax allowances (Halstead 1992, 72). As seen, these mobilisation
goods were used to „cement social alliances, to negotiate status and as tokens of value in the
exchange of staples“ (Halstead 1992, 75).
From the Linear B documents, the administration involved with craft production included the head
2 of 23
of the Mycenaean States titled wanax, who was a political and economic leader, as well as a
religious one (Shelmerdine 2008, 293). Among the high-ranking elites, the „collectors“ have been
identified to be responsible for acquiring and distributing exchange commodities (294); other roles
of the officials are less well understood, out of which, the term gwasileus is seen as „overseers of
groups of workers“ (294), who was certain to take part in the Pylos bronze industry (Bennet 2007,
193). Under the ta-ra-si-ja system, the palatial staff were divided into fully dependent servants who
received food rations and semi-dependent senior officials and skill craftsmen, whose services were
returned with land with a set of production targets (Halstead 1992, 61).
It should be noticed that rather than a consistent monolithic model of complete palatial control,
resource management depended on the type of activity (Shelmerdine (Ed.) 2008, 291). Specifically,
the term „potter“ was ke-ra-me-u, which appeared outside the context of ceramic production in
Pylian landholding documents (Bennet 2007, 198). There have been severely limited Linear B texts
on pottery records of "economic interactions between palatial administration and the area of their
dominion“ (Gilstrap 2005, 13). The rarity of tablets associated with the ceramics industry remains
puzzling for scholars, while some argue it was due to easy accessibility of clay materials (Tegyey
1988, referenced by Hruby 2006), another common explanation was the unmatched seasonality of
pottery production and preservation of tablets in a fiscal year (Voutsa 2001, referenced by Hruby
2006). Apart from the discussions of the inherently limited scope of Linear B tablets, which should
be treated rather as attempts to exert authority (Gilstrap 2005, 36), we would like to analyse from
available indirect archaeological evidence of the degree and nature of palatial involvements, if the
pottery production has been entirely overlooked by the palace.
III. Different Sites in Mycenaean Palatial Economies

The Mycenaean political economies were different in scale but also in kind, each site had its own
regional or local characteristics.
Pylos in Messenia
Firstly, the most well-recorded administrative hierarchy comes from Pylos, where a da-mo-ko-
ro was in charge of a province termed as damo, signifying as „community“ in Greek (Shelmerdine
2008, 300). Down to each district a korētēr with a deputy, the poro-korētēr, were in charge to
ensure communities meet their obligations to the centre (301), representing the central
administration to their districts (302). Since the majority of taxation was arranged decentralised and
collected by regional or local sub-centres (Halstead 1992, 59). Interchangeably, the term ko-to-no-o-
3 of 23
ko, a group of people who should be in charge of the land, was used often together with damos,
suggesting ko-to-no-o-ko functioned as the managerial board of the damos (Lupack 2011, 213).
Since the control of lands affected also the manufacture of goods from which were made, such as
ceramic vessels, damos must have acted as a „corporate body“ and directed substantially its internal
economic and political life (Lupack 2011, 215). It appeared to be the wanax did not have a clear
hierarchy with the damos as its leaders did not need to fulfil their obligations to the wanax, rather
the wanax must earn their loyalty. As such, damos must have engaged in substantial economic
activities that were not controlled or interested by the palatial administration (Lupack 2011, 213).
Map of hypothetical boundary of the Pylian kingdom,

with its division of Hither and Further provinces and
sites (adapted from Bennet 2007, 30)
From the Pylos Ma texts, it demonstrates the mobilisation of six commodities for each of the 17
districts in a fixed ratio of 7:7:2:3:1.5:150 (Shelmerdine 2008, 302). While it is unclear of specific
commodities other than a type of garment and animal hides, each district had one type of taxation
texts, being either assessments, actual contributions (indicating any shortfall), or assessments with
an indication of missing quantities from the previous year (Shelmerdine 2008, 302). These fixed
proportions of records indicated „a customary set of equivalences or exchange“ between the staples
4 of 23
and valuables (Halstead 1992, 74), they should be considered more symbolical of palatial authority
rather than practical (Shelmerdine 2008, 302). While it was unsure if ceramics went unrecorded,
possibly it was not irregularly exchanged and therefore unnecessary to be taxed regularly. Direct
linear B references to ceramics are rare, except a Pylos document (Fr 1184) listed 38 stirrup jars
(ka-ra-re-we) filled with 500 litres of possibly perfumed oil (Bennet 2007, 198), whose emphasis,
however, was placed on the prestige perfumed oil. Nonetheless, there has been indirect evidence
suggesting pottery-making was arranged under the ta-ra-si-ja system, which translated as „amount
weighed out and issued for processing“ (Killen 2008, 194). In particular, this mode of acquisition
involved the allocation of raw materials to a group of dependent or semi-independent workers, who
would be rewarded with payments in return for their services (194). As such, the palace may have
also played an interventionist role to ensure high-quality productivity and needed not to be taxed.
However, records of „purchase“ went rarely archived (195).
Plan of the Palace of Nestor (adapted from Hruby

2006, 2)
The palatial structures of Pylos occupied about 2 hectares, with the surrounding towns of 12-13
hectares at its peak in LHIIIB, and with a reasonable estimation of 3,000 population (Shelmerdine
2008, 298). From the evidence of storage pantries of the palace, it was calculated by Whitelaw
5 of 23
that 8,540 vessels, about 95 per cent of them were found in four-room complexes in the final palace.
Specifically, in room 9, 500-600 were all kylikes; in room 18-22, a majority of fine ware pottery (at
least 75%) was found with about 7000 coarse ware vessels (Hruby 2006, 201); in room 67-68
utilitarian vessels like cooking pots made from coarse clay were found in large quantities, which
were primarily concerned with food preparation; and finally, in room 60, a wider range of vessel
forms was recovered, including bowls, cups, kylikes, tankards, etc (Whitelaw 2001, 57). It was
found that all these vessels were tightly packed according to types, only a few vessels would have
been used in daily activities of the palace (Whitelaw 2001, 54). Such over-stocking appearance was
possibly for breakage back-ups and demanded in large quantities in short-term, indicates the annual
consumption within the palace (61) and the „public function“ of pottery served in the Mycenaean
palace (58).
Percent assemblage composition by shape at the 6 of 23

Palace at Pylos (adapted from Whitelaw 2001, 55)
Excavated vessels in the southeast end of room 22,

Palace of Nestor (adapted from Hruby 2006, 68)
Further, the storage vessels could be differentiated based on clay paste as common coarse illitic
clays (Fabric 1) and kaolinite (Fabric 2). In particular, Fabric 1 needs to be prepared prior, such as
sieving. It is difficult to work on fast wheel and as results being narrowly distributed, made by
individual potters or small pottery workshops (Galaty 2010, 232). The Fabric 1b (a derivational
type) was strongly associated with the site of Koukounara. In terms of Fabric 2, it is suitable for
mass-production by fast wheel and after vitrification, the colour appears to be greenish-yellow. The
pottery associated with fabric 2 was widely distributed, such as kylikes, and produced by a single
source of a nucleated production and therefore likely to be administrated by the palace.
Consequently, fabric 2 gradually marked its social distinction by the palace and became
the „wealth“ ceramics, while fabric 1 was classified as „staple“ ceramics. The Messenian elites
controlled the production of kylix, which played a dynamic role in feasting (Pullen 2013, 440). The
huge quantities of rediscovered kylikes could suggest they were „politically charged“ (240) and
used as a tool for selective promotion. Specifically, out of which, 267 coarse ware kylikes were
used by people during feasting but they were not served. As such, we could observe the implicit
hierarchy of the types of pottery used in the palace. Also, if we relate to the absence of kaolinite
pottery (fabric 1) at Koukounara, we could deduce the possibility of using ceramics to remove the
potential threat to the palace or since Koukounara was a peripheral region neglected by the palace
economy (240). Therefore, some settlements were allowed to grow and others disappeared with the
7 of 23
usage of prestige pottery. Furthermore, from the „waiting room“ of the palace at Pylos, it has been
found an attached pantry containing 500-600 plain ware cups, which is considered as a form
of hospitality offered by the palatial administration with low-ranking persons. In this context,
pottery was employed as a strategy in disguise for direct communication to collect „irregular, non-
obligatory transactions“ (Halstead 1992, 66), other than the retributions collected by the districts.
Density distribution of pottery by fabric type (adapted from

Galaty 2010, 235)
8 of 23
Correspondingly, the hierarchy of pottery was also reflected in the status of the potters and vice
versa. The „Royal Potter“, wanakteros, could be seen to be associated with the wanax and the
significance of such potter’s position would be determined by the quantity of supply of pottery.
Specifically, it has been attested that pottery from the pantries (more than 3.5 metric tons, about
6,700 pots) were made from one workshop by one potter from the single clay bed (Hruby 2006,
202-203), possibly by the „Royal Potter“. His name pi-ri-ta-wo (Brithawon) was also mentioned of
producing fine ware, whose granted land-holdings (ko-to-na ki-ti-me-na) in Pakijane were
documented on Pylos Eo 371+1160 (Shelmerdine (Ed.) 2008, 307; Hruby 2006, 199) ). As such,
this individual should have been highly specialised (Shelmerdine (Ed.) 2008, 305) and rewarded
with his reputable title. Nonetheless, it still lacks direct evidence in explicit text references of
pottery production being connected to the palatial authorities at Pylos (Knappett 2001, 94).
Meanwhile, another potter’s name was mentioned, qe-ta-ko from the list of slaves and craftsmen,
who produced the coarse wares (Galaty 2010, 238). There have been two more potters with
unknown names and status recorded in a personnel tablet (An 207+360) (Hruby 2006, 199).
Overall, from its storage capacity of the four rooms, Whitelaw has led an estimation of palatial
consumption of 12,000 vessels per annum (Bennet 2007, 199), a quantity could be produced by
only one or two full-time or two to four part-time potters. If we extend the calculation to the entire
polity, there would have been a total consumption of about 75,000 vessels annually, with 100-200
full-time or up to 500 part-time workers (199), counted for 1 per cent of the population (Hruby
2006, 236). The consumption of the palace therefore only occupied a small 2 per cent, considered
rather as „an insignificant player“ (Whitelaw 2001, 65) of the overall significance in the production
within the polity (77). Based on a well-established system of ceramic exchange in the polity (Galaty
2010, 232), it would be certainly lucrative to be administrated by the palace or potting families and
brokers. If the palace did not take a direct interest in the production of ceramics, they would have
participated in a „wealth-financed“ economy (239) and to some extent, extended their political
power to the „staple“ economy as well. Since there was only a loose connection postulated between
the palace and the pottery producers, in other cases, ceramics would be bought in when needed, as
evidenced by the nets in a payment (o-no) to „networkers“ in Pylos Un 1322 (Shelmerdine (Ed.)
2008, 307), the surplus would have been given away and rarely being exported (Galaty 2010, 232).
Due to the mass production and social trends of open markets, the polity did not encourage
household production of pottery (Hruby 2006, 236), at the same time, we can postulate from the
9 of 23
spatial location of nucleated production and due to the bulky, fragile nature of pottery, there should
have been some degrees of specialisation with particular shapes, such as large pithoi, and
adaptation of production techniques (Whitelaw 2001, 68). Also, the demands from the palace had
driven more people into the production of specialised occupations, enjoying the benefits of
participating in the regional systems (Aprile 2013, 435). Naturally, by social diffusion,
the hierarchy of the palatial system would be reinforced in Mycenaean society generally (Hruby
2006, 238). For example, from LHIIIB Pylos polity of Malthi, it has been found coarse kylikes
attempted to be forged in yellow, imitating the appearance of fine wares (fabric 1) (Hruby 2006,
239). It should be noticed that most of the palace fine ware pottery was plain, not of high value
(Knappett 2001) and lacked apparent hierarchy in drinking vessel. Nonetheless, these vessels have
become politically charged in use (Knappett 2001, 88). The palatial centre, therefore, manipulated
the market by vertically integrating communities with the palatial centre, taking the form of power
transmission to the population (Aprile 2013, 430). As results, the „wealth ceramics“ were widely
exchanged among households, supported by exchange behaviours regulated by an elite
redistributive network (Aprile 2013, 431).
Mycenae and the Petsas House in Argolid
Plan of Mycenae, with location of Petsas House excavation

(adapted from Shelton 2010, 185)
10 of 23
Argolid was occupied by several concentrated sites, one of which, Mycenae, was the largest urban
centre in mainland Greece in the 14th and 13th century BCE, with its core area covered 32 hectares
(Shelmerdine 2008, 298) and its population reached about 6,400. The site was discovered with a
wide variety of ceramics, it was considered as the model of „peer-polity interaction“ (Pullen 2013,
440), which associated with „intensification of production and the further development of
hierarchical structures for the exercise of power“ (Renfrew 1986, referenced by Parkinson 2010,
15). The pottery goods produced in Mycenae were circulated for external systems of exchange,
with attached workshops of a few large-scale producers.
Plan of Petsas House after 2007 season (adapted

from Shelton 2010, 186)
Specifically, the Petsas House ceramic workshop located northwest of the citadel of Mycenae on
the Pezoulia hillside (Shelton 2010, 189), the ground floor on the West was the storage rooms,
which served the primary function of Petsas House, domestic areas in the Eastside, and industrial
installation in the South (190). Further, Room Pi was located near a water source and may have
11 of 23
been used for the processing of pottery clays (191). The well in the South end of Room Pi was filled
with red-brown soil, clay and mud brick, with a deposit of over 500 restorable vases were found. In
the storeroom Alpha, 500 vases approximately were discovered, the majority being decorated fine
wares. In the heirloom and Room Alpha, pieces of stirrup jars were found with strict parameters of
volume and strength (196). The stirrup jars functioned to contain oil and scented wine, which are
two liquids controlled by the palace, as they were also found in large numbers from overseas
contexts, the palace would have inspected its production as a socio-political mean for cross-
cultural exchange (196). Further, the organisation of these high-quality pots was arranged according
to their shapes and size, possibly made by a single specialist potter and a few painters should have
worked alongside one or two assistants (191). These pots, nonetheless, were not exclusively of
palatial interest due to its simplicity and mostly likely being independent production but massively
produced of such a great variety of range, such as the conical cups recovered were very likely to
serve the utilitarian need of distribution of rations and handed out by the palace daily (196). In
other rooms, majority of vessels was undecorated kylikes and bowls of various range produced by
potters with a range of skill levels (192), they were used mainly for the consumption of liquids
during the feasting and rituals (193). However, these kylikes were rudimentarily done and barely
functional but mostly likely served the cult function accounted for its quantity. From its styles, one
could deduce the patterns of mass production with some individual artistic characteristics. These
kylikes also have a parallel production size alongside figurines of female and bovine found at the
entrance in Room Gamma, suggesting events of standardised rituals from a common authority
(195).
In terms of external exchange of commodities, there is no evidence of direct contact by the

Mycenaean palaces involved in external trade, which perhaps relied on independent merchants
(Shelmerdine (Ed.) 2008, 363), for example, from the evidence of the Gelidonya shipwreck, it
carried Mycenaean bowls and jars by private traders (365). Similarly, Petsas House also conducted
trade through private bartering rather than by the providence of the palace (Shelton 2010, 197),
for example, small fragments of its Canaanite jars were written with the hieroglyphic sign „Ra“ as
well as elements of the official name „Neb-Maat-Ra“ (Shelton 2010, 197), suggesting the
exclusiveness of the exported items.
12 of 23
Kylikes and conical cups (LHIIIA

2) in Petsas House, Apotheke A
and well deposit, room Π
(adapted from Shelton 2010, 194)
Fine ware stirrup jars (LHIIIA 2) in Petsas House,

Apotheke A (adapted from Shelton 2010, 197)
From its output, we have observed a small range of pottery wares were specifically and only served
the needs of the palace, such as the stirrup jars, kylikes and conical cups, they are produced in bulks
but with some individualistic characters and even new experimental shapes. Other surpluses would
be distributed through market exchange via the extensive road system (Pullen 2013, 443), serving to
integrate communities vertically with the palatial centre. As shown, the Petsas House was a multi-
task structure occupied for residence or business usage (Shelton 2010, 189), at the same time,
individuals also potentially played multiple roles of potters, brokers, and external diplomatic
traders. The Petsas House, therefore, had a great significance to the palace in terms of its industrial
installations and storage procedures in LHIIIA 2, a period where the political economy at Mycenae
faced internal growth and rapid outward expansion (184). Correspondingly, the Petsas House
also represented an „independent, cottage industry that is in the process of being absorbed into the
palatial sphere“ (193).
13 of 23
Interestingly, a Petsas tablet has been discovered, a-pu-do-si, which is a shipping invoice or a
delivery from the palace of an unknown commodity or material (Shelton 2002, 393). The tablet has
two parallel horizontal registers, from its numerical sign of the „hundred“ at the right bottom of this
fragmentary „leaf“ tablet, we could deduce more than 200 should be reconstructed, o-u-te-ra as a
„later payment“ (394). How do we explain the discrepancy between the huge consumption interests
of the palace and the absence of administrative interests in terms of organisation (Whitelaw 2001,
71)? From another tablet Ue 611 and sealings Wt 501-507 discovered from the House of Sphinxes,
we could observe on one side of the tablet, 12 types of vessels were recorded, yet, the other side
was recycled by another scribe. The sealings acted as „receipts“, recording 8 types of vessels with 5
sharing with the tablet (Whitelaw 2001, 73), it was unclear if the pottery to be stored as
merchandise to be redistributed, or consumed internally in the activities of the house (White 2001).
The records of ceramics, therefore, appeared to be in an „ephemeral“ manner (73).
Leaf tablet from Petsas House, Ui 2 (adapted from

Shelton 2002, 390)
Tsoungiza and Mycenae

In southwestern Corinthia, Tsoungiza, situated just outside the Argolid and within two hours
walking distance of Mycenae (Dabney et.al 2004, 198). Tsoungiza was a small community of
approximately ten households (Pullen 2013, 441), its ceramics were considered as an emulation of
Mycenae in terms of „assemblage, shapes, and decoration“ (441). The case study of Tsoungiza,
therefore, is an exemplary one, demonstrating the pottery ecology of a small settlement
incorporated into larger social systems.
14 of 23
Excavation plan of E2 with highlighted P1, 1986

(adapted from Thomas 2005, 456)
The ceramics from EU2 pit 1 generally sorted into painted sherds (patterned, linear, solidly painted,
or unidentifiable) and unpainted pottery (fine, medium-coarse, or coarse) (Thomas 2005, 458), the
table below summarised some of the key findings from the primary site inspection.
Table 1. Key findings of pottery assemblage found at Tsoungiza site

(information adapted from Thomas 2005)
Type of pottery Percentage of Motifs and Styles Comparisons with other sites
unearthed pottery
sherds
Kylix the most common horizontal or diagonal whorl well-known at Mycenae in

unpainted (50%) shells (82%) LHIIIA 2, (83% in room 22)
hybridised version with trefoil -

rock work
(Thomas 2005, 480)
15 of 23
Large jug/amphora/hydria among the most

common
the most common type

of cooking vessels
Deep Bowl second most common lack of standardised shape and panelled patterns observed in
painted shape vary in panelled patterns the Citadel House (50%), room
22 (36%), Korakou (50%), etc
However, different from the
highly structured nature of
Mycenaean ceramic decoration
One unusual figured piece of a
human figure (490, 495)
Domestic Stirrup jar strong similarity with fabric of

House of the Oil Merchant at
Mycenae
Similarity with fabric and paint

at Zygouries
(Thomas 2005, 471)
Small Stirrup jar concentric circles on false-neck Universal in LHIIIA 2

disks
spirals on the false-neck disks Frequent but variable in LHIIIB
(474)
In particular, large jug/amphora/hydria was derived from a generic vessel to which different loop
handles could be attached (Thomas 2005, 467). They were primarily used as cooking vessels except
for the unusual find of a tripod cooking vessel, which was possibly transported far away
from Aigina (523). Small piriform jars were few in quantities at Tsoungiza and far less standardised
than those from the House of the Sphinxes at Mycenae (468). Noticeably, one of the deep bowls
was decorated with a crude human figure, who was equipped with military garb and rubbery limbs,
showing a „naive or styleless manner of drawing“ (Thomas 2005, 491). Furumark (referenced by
Thomas 2015) suggested it might have symbolic connotations with nature or experimentation by an
inexperienced potter (492). From the summarised table, several comparable stylistic links could also
be made, Tsoungiza shared some degree of homogeneity demonstrated by Mycenaean ceramics, at
the same time, the small site Tsoungiza also exhibited its artistic individuality amid the
commonality (Thomas 2015). The comparisons of fabrics also led to the understanding of
the mechanism by which the inhabitants obtained the ceramics, such as the tripod cooking pot from
Aigina was obtained from far (537). In particular, Zygouries who also shared similar stylistic
features was another settlement located in proximity, acting as a potential competitor among the
periphery settlements. To create regional hierarchies under the model of „polity-peer interaction“,
Tsoungiza was possibly motivated to employ the practice of feasting and public ritual (Dabney et.al
2004, 214).
16 of 23
Examples of kylikes FS 257 with whorlshell and hybrid flower motifs

(adapted from Thomas 2005, 482)
Examples of stirrup jars, number 1 shares similarity with House

of the Oil Merchant, number 3 resemble at Zygouries (adapted
from Thomas 2005, 471)
Examples of varied panelled patterns on deep bowls (highlighted), with

an exception of number 1 with a decorated human figure (adapted
from Thomas 2005, 488)
Further, a wide variety of deep bowls and kylikes with differentiation in sizes were found in this
non-elite settlement, used for personal consumption as well as serving vessels (536). There wasn’t
much of distinction between „painted“ and „unpainted“ kylikes, plain ware kylikes were widely
17 of 23
used, suggesting the objects associated with feasting lacked inherent value, but the
associated symbol was much more significant (Aprile 2013, 432). The levels of inclusion of the
elites who took part in the same basic provisioning (432) indicate group solidarity. Also, if we
postulate different type of vessels functioned differently, a variety of recipes would have been
presented (537). The oversized large pots possibly functioned for shared consumption (Dabney et.al
2004, 203), while the open vessels dominated the majority (70% of painted vessels) for carrying
liquids such as oil and wine, suggesting the presence of public feasting. As additional evidence, the
pottery deposits were found together with other deposits like ceramic figurines, animal bones and
broken stone tools (Thomas 2015, 534), suggesting further ceremonial religious feasting of
LHIIIA2.
A female figurine (number 6) and a bovine figurine

(number 11) (adapted from Thomas 2005, 533)
As seen, from the presented evidence of drinking, serving, and cooking vessels, and other
household deposits, this regional feast was fostering an alliance between elites at Mycenae and
Tsoungiza (Tartaron 2010, 165). This example of decentralised Mycenaean feasting (Galaty 2010,
237) would have brought affiliated people into closer interactions, a strategy of „converting raw
materials of agrarian wealth into social and economic prestige“ (Dietler and Herbich, referenced
by Dabney et.al 2004).
By further observations, Tsoungiza had been mirroring other palatial sites even in terms of the
„overall functional and decorative composition of their assemblages“ (Thomas 2005, 539).
Arguably, controlled distribution of standardised pottery helps to reinforce group identity and also
to lever the wealth of the elite further through a monopoly of the market economy driven by a
limited number of productive potters (540). Nonetheless, the only difference of pottery assemblages
18 of 23
was with the distribution of small closed vessels and kraters, which catered for perfumed oils and
other luxury goods (538). Such exclusivity remained to distinguish elite centres and village
communities in the consumption of the type of commodities.
Personal Serving Vessels Storage Vessels

Consumption
Tsoungiza Site 47 % 14 % 6.5%
Room 22 at Mycenae 65 % 16 % 11.5%
Pylos 84 % 12 % 1%
Table 2. Comparisons of functional composition of pottery assemblages

(information adapted from Thomas 2005)
IV. Discussion
The nature of pottery production, as already deeply rooted in the Aegean before the Mycenaean
period (Shelmerdine (Ed.) 2008, 303), its clays for potting could be found in many locations in
mainland Greece, and it neither demands a significant labouring like that of bronze, oils and
textiles, nor highly technological knowledge or tools (Knappett 2001, 86). The title ke-ra-me-u was
given to a potter for recognition as a professional identification (Hruby 2006, 210), although, we do
not know exactly the constitution of production groups in daily life and their facilities. The amount
of time needed by potters was affected by seasonality, such as rainy seasons (Hruby 2006, 210), and
the „full-time“ potter is assumed by scholars to be more „intensive“ and manufacturing the more
standardised items (Hruby 2006, 221) than others. Nonetheless, their proportion of subsistence was
largely unknown since no documentation about the societal forms of payment or goods in exchange
was recorded, other than land-holdings that received by a privileged minority (212). From the
perspective of standardisation of production, in both Pylos and Mycenae, we could trace intentional
production of highly decorated elite wares, or of highly standardised to meet market demand out of
potter’s technical choices whose skills and experiences may vary. Specifically, vessels from Pylos
were mostly unpainted, lacking elements indicating time-consuming production of unique products
(215). In the context of ceramics consumption, elites were not exclusively associated with prestige
wares nor non-palatial consumers consistently connected with utilitarian goods (Costin, referenced
by Hruby 2006, 219), which has failed to comply with the common assumption of the market
economy.
19 of 23
In Pylos, its pottery was politically manipulated and played the symbolic function for social status
with the distinction of fine wares from the coarse wares. As a result of social diffusion, it had also
impacted the non-palatial market economy of pottery. The overwhelming quantity of kylikes
connected with feasting and social etiquette superseded that of Mycenaean and maintained mainly
its self-sufficiency. While in Mycenae, there was evidence of internal alliance fostering with
regional settlements such as at Tsoungiza. The „cottage industry“ at Petsas House indicated an
external alliance networking with Mycenae, targeting „eastern“ consumers (Bennet 2007, 199). The
Mycenaean wares have a concentration of „high-quality, high decorated ceramics“ (Bennet 2007,
199), such as the stirrup jars for oil shipped to the East in large quantities at Petas House, sponsored
by elites at Mycenae.
In general, both Pylos and Mycenae were „networked and hierarchical“ (Galaty 2010, 242),
typically relied on wealth finance, but also operated through mobilisation of staples. The diversified
relationships between producers and consumers proved it unfit for the dichotomy of an attached or
independent potter (Knappett 2001, 95), whereas the attached potters had restricted outlets of
finished products organised by the palace, and the independent potters produced various supplies
based on market economy (Whitelaw 2001). The ceramic wares, in general, were largely neglected
by both of the Mycenaean administrators, reflected by the absence of substantial Linear B formal
records. As such, it was unclear the extent of palatial control in terms of ceramics quality control
and standardisation, division of labour, etc. We could only be certain that if there was a palatial
need, such demand would likely be fulfilled through „purchase“, unrecorded tax, forcible
appropriation or even given as gifts (Galaty 1999a, referenced by Hruby 2006, 202). Nonetheless,
given the lucrative profit margin of mass pottery production, even if the palace did not directly
control all the production and distribution, these pottery activities would have been controlled by
the oikoi of elites (Wright 2010, 256) to lever their wealth accumulation. Further, the role
of feasting was equally significant in the establishment of control over territories (Wright 2010,
257). Both states had seen it as a form of membership, an allegiance for settlements to be more
closely related to the centre and moving away from the traditional villages (257) while maintaining
a degree of independence. Pottery, in particular, was valued not only for its intrinsic quality but also
as an indication of symbolic power, the prosperous settlements would possess greater ceramics
correlated to those of the palace. From the Pylian hierarchical social mirroring to the emulation of
Mycenae at Tsoungiza, these examples of „peer-polity interaction“ have presented the phenomenon
of homologous institutions across different polities (258).
20 of 23
V. Conclusion
This essay has presented the political organisation of Mycenaean palaces, with theoretical
references of command economy and market economy. In the aspects of palatial involvement in the
ceramics industry, we have explored a few direct evidence of Linear B documents, as well as
indirect evidence in terms of pottery sherds, styles and shapes in different settlements. The essay
has focused on specific historical settings in Pylos and Mycenae and compared their similarities and
differences in terms of management of the ceramics industry, distribution networks, and
consumption patterns concerned with both elites and non-palatial consumers. Specifically, the essay
has highlighted the socio-economic roles of potters, and the functions of ceramics served practical/
subsistence purposes and symbolic/political purposes in terms of power transmission in external
and internal alliances. In the Pylian context, the essay has discussed mainly the evidence from the
palatial site, whereas in the Mycenaean context, the essay has presented a ceramic workshop
operation in proximity to the palace and a peripheral settlement. Overall, we have explored different
dynamics of the ceramic industry incorporated into the larger palatial system. As such, we could
tentatively conclude the ceramics industry was not entirely overseen by the palace to the same
degree as other crafts, nor entirely overlooked either.
Word Count: 5,737
21 of 23
VI. Bibliography
Aprile, J.D. (2013). „Crafts, Specialists, and Markets in Mycenaean Greece: The New Political
Economy of Nichoria: Using Intrasite Distributional Data to Investigate Regional Institutions“ AJA
117(3), 429-436.
Earle, T. „Redistribution in Aegean Palatial Societies. Redistribution and the Political Economy:
The Evaluation of an Idea“ AJA 115(2), 237-244.
Whitelaw, T., “Reading Between the Tablets: Assessing Mycenaean Palatial Involvement in
Ceramic Production and Consumption,” in S. Voutsaki and J. Killen (eds.), Economy and Politics in
the Mycenaean Palace States (Cambridge 2001) 51-79.
Halstead, P. (2011). „Redistribution in Aegean Palatial Societies. Redistribution in Aegean Palatial

Societies:Terminology, Scale, and Significance“ AJA 115 (2), 229-235.
Galaty, M.L., Nakassis, D., Parkinson, W. (2011). „Redistribution in Aegean Palatial Societies.
Introduction: Why Redistribution?“ AJA 115(2), 175-176.
Nakassis, D., Parkinson, W., Galaty, M.L. (2011). „Redistribution in Aegean Palatial Societies.
Redistributive Economies from a Theoretical and Cross-Cultural Perspective“ AJA 115(2), 177-184.
Shelmerdine, C.W. (ed.). (2008). The Cambridge Companion to Aegean Bronze Age. Cambridge
University Press.
Lupack, S. (2011). „Redistribution in Aegean Palatial Societies. Redistributive Economies from a

Theoretical and Cross-Cultural Perspective“ AJA 115(2), 207-217.
Gilstrap, W.D. (2015). Ceramic Production and Exchange in the Late Mycenaean Saronic Gulf.
(PhD Dissertation), University of Sheffield, UK.
Hruby, J. (2006). Feasting and Ceramics:A View from the Palace of Nestor at Pylos. (PhD
Dissertation), University of Cincinnati, Ohio, USA.
Pullen, D.J. (ed.) (2010). Political Economies of the Aegean Bronze Age. Oxbow Book, Oxford,
UK.
Thomas, P.M. (2005). A Deposit of Late Helladic IIIB1 Pottery from Tsoungiza. Hesperia: The
Journal of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens 74(4), 451-573.
Dabney, M.K., Halstead, P., Thomas, P. (2004). Mycenaean Feasting on Tsoungiza at Ancient
Nemea. Hesperia: The Journal of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens 73(2),
197-215.
Bennet, J.(2007). „Chapter 7: The Aegean Bronze Age“ in Scheidel, W and Morris, I. (eds.), The
Cambridge Economic History of the Greco-Roman World, Cambridge University Press 2007.
173-210.
22 of 23
Bennet, J. (2007). „Chapter 3: Pylos: The Expansion of A Mycenaean Palatial Center“ in Galaty,
M.L. and Parkison, W.A. (eds.), RETHINKING MYCENAEAN PALACES II: REVISED AND
EXPANDED SECOND EDITION, Cotsen Institute of Archaeology Press, USA.
Shelton, K.M. (2002). „A New Linear B Tablet From Petras House, Mycenae“, Minos 37-38,
2002-2003, Ediciones Universidad de Salamanca, 387-396.
Pullen, D.J. (2013). „Crafts, Specialists, and Markets in Mycenaean Greece. Exchanging the
Mycenaean Economy“ AJA 117(3), 437-445.
Knappett, C., “Overseen or Overlooked? Ceramic Production in a Mycenaean Palatial System,” in

S. Voutsaki and J. Killen (eds.), Economy and Politics in the Mycenaean Palace States (Cambridge
2001) 80-95.
Killen, J.T. (2008). „Chapter 6: Mycenaean Economy“ in Y. Duhoux, A. Morpurgo Davies (eds.), A
Companion to Linear B. Mycenaean Greek Texts and their World, vol. 1 (Bibliothèque des Cahiers
de l'Institut de Linguistique de Louvain, 120), 159-200.
23 of 23

Ceramic Production, Distribution and Consumption in The Mycenaean Palatial Economy of The Late Bronze Age

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ceramic Production, Distribution and Consumption in The Mycenaean Palatial Economy of The Late Bronze Age

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Mei Lin Lyu Mycenaean Greece Archaeology

Ceramics Production, Distribution, and Consumption in the Mycenaean Palatial Economy

II. Palatial Political Economy and Linear B Documents

III. Different Sites in Mycenaean Palatial Economies

Map of hypothetical boundary of the Pylian kingdom,

Plan of the Palace of Nestor (adapted from Hruby

Percent assemblage composition by shape at the 6 of 23

Excavated vessels in the southeast end of room 22,

Density distribution of pottery by fabric type (adapted from

Mycenae and the Petsas House in Argolid

Plan of Mycenae, with location of Petsas House excavation

Plan of Petsas House after 2007 season (adapted

In terms of external exchange of commodities, there is no evidence of direct contact by the

Kylikes and conical cups (LHIIIA

Fine ware stirrup jars (LHIIIA 2) in Petsas House,

Leaf tablet from Petsas House, Ui 2 (adapted from

Tsoungiza and Mycenae

Excavation plan of E2 with highlighted P1, 1986

Table 1. Key ﬁndings of pottery assemblage found at Tsoungiza site

Kylix the most common horizontal or diagonal whorl well-known at Mycenae in

hybridised version with trefoil -

Large jug/amphora/hydria among the most

the most common type

Domestic Stirrup jar strong similarity with fabric of

Similarity with fabric and paint

(Thomas 2005, 471)

Small Stirrup jar concentric circles on false-neck Universal in LHIIIA 2

spirals on the false-neck disks Frequent but variable in LHIIIB

Examples of kylikes FS 257 with whorlshell and hybrid ﬂower motifs

Examples of stirrup jars, number 1 shares similarity with House

Examples of varied panelled patterns on deep bowls (highlighted), with

A female ﬁgurine (number 6) and a bovine ﬁgurine

Personal Serving Vessels Storage Vessels

Tsoungiza Site 47 % 14 % 6.5%

Room 22 at Mycenae 65 % 16 % 11.5%

Table 2. Comparisons of functional composition of pottery assemblages

Word Count: 5,737

Halstead, P. (2011). „Redistribution in Aegean Palatial Societies. Redistribution in Aegean Palatial

Lupack, S. (2011). „Redistribution in Aegean Palatial Societies. Redistributive Economies from a

Knappett, C., “Overseen or Overlooked? Ceramic Production in a Mycenaean Palatial System,” in

You might also like