The Minoan Double Axe: An experimental study of production and use 9781407308814, 9781407338668

Table of contents :
Front Cover
Title Page
Copyright
Contents
List of figures
List of tables
Acknowledgements
1. INTRODUCTION
2. ARCHAEOLOGICAL EVIDENCE FOR DOUBLE AXE PRODUCTION
3. ANALYSES OF MANUFACTURING
4. ANALYSES OF USE
5. EXPERIMENTS WITH MODERN CAST DOUBLE AXES
6. USE AND USERS
7. SUMMARY
8. CATALOGUE
9. GLOSSARY
APPENDIX I. THE MODERN CAST DOUBLE AXES
APPENDIX II. OTHER MANUFACTURED TOOLS
BIBLIOGRAPHY

Citation preview

BAR S2304 2011

The Minoan Double Axe An experimental study of production and use

LOWE FRI

Maria Lowe Fri

THE MINOAN DOUBLE AXE

B A R red cover template.indd 1

BAR International Series 2304 2011

15/11/2011 13:23:38

The Minoan Double Axe An experimental study of production and use

Maria Lowe Fri

BAR International Series 2304 2011

ISBN 9781407308814 paperback ISBN 9781407338668 e-format DOI https://doi.org/10.30861/9781407308814 A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library

BAR

PUBLISHING

Contents List of figures ........................................................................................................................ iv List of tables.......................................................................................................................... vi Acknowledgements .............................................................................................................. vii 1. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................... 1 Previous research .................................................................................................................. 1 Typologies .................................................................................................................................................................... 1 Shape and function ....................................................................................................................................................... 2

Aim ....................................................................................................................................... 4 Method ................................................................................................................................... 4 The study objects .................................................................................................................. 5

2. ARCHAEOLOGICAL EVIDENCE FOR DOUBLE AXE PRODUCTION .............. 7 Metals..................................................................................................................................... 7

Copper and copper sources in Crete ............................................................................................................... 7 Copper sources outside Crete ......................................................................................................................... 9 Arsenic and arsenic-bronzes ........................................................................................................................... 9 Tin and tin-bronzes ....................................................................................................................................... 10

Manufacturing ...................................................................................................................... 11 Moulds .......................................................................................................................................................... 11 Stone moulds ................................................................................................................................................ 11 Clay moulds .................................................................................................................................................. 11 Metal moulds ................................................................................................................................................ 12 The flask technique (wooden moulds) .......................................................................................................... 13 Other casting equipment ............................................................................................................................... 14 Crucibles....................................................................................................................................................... 14 Bellows and Tuyères .................................................................................................................................... 15

Finishing treatments ............................................................................................................. 15 Conclusions .......................................................................................................................... 16

3. ANALYSES OF MANUFACTURING ........................................................................ 18 Problems with the analytical and interpretative process ...................................................... 19 Casting and casting defects .................................................................................................. 19 Casting joints ................................................................................................................................................ 20 Impressions of sand ...................................................................................................................................... 20 Scabs............................................................................................................................................................. 22 Dirt inclusions .............................................................................................................................................. 22 Gas- and blowholes ...................................................................................................................................... 22 Traces of runners .......................................................................................................................................... 23 Shrinkage cavities ......................................................................................................................................... 24 Hot tears, hot cracks or cold tears ................................................................................................................. 25 Cold lapping ................................................................................................................................................. 26

Finishing treatments ............................................................................................................. 26 A new typology?........................................................................................................................................... 27

i

The axe body ................................................................................................................................................ 28 The long sides including the shaft hole ......................................................................................................... 29 The cutting edges .......................................................................................................................................... 30

Decoration ............................................................................................................................ 31 Incised motifs ............................................................................................................................................... 31 Cast motifs .................................................................................................................................................... 33

 Conclusions .......................................................................................................................... 34

4. ANALYSES OF USE ..................................................................................................... 35 Introduction to the analyses ................................................................................................. 35 Metal analyses ...................................................................................................................... 36 Discussion .................................................................................................................................................... 37

Use-wear on the cutting edges and the axe bodies ............................................................... 39 Description and identification of use-wear on the cutting edges ................................................................... 39 Description and identification of use-wear on the axe bodies ....................................................................... 43

Results of study of use-wear ................................................................................................ 44

5. EXPERIMENTS WITH MODERN CAST DOUBLE AXES .................................... 46 Recording procedures of the experiments ............................................................................ 47 Manufacturing a modern double axe.................................................................................... 47 Casting and casting defects ........................................................................................................................... 48 Finishing treatments of the modern double axes ........................................................................................... 49 Shafting ........................................................................................................................................................ 52

Chopping materials .............................................................................................................. 53 Felling a Scotch fir tree................................................................................................................................. 55 Felling a birch tree ........................................................................................................................................ 56 Felling an oak tree ........................................................................................................................................ 57 Conclusions from felling trees ...................................................................................................................... 58 Dressing and splitting stone .......................................................................................................................... 58 Conclusions from dressing and splitting stone .............................................................................................. 60 Cutting up a lamb ......................................................................................................................................... 60 Cutting cattle bones ...................................................................................................................................... 63 Conclusions from cutting up bones............................................................................................................... 64

Conclusions .......................................................................................................................... 64

6. USE AND USERS .......................................................................................................... 66 The use of the Minoan double axes...................................................................................... 67 Axes with dents on cutting edges and small degree of mushroom-edges (categories 1 and 1A)................... 67 Axes with dents on cutting edges, an overall bluntness and mushroom-edges (categories 1, 1A and 2) ..... 68 Axes with blunt cutting edges (categories 2, 2A and 3) ................................................................................ 69 Axes with other types of use-wear ................................................................................................................ 71

Find locations and find contexts .......................................................................................... 71 Mortuary contexts ......................................................................................................................................... 71 Habitation areas ............................................................................................................................................ 72 Psychro cave ................................................................................................................................................. 73 Uncertain find locations ................................................................................................................................ 74

Conclusions .......................................................................................................................... 74

ii

7. SUMMARY .................................................................................................................... 75

8. CATALOGUE ................................................................................................................ 78 Catalogue of studied double axes ......................................................................................... 78 Catalogue of non-studied double axes ................................................................................. 88

9. GLOSSARY ....................................................................................................... 122

APPENDIX I. THE MODERN CAST DOUBLE AXES.......................................... 125

APPENDIX II. OTHER MANUFACTURED TOOLS ............................................ 127

BIBLIOGRAPHY .................................................................................................. 128

iii

List of figures  Figure 1. Copper sources discussed in Chapter 2 (after Davaras 1976, Map 2). .................. 8 Figure 2. Stone mould from Mallia (permission from Evely 1993, Fig. 21). .................... 11 Figure 3. The metal mould from Vasiliki (permission from Evely 1993, Fig. 21). ............ 13 Figure 4. A moulding-box made out of wood. The two wooden frames are put together and the piece of wood which will create the runner has been positioned. This particular mould is today in use at Bäckedals Folkhögskola. ................................................ 14 Figure 5. Clay crucibles M 21 and M 19 found at Kommos (after Blitzer 1995, Pl. 8.104). 14 Figure 6. A pot bellows M 42 from Kommos (after Blitzer 1995, Pl. 8.105). ................... 15 Figure 7. Cold-working the cutting edge with a stone on a stone anvil. ........................... 16 Figure 8. Grinding and sharpening the cutting edge with a pumice stone. ........................ 16 Figure 9. Double axe terminology (after Evely 1993, Fig. 18). ....................................... 20 Figure 10. The casting joint as identified on no. 2 (drawing by M. Lowe Fri). ................. 20 Figure 11. Impressions of sand and dirt inclusions on axe A, cast at Bäckedals Folkhögskola. The impressions of sand are the smaller holes mostly concentrated to the centre of the axe and the dirt inclusions are the larger and more irregular ones. . 21 Figure 12. Scabs are sand grains which have been trappd by molten metal during casting and are stuck to the axe surface. If left on the axe they look like lumps, and if they are removed the scabs causes small holes in the axe surface (drawing by G. Lowe). ..... 22 Figure 13. Gas- and blowholes as they appear on the axe body of no. 7. On the right there is a crack situated in the centre of the cutting edge. This crack is caused by cold lapping (drawing by R. Lindberg). .................................................................................. 23 Figure 14. The possible design of the core (permission from Evely 1993, Fig.18). ........... 23 Figure 15. Traces of runners as identified on seventeen double axes. On this drawing both the traces of runners are connected to the shaft hole (permission from Evely 1993, Fig. 19). ............................................................................................................ 24 Figure 16. Some of the shrinkage cavities look exactly like the small impression on this drawing, though they can also be undulating in the whole shaft hole (permission from Evely 1993, Fig. 18). ......................................................................................... 25 Figure 17. Tears or cracks as they are situated on the long side of no. 9 (drawing by M. Lowe Fri).......................................................................................................... 26 Figure 18. Evely’s typology (permission from Evely 1993, Figs. 19-20). ........................ 28 Figure 19. The incision on axe no. 13 (drawing by M. Lowe Fri).................................... 31 Figure 20. None of these axes were found at the same location, though two of the axes probably share the same motif, a bucranium (nos. 3 and 90). The cast motif of no. 3 (drawing by M. Lowe Fri). ................................................................................. 32 Figure 21. These are the different activities presented by Gordon A, breaking, B, cutting, and C, splitting (after Gordon 1985, Fig. 2). ......................................................... 35 Figure 22. The cutting edge on no. 16 has both dents which are concentrated (upper part) and randomly (lowest part of the cutting edge) (drawing by G. Lowe).................... 40 Figure 23. On no. 14 the lowest point has a slight mushroom-edge and above this hard dents are visible (drawing by R. Lindberg)........................................................... 41

iv

Figure 24. Axe no. 14 has varying degrees of mushroom-edges and an overall bluntness in the range of 2 to 3 mm in width (drawing by R. Lindberg). ................................... 41 Figure 25. On no. 15 a blunt cutting edge and dents with striations within the dents was identified (drawing by G. Lowe). ........................................................................ 41 Figure 26. An extremely blunt cutting edge on axe no. 21 (drawing by G. Lowe). ........... 41 Figure 27. Core box, core and pattern prepared to cast modern double axes..................... 48 Figure 28. Preparing the flask moulds for casting and casting the prepared moulds. The bricks are placed on the mould when cast to prevent the mould from separating...... 49 Figure 29. The newly cast double axes with flash and traces of the running system left in place. The black surface of the cast axes also appear very different from the axe cast at Bäckedals Folkhögskola (Fig. 11).................................................................... 49 Figure 30. Removing flash with one of the chisels......................................................... 50 Figure 31. Axe A after one of the cutting edges was hammered. The cutting edge which was hammered became slightly convex, which also gave the axe body a more concave appearance. .......................................................................................... 51 Figure 32. A corner of the axe broke off during finishing treatments. The two different colours, depending on the grain structure, can be seen on both the small piece that broke off and in the cut in the axe. ...................................................................... 51 Figure 33. The grinder made to sharpen the axes used for felling the oak tree and cutting lamb and cattle bones. The grinder can be maneuvered by one person, but if two persons worked at it at the same time, one holding the axe and the other one the grinder’s handle the sharpening of the axes was more precise and went faster. ........ 52 Figure 34. The first shaft made with a shoulder and a split end where a wedge was hammered down. ............................................................................................... 52 Figure 35. Axe A after twenty-one minutes of use. ........................................................ 55 Figure 36. Axe A after forty-three minutes of use.......................................................... 56 Figure 37. Axe D after sixty minutes of use. ................................................................. 58 Figure 38. Axe A, the upper photograph shows the sharp cutting edge when used on granite. The lower photograph shows the thicker cutting edge when used on granite.59 Figure 39. The three axes (H, I and G) prepared and shafted for the bone experiments. .... 60 Figure 40. The bones discussed in this chapter (modified after Halstead et al. 2004, 32, Fig. 2.10). ................................................................................................................ 60 Figure 41. Suitable pieces of lamb for a stew? .............................................................. 61 Figure 42. Lovisa Strand in action. Cutting the lamb’s ribs. ........................................... 62 Figure 43. Gunnel Ekroth in action. Cutting all through the femur bone. ......................... 63 Figure 44. The difference of the cutting edges after cutting the lamb and the cattle bones. The cutting edge used on lamb is the photograph at the top and the lower one was used on the cattle bones...................................................................................... 64 Figure 45. A ball-peen hammer (drawing by M. Lowe Fri). ......................................... 122

v

List of tables Table 1. Casting defects on the examined double axes. ....................................................... 21 Table 2. Finishing treatments of the examined axe bodies. ................................................. 28 Table 3. Finishing treatments on the examined axe’s long sides including the shaft hole. .. 30 Table 4. Finishing treatments of the cutting edges (c.e.), of the examined double axes. ..... 31 Table 5. Decoration. ............................................................................................................. 32 Table 6. Chemical composition and qualities for sand-cast tin-bronze alloys (modern samples). ..................................................................................................................... 36 Table 7. Metal analyses. ....................................................................................................... 38 Table 8. Different use-wear, which appears on the cutting edges (c.e). ............................... 42 Table 9. The working activities of the Minoan double axes. ............................................... 71

vi

Acknowledgements  This book is a revised version of my PhD thesis, The double axe in Minoan Crete: a functional analysis of production and use, Stockholm University 2007. Since I defended the thesis important work have been published concerning metallurgy during the Bronze Age, which have been included mainly in chapter 2. Although the other chapters also have been corrected and more recent literature added the conclusions arrived at are the same.

 I have received support, help and encouragement from many people during the work with this book. For the revision of the book I would like to express my deepest gratitude to Dr. Doniert Evely, Curator at Knossos, who has read and suggested many improvements in the text. Dr. Evely has also generously shared his knowledge of metallurgy and practical matters concerning Minoan tools with me, and inspired me during discussions both at the Taverna, Knossos, and through e-mail. Thank you for all your support. At the Department of Classical Archaeology and Ancient History, Stockholm University, I have had several seminars through the years; I want to thank the participants of the seminars for contributing ideas, discussions and criticism which have helped me forward in my work. I have also been fortunate to have had several seminars at the Swedish Institute in Athens, which have been led by the former Director, Ann-Louise Schallin. These seminars have given me a chance to discuss problems with Bronze Age archaeologists working in Athens. Several specialists have helped me through-out this work: Dr. Lena Sjögren, Dr. Claude Björk, Lovisa Strand, MA, Dr. Gunnel Ekroth and Dr. Erika Weiberg. You have all contributed to my work in different ways for which I am very grateful – thank you. Without the technical help and invaluable support which I have had from Mr Graham Lowe – an experienced and trained foundry man, also my father, I would not have obtained the results in this book. Not only has he manufactured patterns for the double axe replicas, conducted finishing treatments, felled trees, dressed stones, guided me through casting procedures, casting defects and effects on metals, but he has also been my travel partner for several trips both to England and Crete. Thank you; I am very grateful for everything that you have taught me and still teach me. I would not have had the permission to study the double axes in Crete without the help from the Director Dr. Arto Penttinen and Mrs Bodil Nordström Karidakis at the Swedish Institute in Athens. They have helped me with the contacts with the Greek Ministry of Culture and the different museums in Crete. My deepest gratitude goes to all of you at the Swedish Institute for helping and supporting me through-out my work. I would like to express my gratitude to Dr. M. Vickers for the permission to study the double axes at the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford, and for permitting Mr G. Lowe to help me with the work in the museum. I am sincerely grateful for the opportunity and help that I had from the Director of the 25th Ephorate of Prehistoric and Classical Antiquities, M. Andreadaki-Vlasaki, who arranged my stay at the Chania Museum, and for the help in the museum by Mrs A. Mylona. The study session at the Archaeological Museum of Rethymnon was made possible and arranged also by Director M. Andreadaki-Vlasaki and for help in the museum I deeply thank Mrs N. Karamaliki. Likewise I would like to thank the Director of the 24th Ephorate of Prehistoric and Classical Antiquities, Dr. K. Apostolakou, who arranged my study session at the Archaeological Museum of Aghios Nikolaos. I also received special permission to study two of the double axes housed at the Archaeological Musuem at Aghios Nikolaos from Professor K. Davaras, for which I am very grateful. My English has been revised by Dr. Jon van Leuven. The Bibliography has been thoroughly checked by Dr. Johan Flemberg. Funding for this project was kindly provided by P. A. Siljeströms Stipendiestiftelse at Stockholms University; Swedish Institute at Athens: Stora Arkeologiska Stipendiet; Birgit och Gad Rausings Stiftelse för Humanistisk Forskning; Helge Ax:son Johnsons Stiftelse; Gunvor och Josef Anérs Stiftelse; Erna och Einar Palmgrens Fond; Föreningen Svenska Atheninstitutets Vänner; Rosa och Valter Tengborgs Stipendiefond; and Inga Sernings Minnesfond. Last but not least, I want to sincerely thank my supporting family who always stand by my side – Graham, Kerstin, Anna, Richard, Philip and especially my husband Bobby and our sons William and Morris. Järfälla, August 28, 2011. vii



viii

1. INTRODUCTION

“Of all religious symbols and emblems that appear in the Minoan civilization the double axe is the most conspicuous, the real sign of Minoan religion and as omnipresent as the cross in Christianity and the crescent in Islam”.1

not with trying to interpret the use of the axe. This book is an attempt to make a pragmatic study of the Minoan double axe in order to find out what the double axe was used for in daily life; therefore this will be a study of function.

“Also a common symbol of the Minoan religion. It was assumed to have been a sacrificial axe, but it is never shown in such a context”.2

I will start with presenting previous research conducted on the matter and then move on to present my ideas of what can be further accomplished with the material to reach new conclusions on the use and users of the Minoan double axe.

 Already during the early stages of the 20th century, when Minoan archaeology was still in its infancy, certain objects were recognized as typical of Minoan society and, today, they still are. One such popular object and motif is the double axe. It has become an emblem for Minoan religion and the axe is mostly placed in the religious sphere, as can be seen from the above quotations written by eminent Minoan scholars. The difficult dilemma with Minoan research is discussed by Hamilakis and the other writers in the volume Labyrinth revisited. Rethinking “Minoan” archaeology.3 Hamilakis discusses different ways of studying Minoan archaeology with new approaches and one is, for example, “To evaluate some persistent and popular interpretative schemes and expose their limitations”.4 Inspired by this statement, my study shifts the focus of the double axe from the religious to an everyday context. I will study the double axe as an ordinary object and not approach it as a religiously charged object, which has often been the case. In order to develop new interpretations of Minoan material, I believe that manufacturing, use and users of different objects need to be thoroughly studied by using different methods. This study is an attempt to show that the double axe is and was an extremely practical and effective tool without having to attribute it to a profane or a religious context.

Previous research Since the double axe is such an important and symbolically charged object, emblematic for Minoan Crete, it has been discussed from different perspectives. Some scholars have created typologies; others have discussed shape and function without a typology. Shape and function also include the discussion of which double axes are tools and which are “sacred” or votive gifts. Because of the different directions of previous research I have dealt with them in different ways. The scholars who have organized their own typologies are presented first, and finally the scholars who recognize shape, function and the issue whether the axe was used as a tool or not.

Typologies The previous research conducted on the double axe has often involved a typology. To-date there are five such studies conducted by Buchholz, Deshayes, Branigan, Harding and Evely. The information from these scholars varies, some of them have thoroughly accounted for many different aspects of the double axe, such as the fastening of the axe and its chronology, while others have only studied different types. But primarily, organizing the axes into different typologies has not aimed at examining function. When chronology is an issue, it concerns the development of shape through time for instance, Buchholz’s study of convexity and concavity of the axes.

Contrary to the above quotations, there are scholars who recognize the double axe as a tool for everyday use, for example Davaras, who writes that the double axe was “...the most common Minoan tool”5 and perfect because of the two cutting edges, which made it well balanced and also meant that it did not need sharpening as often as a single axe.6 But generally, studies regarding the double axe as a tool have been concerned with typologies and

Buchholz published the first typology in 1959.7 His study includes the whole Aegean, Europe and Asia Minor. The typology is divided into five different types depending on the axe body and convexity of the cutting edges. Buchholz describes the double axe as both a workable and a non-workable object, and both categories are

 1

Nilsson 1950, 194. Marinatos 1993, 5. Hamilakis 2002, and especially the introduction written by Hamilakis (2002, 2-28). 4 Hamilakis 2002, 4. 5 Davaras 1976, 71. 6 Davaras 1976, 71-74. 2 3

 7

1



Buchholz 1959.

The Minoan double axe. An experimental study of production and use represented in the same typology. The procedure of shafting is also accounted for. His thesis is a wellarranged survey of the double axe and future typologies have been based on his.

Shape and function One question which probably can be answered immediately is why a double axe was made and why it was so popular in Crete. There could be practical aspects of why the Minoans preferred a double axe instead of a single axe:14 the axe is better balanced due to the symmetrical design and due to the two cutting edges it does not need to be resharpened as often as a single axe.15 The heaviness of the tool can also be a positive aspect because it generates more energy when striking (kinetic energy).16

Deshayes’s typology was published in 1960, in a twovolume research about tools in general.8 The double axe typology presented includes axes from the Aegean, Near East and the Balkans. His typology was divided into four types with many sub-groups for special features such as oval or round shaft holes. In the typology, there are types of double axes that are only found in the Near East or in the Balkans (to my knowledge, they have not, to-date, been found in Crete).9

The double axe is a more or less rectangular tool, cast with a shaft hole in the centre, and has fairly straight or slightly convex cutting edges.17 Because of metal shrinkage when hardening after casting, Dawkins and Bosanquet believe that the Minoans turned the mould from standing on one side to the other side when cooling off, to prevent holes on the face of the double axe. This procedure makes the shrinkage holes show inside the shaft hole instead.18 The shaft holes have been subject to lengthy discussion, which is also connected with the socalled “wedging grooves”. Several axes have “wedging grooves” which start from the shaft hole and follow the long side of the axe body. The grooves can be either triangular or straight (in a line) and usually there are two. These grooves are supposedly used to put a wedge of wood or a nail in, to stop the axe head from coming off when working. The axe was improved during the Minoan era by making the shaft hole oval instead of round, stopping the axe head from turning around the shaft.19 According to Xenaki, the double axes follow more or less the same shapes from Early Minoan II to the end of the Late Minoan period.20 The question of shape has also been discussed by other scholars in the past, for example Petrie, Nilsson and Branigan.21 They divide the axes into profane or ceremonial ones by studying manufacturing aspects of the double axes. They stress that some of the axes have no shaft hole, and on others the shaft hole is too small or irregular to secure a shaft for working. Other double axes are made of sheet metal, which would not make strong tools, and in addition the earlier ones from Early Minoan II are not for practical use.22 The degree of convexity of these early sheet metal axes would not,

Next out was Branigan who published his typology in 1974.10 He also organized the axes into five different categories. The major feature that separates him from Buchholz is that Branigan’s typology concentrates on material from Crete and the Greek Mainland (though he uses material from other regions to compare with). Branigan, like Buchholz, mixes thin sheet bronze double axes with solid cast ones, i.e. workable and non-workable axes are placed in the same typology.11 His five groups are divided by, and depend on, the shape of the axe body and the cutting edges. The types also have sub-groups depending on whether they have an oval or round shaft hole. Harding’s typology is fundamentally the same as Buchholz’s and accounts for double axes from the whole of Europe.12 Four of the groups are identical to Buchholz’s but Harding, instead of Buchholz’s fifth category, has added two other types: the Kilindir-Begunic type and Hermones-Kierion type. Harding also has a longer discussion about shaft holes than Buchholz. Evely’s typology is published in a two-volume work and is based on axes found on Crete.13 There are four types with sub-groups depending on whether the axe has an oval or round shaft hole. It stands out from the abovedescribed typologies because it is more detailed with subgroups defining the different qualities of the double axes. The sub-groups are accounted for as, for example, 1a, 1b and 1c. 1a stands for a more or less rectangular axe with a round shaft hole, and 1b a more or less rectangular axe with an oval shaft hole, while axes placed in group 1c are more or less rectangular in shape but no other information is available. All the sub-groups include axes with socalled “wedging grooves” and “ears”. Evely’s fine-tuned typology has laid an excellent basis for further studies of the Minoan double axe.



14 There are single axes found on Crete; according to Evely (1993, 55) there are eighteen which have slightly different designs. 15 Davaras 1976, 71; Evely 1993, 41. 16 Evely 1993, 41. 17 Dawkins & Bosanquet 1923, 117-118; Xenaki 1950, 127. The shaft hole was made when casting with a core, which can be seen on the mould found at Phylakopi, Atkinson et al. 1904, 191, Fig. 161. Nilsson 1950, 194-195. Nilsson gives in note 2, a long list of references to “real” double axes. 18 Dawkins & Bosanquet 1923, 117. 19 Hawes 1908, 34; Petrie 1917, Pl. XII, nos. 18-20, 22-24; Xenaki 1950, 127. 20 Xenaki 1950, 127. 21 Petrie 1917, 13-15; Nilsson 1950, 194-195; Branigan 1968, 89. 22 The earliest type of the double axe has been found in an Early Minoan IIB context. These thin sheet metal axes, for example found at Platanos, at Apesokari (both bronze and steatite axes) and at Kamilari, are interpreted as votive axes. Cf. Petrie 1917, 13-15; Nilsson 1950, 194195; Xenaki 1950, 127; Branigan 1968, 55; Branigan 1970a, 81, 84, Appendix 2.

 8

Deshayes 1960. See especially types C and diverse forms in Deshayes 1960, 256-260. 10 Branigan 1974. Branigan has developed his typology over the years; the first typology I have found was only divided into three different types. Type I: votive double axes made of sheet copper. Type II: working double axe cast in solid copper, with the cutting edges convex. Type III: the same as Type II, with the difference that the cutting edges are straight. Cf. Branigan 1968, 30-31, Fig. 8. 11 Branigan 1974, 21-22. 12 Harding 1975, 190; Harding 1984, 127. 13 Evely 1993 & 2000. 9

2



Introduction

 according to Nilsson, be suitable for a pragmatic tool.23 Axes have also been manufactured of soft stone and lead, which would not be suitable as tools either.

straight cutting edge would be perfect for stripping bark or making planks.31 The double axe could also be a working tool for a butcher. Davaras writes that the double axe was probably used to kill a bull during a religious ceremony (he does not include this use in his working categories); he draws this conclusion from animals being sacrificed during Classical times in Athens with a double axe.32 Nilsson writes that the double axe is a tool for killing the bull or rather to “shock” the animal before placing it on the slaughtering table.33 This view could be strengthened by the fact that the double axe is found depicted between socalled sacred horns (horns of consecration).34

There are axes which are incised, and these are thought to be of sacred significance.24 Evely argues that some of the cast axes could be votive ones because they have an extra incised line on the face of the long side of the axe. Others have “religious motifs” such as sacral knots, a bucranium, and a butterfly incised on the axe body. There are also eight axes with Linear A signs incised on the axe body, but Evely reckons that these are more probably a mark of ownership than of religious meaning.25 Downey notes that the different thicknesses of the double axes are never mentioned, though, he does not take this observation any further.26

Davaras and Vanschoonwinkel comment on the axe being found in quarries,35 whereby it could be interpreted as a tool for a stonemason. One special form which Petrie mentions is from Sardinia; this could have been used to cut rock (hewing rock).36 However, according to Evely, there is no evidence to identify the double axe as only a stonemason’s tool and some of the axes are found in such contexts that they could be tools for general work.37

Scholars have also discussed the functions of the double axe, but these are only qualified guesses and no one has seriously tried to find out exactly what the Minoans used it for. According to Davaras woodsmen, carpenters, shipbuilders and masons may have used the axe.27 The many categories are explained by the fact that the tool has an efficient shape. Petrie also argues that it was a woodworker’s tool, used for tree felling.28 Evely thinks that a woodworker used the double axe primarily, because of accompanying tools found with the double axes.29 Furthermore, Evely states that, although there are different types of double axes, they hardly have anything to do with different working aspects. He also points out that the use-wear on the axes is principally the same, so he concludes that the axes were used for the same working task, although he reckons that a few of them were used as sledgehammers. Evely believes that it would be difficult to separate the axes used by butchers, carpenters or stone masons (dressing stone); the only usewear visible consists of different grades of exposure to chopping and occasionally hard work as hammering.30

Furthermore, Davaras and Vanschoonwinkel write that the axe is also found in fields.38 This could, depending on location, mean that it was used as a farmer’s tool, though it could also imply that it was only a stray find. Hood does not discuss the double axe at length but presents it in a chapter concerning agricultural tools and writes that it is a “...standard tool...” in addition to the adze-axe.39 Richter and Petrie refer to the axe as a weapon.40 However, Davaras points out that identifying the double axe as a weapon is a mistake made because the Amazons later used the double axe to defend themselves.41 The double axe could be used as a weight, according to Petrie, but he does not present conclusive evidence for such a theory.42 The scholars referred to above suggest different working actions for the double axe, but all rest on circumstantial speculations based primarily on different find locations. By conducting a more focused study of production and use of the double axe, hopefully a more nuanced picture of the double axe can be reached.

The most recent comments on functional matters are made by Downey, who considers that the double axe primarily was a tool for felling trees and stripping off bark, in addition to making planks. He also argues that the different shapes of the cutting edges (convex or straight) could reveal what the axes were used for. The





31

Downey 2001, 792. Davaras 1976, 71-74. Nilsson 1950, 231. 34 Nilsson 1950, 231; Marinatos 1993, 5. 35 Davaras 1976, 71-74; Vanschoonwinkel 2004, 411. 36 Petrie 1917, 13. The axes mentioned by Petrie as for varying use are from, Ephesus, Pompeii and Egypt. 37 Evely 1993, 51. 38 Davaras 1976, 71-74; Vanschoonwinkel 2004, 411. However, the question is whether the fields were used anciently or not. 39 Hood 1971, 84. 40 Richter 1915, 429; Petrie 1917, 13. He refers to it as a fighting axe in Etruria, but does not give a time span. 41 Davaras 1976, 71-74. 42 Petrie 1917, 14-15.

23

32

Petrie 1917, 13; Pendlebury 1939, 118; Nilsson 1950, 194-195. 24 Nilsson 1950, 195. 25 Evely 1993, 50. See further Motifs. 26 Downey 2001, 792. 27 Davaras 1976, 71-72. 28 Furthermore Petrie (1917, 13) writes that the activity of felling trees can be verified by the sculptures found at Nineveh, but unfortunately he does not give further references to them. 29 Evely 1993, 51. 30 Evely 1993, 51. See Deshayes note 8. Evely refers to Branigan (1974, 133) who states that the metal tools would have had an impact on woodworking. J. Shaw 1973, 46, who has compared the double axes to modern axes for woodcutting, states that the usage for trees would be a good one.

33

3



The Minoan double axe. An experimental study of production and use for working on, i.e. hard or soft material. Thereafter, the double axes will be studied to record use-wear both on the cutting edges and on the axe bodies, in order to compare them with modern cast double axes which were used for different activities. Research on use-wear of Minoan double axes has not been attempted before. The axe is considered as a chopping tool, but this has not been further investigated. Attempts have been made to determine whether the double axe was used or not, for example by Evely, but no further classification regarding the use-wear was conducted. For single axes there have been investigations of use-wear, although unfortunately those carried out by Larsson44 and Vandkile45 have mostly involved interpretation of drawings and not by visual examination of axes. Larsson has studied drawings from Oldeberg’s46 publications and has defined use-wear analysis as follows: “The main point of interest when trying to decide whether an object shows obvious signs of wear or not is the edge – whether it is symmetric or asymmetric in its form”.47 Larsson states that he is aware of the difficulties of relying on drawings when conducting this kind of study.48

Aim The aim is to study the double axe as a tool and find out what it was used for in practice. The question of who used the double axe and for what purpose during the Bronze Age in Crete has not been answered satisfactorily; this is due to the fact that no one has as of yet studied the use-wear of the double axes. As seen in the abovepresented previous research, it has been assumed that the following groups used the double axe during the Bronze Age in Crete (beyond the religious sphere): carpenters, boat builders, woodworkers, butchers, stonemasons, bricklayers and farmers.43 Carpenters, boat builders and woodworkers could have used it to fell trees and make planks, furniture, and architectural details. The butcher could use the axe to slaughter the animal and then prepare the meat. The stonemason and the bricklayer could use it during construction work, for example to dress stone. The farmer could probably have used the double axe as an “all-round tool”, which could be good for taking care of olive trees but just as good for construction work and butchering. My aim is to present a more balanced picture of the double axe, trying to attribute different axes to different workers. Therefore, this will be a functional study where I study the cutting edges and the axe bodies for traces of use-wear. The work carried out by these different working categories varies widely. The different working tasks would probably show on the cutting edges of the double axes because some of the material was softer (for example, some types of wood) or harder (for example, stone). I also intend to study the whole manufacturing process from ore to axe, because the awareness of casting techniques during the Bronze Age could affect the quality of the axes. The manufacturing process can also be important when studying the functional aspects of the axes because a good cast and finishing treatment can, for instance, make the tool harder.

When the iceman, known to us as Ötzi, was found in the northern Alps several years ago, he had a few personal belongings with him, one being a copper axe. This flanged axe (a single axe with a convex cutting edge) has been an object of research and a team of archaeologists has made replicas from his axe in order to find out what the flanged axes in the northern Alps were used for.49 Kienlin and Ottaway have conducted experiments felling trees and have published photographs, which I have used. This work is very similar to my approach and the replicas and the other flanged axes they have used for the investigation were of great value for me. I will compare the double axes with the single axes represented in their study. Work with single bronze axes from Machu Picchu has also been published: the research focused on axes used on wood and stone.50 For working in stone there are photographs published which show the axe body and the cutting edges, which were used on hard material, resulting in specific striations. These published photographs will also be compared to the Minoan double axes.

Method To answer the question of use and users I will undertake four different studies. The first will concern the manufacturing process of the double axes. I will try to identify casting and casting defects and finishing treatments, i.e. work conducted on the axe body, long sides and the cutting edges, because this will reveal the condition of the cast axe.

The third part of my study will concern experimental work with replicas of Minoan double axes. A total of

 44

Larsson 1986. Vandkilde 1996. 46 Oldeberg 1976. 47 Larsson 1986, 78. 48 Larsson 1986, 78. Studies of stone axes have been conducted and published, for example by Olausson (Tools and technology. Lithic technological analysis of Neolithic axe morphology, Lund 1983). Her work consisted of examining Neolithic stone axes from Sweden and she has also conducted experimental work with manufacturing stone axes and felling trees with them. However, I have not found it useful to compare stone and metal axes because the different materials they are made of show different use-wear marks. 49 Kienlin & Ottaway 1998. 50 Gordon 1985.

In the second part, metal analyses of the double axes conducted by others form the basis for my analysis of metal contents. The metal analyses reveal the alloy’s qualities, which show whether the bronze alloy is hard or soft. To recognize whether the double axes were casts of durable bronze alloys will theoretically give an idea of what sort of material the axes would have been suitable

45



43 Petrie 1917, 13, 18-20, 22-24; Nilsson 1950, 231; Hood 1971, 84; Davaras 1976, 71-74; Evely 1993, 51; Downey 2001, 792; Vanschoonwinkel 2004, 411.

4



Introduction

 seventeen axes were cast, one at Bäckedals Folkhögskola in Sveg, Sweden, and sixteen at the Kamarianakis foundry in Piraeus, Greece. First of all, they will help in reconsidering some aspects of the manufacturing process of the double axe. All stages of the manufacturing process, i.e. casting in flask moulds, cold-working and other finishing treatments with different stones, were experimented with, except annealing. Secondly, experimental work was conducted on different hardnesses of wood, stone and bone. I have chosen materials as close as possible to what was presumably available on Minoan Crete. The use-wear from the experiments will be compared with use-wear on the Bronze Age axes. From this it is expected to be able to draw conclusions about the use and users of the double axes.

for 229 axes known to me through publications. My study concerns the practical use of the double axe as a tool and so includes only double axes cast solid in copper or bronze with a length of 10 cm or more. The following types are excluded. Firstly the small double axes of gold as found, for example, in the Arkalochori cave;52 they would not be suitable as tools because of their size, the precious material they were made of and the design. I do not consider double axes made of sheet metal (one found at Knossos had a coating of gold) because they too do not allow any work to be done with them.53 Furthermore, I will not deal with any double axes made from precious metals such as silver54 and electrum,55 because they are not suitable metals to do laborious work with. There are also small double axes made of lead,56 ivory,57 steatite,58 clay or terracotta59 and probably of faience, which are omitted.60 In other words I exclude any type of double axe that cannot be defined as a tool.

In the fourth part the use-wear on the Minoan double axes will be compared to the modern double axes used during the different experiments, in order to identify certain axes with specific working activities. The comparative material will consist of use-wear analyses and experiments conducted with flanged axes from the north Alpine region and from Machu Picchu (see the abovementioned work by Kienlin and Ottaway, and by Gordon). In addition the find locations and the find contexts of the Minoan double axes will be considered. These sources should add information to the already assessed use of the axes and further point to a user.

The Minoan double axe also appears as a motif on different types of objects: as mason’s marks on architecture,61 in stone, as depictions on ceramics62 and as patterns on seals,63 and the Linear A and B scripts have signs which resemble a double axe.64 This popular motif



52 Sp. Marinatos 1934, 252, Fig. 3; Sp. Marinatos 1935a, 251, Fig. 4; Lemerle 1935, 307-309, Figs. 59-60; Payne 1935, 170, Fig. 14. The sizes of the double axes vary from a few centimeters between the cutting edges to 70 cm. Also in Phaneromeni cave one golden double axe was found; cf., Young 1937, 139; Lemerle 1937, 475. 53 Evans 1901-1902, 101, Fig. 58; Evans 1930, 414, Fig. 277. 54 Zakros palace, according to Mavriyannaki found in September 1977, Mavriyannaki 1983b, 198, no. 11. A silver double axe was also found in the Arkalochori cave: Hazzidakis 1912-1913, 37, 44, Fig. 9h. 55 Mavriyannaki 1983b, 197, no. 9. According to Mavriyannaki two of the double axes found in Arkalochori cave are made of electrum (HM 605 and 619). 56 In tomb II, Mochlos: Seager 1912, 36, Fig.12. 57 At the palace of Zakros; Matt, Alexiou, Platon & Guanella 1968, 196; Platon 1974, 115, Fig. 69. 58 Evans 1901-02, 101, Fig. 57; Evans 1928a, 336, Fig. 191. 59 Hagia Triada, Banti 1943, 58. Also reported from Jouktas: Mavriyannaki 1983b, 198, no. 20. 60 Platon 1963, 178. The double axe is ornate, though it is not stated whether it is of faience. 61 Found for example at Knossos (Knossos is the place that has the most masons’ marks, for example in: Evans 1921, 218 (Phaistos), 347, 394 and 425). Phaistos: Pernier 1935, 403-404, 408, Pl. II; Pernier & Banti 1951, 423-424, Fig. 270; J. Shaw 1973, 110, Fig. 127a. Zakros: Platon 1964, 152, Pl. 149a; Platon 1965, 189, Pl. 233a; Orlandos 1964, 146; Orlandos 1965, 134, Fig. 167. Gournia (Hawes 1908, 25, Fig. 9), Amnissos (Sp. Marinatos 1932, 79; Karo 1932, 175; Béquignon 1933, 293). For further references cf. Mavriyannaki 1983b, nos. 111-115 and 121. 62 One double axe in relief was found on the bottom of a tripod, at Mallia; cf. Poursat 1966, 536, Fig. 22. Another was on an offering table from Mallia necropolis; cf. Effenterre 1963, 95, Pls. 11 & 35. Potter’s marks for example from House A and B, Quarter Mu, Mallia have several vases (nos. 93- 96) which show the double axe; cf. Poursat & Godart 1978, 124-125. On a potter’s wheel or a terracotta disc, a double axe is incised: Pernier 1904, 444, Fig. 54; Pernier & Banti 1951, 268, Fig. 234; Nilsson 1950, 200, Fig. 93. 63 Boardman, 1961, 70, no. 294, Pl. XXIV; Kenna 1960, 128, nos. 272274; Evans 1935, Figs. 154, 287b & 290. 64 Hieroglyphics: Evans 1909, 195, no. 36; Evans 1935, 686, Fig. 669 (evolution of the sign); Branigan 1966a, 115; Effenterre & Effenterre 1976, 77, Pls. XI & XXVIII A, D; Poursat & Godart 1978, nos. 2, 20,

The axes are presented in two catalogues: studied double axes (nos. 1-21) and non-studied double axes (nos. 22229). Both catalogues are in alphabetical order arranged by sites and are presented with catalogue numbers which are used in the text. The reason for so separating the axes is that the information from the axes which I have studied is easier to compare if presented together, and this also facilitates referring to the axe when presenting them in Chapters 3 and 4. The catalogue text of each axe includes its present location, measurements, date, context, metal analysis, casting and casting defects, finishing treatments, use-wear, my own observations, and bibliography. There is also a glossary included. Two appendices are included. Appendix I is a presentation of the modern cast double axes which are referred to in the text. They have been numbered A-Q, in order not to be confused with the Minoan axes. Appendix II is a list of tools which were manufactured from axe Q and were used during the experiments conducting finishing treatments and cutting bones.

The study objects I have had permission to study 23 double axes but can only refer to 21 of them.51 In total the catalogue accounts



51 Unfortunately, I cannot refer to two of the double axes housed at the archaeological museum at Aghios Nikolaos (inv. no. 3097 and inv. no. 1491). I have had permission from Davaras to study them but cannot use here the results of my investigation.

5



The Minoan double axe. An experimental study of production and use is also found on fresco paintings, for example in the northern part of the palace of Zakro.65 The fresco represents double axes placed between horns of consecration and a leaf motif.66 This design is also found on larnakes, for example on three found at Armenoi.67 The double axes which I have excluded from my study most certainly had different functions in Minoan society, but not as working tools. Scholars have not so far studied production and use from a broad point of view. Neither are there records of experimental work with replicas of Minoan double axes. My work is an attempt to contribute to a wider understanding of the double axe as a tool, by studying all its functional aspects and also by conducting experiments, to get closer to an answer regarding how and by whom the Minoan double axe was used. The first step will be to consider the archaeological evidence for double axe production in Crete.

 24 and 37. Linear A: Raison & Pope 1977, 49, nos. 52, 54, 136, 125130 and 136. Linear B: Ventris & Chadwick 1973, 41, Fig. 9, no. 8. 65 Miniature frescos from Knossos: M. Shaw 1996, 183 (the Ivory Deposit). 66 Platon 1966, 163-68; Gesell 1985, 140, no. 135; Marinatos 1993, 79. 67 Tzedakis 1971b, Figs. 4, 6 and 7.

6



2. ARCHAEOLOGICAL EVIDENCE FOR DOUBLE AXE PRODUCTION

The investigation intends to follow the double axe from ore to axe, by presenting the archaeological evidence for the production of double axes found in Minoan Crete. The study will concern not only the functional aspects, i.e. use-wear, but also the manufacturing processes, which were relevant for the quality of the end product. The manufacturing chain of the double axe will be presented briefly. When studying in depth and so appreciating the different materials and different manufacturing processes, i.e. from obtaining the ore to casting the axe and performing finishing treatments, many details became visible which were important for understanding the axe’s quality and characteristics. In trying to identify and assess matters that were connected with metallurgical work, information was gained that helped take further a more detailed comprehension of why the axes look as they do – for example, why there were small holes on the axes’ surface and why cavities were found on the long sides of the axes. Therefore it was necessary to begin with an investigation of the archeological evidence. The aspects presented here have importance for my study of double axes and may even point towards who used them. Thus, only issues which directly concern the axes, are presented.

The evidence of copper ores on Crete is scarce, nevertheless exists. Eighteen sources were identified by Branigan in Crete and they were accessible from the whole island during the Bronze Age.70 But Branigan pointed out that although today we have identified sources for metal, it does not mean that the Minoans knew they were there. On the other hand, to-date, we may not have found all the sources of metal.71 Through the work conducted by Gale and Stos-Gale, utilized copper sources were identified off-island by analysing leadisotopes in copper and bronze objects and comparing them to those of known copper sources.72 The question of where the copper came from during the different periods of the Bronze Age will be discussed further on. The first stage in obtaining metal is to smelt the ore and the questions of how smelting was learnt and where the process or influence of mining and casting came from have been debated at length by eminent specialists, with often contradictory conclusions.73 Here follows a selection of different oppinions: Branigan thinks that the smelting was carried out near the mining area, so ores did not need to be transported. He therfore concludes that wherever a piece of slag or lump of copper ore is found, it is near a copper mine.74 Broodbank is of the same opinion and he believes that the smelting, most certainly, took place on the island where ores were extracted. This implies that if the copper came from outside Crete the smelting was already accomplished.75 However, de Jesus is of another opinion; “Not in every case was smelting performed at mining sites. In fact, there are indications that mining and smelting at the same site was not as common as one would tend to believe. So, we cannot even use slag deposits as a foolproof sign that there is a mine close by.”76 Further Stos-Gale has argued that the smelting probably took place elsewhere since it depended on the abundance of fuel for the smelting process.77

Metals Copper and copper sources in Crete The basic metal for bronze is copper, which therefore was certainly the most necessary metal on Crete during the Minoan period, not only for the production of double axes, but also for everyday utensils and votive gifts. Whether Crete was self-sufficient in copper during the Bronze Age has been and still is a question of debate.68 Some scholars conclude that Crete had enough copper and some have argued against this.69



70 Faure 1966, 47-58, map 1, identified nineteen sources of copper, though only approximately half of them were used during the Bronze Age. Branigan 1974, 59, Fig. 1, identified eighteen sources. 71 According to Branigan (1974, 59), several sources referred to were not known fifteen years earlier (ca. 1960); Tzachili 2008, 327-329. 72 Gale & Stos-Gale have been working on the analysing method for over twenty years. For some of their work see the bibliography. 73 For smelting see, for example: Read 1934, 383; Coghlan 1975a, 2831. For influence see, for example: Branigan 1974, 98-99; Coghlan 1975a, 41; Muhly 1980, 27-28; Renfrew 1969, 13, 35-36, 38-39; Renfrew 1970, 291, 308; Tylecote 1992, 12. For detailed description of smelting copper sulphide and oxide see: De Jesus 1980, 27. 74 Branigan 1974, 62. 75 Broodbank 2000, 293, 299. 76 De Jesus 1980, 98. 77 Stos-Gale 1998, 723-724, 727.

 68

The conference on Aegean metallurgy in the Bronze Age held in Rethymnon, 2004, shows that this question still is on the agenda and that ores mentioned by scholars during the early 20th century are once again being investigated for copper sources (i.e. Gavdos, Kydonia). Muhly 2008, 35-36; Tzachili 2008, 327-329. 69 No lack of copper in Crete: Xanthoudides 1924, 27; Faure 1966, 4758; Branigan 1968, 51-52; Merrillees 1974, 7; Muhly 1979, 89-90; Harding 1984, 46. Copper came from other sources: Gale & Stos-Gale 1982b, 15.

7



The Minoan double axe. An experimental study of production and use

Figure 1. Copper sources discussed in Chapter 2 (after Davaras 1976, Map 2). Mines are hard to define, although tools suitable for mining have been identified. The earliest and most typical tools were axe-hammers and pounders made of stone. Bronze tools, like hammers and axes, have been found in the countryside (stray finds) where known sources for copper existed. They were badly worn and the use-wear might imply mining.78 Mosso also believed that the double axe was used as a mining implement and refers to the one found by Hawes at Gournia, published in 1908.79

At Lebena, both vertical and horizontal mineshafts were found. They were used during the Early and Middle Bronze Age. These galleries follow veins of cupriferous ore (malachite and azurite) with 2-3% Cu.82 The finds at Lebena are very unusual, because the other Cretan ores come from open-air sources and were easier to extract.83 The amount of copper needed for a Bronze Age settlement has been estimated as 500 kilos per year, which would have been possible to mine from the Lebena sources.84

Several copper sources from the Early Bronze Age are known on Crete. Three of them are presented here because they demonstrate and represent three different sites and three different aspects of extracting copper (Fig. 1).80

Several investigations have been conducted at Chrysocamino, which have resulted in several interpretations of both activities on the site and the time period concerned.85 The main question related to



Copper ores were identified near Fournou Korifi (Pyrgos) as pebbles with a content of 2-2.2% Cu. The content of copper is low but if the metal was easy to obtain, the Minoans would probably have used these low-grade copper pebbles.81

82 Faure 1966, 51; Branigan (1974, 62, 66) believes that the mine was used during the Early Minoan period and supplied the rich tombs found in the Messara plain during this period. 83 Branigan 1974, 66. 84 Although there is archaeological evidence of Graeco-Roman activities in the area, Branigan (1974, 66) assumed that the quality of the ore was so poor that the Minoans would not have bothered with it. The assumption of 500 kilos per year for a village was estimated for a population of 80 people and on the probability that they melted down the tools that became useless and made new tools out of them (which can of course be questioned). 85 Many activities are suggested for Chrysocamino, though mostly connected with metalworking. The first to discuss the activities here was Hawes (1908, 33) and fragments from a furnace were identified. Analysis from the cliff nearby revealed that its minerals contained a low percentage of copper, but Hawes did not give any further references or percentages of the minerals. Already in 1906 (a second visit is also known, but the exact year for this remains unclear) Hazzidakis recognized the cave as a mining area, and used clay crucibles were identified and showed that smelting probably had taken place outside the cave. Hazzidakis’ visit was reported by Mosso (1910b, 292-293) as Hazzidakis did not publish anything from his visit here. The crucible found in Chrysocamino resembled one found at Zakro, though Dawkins (1903, 258, Fig. 35) did not recognize it as a crucible, but as a portable brazier. According to Forbes (1964, 94), Chrysocamino did not have any ores left to be investigated. He concluded that this was probably a smelting place. Two investigations were conducted in the area by Faure (1966, 47-48) and Branigan (1968b, 50-51). They both came to the same conclusion: Chrysocamino was not a Bronze Age site for

 78

Branigan 1974, 66-68. Mosso 1910b, 291. According to Mosso the double axes found in Cretan excavations are the tools which show most use-wear. Mosso based his interpretation on one single axe; this statement is interesting but difficult to demonstrate. 80 There are other sources mentioned by Branigan (1974, 62): Kaloi Limenes, Aghiospharango, Pigaidakia, Chrysostomos. Mosso (1910b, 296-297) believed that the island of Gaudos could have been explored for copper when the Chrysocamino sources were exhausted. 81 At Fournou Korifi there was also an area of fire debris and burnt stones, surrounded by Early Minoan II pottery, which has been interpreted as a smelting oven. Hood, Warren & Cadogan 1964, 95-96; Branigan 1968, 51-52; Branigan 1971a, 10-14; Branigan 1974, 62. However, Warren (1972, 261-262, 263, Appendix XI) reports that an oven used for pottery would not have reached temperatures high enough for melting or smelting. Experiments conducted on pottery from Fournou Korifi showed that the pottery was fired mainly at low temperatures (below 880ºC). However, a few pottery samples were fired at a higher temperature (1050ºC), but Warren does not discuss whether this higher temperature was due to the use of pot bellows or natural wind. 79

8



Archaeological evidence for double axe production the whole of Greece with copper.91 Lavrion is mostly thought of as the location of silver mines of Classical times, but research by Gale and Stos-Gale shows that they probably were used already during the Bronze Age. The mines also contained lead, iron, zinc, copper and small ores of arsenic and nickel.92

Chrysocamino has been whether the cliff was copperbearing or not. The most recent study, led by Betancourt, showed that there was never a copper-bearing ore there.86 However, there was evidence of copper smelting and other objects which can be directly connected with this process, for example pieces from a furnace, a pot bellows and plenty of slag. Betancourt therefore concluded that the ore was transported to Chrysocamino and the first smelting was conducted there, i.e. no metalworking activities such as casting took place there. These new investigations also led to further interpretations about the time periods when the site was used. He concluded that smelting was conducted there from Final Neolithic to the end of Early Minoan III or Middle Minoan I.

Other places within the Aegean could also have exported copper to Crete. Cyprus was one such large copper source showing mining activities already in the third millennium B.C.93 Anatolia was also a potential source.94 During the Late Bronze Age, several metal sources probably supplied Crete with copper. Lavrion was possibly the major source and the second largest probably was Cyprus.95 Further locations of ores which were used abundantly were in the Taurus Mountains and there have been indications of copper which could be traced to Iran.96 Sardinia is also rich in copper and seems to have supplied Crete with the precious metal during the very end of the Bronze Age.97

Structures from an apsidal building were also located at Chrysocamino. The house form is unusual within the Minoan sphere but existed in the Cyclades, for example at Kythnos and Seriphos.87 If not indigenous, the copper during the Early Bronze Age was probably transported from Kythnos or Seriphos, but Lavrion may also come into question because it is an identified smelting place.88 The presence of people from the Cyclades was recognized at Aghia Photia, a few kilometres away from Chrysocamino, which makes it probable that the ore smelted there came from the Cyclades.89

Arsenic and arsenic-bronzes Several double axes show a content of arsenic, which hardens and strengthens the copper, especially during cold-working.98 The hardening effect depended on the percentage of arsenic in the alloy.99

Copper sources outside Crete



91 Branigan 1982, 208; Gale & Stos-Gale 1982b, 17-18; Harding 1984, 46. For a map of sources of copper, lead and gold in Greece, see Branigan 1974, 60. 92 Gale & Stos-Gale 1982b, 17-18; Stos-Gale & Gale 1984, 170, in Vagnetti 1984; Marinos & Petraschek 1956, 231-235 (with an English summary of the ore deposits of Lavrion). Gale & Stos-Gale 1982a, 472481. The Western String trade route between Attica and Crete would be a preferable way to transport the copper from Lavrion to Crete; cf. StosGale & Gale 1984, 170, in Vagnetti 1984; Schofield 1982, 18; Gale 1980, 174-178; Dickinson 1977, 55-56, probable exchange with Mycenae and the Mainland. 93 Dikaios 1946, 244-245; during excavations at Ambelikoú an axe mould and a crucible with copper slag were found. They were both made of terracotta; Dikaios 1952, 312; Muhly 1973, 193, 197. Contacts between Crete and Cyprus during 2300-1900 B.C. could imply that copper was imported from Cyprus; Catling 1964, 18-21; Zwicker 1982, 63-64; Branigan 1982, 208; Harding 1984, 47. 94 De Jesus 1980, 21-22. 95 Stos-Gale et al. 1997; Evely & Stos 2004, 267-270. 96 Yener et al. 1989; Hauptmann et al. 1992; Evely & Stos 2004, 267270. 97 Gale & Stos-Gale 1987, 147; Lo Schiavo et al. 1985, 316-318; Pålsson Hallager 1985, 304; Evely & Stos 2004, 267; Rice Jones 2007, 165. 98 There are only a few axes which are recorded as EM II-MM II; unfortunately there is no metal analysis conducted on them. Most of the axes are dated to MM III-LM I and there are 43 which have a content of As. The contents vary from 5.59% (no. 25) to 0.0005% (no. 234), although the As is mostly in the range of 0.2-0.6%. This implies that the arsenic-bronze was used even in the Late Bronze Age on Crete. There are eight axes which have given metal analysis that only has Sn as a hardening element. 99 The question of arsenic versus tin as an alloying element to strengthen the copper is an interesting subject. When studying the Moh’s scale arsenic is 3.5 and tin 1.5 on the scale, which suggests that arsenic is the harder element. They both, in an alloy with copper, strengthen the copper. However if an arsenic-bronze is not workhardened the effect of the arsenic is hardly evident in the alloy which is the opposite for tinbronzes. Experiments comparing tin-bronzes with arsenic-bronzes have shown that tin is the superior alloying element in strengthening copper.

In the Middle Bronze Age, the need for bronze grew and in the beginning of this period some copper still came from the Cyclades, but by the close of this period the trade had definitely ended.90 There were sources on the mainland, the major ones being in the region of Lavrion, which could have supplied

 metallurgical activities but a later site most probably for re-melting copper, work which could have been achieved by itinerant smiths. Branigan dated the metallurgical activities to the 12th-14th centuries A.D. and Faure only writes that the site was relatively recent. Zois (1990, 340-341) published further work on the site and concluded that it was modern and was used as a lime kiln. For further investigations and details see Betancourt et al. 1999, 344-347 and the final publication Betancourt et al. 2006. 86 Betancourt et al. 1999, 352; Bassiakos & Catapotis 2006, 330. 87 For the recent investigations of Chrysocamino: Betancourt et al. 1999, 343-370; Betancourt et al. 2006. The Apsidal building is in the final publication from 2006 interpreted as a small kitchen used by the workers at Chrysocamino (Betancourt et al. 2006, 66). Seriphos: Gale, Papastamataki, Stos-Gale & Leonis 1985, 83-84; Stos-Gale, Gale & Papastamataki 1988, 24; Hadjianastasiou & MacGillivray 1988, 31-32; Stos-Gale & Macdonald 1991, 264-267. 88 Copper ores at Kythnos: Gale, Papastamataki, Stos-Gale & Leonis 1985, 85-87; Stos-Gale, Gale & Papastamtaki 1988, 23-30; Hadjianastasiou & MacGillivray 1988, 31-34. For Kythnos and Lavrion, Gale 1990, 310-316; Stos-Gale 1993, 120. At Thorikos mining from the Early Helladic II and the Late Mycenaean period was identified with tool marks and pottery sherds. The mining was conducted both in the open air and in a gallery. Mine no. 3 was probably explored for lead and silver, though it proves that mining was conducted in the Lavrion region already during the Early Bronze Age; cf. Waelkens 1990, 114-143 and the preliminary report by Spitaels 1984, 151-174. 89 Davaras 1971, 392-397; Davaras 1976, 128-129; Doumas 1976, 79. 90 Evely & Stos 2004, 267.

9



The Minoan double axe. An experimental study of production and use The main question concerning arsenic is whether it was deliberately added to the copper to make arsenic-bronze, or whether it was present in the ore when smelting, making the arsenic-bronze alloy accidentally. If the arsenic was added, at what percentage can we say, with confidence, that it was a deliberate alloy?

bronze-alloys in the region, as demonstrated by the early items found on the Mesara plain.106

Tin and tin-bronzes Many of the double axes show a content of tin which affects both the strength and hardness in the cast item. In modern standards, ranges between 7.5 and 10% tin are necessary for full effect and the cast item does not need to be strengthened by cold-working.107 Above this range, the effect is detrimental, causing problems during solidification and also setting up stresses within the metal after it has become solid. The effect of the stress, in the cast, is that it becomes brittle. Below 7.5% tin the maximum hardness of the bronze is not attained.108 Therefore, depending on the percentage of tin in the bronze, the quality and workability of the bronze items vary.

There are many scholars who believe that arsenic was used deliberately as an alloying agent during the Bronze Age.100 To decide whether the arsenic was intentionally added or not, the percentage of As needs to be studied. Several scholars agree that if the arsenic content was low, below 1-2%, these bronzes were not real alloys.101 Copper sources containing arsenic can be found in present-day Iran, Turkey (Anatolia) and Cyprus.102 However, to decide whether the arsenic-bronze was deliberate or not is hazardous because a percentage of at least 5% arsenic can be present in an ore.103 Furthermore, arsenic evaporates when melted, which makes it difficult to determine, with certainty what amount of arsenic was originally in the ore or was deliberately put in the crucible at the starting point.104

One question which has been debated when studying the percentages of tin in bronze casts is whether the metal was a deliberate component or an impurity in the copper ore. Above 1-2% tin is, according to some scholars, to be interpreted as a deliberate alloy.109 Thus, Tylecote believes that the tin-bronzes used for the double axes were mostly deliberate tin-bronzes, within a range of 318% Sn.110

There are also scholars who do not believe that arsenic was added to the copper ore at all.105 To-date we have no conclusive evidence which can help us understand whether arsenic-bronze was made deliberately or not. But it exists and arsenic-bronzes are chronologically the first

If we conclude that the tin was deliberately added to copper, where did it come from? If we conclude that tin was an impurity in copper ore, what sources were used and can they be traced? The question of the origin of tin has also been debated at length and there are several tin sources identified in the Mediterranean area.111 The important question is which of them were in use during the Bronze Age.

 However, in the case of conducting finishing treatments by workhardening and reducing thickness of the cast item, arsenic-bronzes are superior. Northover 1989, 113; Lechtman 1996, 484-506. Budd & Ottaway have conducted a series of experiments casting arsenic-bronzes with different percentages of As in order to investigate the mechanical properties in casting and coldworking them. Their study show, among other things, that the As in an alloy with Cu definitley hardens it, cf. Budd & Ottaway 1991, 132-142. 100 Caley 1949, 60-61. The needle Caley examined had a high content of arsenic (2.52%). The arsenic made the needle harder than if it had been made only of native copper. The colour changes when tin and arsenic are blended with copper, making the copper turn light-coloured. The arsenic also has qualities which prevents hard corrosion, unlike tin. To distinguish between tin-bronzes and arsenic-bronzes an analysis is required; otherwise to separate them is nearly impossible (Charles 1967, 21). In an article written by Eaton & McKerrell (1976, 174-175), they state that the skill of the smith during the Bronze Age must be recognized without doubt and that a Bronze Age smith knew that a few percent of arsenic in the cast would be positive for the quality. Rosenfeld, Ilani & Dvorachek (1997, 857-864) also state that the smith must have known the positive properties of both arsenic and tin. Doonan et al. are of the opinion that although roasting arsenide minerals and alloying them with copper are technically advanced processes this was done during the Bronze Age on Crete (Doonan et al. 2007, 111113). 101 There are several sources for copper-arsenic ores, for example tennantite, tetrahedrite, and enargite. For the alloy percentages see: McKerrel & Tylecote 1972, 210, 214; Branigan 1974, 71-72; Coghlan 1975a, 22-23. Metal analyses presented by Coghlan & Tylecote (1970, 80) show that tennantite and tetrahedrite contained As, though the ores were from the British Isles and did not concern Minoan material. 102 According to Slater & McKenzie (1980, 197-215) the tennantite and enargite ores are more common in the Near East and the Aegean area. For Iran: Harrison 1968, 501-505 (Cu ores), 511-512 (Cu-As ore). For Anatolia: De Jesus 1980, 90-91, Appendix V. However, De Jesus does not believe that arsenic-copper was exploited in Cyprus; 1980, 92. 103 Stech 1999, 62; Zwicker 1982, 67. 104 Charles 1967, 24-25. 105 Rapp 1988, 25.

Excavations in the Taurus Mountains (Göltepe-Kestel) showed that stannite, which is a tin (and copper) source, was mined in Turkey during the Bronze Age.112 During

 106

Junghans, Sangmeister & Schröder 1968/2:3, 264-267 (for analyses); Coghlan 1975a, 22. When addressing bronzes, there are different names, depending on how much tin is present in the bronze; Į-bronzes are low-grade tin bronzes and contain less than 15% Sn. ȕ-bronzes are high-grade bronzes and contain more than 20% Sn; cf. Srinivasan 1998, 44. Most interestingly, there is evidence of high-grade bronzes among the double axes which have been analysed; Gale & Stos-Gale 1981, 174. 108 Tin percentage is dependent on the mechanical requirements of each individual cast object. Tin is more effective percentage-wise than zinc; cf. Heine, Loper & Rosenthal 1967, 373. 109 Coghlan & Case 1957, 96; Biek 1957, 72-76; Tylecote 1962, 23, Table 7, 40-42. For zinc, arsenic, and nickel there are no agreed percentages and these metals can be a natural component of the ore. Stech (1999, 62) has drawn his conclusion based on copper ores in Afghanistan which contained 2% Sn. Stech refers to Cleuziou & Berthoud (1982, 15), but they write that over 0.5 % Sn is an indication of a deliberate tin-bronze. Coghlan, in his turn, believes that 2-3% Sn could come from the copper ore; cf. Coghlan 1975a, 36. 110 Tylecote 1992, 27. 111 Tylecote 1992, 19. Tin is found in cassiterite and stannite ores, though the only abundant tin mineral is cassiterite; cf. Battey 1981, 210. 112 According to Coghlan (1975, 24) the procedure to extract tin from stannite is so complicated that it could not have been conducted during the Bronze Age. For further information on the Taurus mountains and 107

10



Archaeological evidence for double axe production probably preheated, to prevent it from cracking.118 The moulds from Mallia also show cavities in the mouldframe to fasten the two parts together, like a locking device, in order to produce a symmetrical double axe. It has been suggested that wooden plugs fastened the two parts together.119 Mavriyannaki, who studied these moulds, referred to the two oval holes on one of the long sides. She identified one of them as made purposively to let the gases out during casting, i.e. a riser.120 In Quarter Mu at, Mallia, a foundry was discovered with several fragments from double axe moulds.121 An additional double axe mould of schist was excavated in Quarter Mu.122 Furthermore, in the palace of Mallia (north-west region), two two-part moulds for double axes made of steatite (an easily worked stone) were found.123 A mould for a double axe was found in room XLVI in Maison E, together with a stand for a double axe.124 Also at Phaistos a part of a stone mould for a double axe has been found.125 In addition a part of a stone mould for an axe (double?) was found by Hawes in Gournia.126

the Early and beginning of the Middle Bronze Age, Troy seems to have provided the Aegean and Crete with the metal.113 Tin could also have come from the Near East by land through Asia Minor, before it was discovered in Europe.114 Tin deposits were also identified in Egypt.115 Thus, the question of the exact origin of tin used in Bronze Age Crete is still unsolved.

Manufacturing Moulds The archaeological evidence reveals several different objects which were used in the manufacturing process of the axes. The casting equipment, for example moulds and bellows, illustrates what techniques were known and used and how the casting was performed. The results of different casting techniques can be identified on the double axes; therefore different aspects of casting, casting equipment, casting defects, manufacturing and manufacturing marks are addressed here. This is an overview of the material and the archaeological material accounted for is from sites where double axes have been found. Stone moulds Twelve two-part stone moulds for double axes were found at the palace of Mallia (Fig. 2).116 They have a prepared cavity in the mould for a shaft core of sand when casting.117 The runners for a two-part mould were most likely made out of clay, and the mould was

Figure 2. Stone mould from Mallia (permission from Evely 1993, Fig. 21).



Clay moulds Moulds were also made of clay. They were mainly used for the investment process (lost wax method) and are rarely recognised in the archaeological material because they were broken after casting, but the use of clay for open moulds cannot be dismissed during the Bronze Age.127 The investment process is quite complicated and requires a lot of preparation and time: it requires clay

extracting activities there, cf. Yener & Özbal 1987, 223-224; Rapp 1988, 26; Tylecote 1992, 19; Yener & Vandiver 1993, 207-238; Willford 1994, 2. 113 Renfrew (1967, 13) believes that there existed a now exhausted source in the Troad area, which would explain the early finds of tin in this area. Renfrew did not consider whether there was a long network for trading tin. Branigan (1970b, 184; 1971b, 54; 1974, 64-65) notes that Italy (Tuscany), Sicily and Sardinia have tin deposits, although it is not certain that they were in use during the Bronze Age. Exchange with metal objects between Italy and Crete can be verified during the Bronze Age (Branigan 1966b, 97-109). According to Guido (1963, 153), the tin found on Sardinia probably came from Spain or southern France. There are today known sources of tin in Sardinia but they do not seem to be used. Ryan (1957, 62-63) listed several sources of tin in Turkey (two in Manisa in Soma county, one in Balikesir in Edremit county, three in Bilecik in Sö÷üt county and finally one in Tunceli Hozat county), although it is not certain that they were used during the Bronze Age. Furthermore, Muhly (1973, 111-112) and De Jesus (1980, map 20, 396) address Troy as a possible supplier of tin. 114 Hogarth 1902, 212; Gowland 1912, 252 (who mentions Persia, Khorasan); Harding 1984, 55 (who does not mention any specific place). 115 Items of tin were found for the first time in the 18th dynasty (15801350 B.C.) in Egypt, and a scene in Rekhmirê’s grave (1450 B.C.) in Thebes shows the process of melting together copper and tin; cf. Wainwright 1943, 96-98; Wainwright 1944b, 100-102; Tylecote 1992, 19. 116 Chapouthier & Demargne 1942, 56-63. Lower level of the portico outside quarters III & IV. 117 Tylecote 1992, 39.

 118

Tylecote 1992, 39. Chapouthier & Demargne 1942, 56-63. Mavriyannaki 1983b, 200, Figs. 7-8. 121 Poursat 1982, 677. 122 Poursat 1996, 69. The schist mould was probably found in House C. 123 Effenterre 1980, 280, Figs. 383-384 (vol. I), 478, Figs. 637-639 (vol. II). The moulds are Heraklion Museum inv. no. 2186 (L 0.15) and Heraklion Museum inv. no. 2187 (L 0.163). 124 Deshayes & Dessenne 1959, 137. 125 Pernier 1904, 468, Fig. 75d. 126 Hawes 1908, 32, Pl. III:63 (no. 398). It is described by Hawes as a part of an axe head mould, though it is hard to conclude if this is a double axe or not by the published fragment. Due to the size of the fragment and the shallow imprint (L 0.53; Th of stone 0.22) the double axe cast in the mould was probably not a working axe. The fragment was found in the area Fh of which hardly anything has survived. 127 Branigan 1974, 77; Coghlan 1975a, 52; Evely (1993, 51) suggests that the double axe could have been cast with the investment technique. 119 120

11



The Minoan double axe. An experimental study of production and use (preferably mixed with, for example, chaff or manure to make it stronger), fine sand, a pattern in beeswax, and an implement to create the runner.128

moulds were used for double axes. The investment moulds were made of two different clays, the inner part of a now bluish-grey (finer clay) and the outer part of reddish-orange clay.133 On one of the moulds, the pouring cup and associated runner were entirely preserved. The runner was placed near the shaft hole and there was also evidence of the oval core for the shaft hole.134 From this mould it was possible to reconstruct the measurements of the double axe cast (L17.2; Th 2.4; W 7.4; oval shaft hole; long sides concave).135 During the earlier excavations at Palaikastro double axes dating to Late Minoan II were found matching these measurements.136 There is evidence of Late Minoan I metalworking in the town from building I, which was in use during then and in Late Minoan III. The deposit found outside building 5 could, according to Hemingway, show a continuity of metalworking activities.137

The first step in making a double axe is to model it in beeswax.129 To get the details of the beeswax model, fine sand is put directly around the beeswax, and this becomes the inner part of the clay mould. The runner can be made with a piece of wood, round in cross-section, and is attached to the pattern with clay. The whole unit (the mould), i.e. the wax model coated with fine sand and the runner, is then covered with a clay mixture. In order to cast, the beeswax must be melted out (melting at ca. 60ºC); after the piece of wood creating the runner has been removed, the molten wax can be poured out. During the melting of the wax, smoke is given off and when it stops, all the wax has been removed. Due to the intense heat when pouring the metal, the moulds are preheated to prevent cracking and breaking during the casting procedure. When the mould is cold after casting, the clay is carefully knocked off with a piece of wood.130 Although they are difficult to find, the excavations at Kommos have brought to light such clay moulds for double axes. Altogether parts of twelve investmentprocess moulds were found in deposits (Late Minoan IIIA2-B) and the one double axe found at Kommos fits perfectly in the moulds. The inner layer of clay (which is in direct contact with the wax model and later with the metal cast) was mixed with chaff, and the clay for the outer surface of the mould was mixed with particles of quartz or hematite and chaff, which made the clay stronger. Two runners were made to pour the molten metal into the mould.131

Metal moulds The earliest mould found on Crete was made of bronze (Cu 96; Fe 2.3; S 1.7; Co 0.1%) and not of stone.138 The bronze mould found in Vasiliki, “Big House” (Early Minoan IIB), was more likely a pattern to make moulds in wax or lead to use for the investment process (Fig. 3).139 However, it is possible to cast artefacts in a bronze mould.140 The metal mould would last longer than one made of clay or stone and would have eliminated the hard work required to produce a stone mould.141 The metal moulds could have been used for mass production.142 The mould found at Vasiliki, which was prepared for a shaft core, would have cast a 16 cm long axe.143 What the core was made of is not known, though socketed axes in the Pitt Rivers Museum have their sand cores still left in position.144

At Palaikastro eleven clay moulds (Late Minoan IIIB) were found in a pit south of building 5.132 Three of the

To pour the molten metal into the mould, a runner is required, although some moulds lack a runner. Branigan





from Late Minoan III A2 (latest). No work shop has been found for LM IIIB; evidence was found for Late Minoan I and Late Minoan II/IIA. 133 MacGillivray, Sackett, Driessen & Hemingway 1992, 147. 134 Hemingway 1996, 238. The mould was reconstructed with two runners, although this is uncertain. If there were two pouring cups the second one could be a riser, installed to let the gases come out when casting to prevent the surface from getting gas holes. 135 MacGillivray, Sackett, Driessen & Hemingway 1992, 147, 150; Hemingway 1996, 226-228, 242, one more could possibly be a double axe mould. The other moulds for tools are: 3-4 single axes, 4 sickles, razors or wood-shavers, 7 bar moulds, and one rectangular that could have produced a tool blank, ingot or a leg for a cauldron. 136 MacGillivray, Sackett, Driessen & Hemingway 1992, 147, N. 77. An average measurement for the double axes is L 17 cm; cf. Dawkins & Bosanquet 1923, 117-118, Pl. 25 a & b. 137 Hemingway 1996, 242-243, N. 44. 138 The metal analysis was conducted by Tselios (2008a, 163, 185, appendix VI). 139 Seager 1907, 116-117, Fig. 2; Branigan 1968, 89; Branigan 1974, 83; Evely 1993, 51. 140 Tylecote 1962, 123-125; Tylecote 1992, 38, 40 (of bronze found in Europe and Asia Minor); Coghlan 1975a, 59-60; Coghlan 1975b, 136139. 141 Catling 1964, 273. 142 Coghlan 1975a, 59-60; Coghlan 1975b, 136-139. Experiments were undertaken with ancient moulds at the Pitt Rivers Museum and showed that casting bronze with both a metal and stone mould works. 143 Seager 1907, 116-117, Fig. 2; Evely 2000, 258. 144 Coghlan 1975a, 56.

128

In order to attain a deeper knowledge and some practical experience of casting, I contacted Karl-Gustaf Lindblad, who is in charge of the course “Forntida smide och metallhantverk” (ancient smithery and metal craftsmanship) at Bäckedals Folkhögskola, Sveg, Sweden. I want to thank Karl-Gustav Lindblad for letting me take part in his course during week 11, 2004. The lessons and practical experiences in casting and mould-making have widened my horizons and made it possible to write this section of my dissertation. I would also like to thank the students of the course, Kristina, Krista, Hans, Toni, Tomas and Håkan, for letting me, constantly, peek over their shoulders during my week there. For the moulds made at Bäckedals Folkhögskola, the clay was mixed with horse manure, sand, coal dust and reindeer hair. 129 Noble (1975, 368-369) found an Egyptian beeswax core from ca 600 B.C. for use in the investment process. 130 In order not to damage a cast item with a fine pattern, it is important to be careful when knocking off the clay mould. 131 Blitzer 1995, 506-507; Evely 1993, 51. There were also moulds for the investment process found in Thermi, Lesbos, though too small to be used to cast a double axe tool. However, they resemble the investment process mould shown in Evely (1993, Fig. 22), and the one found at Kommos (Blitzer 1995, Pl. 8, no. 106). In Phylakopi a single-part clay mould for three chisels (which visibly could have been meant for more originally, LC III, ca. 1100 BC) was found; cf. Renfrew 1985, 316, 332, Fig. 8, no. 6. Two-part stone moulds presumably for double axes were found at Phylakopi: Atkinson et al. 1904, 191, Fig. 161. 132 Hemingway 1996, 215-217, 226-228, 243, no. 44. Catling 1997, 5355, disagrees with Hemingway’s dating and states that the pottery is

12



Archaeological evidence for double axe production mentions one from Mallia which has three sides of the mould closed. The fourth side was open (on the long side) and here the molten metal could be poured into the mould. The open side was probably covered up by a stone; this procedure would have left a flat surface where the molten metal was poured in.145

This technique can be used to cast small and big items and works satisfactorily for producing double axes. It does not require a lot of equipment: a moulding-box, sand, a pattern (copy of the item you want to cast) and an implement to create the runner. Patterns for casting were identified at Tell Edh Dhiba’a, modern Baghdad, which shows that this technique was known and used during the Bronze Age in the region.149

The two-part mould required something to hold the parts together to get a perfectly formed cast object, and this was probably accomplished by the use of long metal strips which were bound around the mould to keep it together. To judge from the metal strip found at the Unexplored Mansion (Knossos), the straps were cut out of larger copper sheets by using a chisel. Metal strips which were probably used in this way were found at Aghia Triada, Gournia, the Unexplored Mansion (Knossos), Mallia and Pseira.146

Shaw has suggested that mud bricks found on Minoan sites were made in wooden frames, and the step to casting metal items in wooden moulds, so-called mouldingboxes, would not have been far off.150 How does the technique work? The moulding-box consists of two wooden frames; first one section of the moulding-box is filled with sand, being rammed or packed to an even hard mass on a flat surface.151 Then this section is turned over so that the flat smooth surface is the uppermost one. Into this half-filled moulding-box the double axe pattern is pressed into the sand. The runner or runners, a piece of round wood, is then positioned (downright) near the double axe, after which the second part of the mouldingbox is placed in position (on top of the first section). The second part is also rammed and packed with sand (the runner downright is still visible) (Fig. 4). When both parts of the moulding-box are filled with sand, the runner is removed and, a hole has been created which goes straight down to the pattern and into which the molten metal will eventually be poured. The moulding-box is then separated. The double axe pattern is removed, leaving a cavity where the molten metal eventually is going to form the axe. The cavity (hole for the double axe) is connected with the runner by making a channel, a so-called ingate, between these two. When this has been done on both sides of the mould, the moulding-box can be put back together again.

Figure 3. The metal mould from Vasiliki (permission from Evely 1993, Fig. 21). The flask technique (wooden moulds) The flask technique (a two-part mould) would, like the investment process or other clay moulds, leave very little or no archaeological evidence because of the mould consisting mainly of sand.147 The flask method is easily compared to the investment process and should definitely be considered as a method for Bronze Age Crete even though we do not have any remaining evidence for it.148

 found, but also to Agricola and the Bible. 1 Kings 7:46 refers to casting; the problem is to understand what technique was used. According to the Swedish translation of 1917 it seems that clay moulds were used (in Swedish: lerformar), but according to an English version from the early last century, which follow the Hebrew text, the casting is referred to in a different way than in the Swedish version. The translation in the English Bible (s.a.) is “in the thickness of the ground”. The English version of this passage in the Bible most certainly refer to casting in the ground, which could be interpreted as sand casting, but the Swedish versions refer to real moulds. In a Swedish Bible from 1879, the casting is also referred to as accomplished in the clay ground (in Swedish: lermarkene). Experiments were conducted using this technique; one, in which different compositions of sand were used, with sand which contained different percentages of clay, showed that more clay in the sand meant that the bronze cooled off more slowly, which could cause a more brittle cast; cf. Ottaway & Seibel 1998; Eccleston & Ottaway 2002. 149 A clay model of an axe head was found at a coppersmith’s workshop at Tell Edh Dhiba’a, near modern Baghdad (Old Babylonian period, ca. 2000-1600 B.C.), and identified as a pattern for casting. A core for the mould was also found in the workshop; cf. Davey 1983, 179-180. 150 J. Shaw 1973, 187. 151 Red industrial moulding sand was used at Bäckedals Folkhögskola, something the Minoans, however, would not have had.

 145

Branigan 1974, 81. For Aghia Triada and Pseira cf. Evely 2000, 362; for Gournia cf. Hawes 1908, 33, Pl. 4, no. 65 (the metal strips were of copper and a small percentage of lead, but no exact percentages were given. They were recorded and demonstrated as for mending (Hawes 1908, Pl. 3, no. 67) but could most certainly have been used as tongs; for Unexplored Mansion cf. Catling & Jones 1977, 61; Catling & Catling 1984, 218; for Mallia cf. Deshayes & Dessenne 1959, 66, Pl. XX, no. 2. 147 Pernot (1998, 108-109) has come to the conclusion that the technique would not leave any archaeological remains to be identified. He does not, however, consider this to be a technique used during the Bronze Age. 148 Coghlan (1975, 51) writes that sand moulding was not used during the Bronze Age. He mentions some cores found that could belong to this kind of technique, although they could, in my opinion, have been used for a one- or a two-part mould. Davey (1983, 179-180), argues for the possibility of sand moulding and points to the axe pattern and core 146

13



The Minoan double axe. An experimental study of production and use locations in Crete, here follows examples of crucibles found in “double axe locations”.155 Several crucibles dating to two different periods have been found at Kommos (Fig. 5). Seventeen clay crucibles, mostly fragmentary, from Middle Minoan IIILate Minoan I were found in the southern complex (building T, where excavation also uncovered a charcoalcoated floor). They are in the shape of a spouted bowl, and the average diameter is 25-30 cm. There was also evidence of where the lifting device was meant to clasp the bowl to lift the crucible. The crucibles were used several times, which is evident through different melting levels in the crucibles. Clay was added on both the inside and the outside of the crucibles and then they were used again.156 Furthermore, eleven Late Minoan III crucibles were found at Kommos, in different areas and from the Middle Minoan III-Late Minoan I. The later ones are smaller, have no base and are bridge-spouted. They come from three (habitation) areas (the house with the Snake Tube, North House, and area of building X).157

Figure 4. A moulding-box made out of wood. The two wooden frames are put together and the piece of wood which will create the runner has been positioned. This particular mould is today in use at Bäckedals Folkhögskola.

Figure 5. Clay crucibles M 21 and M 19 found at Kommos (after Blitzer 1995, Pl. 8.104).

Other casting equipment Crucibles Crucibles can be used to smelt, i.e. to extract the metal from the ore, and to melt the metal for cast.152 To melt and alloy copper and tin at Bäckedals Folkhögskola a clay crucible containing the metals was placed in a hearth or a bed of hot coal with walls of stones, which made the charcoal stay in place and also directed the air on the fire.153 The same procedure could be conducted when smelting the ore too.

Zakro has also revealed several crucibles (Middle Minoan III-Late Minoan I) in the House of the Niches, unfortunately no further details are known.158 Also at Mallia a crucible (Late Minoan IIIB) was found north of the seal workshop.159

The crucibles used in Minoan Crete contexts were made of clay or stone and had various shapes, but it seems as if the charcoal was placed in the crucible for smelting and melting activities. To secure the crucibles during the working process they were placed in charcoal or soil but this were not were the preliminary supply of heat came from.154 Plenty of crucibles have been found at various



Two different crucibles were identified at Gournia, one cylindrical with holes for a carrying device (Late Minoan II-Late Minoan I) and another bridge-spouted with three feet (Late Minoan I).160 155

There are at least one type of crucibles that is not represented here, Evely’s Type I (Evely 2000, 347). This type is designed as a bowl placed on a stand/stem. The stem is pierced as to be able to insert a handle through the hole when pouring the metal (reminds somewhat of the Gournia exemple referred to above). Early examples have been found at Aghia Photia in Tomb 10 and 45 (Betancourt & Muhly 2007, 147-150). At Myrtos Pyrgos III an example was also found; cf. Cadogan 1977-78, 76, Fig. 17. 156 Blitzer 1995, 502-504. Resembling crucibles: Cummer & Schofield 1984, 86-88, Pl. 65 (Keos). Atkinson et al. 1904, 191 (Phylakopi); Lamb 1928-30, 37, Pl. IX (Thermi, Lesbos). 157 Blitzer 1995, 504-505. 158 Orlandos 1976, 191. 159 Farnoux 1990, 915, Fig.10. 160 Hawes 1908, 32, Pl. 3, nos. 57 and 58. The cylindrical one was made of clay and was interpreted as a smelting pot. The other one was made of steatite.

 152

Smelting could also be conducted using a furnace which was the case at Chrysocamino; cf. Betancourt 2006, 109-123. For experiments using a replica of the Chrysocamino type see also Catapotis, Pryce & Bassiakos 2008, 113-121. 153 The clay crucibles at Bäckedals Folkhögskola were made of clay, coal dust and reindeer hair. 154 Coghlan 1975a, 71; Tylecote 1980, 201; Evely 2000, 346, 352.

14



Archaeological evidence for double axe production At the Unexplored Mansion (Knossos), seventeen (ten complete and seven fragmentary) handmade clay crucibles were found in different rooms (Late Minoan II). The shapes vary from semi-circular to oval with more or less pronounced spouts (some of them bridge-spouted) to facilitate pouring the molten metal; measurements of the rims are between 14x10 and 6.1x5.5 cm. There are visible metal remains in the crucibles and surface blackening on the outside which prove that these crucibles were used. The metal remains are not only from copper/bronze but, at least, three of the smaller crucibles have been used for more precious metals as gold.161

Cyprus and the Near East. Towards the base there was a hole for a tube to be placed; the tube was placed into the tuyère, and the tuyère was connected to the furnace or hearth. Skin was attached over the clay bowl, and by pulling this upwards and downwards, air was pumped where needed.169 The tuyère was a tapered cylindrical tube made of clay; the bellows was attached to one end and at the other end air was brought into the furnace, to keep the temperature high when smelting ore or melting metal.170 Building I at Palaikastro has revealed a tuyère and two moulds.171 Also eight tuyères were found in a deposit (though Late Minoan III) in Palaikastro; several had evidence of metallic residue and one was even clogged up.172

Excavations at Palaikastro have discovered several crucibles dating to different periods. In Building I a large number of bridge-spouted semi-circular crucibles dating to MMIIIb-LMIa were found.162 Furthermore, a Late Minoan III deposit was found at Palaikastro containing, among other things, three crucibles with metallic residue.163 In one of the crucibles there were still several (in total five) layers of slag (4-5 mm each) which also had run over the spout; in the slag small metal prills were detected. The prills were analysed and the residue contained 95% Cu and 5% Sn.164 Other equipment connected with the crucibles are tongs which were used to lift the crucible from the hearth. They were probably made of withies or metal strips.165 Tongs made of withies have not been identified, but a few metal tongs have been recognized on a few archaeological sites where also double axes were found at the Unexplored Mansion (Knossos), Mallia, Nerokourou, Pseira and two from Zakro.166 The lifting tongs and other pouring equipment must be pre-warmed and not wet before casting, because otherwise it could result in casting defects such as cold lapping.167

Figure 6. A pot bellows M 42 from Kommos (after Blitzer 1995, Pl. 8.105).

Finishing treatments To get the required shape and sharpness of the double axe after casting, various finishing treatments were accomplished. Cold-working and annealing removed flash, and formed the axe body and the cutting edges.173 Anvils, like those identified at Kommos, were probably used to support this kind of work.174 Also, stones for hammering the axe body and cutting edges were found (Fig. 7). There was a variety of stone hammers which probably were used depending on the work required. The stone hammers were spherical, facetted, ovoid, flat-disc, round or elongated.175 Metal sledgehammers were probably also used for this kind of work.176 Sledgehammers were

Bellows and Tuyères Extra air intake, in order to get the required heat in the hearth to melt down the metal, was provided by bellows. During excavations at Kommos three fragmentary finds of pot bellows were recorded (Fig. 6). They are thinwalled wheel-made and handmade bowls; the bestpreserved one shows that the bowl was attached to a long tube. The fired clay (bright orange, slip in colour buffwhite) was mixed with sand and small stones and chaff.168 This bellows resembles those recovered in

 169

Various forms of the pot bellows have been found in Cyprus and the Near East and for the operation of the pot bellows see Davey 1979, 101. This kind of bellows was also most probably preferred because it was easy to transport; cf. Davey 1979, 101-111, Fig. 2. This would make it easier to smelt the ore near the extracting point; cf. Branigan 1974, 62. 170 Tylecote 1980, 199. For the function and various forms of tuyères (found outside of Greece), cf. Tylecote 1981, 107-118. 171 Hemingway 1996, 250-251. 172 MacGillivray, Sackett, Driessen & Hemingway 1992, 144; Hemingway 1996, 218-221. 173 Branigan (1974, 81) suggests that the axes of his type II probably were cast in mould of type III, and then hammered into the concavesided shape of type II. According to Hemingway (1999, 357) signs of forming the objects can be identified on items from Pseira. 174 Blitzer 1995, 484-486. There were five anvils made of sandstone and two of chert. They are all rectangular and measurements are between L 80-20.8; 35-9.8; Th 14.4-8.6. 175 Evely 1993, 108-111. 176 Evely 1993, 97, 101.



161 Catling & Catling 1984, 219-220, 222, Pls. 199, 206-207; Evely 2000, 347-351, 404-405. 162 MacGillivray et al. 1989, 421; Evely 2000, 349, 351, Fig. 140. 163 MacGillivray, Sackett, Driessen & Hemingway 1992, 146; Hemingway 1996, 221-226. 164 Hemingway 1996, 225, Appendix III, 251-252. 165 Evely 2000, 365. Withies were chosen because of the wood’s flexibility and easiness as wood does not conduct heat. 166 For Pseira cf. Evely 2000, 365; Unexplored Mansion (Knossos), cf. Catling & Catling 1984, 215, Pls. 198h, 205, no. 1; for Mallia cf. Chapouthier & Demargne 1962, 58 no. 2207, Pl. 44; For Nerokourou cf. Vagnetti 1984, 159, Fig. 2.1, Pl. II.I; for Zakro cf. Platon 1970, 214, Pl. 338. 167 Cold lapping is dealt with in Chapter 3. 168 Blitzer 1995, 508-509.

15



The Minoan double axe. An experimental study of production and use Finally, the double axe needed to be shafted.185 Several small double axes were discovered during excavation at the Arkalochori cave and parts of wooden handles were preserved in the shaft holes. The shafts are believed to have been made of pinewood and juniper.186 Only juniper-tree, however, would be successful as handles for double axe tools, because of the resilience of the wood.187

identified at Aghia Triada and Psychro and besides these there are double axes, for example nos. 115 and 207, which show extensive use-wear.177 Furthermore, other bronze tools, such as chisels, were most probably used to remove flash.178 Chisels were found at several locations, for example Mallia, where several different types were recognized, which implies different working actions, for example, finishing treatments.179

Figure 8. Grinding and sharpening the cutting edge with a pumice stone. Figure 7. Cold-working the cutting edge with a stone on a stone anvil.

Conclusions Evidence of mining in the Minoan period on Crete has been, and remains, a question of debate. It seems likely, however, that there were mining activities, at least at Lebena, which are indicated by mining galleries: but of what period? The Minoans also imported copper from the early stages of the Minoan period and through the whole Bronze Age. The sources which supplied Crete with copper were most likely located at first in the Cyclades and later on in the Lavrion area. Besides these two sources, Cyprus, the Taurus mountains and Sardinia are areas which are thought to have provided copper to Minoan Crete.

The last part of the finishing treatment was grinding and polishing the axe, and the most important was to sharpen the cutting edge (Fig. 8). Blitzer identified thirteen pumice stones at Kommos which probably were used for these purposes.180 Furthermore at the Unexplored Mansion, Knossos, pumice was identified and interpreted as used for grinding and sharpening work.181 Sandstone was also most likely used for filing, grinding and polishing. Sandstone used for these purposes was identified in the Unexplored Mansion (Knossos).182 The axe, both when brand new and when used, obviously needed to take a final cutting edge; this was done with a whetstone.183 Whetstones were identified in the archaeological records at the Unexplored Mansion (Knossos), Knossos, Phaistos, Gournia and Palaikastro.184

Not only the origins of the copper sources are complicated when addressing metallurgy in the Bronze Age. The knowledge of how to create bronze was available: in two kinds of bronzes, arsenic-bronze and tinbronze. Both arsenic and tin have a strengthening effect on copper, which meant that the end product was harder and stronger than if only made of copper. The most intriguing questions concerning alloying are how much knowledge the bronze smith had about the hardening



177 For Aghia Triada cf, Deshayes 1960, 105, Pl. 60, nos. 1 and 3; J. Shaw 1973, 53, Fig. 41a-b; For Psychro cf. Boardman 1961, 52, no. 225, Fig. 24, Pl. XVII. 178 Cf. experiments, Chapter 5. 179 Evely 1993, 2-11; For Mallia cf. Deshayes & Dessenne 1959, 69, nos. 3a-e, Pl. 21, no. 3. For an overview and representation of the different types cf. Evely 1993, 2-19. The chisels were not only used for metal-working, as the different types indicate, wood-working is probably the most common area of use for a chisel. 180 Blitzer 1995, 509-510. 181 Evely 1984, 12 (D 12), 229, Pl. 211a-c; Evely 1993, 112. In a floor fill, Late Minoan I-II. 182 Evely 1984, 65 (M 143), 75 (N 72), 227, Pl. 209, nos. 5 and 6 & Pl. 227, no. 10. They were found in the Late Minoan II context. 183 Evely 1993, 112. 184 For the Unexplored Mansion cf. Evely 1984, 226, Pl. 209, nos. 9, 16, 18 and 19 & Pl. 227, nos. 17 and 20. They were from Late Minoan II and post-Late Minoan contexts; for Phaistos cf. Levi 1976, Pl. 242

 (Middle Minoan I-II); for Gournia cf. Hawes 1908, 32, Pl. 3, nos. 29-31 (Middle Minoan III-Late Minoan I); for Palaikastro cf. Warren 1965, 314, no. 103, Fig. 21, Pl. 79e (Late Minoan IB). 185 Mavriyannaki 1983b, 202. 186 Diapoulis 1980, 131. Sp. Marinatos (1974, 95) concludes that the handles were made of Abies Cephallenica (five shafts) and Cedrus (two shafts), though Diapoulis objects to this. 187 Today the most preferred woods for tool handles are ash and hickory. They both are, as the juniper-tree, resilient and elastic and therefore suitable as handles.

16



Archaeological evidence for double axe production effects of arsenic and tin, and whether the smith deliberately added the metals to the copper or not. There are, as yet, no conclusive answers to these questions for the first, but it has to be so for the second. Evidence of metallurgical work has been identified in several sites on Crete, but as shown by Evely it is difficult to pinpoint the exact production.188 Indications of manufacturing double axes were found at various sites and consist of moulds, crucibles, bellows and tuyères. I agree with Evely that the only sites where the production of double axes can be verified are at Kommos, Mallia and Palaikastro.189 One kind of mould is not visible in the archaeological material, namely the moulds used in the so-called flask technique. Because these moulds primarily consisted of materials easily destroyed, i.e. sand and wood, this relatively straightforward casting technique should not, however, be ruled out as a technique used during the Minoan period. Finally, finishing treatments were also an important part of the manufacturing process. Cold-working and annealing were probably conducted on anvils, and a sharp cutting edge was probably attained by filing and polishing with sandstone or pumice.



 188 189

Evely 2000, 335-341. Evely 2000, 338, 341.

17



3. ANALYSES OF MANUFACTURING

The following chapter analyses the manufacturing process of the double axes. The analyses will concern characteristic signs which can be detected from casting. Casting joints from a two-part mould, impressions of sand, scabs and dirt inclusions not only reveal what kind of mould the double axes were cast in, but also show the skill of the smith. In addition to identifying the mould, there are also casting defects. Gas- and blowholes, traces of runners, shrinkage cavities, tearing or cracking of the metal and cold lapping are features which are found and identified on the double axes.190 Identifying casting defects will give a further understanding of the Minoan smith’s skills and knowledge of casting, i.e. whether the smith knew how to avoid unwanted features.

the suitably prepared metal samples can then be thoroughly studied.191 The most important information achieved by undertaking such studies is that manufacturing processes and finishing treatments are revealed, i.e. from casting to annealing and coldworking. Unfortunately few studies like these have been undertaken. However, Northover and Evely analysed tools from the Ashmolean Museum according to this principle, where three double axes were included from Middle Minoan III-Late Minoan I.192 Their investigation revealed finishing treatments, i.e. annealing and coldworking which, for example, reduced the thickness of double axe no. 13 by 20-25%. Furthermore, Tselios has analysed Early Minoan daggers from the Mesara plain. His investigations have contributed to the identification of at least seven separate activities in finishing treatments.193 Tselios has also shown that earlier objects from the Early Minoan II-III period had a lesser amount of finishing treatments than the later objects from the Middle Minoan I-II period. Four double axes were included in his study, the results which he has shared with me and will be referred to later.194 These studies are important because they reveal the technical skills and awareness of the Minoan smiths, and further studies of Minoan material would give us additional information and help in understanding the manufacturing and finishing treatments of bronze tools. Therefore in the future it would be desirable if tools are both studied visually and metallographically.

When approaching the double axes in the past, typologies have been an important, or often the only, way to study them. The axes were divided into different categories depending on their shape, i.e. how concave the axe body is and how convex the cutting edges are. Before considering finishing treatments of the double axes, I investigated these typologies and also examined why the axes have different appearances. Were the different types products of different moulds or can there be an additional explanation? Finishing treatments were required after casting and the first step consisted of cold-working or annealing, for example, to reduce the axe body’s thickness or to give the axe the required shape. Grinding and polishing the axe were also a part of the finishing treatment, which removed unevenness left from, for example, the running system and mould, i.e. flash. The last stage was to sharpen the cutting edges. Different working purposes lay behind different finishing treatments, for instance how slim an axe body and how sharp a cutting edge was needed. The finishing treatment will contribute to our understanding of the kind of work which was performed with the axe, because it implies what condition the axe was in.

Besides casting and casting defects in manufacturing, finishing treatments and decoration are identified on several axes. The decoration can be a part of the finishing treatments but can also be a part of the casting process. Different possibilities will be presented and discussed. The decorations are of two different kinds, incised or cast. The analyses in this chapter were conducted on those double axes that I had permission to study during visits at the Ashmolean Museum, the Archaeological Museum of Chania, the Archaeological Museum of Rethymnon and the Archaeological Museum of Aghios Nikolaos.

The visual examination which is conducted in this study could be supplemented with metallographic studies. The study of metallography consists of small samples taken from metal objects, which are studied under an optical microscope which reflects light through the microscope’s lens and onto the metal sample. The surface sections of

 191

Scott 1991, 57. Northover and Evely 1995. The double axes are nos. 7, 10 and 13. 193 Tselios 2004, 45; Tselios 2006, 193-197; Tselios 2008a; Tselios 2008b, 124-129. 194 I would like to thank Thomas Tselios for guiding and explaining the different stages of annealing and cold-working and showing the daggers and double axes to me. The double axes are not included in Tselios’s work and I have the permission to use these results, for which I am extremely grateful. The axes are: Palaikastro inv. no. 1382 and inv. no. 1128, Phaistos inv.no. 349 and Pseira inv. no. 1590 (not a double axe tool). 192



190 The casting terminology used is modern. However, there is one exception: the so-called traces of runners are, my own term which I have decided to use instead of “wedging grooves”; see below. The modern casting terms can be found in Heine, Loper & Rosenthal 1967; Åkesson 1976; Svensson 1990.

18



Analyses of manufacturing

 conducted on living trees, stone and bone. The material chosen was of different hardness so that different usewear was created on the cutting edges and axe bodies. The experimental part of the study will be presented in Chapter 5.

Problems with the analytical and interpretative process To examine metals is difficult, sometimes impossible, due to many factors. Depending on the cast and the life cycle of the double axe, the surface can show different defects. A good cast results in a good surface. A good surface has a better resistance; a compact material is able to ward off ablation better, i.e. the item’s surface is not so easily damaged. A defective cast results in a defective surface, which does not have the same resistance. The defective surface is open and more vulnerable; therefore water, wind and dirt are more destructive to this surface. As a result, a minor casting defect can, in the time the axe lies buries in the ground, become worse and larger. I cannot always, with confidence, say what it is or what has happened and give a technically acceptable answer for all the casting defects and use-wear on the double axes. This applies to all the visual examinations, conducted by either myself or others. Time distorts and changes the evidence.

Casting and casting defects As shown in Chapter 2, the moulds were made out of stone, clay or sand, which implies that the axes were cast in different techniques. The moulds not only reflect different techniques but resulted in different end products. A stone mould would probably cast the thickest and least defined axe because such a mould was not as precise as clay or sand moulds were. The clay and sand moulds were first prepared by making life-size models of the desired cast, then after the pattern was removed the axe was cast in metal. The more time-consuming process of the clay and sand moulds gave a more controlled and precise result.

Examinations were conducted on twenty-three of the 229 axes in the catalogue for all of the above-mentioned features.195 The results might be different if more double axes had been studied, although the axes investigated show good examples of casting and casting defects as well as a variety of use-wear.

However, independently of which technique was used, casting defects appeared. The moulds left diverse kinds of visible characteristics on the cast, which sometimes reflect the mould type used. A two-part mould, for instance, can leave a casting joint visible on one of the long sides. A flask mould can leave impressions of sand on the axe surface in the form of tiny holes. Scabs are a direct indication of a sand mould which was packed too hard. Dirt in the mould would leave impressions as dirt inclusions in the cast. If the mould was not preheated sufficiently, damage may have occurred on the axe body in form of gas- or blowholes. The running system can also leave traces on the axe, in the form of grooves on one of the long sides. The metal, when cooling off in the mould, can behave in different ways, sometimes causing shrinkage cavities. The shrinkage of metal while cooling off can also appear in the form of hot- or cold tears. Another aspect which is important is the temperature of the molten metal; if not hot enough when poured into the mould it could cause cold lapping, i.e. the metal did not fill the mould and laps were created. Once the finishing treatments were accomplished, the casting joint and other uneven surface damages were ground and polished, which created a smooth surface.196

Another problem with assessing edge wear and traces of use on cutting edges and axe bodies is in determining the degree of use. For how long was the axe used? Do dents randomly occurring on the cutting edge mean that it was only used for a short period of time, say 10 minutes? Does a blunt axe really imply that it was used for several hours or several days? Further, it may be that the axes were at some point resharpened, but when? Can we tell the difference between sharpening occasions and is it possible to tell if the use-wear came from the first period of use? These are problems that we really cannot solve, although experimental work can give us an idea of both the degree of finishing treatments and the use of different materials. An additional difficulty is the identification of the material worked on. Can we really positively identify the materials through the use-wear, i.e. dents and striations on the cutting edges and the axe bodies? To some degree we can identify the material worked on: for example, the difference between tools used on wood and on stone can be identified by studying the cutting edges and the axe bodies. Furthermore, it is important to do experimental work on a variety of materials to be able to compare the experimental axes with the Minoan ones. In this way we may get a more conclusive answer from the visual examination of the Minoan axes.

The technical survey can contribute to the understanding of the manufacturing process during the Bronze Age in Crete. Furthermore, it addresses the quality and characteristics of the axes in the as-cast state. I will first deal with features which were directly caused by the mould, followed by those caused by the running system and finally defects caused by the metal itself. One interesting detail is that every single axe studied had some sort of casting defect.

To give further substance to this study and to try to answer the questions raised above, experiments were





195

Unfortunately only the results of twenty-one double axes are presented here, as I do not have permission to publish Aghios Nikolaos inv. no. 1491 and inv.no. 3097.

196

For casting terms cf., Heine, Loper & Rosenthal 1967; Åkesson 1976; Svensson 1990.

19



The Minoan double axe. An experimental study of production and use system, i.e. where the molten metal was poured into the mould. Producing a double axe and attaining a perfect shape, as no. 3 has, can hardly be probable when open mould casting is considered, because the double axe is well shaped and the long flat sides are equally smooth and well designed in form. If cast in an open mould one face would be formed with an up-raised centre which slopes gently down to the cutting edges (shape of the mould) and the other face would be flat because of this side being open (no mould). There are no signs of heavy hammering on the surfaces or other deformities, which would have been evident especially on one face if it had been cast in an open mould.

Figure 9. Double axe terminology (after Evely 1993, Fig. 18). But before getting into further details, Table 1 summarises the casting defects which appear on the studied double axes. Fig. 9 presents the axe terminology used throughout the study.

Figure 10. The casting joint as identified on no. 2 (drawing by M. Lowe Fri).

Casting joints Several axes have casting joints, which indicate casting in a two-part mould of clay, sand or stone. The casting joints are visible as a line on the long sides. Several axes have thin casting joints and others appear to have thicker ones. The thicker casting line suggests that the mould was not closed in a satisfactory way due to the fact that the mould parts did not match, or was closed in a careless way.197 During the casting procedure, the metal would ooze from the mould and fill out the joint, creating flash. On removing the cast, a flash line is visible, where the mould was imperfectly matched. The flash line, i.e. the excess of metal, is removed during finishing treatments to create a smooth surface. Even though finishing treatments were accomplished, casting joints are still visible on the long sides of several axes.

Impressions of sand Sand impressions indicate that the axes were cast with the flask technique using moulding boxes or other clay or sand moulds.199 The impressions are identified on both axe bodies and the long sides of the axes. All the replicas which were cast using the flask technique showed exactly the same patterns of small holes as the Minoan double axes did. The defect is a result of loose sand in the mould when casting. Impressions of sand are identified on four double axes (Fig. 11). Nos. 2, 4 and 12, were definitely cast in sand moulds since small holes are visible on the axe bodies.

Casting joints are identified on eight double axes. On the upper long sides of nos. 4 and 2 thin casting joints are visible (Fig. 10). Nos. 7 and 10 both show broad casting joints. There are double axes that show traces of finishing treatments on the casting joint; no. 6 is a good example of how the joint line was nicely removed to create a smooth surface. An axe in the Rethymnon museum (no. 20) has an unusual casting joint (especially on one side), which is an extension of where the running system (see below) was placed. On one of the long sides of no. 5, it is possible to identify traces of a line.

A rough and uneven surface can also be seen on no. 11 both on the lower long side and on the axe body. This can be a result of casting, though the axe has oxidized and is therefore difficult to interpret. Rough surfaces on the double axe can imply casting in a stone mould or an open mould. The thickness of the axe is probably related to the type of mould it was cast in. A sand mould is used for more defined and slim axes and stone moulds for less defined and thicker ones, because of the different possibilities of the casting techniques. There is definitely a difference in the appearances of the double axes. Examples of this were observed at the Archaeological Museum of Heraklion and the Archaeological Museum of Aghios Nikolaos (for example no. 203, which showed a very rough surface).

A double axe with incisions from Helenes (no. 3), and especially the mould of this double axe, has been discussed at length. Mavriyannaki believes that the socalled “wedging groove” proves that an open mould was used and the groove on the long side was where the molten metal was poured into the mould.198 The “wedging groove” is a hole created by the running 197 198

Åkesson 1976, 50-52; Svensson 1990, 485. Mavriyannaki 1978, 201.

199

20

Åkesson 1976, 152-153; Svensson 1990, 492.

Analyses of manufacturing Table 1. Casting defects on the examined double axes. Catalogu e Number

No.1 No. 2 No. 3 No. 4 No. 5 No. 6 No. 7

Castin g joint

Impressio n of sand

Scab s

Dirt inclusion s

Gas- and blowhole s

X X X X X X X

Shrinkag e cavities

X X X

X

X

X

X

X

X X

X X X

X X X

X

X X X

X

X X

X

X

X X

Cold lappin g

X

X X

Tearing

X

No. 8 No. 9 No. 10 No. 11 No. 12 No. 13 No. 14 No. 15 No. 16 No. 17 No. 18 No. 19 No. 20 No. 21

Traces of runner s

X X X X X X X X X X X X X X

X X

X possibl e X X

X X X X X X X X X

X X

X

Figure 11. Impressions of sand and dirt inclusions on axe A, cast at Bäckedals Folkhögskola. The impressions of sand are the smaller holes mostly concentrated to the centre of the axe and the dirt inclusions are the larger and more irregular ones.

21

The Minoan double axe. An experimental study of production and use Dirt inclusions were identified on five double axes. Three axes, nos. 9, 15 and 19, show partly uneven surfaces and some irregular holes, which probably are dirt inclusions. The holes on the axe face with Linear A incision no. 6 are interpreted by Evely as blowholes.204 Lowe, on the other side, identified the irregular holes as dirt inclusions because of the texture of the holes.205 The other side of the axe body also shows signs of dirt inclusions, although not as numerous as on the Linear A side. A slightly different appearance of this defect is identified on no. 1. The rough surface of this axe could be a combined effect of the mould and the metal, which was not hot enough when casting. The uneven surface carries impressions from a mould, although it was not to be compared with the holes from a sand mould and most probably should be identified as dirt inclusions.

Scabs The identification of scabs implies that sand moulds were used for casting. Scabs appear on the axe body and resemble crusts.200 The defective areas are covered with small lumps of sand grains; they appear as if they could be lifted up, but are attached to the axe (Fig. 12). Scabs are caused by sand moulds, which were too tightly packed. When the hot molten metal is poured into the mould the heat makes the sand tend to expand but due to the tight packing, there is no room for expansion.201 The heat causes the sand to move upwards and the molten metal surrounds it. Sand grains are trapped and fastened in the metal and become burnt, hard and abrasive. Scabs are thus sand grains encapsulated in the metal poured in the mould when casting. Scabs are identified on four double axes. The axe bodies of nos. 4, 5 and 11 reveal typical patches of scabs.

Gas- and blowholes Axes are affected too by gas- and blowholes. These features can be caused when casting both in a stone and a sand mould, but they can be avoided with knowledge and experience. Gas- and blowholes are identified as small uneven craters or cavities on the surface of the axes (Fig. 13). The surfaces of the cavities or craters are rough with raised areas which are irregular, uneven in size and sharp (pointed), an altogether different appearance if compared with the impressions of sand, which are small rounded cavities with smooth surfaces. Gas- and blowholes are an effect of gas or moisture trapped in the mould when casting.206 This often occurs with permanent moulds (like stone, clay and metal), when not preheated. Permanent moulds (i.e. all except the flasks with their sand) do not have the ability to allow excess moisture in the form of steam to permeate the mould material and escape. The steam is trapped and the oxygen is burnt away, leaving hydrogen trapped in small pockets against the surface. Upon solidification these gas globules give gas- and blowholes as surface defects. An abnormal excess of moisture can also produce these holes internally or even cause the mould to explode.

The identification of scabs can vary if the scabs are wornoff when using the axe. Worn off scabs are visible as small holes together with scabs. This phenomenon is identified on nos. 4, 11 and 21.

Figure 12. Scabs are sand grains which have been trappd by molten metal during casting and are stuck to the axe surface. If left on the axe they look like lumps, and if they are removed the scabs causes small holes in the axe surface (drawing by G. Lowe).

Dirt inclusions Dirt inclusions are a defect which cannot prove conclusive for telling between sand or stone moulds; the defect can result with both mould types. The rough and uneven appearances of the axe bodies can be due to different reasons, dirt inclusions being one (for other surface defects, cf. impressions of sand, scabs, gas- and blowholes). Dirt inclusions appear as holes and are rough, irregular and untidy, and look gritty, crumb-like or sandpaper-like (Fig. 11).202 They are caused by dirt in the mould when casting. The dirt can, for example, come from the crucible or the molten metal. To avoid it the surface of the molten metal should be scraped off to remove any impurities before casting.203

In the studied material there are three double axes of pure copper, according to the material analysis. 207 To cast pure copper is difficult and knowledge of how molten copper reacts is important to the smith. When melting to obtain tin- or arsenic-bronzes, the fluid metal does not absorb oxygen in the melting furnace atmosphere, as pure does. Another difference is that tin improves fluidity which makes the metal easier to pour into the mould. However,

204

Evely 1993, 44, no. 42. Discussion with Lowe during a visit to Ashmolean Museum, Oxford, 24-25 February 2004. 206 Blowholes and gas holes have slightly different appearances. Because of my limited experience of casting and casting effects I will treat them as one defect. Åkesson 1976, 128-131, 140-142; Svensson 1990, 490, 491. There are also other objects that show the same phenomena, for example copper ingots; cf. Tylecote 1980, 194. 207 Mosso 1908, 583; Popham 1984, 23-24: H25; Junghans, Sangmeister & Schröder 1974, 244-245. 205

200

Heine, Loper & Rosenthal 1967, 176; Åkesson 1976, 92-93; Svensson 1990, 488. 201 Quartz (SiO²) in sand expands and changes shape from triangular to hexagonal at 573ºC. 202 Åkesson 1976, 152-153; Svensson 1990, 492. 203 Dr. Evely has brought to my attention that the bridge-spouted crucibles were probably meant to do this in the pour.

22

Analyses of manufacturing

Figure 13.Gas- and blowholes as they appear on the axe body of no. 7. On the right there is a crack situated in the centre of the cutting edge. This crack is caused by cold lapping (drawing by R. Lindberg) When studying the “wedging grooves”, it became clear that in several cases the grooves did not follow the long side all the way to the shaft hole. This means that the grooves would not have supported a wedge driven into the handle. Are these so-called “wedging grooves” really meant for securing the handle?

when melting pure copper, it absorbs gases, and when poured into a mould this sometimes results in gas- and blowholes, which reduce the strength of the double axe. Coghlan has conducted experiments to establish the ancient way of casting pure copper to avoid these effects. A conclusion drawn is that a riser (a vertical tube) at the highest point of the mould is essential, so the gas can escape and so prevent blowholes.208 There are six double axes recognized with gas- and blowholes. Typical examples are identified on the axe bodies of nos. 7, 8, 14, 15 and 16. The uneven surface of no. 21 most probably comes from casting. Gas- and blowholes are a possibility, but the surface has an acceptable finish. The differences of the two axe faces may be due to different states of preservation before excavation.

Figure 14. The possible design of the core (permission from Evely 1993, Fig. 18).

Traces of runners Evely has presented a theory of how the core, to cast the shaft hole, probably was formed. The core had features projecting horizontally to form “wedging grooves” on the axe (Fig.14).209 These grooves were cast so that wedges could be placed in them and hammered into the shaft, functioning as a securing device for the shaft. If Evely is right in his assumption, the long sides with the “wedging grooves” should be the upper longside.210

Another possibility for explaining these grooves can be found in the casting technology. When casting in a twopart mould (clay, sand or stone) there are features to pour the molten metal into the mould, which are called runners. The runners are placed as two channels on one of the long sides of the mould. In the case of the double axes there is evidence of casting with one or two runners. There can be an overflow of metal when the mould is fed, and the overflow is left in the runners. When the running system is removed from the mould, traces of the runners can be visible as flash, i.e. the overflow of metal, which is broken off and leaves these grooves. The grooves vary and some are visible as uneven elongated holes, just as if the flash had been broken off and accidentally damaged the long side of the axe. In this state they are not connected with the shaft hole unless, by accident, the broken-off flash caused a tear down towards the shaft hole.

208

Coghlan 1975a, 65-67. Evely 1993, Fig. 21. Evely was not the first to recognize this phenomenon. Mavriyannaki has studied the double axes with incised figures and also commented on the grooves. She observed that not all “wedging grooves” are in direct contact with the shaft hole, so using all these for fastening the double axes could not have been the case. The incised double axes studied by Mavriyannaki (1978, 202-203) have a groove just beside the shaft hole, so her final interpretation is that it is a device for hanging up the tool on the wall. It is unlikely that the axes were suspended with the help of the groove situated next to the shaft hole. But hanging up a double axe should not be excluded because the archaeological material shows that this was actually done. Evidence that double axes were suspended during the Minoan period can be seen on a fresco from Knossos (Cameron & Hood 1967, 32-33, Pl. V). A small double axe from the Arkalochori cave has a ring in the lower end of the gold handle; cf. Sp. Marinatos 1935b, 218, Fig. 19; Evans 1964, 346, Fig. 290 d. Terracotta double axes and other more recent votive double axes have, instead of a

209 210

handle, a ring directly placed on the middle of the axe blade (Papadimitriou 1948, 102, Fig. 6; Labrinoudakis 1975, 173, Pl. 149Ȗ).

23

The Minoan double axe. An experimental study of production and use When cast and unworked, the grooves are crude and uneven and not connected with the shaft hole. Finishing treatment is necessary to connect them to the shaft hole if they are to be of any use. Some of the grooves are really worked on (some nearly as long as the axe blade) and were most certainly created for a specific purpose. However, there are also grooves which are left crude and not connected with the shaft hole. If the core, as Evely suggests, created the so-called “wedging grooves” and were cast for the purpose of shafting, why are they not visible on all the axes? And as for the grooves worked on, why are they not all connected to the shaft hole?

Traces of runners (“wedging grooves”) were not a conscious practical aspect of the casting process, as the different finishing treatments showed. Six of the double axes show that the traces of a runner did not create a groove. Five of the axes show that different treatments were performed on the grooves; one was left as a hole not connected at all to the shaft hole, and the others were worked nicely to a groove probably without a lot of effort. The running system on six of the axes needed more extensive work after casting to form grooves. Finally, three of the axes show that grooves connected to the shaft hole were left without any finishing treatment. The ones connected to the shaft hole were certainly used for a practical purpose as Evely and others have suggested, although they were not cast as such on purpose. One axe had worked grooves, though none of them were connected to the shaft hole.

Therefore I do not agree with the theory that the “wedging grooves” are cast as Evely suggests. I suggest that they are the result of the running system which was worked on at times after casting. The finishing treatments created these grooves, which most probably had a practical function. In the catalogue, when they appear on the axes they are identified as traces of runner(s), and descriptions of what finishing treatments were accomplished are included. However, when traces of runners are visible, that side was accordingly identified as the upper long side; this is something of a supposition on my part and needs to be related to the use-wear, which can help in revealing which way around the axe was shafted.

There may be yet one other aspect in the interpretation of these traces of runners and their possible use. Could the grooves as functioning components have been a later invention or development? The worked-out grooves seem only to be found during the Late Bronze Age, from Middle Minoan III-Late Minoan III, which is a time span of ca. 1700-1200 BC. It can therefore be suggested that this was a development from the Middle Minoan to the Late Minoan period, i.e. from the first palace period to the second palace period.

Shrinkage cavities Shrinkage cavities occur when the metal solidifies in a mould (clay, sand or stone mould).211 All metal poured into a mould goes through a running system and this area becomes superheated. After the mould is filled up, solidification takes place. The point furthest from the runner solidifies first, in the case of an axe, the cutting edge. The inner parts of the casting cool off in turn and the thickest part around the shaft hole is the last part to cool and solidify. This is due not only to the fact that this is the thickest part, but also because it is in contact with the core probably made of sand, which becomes red-hot when the metal is poured into the mould. The axe hardens one section at a time and makes the structure of the metal harder. The different metallic structures in the cast interact between themselves in solidifying so that the still liquid metal is drawn to the outer areas of the casting. If liquid shrinkage occurs anywhere as a result of such migration, it is fed and replenished from thicker sections which are still fluid, i.e. areas around the running system and the thicker section around the shaft hole.212 Because the structures within the molten metal are so drawn in different directions during solidification, the result can be shrinkage cavities. With the axe this phenomenon left shrinkage cavities in and around the shaft hole in the vicinity of the running system, the last place to solidify,

Figure 15. Traces of runners as identified on seventeen double axes. On this drawing both the traces of runners are connected to the shaft hole (permission from Evely 1993, Fig. 19). Traces of runners are identified on seventeen double axes (Fig. 15). As stated above, the double axes were cast with one or two runners. There are five double axes where traces of one runner can be identified (nos. 3, 5, 15, 17 and 18). On no. 17, from Chania, the probable trace left by the runner can most likely be identified as a cavity in the form of a triangle. This axe was cast in a mould shaped differently. Traces of two runners are identified on twelve double axes (nos. 1, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 16, 19, 20 and 21). The traces vary in appearance and several are worked on after casting. Others are left in an as-cast state and some are not connected with the shaft hole.

211

Åkesson 1976, 118-119; Svensson 1990, 489. Dawkins & Bosanquet (1923, 117) already addressed the problem of liquid shrinkage. Dawkins thought that the reason for the shrinkage in the shaft hole was that the metallurgist turned the mould upside down when it was cooling off to prevent the axe face from showing shrinkage.

212

24

Analyses of manufacturing and so able to be drawn upon the longest to replenish other parts. Evely’s core for casting a double axe also has features for so-called “ears”, which he also believes were made intentionally (Fig. 14).213 The “ears” are placed approximately on the middle of the core and are two elongated sections projecting from the core, which create cavities in the axe body when cast. These cavities (“ears”) are, according to Evely, made to secure the shaft safely by hammering down two wedges in the shaft hole parallel with the shaft. The cavities described by Evely as “ears” are, however, most likely not planned features produced by the core. I believe that they are shrinkage cavities caused by liquid shrinkage during solidification. These cavities appear in the shaft hole because that is the thickest part of the axe and therefore the last place for the metal to solidify; and furthermore, this part feeds the rest of the axe mould with the sufficient amount of molten metal.

Figure 16. Some of the shrinkage cavities look exactly like the small impression on this drawing, though they can also be undulating in the whole shaft hole (permission from Evely 1993, Fig. 18). No. 9 is different from the shrinkage described above. In connection with shrinkage cavities in the shaft hole, which are of different sizes, there is a hole running straight down the axe body. The hole is uneven and is next to the shrinkage in the shaft hole. This phenomenon is definitely related to shrinkage when the axe solidified.214 Two of the axes (nos. 19 and 20) have a small piece of metal in the shaft hole, although the axes were used.

The conclusion I draw from this is that the “ears” that Evely refers to may be a result of shrinkage during solidification. The features called “ears” and “wedging grooves” are most probably results of the casting process. That they were accidental was confirmed when a study was undertaken of the appearance of the shrinkage cavities. The axes that I studied showed that the shrinkage differed in all cases; some cavities are small and go deep into the axe body, and some are shallow and elongated in the shaft hole. Even if one produced a series of absolutely identical moulds and running systems these cavities would never appear the same. This is due to the casting temperature, which has a decisive effect on shrinkage – the higher the temperature, the more visible shrinkage and more visible defects, and vice versa.

Shrinkage cavities as purposeful aspects of the actual casting process are highly unlikely. Seven of the axes have no shrinkage cavities and there are fourteen which have them. None of the cavities are worked on after casting. The shrinkage cavities, when visible, do not show the same shape or depth in the axe, which should be expected if the cavities were made on purpose. The shrinkage cavities were certainly not used.

I will therefore call them shrinkage cavities. These will be found close to the long side where the runners were placed.

Hot tears, hot cracks or cold tears Besides the shrinkage cavities other features can occur during solidification of the axe. Hot tearing or hot cracking can appear in clay, sand and stone moulds, as elongated cracks which occur when the cast is cooling off.215 The molten metal draws and pulls in many directions when solidifying, and the thin section that cools off and solidifies first starts pulling away from areas that are thicker and more voluminous. At a certain stage of the solidifying process the metal is no longer fluid, but is not entirely solid either; it is mushy, soft and yieldable. If the yieldable metal finally gives in somewhere, it cracks. Another possibility for the origin of tears or cracks in the cast is when the cast is removed too soon from the mould. The axe, still hot, is taken out of the mould with the running system. The sudden exposure to cold air, which speeds up the solidification, sets up a stress and strain in a kind of shock effect. This also

Shrinkage cavities are identified on fourteen double axes (Fig. 16). There are specimens that only have one shrinkage cavity in the shaft hole: nos. 5 and 21. The most common case is two shrinkage cavities of somewhat similar size (when shrinkage cavities from the different axes are compared to each other, they are not of comparable sizes) as is seen in nos. 10, 13, 15, 16 and 20. On no. 14 the shrinkage is deeper on one side than on the other. There are also axes that show minimal shrinkage in the shaft hole; nos. 3, 8 and 18. Shrinkage can also appear as uneven and undulating in the shaft hole, as in no. 12. No. 19 also has uneven shrinkage but the cavity is deeper on one side than on the other.

214

213

This phenomenon is connected with shrinkage; cf. Svensson 1990, 488-489. 215 Heine, Loper & Rosenthal 1967, 204-206; Åkesson 1976, 180-182 (hot tearing), 184-185 (cold tearing); Svensson 1990, 493.

Evely 1993, Fig. 21.

25

The Minoan double axe. An experimental study of production and use

 causes tears or cracks, so-called cold tears, on the axe. All these, the so-called hot tears, hot cracks and cold tears, are not really cracks defined as sharp lines, but tear structures. The phenomena occur on several axes and are visible as cracks in the area of the shaft hole or running system. If carefully studied they can be separated, although due to lack of experience they are dealt with as one group.216

hole, while close to the cutting edge it appears as a crack. The axe body also has evidence of cold lapping. Minor areas of cold lapping are also identified on nos. 1 and 19. One axe from the Ashmolean Museum (no. 7) has several areas of cold lapping on the axe body (Fig. 13). One of the cutting edges has a crack; cold lapping can cause this but Northover and Evely mention sulphur inclusions, some of them elongated in the axe.218 Sulphur inclusions can cause weakness in the casting; this is possibly why the axe split.219 On no. 3, a different appearance of cold lapping is identified on one of the cutting edges. The area destroyed has started to flake due to cold lapping. The flaking is a result of the metal not being homogeneous when solidifying.

Figure 17. Tears or cracks as they are situated on the long side of no. 9 (drawing by M. Lowe Fri). Tears or cracks are identified on seven double axes (Fig. 17). Only one of the double axes (no. 18) has one crack. More usual are several cracks or tears, which are elongated as on nos. 5, 9 and 19. A number of tears can also be identified on no. 11 in the area of one of the runners. On no. 2 tears are recognized close to the shaft hole and towards the edge where the running system was removed. No. 8 revealed cracks or tears, although the texture of the cracks is different from the abovementioned.

Finishing treatments Finishing treatments of the double axes included several stages, i.e. hammering, grinding, filing and polishing. The axe body and long sides could be hammered to receive their final form, and apart from altering the shape of the axe, hammering also hardened the metal structure.220 These procedures could be accomplished either by annealing or by cold-working. When the final shape was attained the axe was ground and polished with a stone used as an abrasive to remove unevenness, such as flash and other casting defects like gas- or blowholes. The most important step was probably to form and sharpen the cutting edges. The V-shape of the cutting edge was attained first by hammering and finally sharpened up with a stone.

Cold lapping The temperature of the molten metal is very important when casting, regardless of whether it is cast in clay, sand or stone moulds. Cold laps are identified as irregular or somewhat rounded, small-edged cracks in the cast where the metal has not sufficiently filled the mould. The irregularities are smooth and soft on the edges like solidified lava. Cold lapping is an effect of molten metal which does not have sufficient temperature, i.e. is not hot enough, to give a correct fluidity and unhindered flow into all parts of the mould.217 When the metal is poured into the mould, it immediately begins to lose temperature, i.e. heat is conducted away into the mould walls and the air in the mould as it is pushed out. The molten metal, when not hot enough, does not flow and, becomes sluggish and congealed. The metal does not pour easily into the mould, and this resistance hinders it from flowing together and becoming homogeneous. These factors give resistance to the fluidity of the metal and cause cold laps.

The importance of studying and identifying finishing treatments is twofold. First, the typologies presented in this chapter show diversity in the concavity of the axe bodies and the convexity of the cutting edges. But what do the different appearances of the double axes actually represent – are they the result of the tools being intended for dissimilar usages or is it simply that the finishing treatments alone proved decisive? Secondly, in identifying these processes, we also learnt more about the bronze smith’s work and the effort of producing tools.221 Different finishing treatments could also point to different working activities. A slim and rather long axe is appropriate for cutting trees, and a more compact axe



Cold lapping is identified on five double axes. The axe with the most typical traces of cold lapping is no. 6. On the longside, cold lapping has caused two features. Close to the shaft hole, the cold lapping appears almost as a

218

Northover & Evely 1995, 100. This is reported from bronze metal axes from Machu Picchu, where the cutting edge had cracked in lines of sulphur particles; cf. Gordon 1985, 320, Fig. 5, no. 9. 220 Mavriyannaki (1978, 201) briefly comments on the finishing treatment of the axes after casting and mentions that the axes would be hammered to remove unevenness and to reach the final shape, but she does not discuss the issue further. 221 A bronze smith is what I call the worker who made the axes. The correct name for a person who casts would be a foundry man, and the worker who annealed would be a smith. But the way to address such a worker in the Minoan literature has been a smith; therefore I shall follow this tradition. 219



216 The main differences between these features were the structure of the tears. The hot tears or hot cracks were jagged in the cracked edges and the cold tears were more defined and even cracks. 217 For the double axes from the Ashmolean Museum, the feature was brought to my attention by Lowe, 24-25 February 2004. Åkesson 1976, 54-55; Svensson 1990, 486.

26



Analyses of manufacturing with a thicker cutting edge was more suitable for stonework.

Evely’s typology is based on axes found only on Crete and is more detailed than the previous ones (Fig.18).224 There are four basic types with sub-groups depending on whether the axe had an oval or a round shaft hole. Evely argues that, although there are different types of double axes, it hardly had anything to do with different working aspects. He also points out that the use-wear on the axes is principally the same, so he concludes that the axes were used for the same working activities, though he considers that a few of them were used for harder work.

Telling the difference between striations and scratch marks on the axes laid down by finishing treatments, working actions or even post-depositional circumstances was not without its problems, as can be seen too in the experiments (Chapter 5). Sundry sorts were separated out and described, but in several cases no final conclusions could be drawn. One overall difference between finishing treatments and working marks was that the first could be found all over the axe body, while work-related marks were mainly concentrated in the area around the cutting edges. Marks from finishing treatments also run in different directions, i.e. both horizontally and vertically. Post-depositional marks often appeared on the oxidized and corroded parts, while work-related and marks from finishing treatments tend to be identified beneath the same rusts and scabbing.

In trying to find out what working activities the double axes were used for, it was necessary to create a typology that showed as many variations in detail as possible. None of the above-presented scholars’ typologies met the requirements for details I required in studying the double axes, and therefore I chose to create my own. The main difference between my typology and the already existing ones was that all the aspects associated with a double axe were considered and the groups so divided by them. The result was a typology that became trickier and more complex than the others, but allowed the axes to be individually judged before placing them in the typology. The new typology contains eight types with sub-groups for every aspect.

A new typology? One most important part of studying the double axes in the past has been to divide them into different types which were mainly based on the shape of the axe body and cutting edges. Research conducted, so far, on the double axe always has involved a new typology. There are five such studies completed by Buchholz, Deshayes, Branigan, Harding and Evely.222 The first difficulty with the typologies, except Evely’s, is that they were based on double axes from the whole Aegean area, the Balkans, the Near East and northern Europe. This means that there are forms of double axes included in the typologies that are not found on Crete. Therefore they do not give a particularly relevant framework for the Minoan double axes.

The first museum where I studied double axes was the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford. When working with the new typology I realized that it was impossible to actually apply the typology, with its very fine-tuned divisions, to the double axes because they were more or less manufactured after casting. After studying twenty-three double axes I concluded that a rigidly imposed typology was misleading. The apparently different types of axes were results more of manufacturing, finishing treatments, rehammering and resharpening than the result of an idea present from their very casting. This meant that all the axes were cast in similar moulds, which were more or less rectangular. Of course the double axes varied but not as much as the above-mentioned typologies lead us to believe. The axes were hammered into desired shape; this was clearly shown on several double axes, especially the ones with really projecting cutting edges. Perhaps it all, depend on whom it was cast for. These adjustments could have an important role in suiting the axe for different activities.

All the typologies have in common that they divide the axes into different groups depending on the concavity of the axe body and the convexity of the cutting edges. The typologies therefore start out with fairly rectangular shaped axes and end up with axes that have extremely concave axe bodies and extremely convex cutting edges. The most extreme cases are, to my knowledge, only found made in sheet bronze and therefore cannot be practically categorized as tools. Therefore the second problem with the typologies is that they mix thin sheet bronze double axes with cast ones; i.e. workable and nonworkable double axes are in the same typology.223 Evely’s typology is the only exception to this, accounting only for workable double axes. Furthermore, in the basic groups of the typologies, sub-groups were constructed so that special features such as round or oval shaft holes could be taken into consideration.

The new typology did not lead me directly to an answer on who used the double axes. It did confirm me in my opinion that the different types did not depend on moulds and that the individual characteristics were not due to preconceived ideals, but to casting and finishing treatments.

222

Buchholz 1959; Deshayes 1960; Branigan 1968 & 1974; Harding 1975 & 1984; Evely 1993. Branigan 1974, 21-22.

224

Evely, R.D.G., Minoan crafts: tool and techniques. An introduction, Vols. 1-2, Göteborg & Jonsered, 1993 & 2000.

223

27

The Minoan double axe. An experimental study of production and use



Figure 18. Evely’s typology (permission from Evely 1993, Figs. 19-20).

The axe body

bodies showed hammering marks from the centre of the axe to the cutting edges. This treatment was what created the projecting cutting edges.

As explained above, I believe that the moulds were similar in shape and no projecting cutting edges were cast. The axes were all cast more or less rectangular, although of various thicknesses. The bronze smith completed the final shape after casting; i.e. the cutting edges were formed in the desired way, probably meeting the requirements of the user.

Hammering was not only used to shape the axe; it also hardened the metal by altering the alloy’s structure. The hammering could be accomplished by cold-working or by annealing (or both). The axe body needed further finishing treatments to get a smooth surface, which was accomplished by grinding and polishing. This removed the uneven surface which could be, for example, caused by gas- or blowholes. The marks from grinding and polishing could sometimes be separated from use-wear because they ran both vertically

Hammering marks could be identified on several double axes, both on the axe body and on the long sides. The axe Table 2. Finishing treatments of the examined axe bodies. Catalogue number No. 1 No. 2 No. 4 No. 5 No. 6 No. 7

Filing, grinding or polishing marks X? X?

Hammering X X

No. 12 No. 13 No. 15 No. 17 No. 18 No. 21

3 dashes/strokes X Annealing and Cold-working X? Annealing and cold-working X Annealing and cold-working X X X X

X? X X X

28



Tool marks

X

No. 8 No. 10

Tool marks

Tool marks Probable tool marks on axe body

Analyses of manufacturing and horizontally in relation to the cutting edges. The usewear, on the other hand, appeared to be connected by vertical marks in line with the dents of the cutting edges, i.e. horizontal on the axe body.

centimeters long and appear similar. The tool marks however vary more in appearance and can be more like dents, as on no. 13, but can also consist of longer strokes or dashes as on no. 4. These marks could have been made during several phases of the finishing treatments. For example while creating the bevelled edges of the long sides, most probably involving a chisel, the tool could have slipped and thus made the mark on the axe body. The same scenario seems probable during shafting. Annealing and cold-working could also have produced deeper marks, a fact that should not be ruled out.

Table 3 above shows the finishing treatments conducted on the studied axe’s long sides including the shaft holes. The most common finishing treatment of the axe body is hammering. This can be detected on eleven of the axes. The hammering marks are identified as deeper or shallower impressions on the axe body, which depends on what kind of finishing treatments were conducted. Generally cold-working leaves more prominent heavy marks than annealing, which leaves more shallow imprints on the axe body. However, also to be considered is the thickness of the double axe. Northover and Evely, as mentioned above, analysed three of the double axes from the Ashmolean Museum (nos. 7, 10 and 13).225 Their investigation showed that cold-working reduced the thickness of the cutting edges by 20-25%. No. 10 was work-hardened, which brought Northover and Evely to the conclusion that this was an axe for heavy-duty work.226 This was implied by heavy hammering that would indeed change the shape of the double axe. Furthermore, this substantiates my suggestion that the axes were cast in the same type of mould and then hammered to desired shape.

The long sides including the shaft hole The axe’s long sides also needed to be hammered to form the projecting cutting edges. This procedure has left hammering marks on the long sides. Hammering was also chosen to form the bevelled edges which several of the double axes have. The shaft holes and traces of runners, which were crude and uneven after casting, could to some extent be hammered out to become smoother and less ragged. These areas would need special attention: one can easily imagine that a chisel was used together with a hammer to form the shaft hole, which sometimes was worked oval after casting. A chisel could also be used to accomplish finishing treatments on the grooves which were left by the running system. Both these aspects were useful when shafting. There are also several tool marks around the shaft hole which might come from the shafting process.

Three of the axes (nos. 72, 182 and 224) are of nearly pure copper. Copper, being a soft metal, would be a satisfactory metal for a working tool if hammered, i.e. work-hardened.227

To finish off the long sides a stone, like sandstone or pumice, was chosen to grind and polish the axe to remove defects such as casting joints and flash.

Filing, grinding or polishing marks are difficult to detect on the axe bodies but most certainly identified on eight of them. The reason for exercising care in this matter is twofold. First, post-depositional marks also show up as scratches and several of the axes are oxidized and corroded, effects which can cover the grinding and polishing marks and make them invisible. Those recognized have their grinding and polishing marks beneath the oxidation and corrosion. Their presence, of course, does not mean that the finishing treatment of the axe is the only possibility, although it seems reasonable. The second possibility is use-wear.

Table 3 below shows the finishing treatments conducted on the studied axes’ long sides including the shaft holes. Finishing treatments on the long sides including the shaft hole are identified on twenty-one double axes. Hammering marks visible on the long sides are only detected on six double axes. Flash or joint lines were probably filed or ground off just as easily. Casting defects like gas- or blowholes are rarely found on the long sides, which meant that hammering or filing was unnecessary. The most common feature on the axes is bevelled edges, which are found on seventeen of the axes. These were created to get nicely finish off the edges of the long side; in cases of flash lines these would be ground or filed away by creating the bevelled edges. The bevelled edges were probably manufactured by hammering and finally smoothened by polishing with a stone. One could even imagine that they were made with the assistance of a chisel, the marks of which can be identified on some.

Four double axes have separate tool marks on the axe body, which do not correspond to hammering, polishing or grinding marks. These marks are deeper and more defined than scratches or striations after filing, grinding or polishing. The marks or striations after polishing or grinding varied in length but are mostly over two 225

Northover & Evely 1995, 100-101. Northover & Evely 1995, 100-101. Coghlan 1975a, 76; Ottaway 2001, 97. The hardness of the double axes can be tested by a Vickers test. Northover and Evely 1995, 93, note 14. If the copper axe was reheated or annealed, it would lose the hardening qualities attained by hammering. The axe would need to be hardened again by the same procedure to give sufficient hardness for a cutting edge. Discussion 03.08.07 with Lowe and Humpish, who are both trained foundry men. 226 227

Eleven of the axes show work-related marks in the cavities left by the running system. They were probably used for securing the handle, which was discussed above, but were not created with this purpose in mind.

29

The Minoan double axe. An experimental study of production and use

 Table 3. Finishing treatments on the examined axes’ long sides including the shaft hole. Catalogue number

Hammering Marks

Bevelled edges X X X X

No. 1 No. 2 No. 3 No. 4 No. 5

X

No. 6 No. 7 No. 8 No. 9 No. 10 No. 11 No. 12 No. 13 No. 14 No. 15 No. 16 No. 17 No. 18 No. 19 No. 20 No. 21

X X X X

X X X

Worked traces of runners X

X X X X X X X X X

Shaft hole

Other tool marks

X X

X X X

Postdepositional?

X X X X

X X X

X X X X X X X

X

X X? X

X X

X X X

Grinding and polishing marks are hard to detect and only five of the axes have these marks. The reasons for this difficulty have been expounded above.

X

the V-shape of the blade, and finally of sharpening the cutting edges with sandstone or pumice. These procedures could be detected on the cutting edges as hammering marks and as thin scratches on and close to the cutting edge. These marks and scratches can certainly be distinguished from use-wear because they would be found running both vertically and horizontally to the cutting edge.

Eleven axes have some evidence of tool marks around the shaft hole. They were probably either the result of fastening the shaft or made when finishing off the cavities left by the running system.

Resharpening of the cutting edge was also identified. Several marks from previous working actions had continued higher up into the axe body, whereas, resharpening the cutting edge involved only a maximum of one centimetre by the cutting edge itself. A disturbed pattern of wear could therefore be an indication of resharpening. When resharpening the cutting edge it would first be prepared with annealing or cold-working, depending on how worn the cutting edge was, and finally resharpened with a stone. Table 4 below shows the finishing treatments conducted on the cutting edges.

The last group to be mentioned includes only two axes (nos. 4 and 16) which have separate marks not connected with the forming of the running system, shaft hole or bevelled edges. On no. 4 five small marks in a row are identified on each side of the shaft hole. It is probable that these were made while annealing and probably by tongs gripping the axe as it was worked. The tool marks on no. 16 are completely different and consist of four separate marks on the long side opposite to the traces of runners. The marks, approximately 0.5-1.5 cm long, are deep and jagged and spread over the long side. My interpretation is that they were probably made by a chisel during finishing treatments.

Finishing treatments of the cutting edges cannot be identified on all the double axes due to extensive usewear. For the V-shaped cutting edges, hammering marks close to the cutting edges were expected to be more abundant. However, only on four of the axes can they be positively identified. One of them (no. 7) was analysed by

The cutting edges Finishing treatments on the cutting edges probably consisted of hammering to form the projecting edges and 30



Grinding or polishing

Analyses of manufacturing Table 4. Finishing treatments of the cutting edges (c.e.), of the examined double axes. Catalogue number

Hammering

V-shaped c.e.

No. 1 X

No. 2

Both c.e. Both c.e.

No. 5 No. 7

No. 13

Right c.e. Both c.e. varies 35 mm Both c.e. 5-6 mm

Both c.e. Annealed and cold worked Annealed and cold worked

Both c.e.

X

Both c.e. Both c.e.

No. 16

Both c.e. ca 3 mm Both c.e. ca 4 mm

No. 17 No. 18

X

Both c.e.

No. 19 Northover and conclusion.228

Resharpening

Annealed and cold worked

No. 8 No. 10

Filing or grinding

Evely

who

reached

the

same

i.e. cast or incised after casting, and what function or meaning can be ascribed to them.

Regarding the V-shaped cutting edges, which are identified on six double axes, some of them were probably filed and ground in this way, and this could be an answer to why hammering marks are not visible on all of the edges. The V-shape was not limited to the outermost point of the cutting edges; it is also identified extending approximately one cm up onto the axe body.

According to Evely, the simpler motifs were completed after casting, rather than in the investment process, i.e. in a mould, where the motif was modelled in wax.229 After studying the double axes from the Ashmolean Museum with Linear A signs, I agree with Evely. They are definitely incised after the casting procedure. Furthermore, Evely points out that tool marks from the incising process are still visible (for example on nos. 6, 13 and 15).230 Here I also share the same opinion with Evely, because if the designs were cast, there would be no individual strokes of a tool.

Filing or grinding of the cutting edges can be identified on six double axes. All cutting edges were not made razor-sharp, i.e. V-shaped. There are cutting edges which are blunter but they were filed or ground as well.

Decoration Decorations are found on thirteen of the double axes. They are of two different kinds, simpler designs like Linear A and Linear B signs, and more complex motifs such as lions. The two groups are quite unlike in their finished appearance; the simpler ones seem cruder and are not as neatly finished as the ones which depict a more complex motif. Table 5 below shows the decoration on the axes.

Figure 19. The incision on axe no. 13 (drawing by M. Lowe Fri). This group is interpreted as Linear A or Linear B signs (Fig. 19). More often Linear A has been considered, though many of them have parallels in Linear B.231 Considering the time period of the axes (and assuming

Incised motifs There are eight double axes that have incised motifs, i.e. simpler designs which mainly correspond to Linear A. The intriguing question is how they were manufactured,

228

229

Evely 1993, 50. Evely 1993, 54. A possibility could be of using the investment process and cutting the signs on the wax with a chisel. This procedure could cast the more crude incisions. Personal communication with Dr. Evely. 231 See, for example, Fig. 6, in Ventris & Chadwick 1973. 230

Northover & Evely 1995, 100-101.

31

The Minoan double axe. An experimental study of production and use Table 5. Decoration. Catalogue number

Linear A or Linear B

No. 3

Motif

Alike

Bucranium

Mallia

Placing of decoration Centre of axe body

No. 4

Linear A?

No. 6

?

Centre of axe body

No. 13

Linear A Linear B?

One of the long side

No. 15

Linear A Linear B

Centre of axe body

No. 54 No. 57 No. 58

Dashes on axe face

Linear A Linear B Linear A Linear B

One of the long sides Both sides of the shaft hole (on one long side)

Linear A Linear B

No. 90

Bucranium?

No. 103

Lion, on both 232 faces

No. 134

Butterfly, on both faces

No. 165

Linear A? Linear B?

Long side? sacral knot between quivers, and “figure of eight” shield between sacral knots

No. 194

No. 225

No. 3

Linear A Linear B

Find location and date Helenes LM Nerokourou LM Knossos MM IIIB-LM IA Selakhanos MM III-LM I Provenance unknown MM IIIB– LM I Kalo Chorio MM III-LM I Kamilaris LM? Kardhamoutsa MM III-LM I Mallia LM I Mallia MM-LM Phaistos MM IIIBLM IA Selakhanos EM II-MM II

Centre of axe body (both axe faces)

Vorou MM III- LM I

Both long sides

?Ziros MM III-LM I

Figure 20. None of these axes were found at the same location, though two of the axes probably share the same motif, a bucranium (nos. 3 and 90). The cast motif of no. 3 (drawing by M. Lowe Fri).

232

Evely (1993, 50) points out that the lion is thought to be a modern contribution.

32

Analyses of manufacturing

 they are correctly dated), only Linear A should be contemplated regarding the designs.233

There are three examples. Nos. 13 and 165 had, according to Pope, the two Linear A signs L 30 and L 31, though Mavriyannaki disagrees and has interpreted them as Linear A L 30 and L 98. Evans, on the other hand, believed that it was only one sign. However, they actually correspond to Linear B, I 31, with the phonetic value dasa.239 The most intriguing fact is that they were found at the same location, namely Selakhanos, though unfortunately not together or at least they were not recorded together. The signs could represent the owner or the producer; however, the interpretations regarding these two axes could not be taken any further, since the find contexts did not reveal anything. No. 13 was bought in Kritsa and no. 165 was found in a bronze hoard together with three other double axes and two chisels.

The Linear A and B signs have been identified by different scholars, though there is one incised example not previously mentioned: no. 6. For this I have tried to find parallels within the Linear A or Linear B signs without success. A second design, consisting of three dashes, appears on no. 4. Vagnetti considers them made while the metal was warm and that they probably correspond to Linear A signs.234 However, the comparative Linear A signs are not convincing. The three dashes appear on one of the long sides; two are parallel and placed in the middle of the long side, and the third dash is separated and situated towards the edge of the long side. Comparing the other Linear A or Linear B signs visible on other axes, these three signs do not interact, which the other signs do. If a sign consists of more than one line they almost connect with each other, whereas the dashes present on no. 4 do not. If they had some practical use, a number would be a possibility. I agree that the dashes were made when the axe was still warm, but more probably by accident while forming the cutting edge or shaft hole. The shaft hole on no. 4 also shows tool-marks around the shaft hole and they were most probably made by a chisel. The marks are therefore a product of the finishing treatments of the double axe; that the axe was warm could have been due to annealing. Unfortunately there are no measurements of these signs; however, they would most likely be a perfect match to a chisel.

The second example consists of three axes (nos. 6, 54 and 58) which have Linear A L 6 incised. This sign is also found in Linear B and has the phonetic value tu. These axes are unfortunately all from different locations: no. 6 (Knossos), no. 54 (Kalo Chorio)240 and no. 58 (Kardhamoutsa).241 The last example is the Linear A sign 25, which is also found in Linear B and has the phonetic value nu.242 The sign was found on two axes with, unfortunately, different find locations: no. 15 (Crete, unknown provenance) and no. 58 (Kardhamoutsa). The three axes are from Kalo Chorio, Kardhamoutsa and Crete (unknown provenance) respectively, all with no find context, and one is recorded from Knossos, the house north west of the Palace. These contexts do not provide any further information, and therefore a discussion concerning Linear A and B in relationship to find contexts was not fruitful. I believe that Mavriyannaki has identified all the possibilities regarding the analysis of the Linear A and B signs.

Different scholars have already considered the meaning of the simple motifs, i.e. the incisions. Evely has interpreted them as owner’s marks.235 Mavriyannaki has several ideas of how these simple incisions could be understood.236 Her two main points are that they were signs of ownership or stood for the weight of the tool (which can be compared to today where certain marks on tools designate the weight). Such a motif could, furthermore, be a smith’s sign or the workshop’s that produced the axe, but also a sign to identify the special use of the tool or the contents of the metal alloy. Marks on tools or on objects made of metal are rare. Mavriyannaki also compares these signs with pottery marks.237

Cast motifs There are five double axes with motifs on one or both axe faces. The interesting questions here also concern the production and meaning of the motifs. The question whether the motifs were cast or incised after casting was already commented on by Mosso. He studied no. 134 and concluded that the axe was manufactured by using the investment method. The butterfly would not show so nicely if cast in an ordinary one- or two-part mould.243 Mavriyannaki has discussed no. 3 regarding the methods of manufacturing of the bucranium (oxskull) on this axe. First she concluded that the motif was cast, although this alternative is hardly an option for

Linear A can, to some extent, be understood through Linear B. Evely has studied this aspect of the double axes and concludes that the same sign and combination of signs appear on different axes.238



233 The axes are dated between EMIII-LMI and since Linear B first appeared during LMII-LM III it is likely that the signs are Linear A. 234 Vagnetti (1984, 157, note 7) compares it with Linear A with references to: Evans 1894, 280; Buchholz 1954, 134-136; Pope 1956, 132-135; Grumach 1962, 85-86, Fig. 4; Branigan 1974, Pl. 12, 584; Mavriyannaki 1983b, 213. 235 Evely 1993, 50, note 11. 236 Mavriyannaki 1983a, 86-89. 237 Mavriyannaki 1983a, 86-89. 238 Evely 1993, 50.

 239

Evans 1894, 280; Pope 1956, 134. Alexiou 1965, 554; Mavriyannaki 1983a, 82-83. 241 Raison & Pope 1980, 239; Mavriyannaki 1983a, 82. 242 Raison & Pope 1980, 245; Mavriyannaki 1983a, 82; Evely 1993, 44, Pl. 13. 243 Mosso 1910b, 318-319, Fig. 560. 240

33



The Minoan double axe. An experimental study of production and use

 reasons stated above (cf. casting and casting defects).244 Mavriyannaki has, however, later revised her opinion and she proposes that a sketch was first prepared of the motif and then engraved on the double axe.245 Evely comments briefly on the motifs, though he does not discuss whether they are cast or incised.246

Conclusions This chapter has shown that several aspects in the manufacturing process could be detected, although it is best to err on the side of caution. Other factors, such as the degradations of time, must also be considered: similarity of appearance may not equate with a correspondence in cause. The mould type used, i.e. sand moulds and stone moulds, can be identified by studying the axe’s surface. Other visible results, unwanted, were casting defects. Nine different casting defects are identified on the axes which were related to the preparation of the moulds, the mould itself and the temperature of the molten metal. I have come to different conclusions than other scholars regarding the so-called “wedging grooves” and “ears”, which certainly are casting defects left by the running system and the solidification of the metal in the mould. Even though the axes reveal a variety of casting defects, they were used perhaps: with the exception of no. 7, which has severe cold lappings that have, among things, resulted in a long crack on one of the cutting edges.

Casting a decoration can be accomplished in different ways by using the investment process or a sand mould. In both cases the pattern is either incised with the decoration wanted or the latter is modelled on to the pattern. Depending on which way of manufacturing is chosen, the decoration is produced as a positive or negative impression. There are two options for the production of these motifs; they were either cast with the investment process or they were incised after casting. There were no cast motifs recorded for the investment process mould found at Kommos.247 I have studied no. 3, which has a motif of a bucranium and separate straight lines above and below the ox-skull (Fig. 20). The lines towards the cutting edges have unfortunately vanished. This could indicate casting with the investment technique where the pattern was not deep enough and not intact in the mould when cast; i.e. the pattern had vanished and therefore no motif was cast. The axe is heavily oxidized and the lines may be invisible because of this, but I cannot identify any tool marks. If this was incised after casting I would at least have expected the starting point of the tool to be visible.

That the axes were used can be further concluded from the amount of finishing treatments discovered on them. These treatments included the final shaping both of the axe body and of the long sides. This was arrived at through hammering the axe body, sharpening the cutting edges and shafting the axe. The different appearances of the axes are not due to different mould shapes, but were due to varying degrees of hammering on the axe body and the long sides of the axes. These observations call into question the different typologies presented by several scholars that are based on the axes’ physical appearances. Rather the state of the as-cast axe would determine what finishing treatments were needed, and could perhaps reflect the later use of the axe. A perfect, slim cast could be sharpened into a good cutting tool for any kind of wood. A thicker axe was also sharpened but with thicker edges and could probably be used for stonework. A damaged cast with cold lapping affecting the cutting edge was not to be used for cutting trees, though with a blunter cutting edge it could be redesigned for dressing stone.

Most scholars interpret the more complex motifs as sacred and connected with the religious sphere, because the double axes frequently appeared in religious contexts.248 To decorate a good and useful tool probably meant that it was not to be used for a specific purpose in a specific context. The axes were working tools and could have been used to execute various tasks. Whether the specific tasks were work in a sanctuary, palace or settlement does not really change the axes’ importance as tools. Perhaps the more complex motifs also indicated who owned the axe and functioned as a mark of ownership, just as the Linear A signs probably did. The fact that these motifs are found in a wider context in the Minoan society could possibly point to their being just an important and popular motif. And, finally, as Mavryannaki concluded, the only way of examining the motif from the right angle was when the axe was hung upside down after being used.249

The finishing treatments may include decoration on the axes. The different decorations are divided into two groups, one with plain designs, i.e. Linear A or Linear B signs, and the other with more complex designs like lions. The most probable interpretations of the different decorations are owners’ marks.

 244

Mavriyannaki 1978, 201. Mavriyannaki 1983b, 212. 246 Evely 1993, 50. 247 Blitzer 1995, 506-507. They are mostly very fragmentary finds, which most probably would not leave this kind of information. 248 Buchholz 1962, 167, 170. For a discussion of the motifs: Buchholz 1962, 167-170; Mavriyannaki 1983b, 211-213 (especially no. 3); Evely 1993, 50. Verlinden (1985, 147, 149) especially discusses the axe from Vorou (no. 194) and he states that the axe is not to be regarded a tool. The axes with motifs are to be regarded as of unique value and were probably used in processions in the religious or political sphere; i.e. they had a symbolic value. 249 Mavriyannaki 1978, 203. 245

34





4. ANALYSES OF USE

Introduction to the analyses In the analyses of use-wear on the cutting edges the following aspects must be considered: the movement and use of the axe, the hardness or softness of the material worked on, and probably to some extent the quality of the axe. Dents appear as soft or hard, deep or shallow indentations on the cutting edge depending on what material the axe was used on and the amount of time the axe was used. The movement of the axe can be identified through studying the wear of the lowest, upper and centre parts of the cutting edge. Studying the dents and how the dents are situated on the cutting edges allows one activity or use to be distinguished from another.250

Finally, in splitting, an already existing crack is used to split the material, creating equal pieces of the material, the cutting edge working vertically (Fig. 21). These different activities require axes prepared with different finishing treatments.253 Different finishing treatments of the cutting edges decide the different uses of the axes. Furthermore, Gordon has tried to separate use-wear connected with woodworking from use-wear related to stone working by studying the indentations of the cutting edges.254

Studies analysing use-wear on metal are not common. There are, to my knowledge, no studies which concern use-wear on Minoan double axes. There are two studies conducted on single metal axes, one from the NorthAlpine region and one from Machu Picchu.251 Figure 21. These are the different activities presented by Gordon. A, breaking, B, cutting, and C, splitting (after Gordon 1985, Fig. 2).

When analysing flanged bronze axes from the NorthAlpine region (both replicas and original Bronze Age axes) Kienlin and Ottaway identified several aspects of use-wear connected with wood. The use-wear on the cutting edges consisted of dents concentrated or randomly occurring on the cutting edge, bluntness of the cutting edges, asymmetry of the cutting edges, and patterns of scratches extending some two centimetres back upon the axe bodies.252 Several experiments were undertaken by Kienlin and Ottaway with replicas of flanged axes. The experimental work concerned chopping and stripping off bark.

There are studies which do not consider the use-wear on axes but present different materials which could have been worked on. In a study of tools used for stone masonry Bessac includes the double axe, which is called a hammer with a cutting edge.255 The marks and indentations presented are those left on the worked stone, which shows different ways of using the axe on stone.256 Furthermore, studies on bone material have been conducted with the intention to compare cuts on bone and then relate them to different kinds of tools.257

The different uses of the bronze axes from Machu Picchu were identified by Gordon as cutting, breaking and splitting, primarily of wood, but stone work was also recognized. An axe is used in three different ways for these working activities. When cutting, small pieces from the material worked on are removed, the axe working horizontally against the material. Also when breaking small pieces from the material worked on are removed, but the cutting edge hits the working material vertically.

 253

Gordon 1985, 313-315. Gordon (1985, 318-319) also discusses the profiles of the axes, and in modern standards there is an axe profile which is thought to be optimal for cutting wood or organic material. This modern profile was compared to the double axes in order to find out if the profile could lead to a working activity of the Minoan axes. All the Minoan axes’ profiles were thinner and narrower than the modern one and would therefore, according to the profile, not be useful for anything. The profiles did not give further research opportunities and were therefore excluded in this study. 254 Gordon 1985, 322-324. 255 Bessac’s book, L’outillage traditionnel de tailleur de pierre de l’antiquité à nos jours, deals with 24 tools, for example, the double axe, the awl, the chisel, the saw, the drill, and abrasives used by the stonemason from the prehistoric period to modern times. He concentrates his study to Europe (mainly the Mediterranean countries) and the Near East (including Egypt). 256 Bessac 1986, 39-51. 257 Walker & Long, 1977, 605-616; Greenfield 1999, 797-808.

 250

Grace 1990, 10-11. Gordon 1985; Kienlin & Ottaway 1998. Unfortunately I have been unable to study one article which also discusses traces on metal objects: Gutiérrez Saéz, C., ‘Traceología aplicada al material metálico: límites y posibilidades’, in Congreso Peninsular de Análisis Functional, BAR-IS 1073, 2002, 261-272. Another article, by Vivet, (1999) concerns a hoard found near Finistère. The hoard consisted of several objects, among them bronze single axes. Vivet’s effort to study the traces on these axes and the probable owner of the hoard is not detailed and therefore has not been useful when interpreting the Minoan double axes. 252 Kienlin & Ottaway 1998, 275. 251

35



The Minoan double axe. An experimental study of production and use

 With the above studies in mind, the Minoan double axes’ cutting edges and axe bodies will be studied.258 The usewear identified on the axe bodies and cutting edges demonstrates the activities and movement of the axe, which could reveal what material the axe was used on. For example, a hard material like stone would probably leave dents closer to the cutting edge than for example a softer wood (like pine), because the axe penetrates the material to different depths due to the different hardness of the material. The striations on the axe body could also suggest what kind of work was performed. When a tree is felled or a piece cut from a stone block the materials leave striations of different depths on the whole axe body, again because of the penetration into the material or surface preparation of the material.259

The overview in Table 6 below shows the different qualities of the metals and how the metals contribute in an alloy.261 These percentages can vary. Elements may have been added in a number of amounts in order to provide a particular desired effect for a particular function.262 I am aware that the percentages presented in the table are based on modern samples and that the Minoans probably did not know that the ore was impure with antimony (Sb), nickel (Ni), iron (Fe) or zinc (Zn). To what extent they had knowledge of the different qualities of ores and whether arsenic and/or tin were deliberately added is a question of debate, which I shall briefly consider below. I only account for the three basic elements, since other components are so low in content that they most probably would not affect the finished product and they were therefore certainly not added.

Before analysing the cutting edges and the axe bodies, the material, i.e. the bronze, of the axes is studied. Bronze is an alloy of tin and copper or of arsenic and copper: the materials themselves and the proportions of their presence both have effects on the end product. Therefore, I have reviewed the metal analyses of the Minoan double axes conducted by other scholars.

Table 6 below does not illustrate a “perfect” cast, but demonstrates the minimum and maximum percentages required in a cast for certain effects. For an overview and further details of the analysis of each axe, see the catalogue.

Metal analyses

Table 6. Chemical composition and qualities for sandcast tin-bronze alloys (modern samples).263

The hardness of the axe depends primarily on the contents of copper, arsenic and tin. Knowing these proportions could, in theory, help answer questions such as whether the axe could have been a tool for lighter or harder work. I shall therefore compare known alloys of copper, arsenic and tin with the use-wear associated. I will first survey the contents of the alloy and describe what the different elements do in an alloy. Secondly, I concentrate on copper, arsenic and tin to determine to what degree the alloy is hard (strong).

Metal Cu Sn

As

The questions being asked are: will the double axes with less of the hardening elements (arsenic and tin) have the most evident signs of use? Are different thicknesses of the cutting edges due to the metal contents (hardening elements)? Fifty-one Minoan double axes260 have been analysed by others for their metal contents. Here I intend to examine these analyses individually and observe whether the axes would be acceptable for working on hard materials (olive tree, igneous rock) or soft materials (pine tree, sandstone), depending on the alloy.

MAX% 89 10

8.0

QUALITIES Base metal Effects strength and hardness. Above this range, the effect is detrimental causing problems during solidification and after becoming solid Effects hardness. Above this range, the effect is detrimental causing problems when work-hardening the cast item264

 261

The table is based on modern information about metals and this knowledge was most likely not known to the Minoans. The most common alloy for bronze today: Cu 88%, Sn 10% and Zn 2% (gunmetal). 262 Heine, Loper & Rosenthal 1967, 351, 371-374. One good example is the production of bells (church tower type) where a bronze with up to 20% Sn is used. This gives a brittle and hard metal, which, when struck, produces musical tones. As with all metals, there is a series of standard tests: tensile strength, yield strength and deformation limit. These tests are carried out by international standards controlling tests procedures and specimen size and forms; see Heine, Loper & Rosenthal, 1967, Table 14.11. 263 Based on: Heine, Loper & Rosenthal 1967, 373, Table 14.10. 264 The effect also depends on the percentage of arsenic in the alloy. The percentage varies and some scholars recommend maximum 0.6% for strengthening of the copper, while others state that above 4% brittleness can cause trouble (Coghlan & Case 1957, 96). Others recommend higher contents of arsenic to strengthen the alloy, for example Northover (1989, 113) who states that 4% or more is necessary. Dayton (1971, 50) recommends approximately 6% to harden the alloy.



258 To study tools and their use-wear is not the only way of interpreting what a tool was used for. The material worked on may also be considered; this has been done on tools which were used for chopping bones at West Row Fen (Suffolk), one of the tools being a bronze axe. The conclusion reached by Olsen (1988, 349, Figs. 12-14) was that the marks made by stone and metal axes can be separated. More recent studies have been conducted, for example, by Greenfield (2002, 35-54), which further confirms that different tool materials (stone and metal) can be distinguished on bone. 259 Gordon 1985, 322-324; Kienlin & Ottaway 1998. 260 Of these fifty-one double axes I have visually examined eight.

36



MIN% 85 7.5

Analyses of use

 The double axe’s base metal is copper: the range varies between 72.5-99.5%. Copper is a soft metal and its hardening requires alloying with another metal. During the Bronze Age in Crete, there are two metals detected which have strengthened the copper: tin and arsenic. It seems, in general, that arsenic was favoured during the earlier stages of the Bronze Age and that tin became more common during the Middle and the Late Bronze Age.265

the double axes found at the Unexplored Mansion (no. 72) has an unusual composition with 99% of copper and 1% of tin. The same procedure is probable for nos. 182 and 224. These three axes were probably not suitable for any kind of work, unless additionally worked on. The double axes in this category would in theory be better for work in softer materials because of their high contents of copper and low percentage of hardening elements.

The tin content in the double axes varies between 0.514.5% and the arsenic content varies between trace and 2.0%. They both harden copper. The tin and arsenic contents in the cast are argued by scholars to be a conscious choice if present at over 2%, which means that some of the double axes here are not deliberately cast with tin or arsenic.266

2. Double axes with between 7.5-10% of hardening elements In the second category the tin content is slightly below the range that would be preferred in a modern cast and varies between 6.4-7.32%. However, together with the arsenic this would be sufficient to strengthen the axes satisfactorily.

To consider the strength of the double axes they were divided into three categories, depending on the amount of tin or arsenic found in the analyses. The categories are divided according to the modern standard for a goodquality cast, as illustrated in Table 6. 1. 2. 3.

The copper contents vary between 91.1-93.5%, which is almost according to the recommendations for a good bronze alloy.

Below 7.5% of hardening elements in the alloy. Between 7.5-10% of hardening elements in the alloy. Above 10% of hardening elements in the alloy.

Double axes nos. 7, 10, 125 and 127, would, because of their good-quality cast, be workable alloys and tools for dealing with harder materials.

I have taken the tin and arsenic together if they are both present, adding them to get a total of the percentage of hardening elements in the cast. I also describe the function of the axes with these different combinations of hardening elements, and finally assess whether these double axes would be appropriate for working in a soft or hard material. An overview is given in Table 7 below.

The category altogether comprises, in theory, good bronze tools, which could perform work on softer materials such as pine wood and sandstone, but also on harder materials such as igneous stone and oak wood. 3. Double axes with above 10% of hardening elements The nine double axes that belong to this category (except no. 124: 9.95% Sn, 0.22% As and no. 126 10.90% Sn; 0.53% As) all have in common the facts that the content of copper is below the modern preferred range and the content of tin or arsenic is above the modern preferred range. The tin content varies between 0.20 and 18.17% and the addition of arsenic (not-detected to 5.59%) is not high, but having the same effect as tin, it would not be a contributive factor here and instead casue the cast to be even more brittle. The high content of tin would not bestow the maximum benefit to the bronze; rather it would make the axes brittle and easy to break during continuous work on hard materials.

1. Double axes with below 7.5% of hardening elements The content of tin (in the range of none detected to 6.87%) in these double axes is lower than would be preferred in modern casts. Some of them, however, have a content of arsenic (varying between 0.08 and 3.20%), which would help in strengthening the cast. Even so combined, they will still not be enough to strengthen the double axes to a modern standard. The content of copper varies between 80.9 and 99.5%, and some of the axes are of nearly pure copper. One of

 Chernykh (1992, 17) states that a percentage of 8-10% would make the cast weaker and would therefore be no good for tools. 265 Junghans, Sangmeister & Schröder 1968; Branigan 1974; Varoufakis (1995, 154-167, especially 166) has studied Minoan statuettes from the Early Minoan to Late Minoan periods and concludes that the tin contents were a lot higher during the Late Minoan II-III phases (7-12% Sn) than during the earlier periods (not more than 5% Sn). The metal analyses conducted by Catling and Jones (1971, 21-23) of some bronzes from the Late Minoan grave no. 4 at Sellopoulo (Knossos) showed that almost exclusively tin had been used as a harderning element for copper. Only two samples taken from a sword and a lamp with skillet handle included As, and this with only approximately 1%. Catling and Jones (1977, 57-66), who analysed the metal objects from the Unexplored Mansion, concluded that the metal objects from Late Minoan II were harderned mainly with tin. In six cases a presence of arsenic was detected. Even recent analysis of 110 copper-based objects supports this; Mangou & Ioannou 1998, 91-102. 266 For references and further discussion see Chapter 2.

Even though the content of strengthening components is a bit higher than is preferred, these axes could still be used for heavy-duty work (like stone masonry). These axes would, judging from the alloy, theoretically be good enough tools on harder material.

Discussion Three double axes (nos. 72, 182 and 224) are near purity regarding the copper content and would hardly make

37



The Minoan double axe. An experimental study of production and use

 Table 7. Metal analyses. Catalogue number No. 4 No. 5 No. 6 No. 7 No. 10 No. 13 No. 14 No. 15 No. 23 No. 24 No. 25 No. 26 No. 27 No. 28 No. 29 No. 30 No. 32 No. 58 No. 62 No. 63 No. 64 No. 67 No. 71 No. 72 No. 93 No. 116 No. 117 No. 118 No. 120 No. 121 No. 122 No. 123 No. 124 No. 125 No. 126 No. 127 No. 131 No. 132 No. 133 No. 134 No. 135 No. 136 No. 137 No. 138 No. 139 No. 141 No. 151 No. 164 No. 167 No. 182 No. 224

Between 7.510% hardening elements

Below 7.5% hardening elements

X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X

38



Above 10% hardening elements X X

Analyses of use

 good tools for either hard or soft material, unless work hardened after casting.267

compared with the axes from the North-Alpine region and Machu Picchu mentioned above. There are five main categories based on the edge wear and on the degree of bluntness visible on the double axes. Categories 1-3 are based on the edge wear identified by Kienlin and Ottaway and 4-5 are categories which I have constructed for this analysis. Because the double axe has two cutting edges, one and the same axe can be found in two categories. This pattern shows the real advantage of the double axe: two cutting edges for different purposes. These main categories will serve as a first level of identification and are complemented with sub-levels to make a more precise description. First I present the five categories and then a table (Table 8) to give an overview of the Minoan axes and the nature of the different use-wears.

Thirty-nine of the double axes contain alloys that in theory would not be strong enough for work on harder materials (igneous stone, oak) and therefore are more suitable for softer woods such as pine or softer stones as sandstone. Twelve of the double axes would be more suitable for working on harder materials such as igneous stone and oak. The categories presented above could represent the development during the Bronze Age on Crete, so considering the dates of the different axes, the results are:

1.

Dents that appear randomly and concentrated on the cutting edge.268 1A. Dents and bending (mushroom-edges) of the cutting edge.269 2. Overall bluntness of the cutting edge approximately 2-4 mm and different degrees of mushroom-edges.270 2A. Blunt cutting edges with dents and striations within the dents.271 3. Severely blunt cutting edges, minimum 5 mm.272 4. Other use-wear on the cutting edges, not comparable with the above categories. 5. Cutting edges that show no dents.

1. Below 7.5% of hardening elements in the alloy corresponds to the Early Minoan I-Late Minoan II periods. 2. Between 7.5 and 10% of hardening elements in the alloy corresponds to the Middle Minoan III-Late Minoan III periods. 3. Above 10% of hardening elements in the alloy corresponds to the Middle Minoan III-Late Minoan III periods. The only matter that can be distinguished is that category 1. with the lower % of alloying elements, is the only category to contain Early Bronze Age double axes. The other two sets belong together in the second and third palace periods: these contain sufficient, or more than sufficient, tin or arsenic to cast a good bronze double axe.

1. Dents that appear randomly and concentrated on the cutting edge. This category contains double axes where the V-shape of the cutting edge is still visible or partly visible. The damage on the cutting edges varies but is, as a maximum, 2 mm wide. The dents can be separately recognized as small hollows in the cutting edge. They vary in size and depth, probably as a result of the kinetic energy when working and/or of the hardness of the material worked on. The dents are soft or hard, i.e. soft ones are not as sharp and well-defined as the hard. They may appear either randomly or concentrated in groups on the cutting edge.

It is hard to draw conclusions from the above-presented metal contents, because of the fairly small sample; only 51 of 229 axes have undergone metal analyses. The pattern could change with further analyses. This survey is best seen as a preliminary, giving only an idea of what the as-cast quality of the tool was. Moreover, the finishing treatment, i.e. annealing and cold-working of the axe, which is accounted for below, does have an altering effect on the metal, making it harder and stronger. This means that even a tool from the first category actually could be a good-quality one.

The cutting edges have in various degrees begun to turn and curl over themselves (mushroom-edge). This can be seen randomly on the cutting edge. The dents, if carefully examined, also show other features; there can be striations in them, which probably give clues as to the material worked on. To cause these striations, the material worked on was certainly harder than the bronze axe itself.273

Use-wear on the cutting edges and the axe bodies Description and identification of use-wear on the cutting edges



In order to try to connect the use-wear visible on the cutting edges with different working activities, the usewear was divided into different categories. These categories are based on the Minoan double axes

268

Comparable to Kienlin & Ottaway 1998, 279, Fig. 7. Comparable to Kienlin & Ottaway 1998, 278-280, Figs. 5, 6 & 8; Gordon 1985, Fig. 9. 271 Comparable to Gordon 1985, Fig. 8. 272 Comparable to Gordon 1985, Fig. 5, no. 3. 273 Gordon 1985, 322. 270

 267

Cf. Manufacturing, Chapter 2.

39



Comparable to Kienlin & Ottaway 1998, 275-277, 279, Figs. 2, 3 &

4.

269

The Minoan double axe. An experimental study of production and use There are four double axes (nos. 10, 16, 17 and 19) with dents both randomly placed and concentrated on one of the cutting edges (Fig. 22). The other cutting edge on nos. 10, 16, 17 and 19 has other use-wear patterns and, therefore, I conclude that two different working activities were performed with these axes.

could, however, belong in category 1: dents that appear randomly and concentrated on the cutting edge. When deciding in which category they should be places, the Vshaped finishing treatment of the cutting edge and the overall thickness of the axe were studied. This category contains fifteen double axes with overall bluntness and mushroom-edges on one or both cutting edges. Seven of the double axes (nos. 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, 11 and 20) have almost the same wear on both cutting edges and separate dents can be identified on them. However, no. 2 is slightly different because both cutting edges show an overall bluntness and a few individual dents that are comparable to category 1. The overall thickness is ca. 3 mm, though on the lower part it reaches 5 mm. Eight of the double axes (nos. 1, 9, 10, 12, 13, 14, 16 and 18) in this category have one cutting edge with an overall bluntness of ca. 2-3 mm and mushroom-edges (Fig. 24). The edges can also have individual dents, as on no. 1. The difference in wear on the cutting edges indicates two different actions with these axes. No. 9 is also different from the others because of the varied cutting edges. There are several individual soft dents on one of its cutting edges. The unusual thing is the varying width of the cutting edge: the uppermost part is 1 mm, the centre section is 5 mm and the lowest part three mm wide.

Figure 22. The cutting edge on no. 16 has both dents which are concentrated (upper part) and randomly (lowest part of the cutting edge) (drawing by G. Lowe).

2A. Blunt cutting edge with dents and striations within the dents. This category only contains two double axes. On no. 15, both cutting edges show an overall bluntness with hard dents and striations within these (Fig. 25). By the look of the cutting edges, it seems as if they were used, to some degree, on hard materials or were used with considerable force in the blow. The cutting edges seem to have flaked off and bits are missing. The wear marks of no. 1 look quite different from those mentioned above. Here only one of the cutting edges shows striations within the dents (softer compared to no. 15) and also more dents than the other cutting edge. The overall bluntness is, however, almost the same on both cutting edges. The striations within the dents imply that the axe was used on harder material than itself; the softer dents could imply that no. 1 was used for a longer period of time than no. 15.

1A. Dents and bending (mushroom-edges) of the cutting edge. The combined feature of dents and bending of the cutting edges was identified on five double axes. Four double axes (nos. 12, 14, 17, 18 and 19) show this pattern on one of the cutting edges (Fig. 23). No. 13 is slightly different from the above-mentioned, because the dents on the cutting edge are more pronounced and hard. The axe has between 7-8% of hardening elements in the cast, so the axe would not have become more worn because of the quality of its composition. Therefore, the worn cutting edge could imply that this axe was either used on harder material than the other axes in this category or used for a longer period of time. The cutting edges of no. 13 were probably used for different working tasks as, for example, no. 10 from category 1 (above).

3. Severely blunt cutting edges, minimum 5 mm. The axes in this category are severely blunted and flat; the minimum width of the cutting edge is 5 mm. Individual dents in different sizes can be identified and are mostly soft. The cutting edges are often so forcefully worked that they are mushroomed and therefore do not show any traces of V-shaped finishing treatment. These axes were without any doubt used on hard material such as stone and a few of them could also be interpreted as hammers.

2. Overall bluntness of the cutting edge ca. 2-4 mm and different degrees of mushroom-edges. Several cutting edges show a more or less overall bluntness of about 2-4 mm width. Some of the cutting edges are equally blunt all over and show only a few hard or soft dents. The dents can also have striations in them, presumably implying that the material worked on was harder than the bronze axe. The damage to the axe has, in a few cases, also resulted in mushroom-edges. The finishing treatment of the double axe can rarely be identified; the V-shaped form is seldom found because of the often extensive wear. Some of the cutting edges

Five axes belong to this category, two of which I have studied closely (nos. 9 and 21). On no. 21, both cutting edges show the same features, which most likely implies that both cutting edges were used for the same kind of work (Fig. 26). 40

Analyses of use



Figure 23. On no. 14 the lowest point has a slight mushroom-edge and above this hard dents are visible (drawing by R. Lindberg).

Figure 24. Axe no. 14 has varying degrees of mushroomedges and an overall bluntness in the range of 2 to 3 mm in width (drawing by R. Lindberg).

Figure 25. On no. 15 a blunt cutting edge and dents with striations within the dents was identified (drawing by G. Lowe).

Figure 26. An extremely blunt cutting edge on axe no. 21 (drawing by G. Lowe).

41



The Minoan double axe. An experimental study of production and use

 Table 8. Different use-wear, which appears on the cutting edges (c.e). Catalogue number No. 1 No. 2 No. 3 No. 4 No. 5 No. 6 No. 7 No. 8 No. 9 No. 10 No. 11 No. 12 No. 13 No. 14 No. 15 No. 16 No. 17 No. 18 No. 19 No. 20 No. 21

1

1A

2

2A

X both c.e.

4

5

X X

X

both c.e. both c.e.

X X X X

both c.e. both c.e. both c.e. X X both c.e. X X X

X

both c.e. X X X

X X X X

X both c.e. both c.e. been used as hammers.276 These axes have not been studied as closely as the other axes; therefore to reach truly conclusive results further studies need to be conducted.

Furthermore, the severe bluntness of the cutting edges also implies that the material worked on was hard. On no. 9, one cutting edge is almost straight but extremely blunt (width 4-9 mm). The cutting edge has cracked in several places due to the pressure exerted on it. I believe that this axe was used on material which was harder than it was meant for, probably stone.

4. Other use-wear on the cutting edges, not comparable with the above categories. The use-wear is different here from those presented above and could possibly be the result of postdepositional damage. However, the damage could also be work-related use-wear caused by a poor-quality cast and finishing treatment.

In this category I also include three axes which are exhibited at the Heraklion Museum, Crete and which I have only observed through the exhibition case. The cutting edges of no. 207 are slightly different; one cutting edge show deep dents, and the other one is more “evenly” worn, but both cutting edges are mushroomed.274 On no. 51, the cutting edges are very blunt and the metal probably bent because of the pressure on the edge when using the axe. Mosso has interpreted this axe as a miningtool but also points out that the axe is so worn because of the low content of tin.275 Finally comes, no. 115, where one of the cutting edges shows traces of extreme use. The last three examples are extremely blunt and could have

On no. 3 one of the cutting edges was severely damaged. It was flaked in several places and sections of the cutting edge are missing. However, this condition is most certainly related to casting and was caused by cold lapping. 5. Cutting edges that show no dents. Double axes that show a few very shallow soft dents were most probably not used and the dents could be the result of finishing treatments. There are two double axes that probably were not used. The first is no. 5, where both cutting edges and axe body show no traces of wear. The



274 Evely 1993, 49, no. 202. Observations I made during a visit to Heraklion Museum in October 2005. 275 Mosso 1908, 501; Mosso 1910, 242, Fig. 159; Mosso 1910b, 316317, Fig. 178a; Montelius 1924, Pl. 5, no. 5; Buchholz 1959, 35, no. 7h; Zervos 1956, 404, Fig. 611; Deshayes 1960, 105, no. 2020, 255; Evely 1993, 49, no. 200.

 276

Sp. Marinatos 1933-1935, 56; Buchholz 1959, 45, no. 41f; Deshayes 1960, 106, no. 2022, 255, Pls. XXXIV12 & LX2; Evely 1993, 44, no. 35.

42



3

Analyses of use second axe is no. 3, which shows one cutting edge as practically “brand new”. The other cutting edge, placed in category 4, was used minimumally, if at all.

to contact with both wood and stone, which indicates that the axe could have been a tool for all-round work. In category 3, no. 21 corresponds to an axe profile found at Machu Picchu used for stonework.282 This one could be a stonemason’s axe or a ball-peen hammer (Fig. 45), which is used by metal workers for finishing treatments. There are eleven double axes that are combinations of the above categories of use-wear: most frequent are combinations of category 1 or 1A with category 2 or 3. The axes with different patterns of use-wear on both cutting edges show the real advantage of a double axe. I consider it likely that the two cutting edges were used for different types of work. To investigate and interpretate the above categories further, experimental work on different materials must be conducted with modern double axes which correspond to the Minoan ones. The experiments must consider work on different materials, i.e. soft and hard material. The materials must also cover a range of qualities; i.e. it is necessary to try different kinds of wood, or stone in order to get as varied use-wear marks as possible on the cutting edges, before comparing them with the Minoan cutting edges.

The different thicknesses of the cutting edges found in the above categories 1, 2 and 3 could point to three different working activities. Could these be the result of the different working actions described by Gordon, as cutting, breaking and splitting and further imply work in different materials?277 One important factor, also to be considered, is the degree of use. The specimens in category 1 only show dents randomly or concentrated on the cutting edges, which could imply that the axe was used only for a few blows. Then again the cast could also be of such high quality that the cutting edges were not affected. A third possibility could be that the axe had recently been resharpened.278 The first category (category 1 and 1A) corresponds to the work done with flanged axes which could be interpreted as working in wood.279 The only work conducted during Kienlin’s and Ottaway’s experiments with flanged axes was on wood, so preliminarily the Minoan axes in this category will be considered as used for felling trees and related work.

Description and identification of use-wear on the axe bodies

Category 2 is more interesting because the axes are comparable both to the flanged axes and to the ones found at Machu Picchu.280 This category contains Minoan axes that could be considered both for stone and for woodworking.

Identifying use-wear on the axe bodies is difficult because they are often corroded and covered with oxidation. On most of the axes there are visible scratches and marks. These are often due to post-depositional circumstances since placement and movement in the soil for a long period of time affects the metal. Therefore, I have been extremely careful in trying to identify wear on the axe bodies. However, I believe that some of the scratches and marks derive from use and can be connected with the cutting edges, since some of the scratches lie beneath the corrosion. These marks on the axe bodies were therefore present before the metal started to react with its post-depositional surroundings.

Gordon’s interpretation is that they are used on materials harder than bronze, since they are so battered. The material was most certainly stone and the work consisted of breaking off bits of stone when preparing the stone for use. If the axe only shows damage to the cutting edge this could indicate work on a free-standing stone; otherwise the axe body would show striations, because of a sliding contact with the material.281 Not only the cutting edges are to be considered, but also the axe body: the combination of information attained therefrom could help in interpreting the working action. The axes whose cutting edges are seen as used on wood and stone have been studied also so to take in the axe bodies. When doing this I have found that the same Minoan axe has dents and striation marks that correspond

Striations are examples of use-wear which can be built up during a sliding contact with the material worked on. Dressing stone is one kind of work where one side of the axe body would have such a contact with the object worked on. Splitting stone would also leave wear traces on the axe body where the axe works inside an existing crack to open it further. To separate these working activities, the axes’ cutting edges need to be studied. The striations could also be marks from resharpening the tool; such marks, however, would not be expected so high up on the axe body.283

277

Gordon 1985, 313-315. The axes shown by Kienlin & Ottaway (1998) were used between 40-400 minutes, though unfortunately the photographs published do not indicate the time the axes were used. The axe with the least amount of use is not illustrated at all. 279 Kienlin & Ottaway 1998, Figs. 2, 3, 4, & 7. The axes used to create these wear marks were used between 50-340 minutes and they were resharpened. It can be ruled out that the wear was made only by one strike at a tree. 280 Kienlin & Ottaway’s experimental axes nos. 5 and 7 had been used for 80 respectively 330 minutes and had both been resharpened; cf. Kienlin & Ottaway 1998, 273, Figs. 5, 6 & 8, and Gordon 1985, Figs. 8 & 9 (there are no indications of how long the axes were used). 281 Gordon 1985, 322-323. 278

Another alternative to consider is striations from woodworking or felling trees where a comparable sliding action also takes place. I would, however, expect

282 283

43

Gordon 1985, 325, Fig. 5, no. 3. Gordon 1985, 323-324, Fig. 10.

The Minoan double axe. An experimental study of production and use

 different depths of the striations because the woods worked on are different in hardness.284

As seen above, different lengths, depths and thicknesses of striations can be detected on the double axes, implying that different kinds of work were conducted.

There are two categories of working marks on the double axes: long striations and short striations.285 The two types are not necessarily separated and can be found on the same axe.

The double axe no. 2 shows very extensive wear. There are broad striations from the centre of the axe toward the cutting edges, some of the striations reaching one of the cutting edges. This surface could be compared to one of the axes from Machu Picchu, which is recorded as having deep striations probably caused by sliding contact with a rough surface, i.e. stone.287 To split stone blocks an already existing crack is chosen where the axe blows would fall. When so working, the axe would be sliding up and down, creating these deep striations. The longest marks are those which have penetrated the material the most, which correspond to the marks made on no. 2. The overall bluntness of this axe also points to the entire cutting edge being used at the same time, which would be the case in this sort of action.

Long striations are seen as going approximately from the centre of the axe body towards the cutting edge. On some axes the striations reach the cutting edge. The depth and thickness of the striations vary; some are thin scratches while others are deep and wide. The long striations are over 2 cm long. Short striations can be situated anywhere on the axe body. They can also vary in depth and thickness; some are visible as shallow scratches while others are deeper. Short striations are up to 2 cm long.

The sharpening or resharpening of the double axe can most probably also be identified. The striations on no. 20 are much thinner compared to no. 2, and more resemble scratches. The thinner striations could be identified as polishing or grinding marks, either as the first preparation of the double axe after cast or as resharpening the tool after use. Such thin scratches were identified by Kienlin and Ottaway and could not be connected with any work related to wood during their experiments and in comparison with Bronze Age flanged axes.288

Long striations can be identified on the following nine double axes. Three of the axes (nos. 1, 2 and 20) show long striations, beginning at approximately the centre of the axe body and continuing towards the cutting edges. The striations on no. 2 are wider and deeper than on the other two. Nos. 1 and 2 also show a combination of long and short striations. Four of the axes (nos. 10, 11, 12, and 16) have a combination of long and short striations. The striations vary between shallow and deep. Some of these axes have more or less extensive oxidation, which makes the identification uncertain, especially on nos. 11 and 12.

As in the case with the dents on the cutting edges, experimental work needs to be conducted to understand the different striation marks from the axe bodies. The experimental work should not only consider working actions of the axes, but also include finishing treatments of the double axes.

In two cases, nos. 4 and 13, I am unsure whether the marks really are striations caused by work or whether the axe is affected by being buried for many years. Due to oxidation and corrosion both the axes are hard to interpret.

Results of study of use-wear

Short striations can be identified on seven double axes. No. 1 is in parts affected by oxidation, but the oxidized areas appear to have underlying striated zones. All these axes have combinations of short and long striations (nos. 1, 2, 10, 11, 12 and 16), which most probably could imply finishing treatments and working action. No. 8 has deeper striations and they are all over the axe body.

The metal analyses done by other scholars were studied and the double axes were divided into three categories depending on their tin and arsenic contents. The three categories correspond to the quality of the axes and could indicate that these axes were used on different materials, i.e. wood, bone and stone. This also resulted in different casts for the experimental part of this study (Chapter 5).

Striations on the axe body can arise in several ways: finishing treatments, sharpening the double axe, dressing stone, splitting stone or felling trees.286 These different actions would most likely create different striations.

The cutting edges reveal most information when studying traces of use-wear and trying to relate them to working activities. The Minoan double axes were divided into five categories on the use-wear visible on the cutting edges. These categories correspond to the working actions of cutting, chopping and breaking. This implies that the Minoan axes were used for several working activities. Furthermore, striations on the axe bodies were studied. They are different in appearance and the striations which



284 The experiments done by Kienlin and Ottaway showed that when felling trees and stripping bark the work-related scratches never reached further back than 2 cm from the cutting edge. The scratches that were further back were interpreted as polishing work. Kienlin & Ottaway 1998, 282. 285 I have chosen to divide the striations into two groups because the main attention should be to whether these striations are long or short. The question of medium-long striations can of course be raised but does not imply a certain activity as the short or long striations do. 286 Gordon 1985, 323.

 287 288

44



Gordon 1985, 324, Fig. 10. Kienlin & Ottaway 1998, 275, Fig. 1.

Analyses of use

 appear as scratches probably come from sharpening or resharpening the cutting edge while the deeper, wider striations most certainly came from working with stone. To further interpret the use-wear on the cutting edges and the axe bodies, experimental work has to be conducted. The experiments should concern both the finishing treatments and actual working activities to allow additional conclusions about the use of the Minoan double axes.

45



5. EXPERIMENTS WITH MODERN CAST DOUBLE AXES

earlier stages of the 20th century and came into wider use during the 1960’s. Ascher published an article in the journal American Anthropologist (1961) where he demonstrated and discussed five different examples of experiments conducted in the past. His contribution, often referred to, is a guide to approaching and processing experimental archaeology, but was also written for those who do not understand the relevance of experiments.292 J. Coles’ books Archaeology by experiment and Experimental archaeology continued in Ascher’s footsteps and can be used as handbooks for experimental projects and already conducted experiments.293 Since then, it has become more common to use experimental archaeology to answer questions raised during archaeological work. Different types of experimental archaeology have developed and to categorize them has become common. Mathieu refers to the different directions in experimental archaeology as: object replication, behavioural replication, process replication and system replication.294 The work presented here on double axes would be defined both as object replication and as behavioural replication. Within the category of object replication, Mathieu places functional replicas, which are replicas produced in order to be used as the original (ancient) object. Replicas are also manufactured in a way similar to the ancient manufacturing process and with the same material. Within behavioural replication Mathieu has placed functional replication, which is testing of the replicas to get answers about function and use, and is mostly conducted with tools and weapons.295

“It is the aim of archaeology to obtain more information and new sources of information to add to the foundations of knowledge upon which our culture is based. Experimental archaeology, when employed scientifically and with an awareness of its limitations, can add materially to our sources of knowledge about the past, and may be considered as an important way in which archaeology can come to grips with the mental processes, plans and activities of prehistoric man”.289 Experimental work is not a commonly encountered method in the sphere of Aegean Bronze Age studies and experiments are to some degree met with scepticism within the discipline of archaeology.290 Critics most often point out that the method is too positivistic and that we really cannot “get in the heads” of prehistoric people.291 True – we cannot do experiments that exactly copy prehistoric habits and their use of tools, but if we do not try to comprehend the existing material we will never proceed further in our research. I therefore think that experimental studies are necessary to approach the Minoans and their society. However, it is problematic and should not on its own be used to freely interpret and conclude concerning prehistoric use and behaviour. Experiments are a complement to other research methods, i.e. examining and studying ancient artefacts and their archaeological contexts, and then and only then can experimental archaeology as a method come into its full right. Experimental archaeology was already conducted in the 19th century. It developed methodologically during the

My experiments can be divided into two parts: the manufacturing process and the different uses of the double axe. To better understand the entire manufacturing process of a double axe, seventeen axes were cast and ten of them were used for experimental work. In the first stage an attempt was made to replicate every suspected

 289

Coles 1967, 19-20. However there are experiments undertaken considering Aegean material, for example the work conducted by Catapotis, Pryce and Bassiakos studying furnaces in order to reconstruct the work that was carried out at Chrysokamino (Catapotis, Pryce & Bassiakos 2008, 113121). There have also been studies in shipbuilding techniques using replicas of Mycenaean tools cf. Maragoudaki & Kavvouras 2006; Baika, Kamarinou & Maragoudaki 2004; Maragoudaki & Kavvouras in press and also Maragoudaki’s thesis from 2010. 291 Different forms of criticism have been presented, for example that the experiments conducted were for the wrong kind of work; for example, Moorehead (1936, 132-133) concerning experiments conducted with bone points. The experiments conducted by Tyzzer (1936, 261-79) were using the bone points as arrow heads, but Moorehead believed they were fishhooks. Schiffer (1976, 6) thinks that experimental archaeology is too straightforward and only investigates simple things like tools and tool marks, and further that the results are treated far too confidently. Skibo (2000, 203) admits that experiments can help in understanding our past, but he does not believe in isolated experiments investigating only what a single item was used for. Experimental archaeology as long-term projects is, according to Skibo, a superior basis for discussions related to transformations and change over time. 290

 292

Ascher 1961, 793-816. Although published 50 years ago the process presented (Ascher 1961, 810-811) is still valid today and the different stages were followed in the experiments presented here: 1. Converting the limited working hypothesis into verifiable form. 2. Selecting the experimental material. 3. Operating with the objective and effective materials. 4. Observing the results of the experiment. 5. Interpreting the results of an experiment in an inference. 293 Coles (1973, 15-18) presents eight different points which should be fulfilled before conducting an experiment. Coles 1979 is an extended version of his earlier book, Archaeology by experiment. 294 Mathieu 2002, 2-6. 295 Mathieu 2002, 2-3. There are several experiments undertaken with both tools and weapons, for example Odell and Cowan (1986) who conducted experiments with chert tips on arrows and spears, and Frison (1989) who has conducted experiments with projectile points with which to hunt elephants and stones to execute their butchering with. For further references cf. Mathieu 2002. Ascher (1961, 793, 795) would have called these imitative experiments.

46



Experiments with modern cast double axes step in the manufacturing process: this in an effort to understand and identify, for example, the impressions of sand and the different striations visible on the Minoan double axes.

of the double axes.301 Therefore, the following text is a detailed description of the experimental work conducted.

The second stage of the experiment concerned working in wood, stone and bone in order to compare the use-wear on the modern experimental axes with the use-wear on the Minoan double axes. The chopping experiments on different materials are designed to tie in the Minoan usewear to different working activities. Experimental studies using metal and stone axes have had diverse aims, though none aimed at comparing the axes on different materials.296 The most common axes used in experimental work are stone ones; only in a few cases have steel and bronze axes been used. The most common experimental activity with an axe is to fell trees.297 The previous experiments conducted rarely show use-wear, however; for example, Mathieu and Meyer mention that they recorded use-wear but do not present it in their article.298

Recording procedures experiments

Different materials were chosen by me, because after studying twenty-three Minoan double axes I was convinced that the various dents and striations on the axes came from working on different materials. The choice of materials used for the experiments was based on archaeological evidence from Bronze Age Crete. The aim was to come as close as possible to the Bronze Age experience and evidence.

When recording the felling of the Scotch fir, the axe was photographed first after 1 minute, then after every 5 minutes (repeated four times, a total of 21 minutes work). The procedure of recording the felling of the birch-tree was almost the same: the first observation after 6 minutes, then after 11 minutes, then again after 23 minutes, and the final observation after a total of 43 minutes. The recording of the oak tree followed exactly the same procedure (the axe used for the longest time was used for 60 minutes). The stone-working experiments were also recorded in this way. The bone experiments were recorded differently because the time-factor turned out to have less relevance. Therefore, the use-wear on the axes was recorded after dismembering certain parts of the lamb and the cattle bones.

of

the

Seventeen double axes were cast at two different locations for the experiments (for information on the modern double axes, see also Appendix I). One axe was cast at Bäckedals Folkhögskola, Sveg, Sweden (referred to as A) and the other sixteen were cast at the Kamarianakis foundry, in Piraeus, Greece (referred to as B-Q). Unfortunately, I was not able to attend the casting process at Bäckedals Folkhögskola, but I was present at Piraeus to record the experiments.302 All stages of the finishing treatments were recorded: from hammering to the final sharpening of the cutting edge.

As an overall inspiration I have used Kienlin’s and Ottaway’s experiments with flanged axes, which are replicas of the ice-man Ötzi’s axe found in the NorthAlpine region.299 Their study describes both the manufacturing process and the experimental work using the axes to fell trees. The tools, made of either stone or bronze, which were used for the finishing treatments, were carefully chosen. I have tried to get as close as possible to materials found at various Minoan sites, and wherever possible, sites where double axes were found. When the materials used for the experiments are discussed, appropriate references to Minoan materials and contexts are given. For this more detailed purpose, Evely’s two volumes of Minoan crafts: tools and techniques and the reports from the Unexplored Mansion were consulted.300

From the photographs, drawings of the use-wear were transferred onto already prepared outlines of double axe profiles, in order to facilitate the description and identification of the different dents on the cutting edges. The various marks left by the double axe on the different materials worked were also recorded, in order to assist further studies of tool-marks on different materials in the future.

An important part of the method is to record every stage of the experiments, so that one can reconstruct the manufacturing, finishing treatments and the different uses

Manufacturing a modern double axe

296

301

Two patterns of different double axes and their core boxes were made in wood (Fig. 27).303 They were

Of interest are the experiments conducted by Mathieu & Meyer (1997) by felling trees with axes made of stone, bronze and steel in order to study which one is most efficient. For further references regarding experiments concerning tree felling cf. Mathieu & Meyer 1997, 333. 297 Mathieu & Meyer 1997. 298 Mathieu & Meyer 1997, 339. 299 Kienlin & Ottaway 1998. 300 Evely 1993; Evely 2000; Popham 1984.

This is common practice when reporting experiments; see for example Odell & Cowan, 1986; Frison 1989; Kienlin & Ottaway 1998. To record the experiments two digital cameras were used. One camera had a 5x mega pixels and micro-lens and video recording function. This allowed me to take video scenes of the whole process. The other digital camera had 6x mega pixels; on this I could change lenses, and so both a micro-lens and a 35-70mm lens were used. 303 A core box is a mould to make the core – for another mould which needs a core, in order to cast a shaft hole. The first core box (a round 302

47

The Minoan double axe. An experimental study of production and use manufactured by using the measurements of the Minoan axes nos. 13 and 14. These axes were chosen because of their different shapes, which could imply different usages. No. 13 is rectangular in shape and no. 14 has a concave axe body and convex cutting edges.

9-11% tin and 89-91% copper, which is comparable with several Minoan double axes, for example nos. 3 and 131.306 Axes B-Q were cast in Piraeus in November 2005, at the Kamarianakis foundry, by Papadakis.307 These axes were cast with three different tin contents, drawn from the metal analyses studied (Chapter 4). The three different casts were conducted in order to thoroughly examine whether the different percentages of the alloys would make any difference in the performance of the experimental work. There were eight double axes with 15% Sn (comparable to nos. 4 and 5), four with 12% Sn (comparable to nos. 117 and 125) and four with 8-9% Sn (comparable to nos. 10 and 124). The double axes cast in Piraeus were manufactured using both axe patterns: eight double axes were made as replicas of no. 13 and nine double axes made as replicas of no. 14.308 Axe A was made in a two-part mould, which can be identified by the casting joint on one of the long sides (comparable to, for example, nos. 2 and 3). Further information about the mould type can be seen on the surface of the axe body. The body is covered with small and larger irregular holes (impressions of sand and dirt inclusions), which came from the flask mould material (comparable to, for example, nos. 2 and 4). In the as-cast state there are no visible traces of runners (for example, nos. 2 and 4). Shrinkage has taken place during solidification, which is visible through shrinkage cavities on both sides of the shaft hole (comparable to, for example, nos. 3 and 12). Shrinkage can also be seen on the axe body.309 The axes B-Q were manufactured with the same technique as at Bäckedals Folkhögskola. Large flaskmoulds were used whereby two axes were cast in one mould (Fig. 28). Casting or casting defects in these axes are few. There are casting joints on all of the sixteen axes (comparable to, for example, nos. 2 and 3). Impressions of sand, which identify a sand mould, can be detected as on the Minoan ones (comparable to, for example, nos. 2 and 4). The trace of a runner can also be identified on the axes (comparable to, for example, nos. 1 and 10). Shrinkage cavities cannot be found either on the long sides or in the shaft holes (comparable to, for example, nos. 1 and 2). Tiny dirt inclusions can be identified on the axes with 9% tin (comparable to, for example, nos. 1 and 6).

Figure 27. Core box, core and pattern prepared to cast modern double axes.

Casting and casting defects Axe A is a replica of no. 13 and was cast by Månsson and Rask at Bäckedals Folkhögskola, Sveg, in March 2004.304 They used the flask technique with a running system introducing the metal into the mould in two areas, i.e. one on each side of the shaft hole core.305 The metal content is

Finishing treatments of the modern double axes

core after no. 13) was constructed after Evely’s suggestion about the socalled “ears” (Evely 1993, Fig. 21) which, after visible examinations of the double axes housed at the Ashmolean Museum and the cast of the replica at Bäckedals Folkhögskola, have been ruled out and interpreted as shrinkage cavities. The second core box was made after the measurements of no. 14 and had an oval shaft hole. This core box was used for the casting in Piraeus. 304 Here I want to take the opportunity to thank Håkan Månsson and Tomas Rask for casting the double axe, copy of no. 13, for me. They were both students at the course “Forntida smide och metallhantverk” at Bäckedals Folkhögskola, Sveg, Sweden, during the spring semester of 2004. 305 For further information on the use of the flask technique, cf. The flask technique, Chapter 2.

The axes needed finishing treatments of different kinds: removing of flash, polishing the surface to remove the residue from the sand moulds, cold work to form the axe 306

For further information, cf. Metal analyses, Chapter 4. Here I want to thank Panayotis Hel. Papadakis, the worker at Kamarianakis foundary, who cast the axes. 308 For detailed information of the modern cast double axes, see Appendix I. 309 For further information of the casting defects, cf. Casting and casting defects. 307

48

Experiments with modern cast double axes

Figure 29. The newly cast double axes with flash and traces of the running system left in place. The black surface of the cast axes also appear very different from the axe cast at Bäckedals Folkhögskola (Fig. 11). (B-Q), there was plenty of flash left on the long sides to conduct finishing treatments on. In order to try different finishing treatments a knife, two chisels and a small saw were manufactured from axe Q.311 Similar kinds of Minoan tools have been found together with double axes in Minoan contexts at Mallia, Routasi and Zakros.312 Two chisels of different lengths were made from axe Q and were used to remove flash from the long sides of two axes. The double axe was first secured and then a hammer was used to force the chisel into the flash to remove it. The chisel was very effective and the flash disappeared with five-six strokes. The shorter chisel became blunt and mushroom-edged, and several individual dents could be identified on the chisels’ cutting edges.313 This shows that bronze tools are useful in the manufacturing process and in the finishing treatments of tools. Flash was also removed, to some extent, by grinding with stones (pumice, igneous stone and sandstone). This method works but would be a very time-consuming task if used to remove all the flash. Although the flash was removed from the axe with a chisel (Fig. 30), it still needed to be ground and filed to become smooth. This could be accomplished with the 311

Figure 28. Preparing the flask moulds for casting and casting the prepared moulds. The bricks are placed on the mould when cast to prevent the mould from separating.

The way in which the axe was made into these tools was using a grinding machine and this was not done during the Minoan period. When the axe’s lifetime came to an end it was most certainly remelted. The saw was not used for the experiments conducted in this study. 312 For further information on the find contexts see, nos. 90-91, 155-158 and 197-198 in the catalogue. 313 The shorter chisel was 7 cm in length and its cutting edge was 0.1 mm in width. When used for finishing treatments the proportions of the chisel had changed: length 6.5 cm and the width of the cutting edge was 0.6 cm. The second chisel was made slightly longer, 9 cm. The length of the second chisel was not affected by use but the width of the cutting edge was sligtly worn when removing flash; brand new it measured below 0.1 cm in width and after use it was ca 0.1 cm. Mushroom-edges and bluntness can be identified on Minoan chisels’ cutting edges; for examples see Evely 1993, Fig. 3. The same kind of use-wear is also identified on double axes, which could show the correctness of the interpretations made by Evely (1993, 49, nos. 200-204) that some of the double axes actually were used as hammers.

body and the cutting edges, and sharpening of the cutting edges. The traces of the running system and the flash had already been removed on A and the running system had to be removed from B-Q in order to be transported to Sweden (Fig. 29).310 However, on the axes cast in Piraeus 310

Removing the running systems from the axes was necessary in order to transport the axes, because they weighed ca 1 kilo apiece, but it did not mean that certain aspects of finishing treatment could not be accomplished later in Sweden.

49

The Minoan double axe. An experimental study of production and use

 used for the sharpening of cutting edges.316 Scabs or any such casting defects could also be removed by grinding and polishing the axe. The axes were not ground and polished completely by one method, but different techniques and materials were tried in order to obtain a wider understanding of the archaeological material. To get one axe in a good shape, i.e. smooth and shining with a sharp cutting edge, would approximately require a day. One interesting result is that the effect of filing and grinding with a stone became visible as striations on the axe body only after a few minutes. Such striations can be identified on Minoan double axes (no. 20). Only one of the cutting edges on A was initially sharpened and used for experimental work.317 To form the cutting edges and the axe body an anvil of granite, ca. 25x18x10 cm, was selected: other igneous stones of different sizes were also collected in order to be used as hammers (from round to oval and elongated, the size ranging from L16xW8 to L10xW6 cm) some found on the grounds of Arkens boat club.318 Igneous stone was chosen because of tools found in the Unexplored Mansion, where in Late Minoan II, part of the building had been used as a working area for a bronze-smith.319

Figure 30. Removing flash with one of the chisels. above-mentioned stones and would not be too timeconsuming. The mould material, sand, used at Bäckedals Folkhögskola and at Piraeus was of different qualities (Fig. 11 and 29). That at Bäckedals was a red industrial type, which did not stick to the surface of the cast axe. This meant that it was not necessary to clean the axe when it was taken out of the mould: the axe was bronzecoloured directly after casting, though with small impressions of sand. The mould material used at Piraeus was black facing sand, which was left on the axes’ surface as residue when cast. In order to clean the axes’ surfaces of the facing sand and get the impressions of sand removed, finishing treatments were needed. Igneous stone, pumice and sandstone were used again and all stones worked to satisfaction. The problem with pumice is that it wears down quickly because of its porosity. Sandstone is more compact and did not wear down as fast as the pumice did.314 Igneous stone is harder and more compact than sandstone and therefore lasts much longer, although the result on the axe is the same.

One of the cutting edges was first hammered up on the anvil, but after a few minutes the cutting edge started to bend (Fig. 7). Then a stone laid flat on the ground was used instead of the anvil. This did not work out to satisfaction either. Nearby was flat rock, which allowed the cutting edge to be shifted around more readily and so more easily formed. This worked very well and when we got the technique right, it was relatively easy to form the cutting edge. Altogether it took thirty-five minutes of cold-working to get a sharp and thin cutting edge with a stone hammer. The axe was hammered starting between two and three centimeters up into the blade: the cutting edge became slightly convex and the axe body became slightly wavy (Fig. 31). Axes A-P gave an opportunity to experiment with further finishing treatments. The procedure of cold-working with an anvil and on flat rock was tried on one axe with 15% Sn and one with 12% Sn. This was done in order to form

Pumice and igneous stones were chosen because of the excavated finds in the Unexplored Mansion. Several kinds of igneous rock were found there and interpreted as polishers and grinders.315 The pumice is not primarily thought of as a grinding material, but rather as material for polishing objects. However, worn-down pumice have been found in the Unexplored Mansion and interpreted as

 316

Evely 1984, 229; Evely 1993, 112. Ogden (1982, 87) mentions different polishing agents to polish different metals with, one of them pumice which could be used both as a stone and as powder. 317 The reason for making only one sharp was that initially I only had one double axe cast and I wanted to do experiments in as many materials as I could. Saving the other cutting edge made it easier to prepare for another working task. 318 Blitzer has identified anvils of chert and sandy limestone at Kommos. We could unfortunately not find these materials for the experiments. The hardness of the chert (5-7 Mohs’ scale) and of the granite (7 Mohs’ scale) were, however, somewhat comparable and the size of the collected anvil is also in the range of the ones found at Kommos. Cf. Blitzer 1995, 484-486. For chosen forms and sizes of the stones for the experiments, cf. Evely 1984, 224-225, Pl. 208, nos. 15 and 16 & Pl. 227, nos. 1, 6 and 16; Evely 1993, 108, Fig. 47. I want to express thanks for the permission, through Bengt-Åke Fri, to fell trees and cut up the lamb and cattle bones on the grounds of Arkens Boat Club in Kungsängen, Stockholm. 319 Catling & Catling 1984, 204.

 314

Sandstone is a compact stone in comparison to pumice. Pumice is lava and, when a volcano erupts, lava is filled with gas which creates pockets of gas in the lava. The gas burns out but the pockets are left in the stone, which makes pumice a porous and light stone. Sandstone is made up of grains of “sand” which have coalesced to become rock, and the different hardnesses of sandstone depend on the component grains (most common is quartz in different colours) are cemented together. If one considers the different hardness of the stones, pumice is the harder one with 6 according to Mohs’ scale and the sandstones found in the Kommos area are between 3 and 5 according to the same scale. Cf. Blitzer 1995, 417; Loberg 1999, 181, 222. 315 Evely 1984, 224-225, for shape of tools Pl. 208, nos. 15 and 16 & Pl. 227, nos. 1, 6 and 16.

50



Experiments with modern cast double axes

Figure 31. Axe A after one of the cutting edges was hammered. The cutting edge which was hammered became slightly convex, which also gave the axe body a more concave appearance. whole process from forming the cutting edge to sharpening it, the thickness was reduced from 0.15 cm to a “non-measurable” V-shaped edge. To get an edge razorblade-sharp took 5 minutes. The axe body was also affected by the final sharpening, and traces of this can be seen approximately 0.5-1 cm upon the axe body. The sharpening of the cutting edge left small scratches. Most of these were horizontal and diagonal towards the cutting edge, but some also vertical. The different directions show the movement of the stone when sharpening the cutting edge. These kinds of scratches were pointed out by Kienlin and Ottaway.322 For the Piraeus axes a grinder was made (Fig. 33), as shown in Evely’s Minoan crafts. Tools and techniques, Vol. 2.323 The cutting edges here were 0.2-0.5 cm thick as-cast and they were again

the cutting edges, which in an as-cast state were ca 0.3 cm thick. The result was that the cutting edges cracked in different positions. On the first axe (15% Sn), a corner cracked and fell off, and the other axe (12 % Sn) cracked in the middle of the cutting edge (Fig. 32). This was very surprising because the axe from Bäckedals had been so easy to cold-work. The answer to why this happened should most probably be sought in the cooling of the axes. At Bäckedal, the axe cooled off in the mould at a slow pace, and at Piraeus the axes were taken out of the mould very quickly. This can be seen in the grain structure of the axes from Piraeus (the inner part of the metal is lighter in colour than the outer). The quick loss in temperature makes the metal brittle.320 There are Minoan double axes that have a corner broken off just like the experimental axe, for example, no. 20. The coldworking did not affect the double axes cast in Piraeus (apart from the unwanted crackings). Here, annealing would have been a preferable way to proceed.321 The last step before using the experimental double axes was to sharpen the cutting edges. Axe A was first sharpened with sandstone and then with pumice-stone (Fig. 8). Either stone would have been sufficient to sharpen the edge, but I wanted to try two different ones. During the

 320

According to experiments conducted by Ottaway & Seibel (1998), the grain structure of the items cast in a sand mould compared to a stone or metal mould was bigger. The bigger grain structures cause a brittle cast, exactly like the Piraeus axes, although the cooling off of the axes cast in Piraeus and in the experiments conducted by Ottaway & Seibel can in no way be compared. The cooling-off environment of the cast items, in the experiment was conducted by Ottaway and Seibel, was part of the experiments and was therefore controlled. The cast items were in the mould for 60 minutes. The double axes cast at Piraeus were taken out of their moulds less than five minutes after casting. 321 Annealing (heat treatment) double axes have unfortunately not been a part of the experiments. However, annealing has been conducted for further experiments with the modern cast double axes.

Figure 32. A corner of the axe broke off during finishing treatments. The two different colours, depending on the grain structure, can be seen on both the small piece that broke off and in the cut in the axe.

 322 323

51



Kienlin & Ottaway 1998, 275. Evely 2000, Fig. 176.

The Minoan double axe. An experimental study of production and use carving (?).326 On these paintings it can also be seen that the handle is slightly bent on the lowest part of the handle, probably for the axe to lie better in the hand. This is pointed out by Evely, who also suggests that the end of the shaft which one holds is thicker than the diameter of the shaft holes.327

sharpened to razorblade-sharpness. This was done with the axes employed for the lamb and cattle bone experiments and for the felling of the oak tree. It took a great deal of time to sharpen the thicker cutting edges of the Piraeus casts: since two were destroyed by coldworking, the other cutting edges were sharpened only with help of the grinder. This procedure would have been quicker if the axes had been cold-worked, because coldworking would have made them thinner, and the thinner axes would then have been quicker to sharpen. To finish off the cutting edges after using the grinder, we used pumice- and sandstone and sharpened them by hand. The whole procedure, after getting used to it, took approximately 15-20 minutes per cutting edge.

The first shaft that was made for the first experiments with axe A was ca. 40 cm in length and made of cherry tree-wood (Fig. 34).328 The shaft hole was round, which could be a problem when performing heavy work because the axe could fall off the shaft when working. Moreover, that part of the wood in the small shaft hole is vulnerable: thinner than the handle proper it can easily break from the stresses engendered by the heavy head on impact. One hard blow with the axe could either make the axe-head fly off the shaft, or make the shaft break. Therefore, the end of the shaft placed into the axe’s shaft hole was split. Into the split end, a wedge was hammered, to secure the handle by expanding its width. The shaft was also manufactured with a shoulder; i.e. the shaft was thicker just below the axe head for support: this helps reduce the shocks of the working blows. The lowest part of the shaft was formed like the Egyptian single axes. The shafting done, the axe was put in water over night to let the wooden handle swell before the experiments were started.

Figure 33. The grinder made to sharpen the axes used for felling the oak tree and cutting lamb and cattle bones. The grinder can be maneuvered by one person, but if two persons worked at it at the same time, one holding the axe and the other one the grinder’s handle the sharpening of the axes was more precise and went faster.

Shafting Discussions concerning materials for shafts and shafts lengths are almost non-existent in the scholarly literature. The only Minoan shaft materials come from miniature double axes found at the Arkalochori cave. Some of these double axes had fragments of wood present in the shaft hole, which turned out to be juniper or pine.324 Of these two, only juniper-tree would do as a handle for double axe tools because of the flexibility of the wood.325 As for the length of the shafts, Egyptian evidence gives further information. Single axes can be seen in use on the tomb paintings from the Old, the Middle and the New Kingdoms. The differences in the lengths of the shafts may of course be due to the artist, the perspective of the painting etc. However, the paintings represent different tasks being performed. The axe with the longest shaft is used for felling trees or bushes while the ones with the shorter handles are used for working on a boat, i.e.

Figure 34. The first shaft made with a shoulder and a split end where a wedge was hammered down. After conducting the first set of experiments, we agreed that the length of the shaft could be improved and that a longer length of 50-60 cm would have given a more ergonomic form and greater effect when working (kinetic energy). The shorter shaft of 40 cm did not allow the axe to have a long-enough swing because the person who held the axe was forced to stand close to the tree and therefore the axe was not used to its maximum effect. The second shaft, made of juniper (Swedish), was made with 326

Newberry 1893, Pl. XXIX; Davies 1902, Pls. XV-XVI; Davies 1927, Pl. XXXVI (shows a man felling a bush with an axe with a long handle); Evely 1993, Fig. 24. 327 Evely 1993, 54. 328 To my knowledge the cherry tree did not exist in Minoan Crete, although it is used here because the wood was available.

324

Diapoulis 1980, 131-132. Examinations which Sp. Marinatos (1974, 95) had undertaken showed that the handles from double axes found in the Arkalochori cave were made of Abies Cephallenica (fir, five shafts) and Cedrus (two shafts). 325 Discussion with Lowe while conducting experimental work.

52

Experiments with modern cast double axes the Royal Road at Knossos.333 The nearest to these types of wood in Sweden was either a spruce fir or a Scotch fir. The Scotch fir was chosen, because it was more abundant where the experiments were conducted. The hardness of the fir, which also was of importance, is comparable to that of pine.334 Fir tree (most likely Abies Alba) has been reported as building material both from Knossos and Phaistos.335

a length of 55 cm and a wedge to secure the shaft was driven into the axe. For the bone and oak tree experiments, shafts of different lengths were made for the double axes with different percentages of tin. To fell the oak tree, the three different lengths of the shafts were 71, 60 and 35 cm long respectively in order to establish whether the length was important. For the bone experiments we also experimented with three different lengths of the shafts. One handle was 20 cm, the second 30 cm and the third one 47 cm long. These lengths were chosen after studying butchering axes of modern date.329

Birch tree, which is harder than Scotch fir was chosen for the second experiment in cutting trees. The birch tree is found in modern times in northern Greece, but was probably not present in Crete during the Bronze Age.336 The hardness of birch wood is comparable to that of plane-tree, which has been identified in the Kommos material.337 The birch wood is between a pine and an oak wood in hardness.338

Chopping materials The experimental work using the modern double axes was conducted by felling trees, dressing stone and cutting up bones. Different trees, stones and thickness of bones were selected because of their different hardnesses in order to obtain a variety of use-wear. However, to get the experiments as close as possible to the conditions of the Minoan period, I studied what materials Bronze Age Crete offered before choosing the chopping materials for the experiments. This kind of information is available in the Kommos excavation publications, where there are analyses of flora and fauna, and in, Rackham’s and Moody’s book “The making of the Cretan landscape”. In addition, several articles have been consulted to conduct the experiments.330

Oak tree, which is the hardest wood used for the experiments, was chosen because there is plenty of evidence of oak in the archaeological material. Charcoal from oak tree was, for example, found at Pseira.339 The stones chosen for the experiments were sandstone and granite because of their different hardness.340 Sandstone has been reported as a ground stone from Kommos.341 There are also three sandstone quarries located near Zakro and Roussolakkos.342 A sandstone quarry has also been located at Mochlos, where the ashlar blocks for the rebuilding of Gournia were taken.343 Sandstone was not only used as a building material for houses, but also for steps, benches, door jambs and pillar bases.344 In producing the above-mentioned items,

The axes were used on wood of different hardness to study whether different use-wear resulted: Scotch fir, birch and oak tree were chosen. Two types of trees present at Kommos and its surroundings during the Bronze Age were pine tree and cypress.331 Pine and probably cypress were used as building material for roofs, reinforcement of rubble and mud brick walls, beams for floors and staircases, columns, frames for doorways and windows.332 Pine was found in charcoal samples collected both from Fournou Korifi (Myrtos) and from

 333

Rackham 1972, 300; Rackham & Moody 1996, 127. The fir tree (Abies Alba) has an average dried weight of 480 kg/m³ and the pine, depending on the species, between 420 and 560 kg/m³. The exact species found for example in the immediate surroundings of Kommos is Pinus Halepensis; unfortunately I have not found an average dried weight for it. Jackson & Day 1990, 17-18; Shay & Shay 1995, Table 4.9. 335 J. Shaw 1973, 135-136; Evely 2000, 534. 336 Sfikas 1978, 132. 337 Shay & Shay 1995, 127. According to Jackson & Day (1990, 22, 27) the birch and the plane tree have the same average dried weight, which determines the hardness of the wood. 338 The dried average weight for oak is between 720 and 790 kg/m³, for birch 640 kg/m³ and for fir 480 kg/m³; cf. Jackson & Day 1990, 17, 22 & 27. 339 Schoch 1998, 39. 340 According to Mohs’ scale of hardness from 1-10 (1 softest, 10 hardest), sandstone has a hardness of 3-7 (depending on the binding agent in the sandstone) and granite a hardness of 7. The stones found in the surroundings of Kommos have been further tested and the sandstone has a hardness of 3-4 and the quartz of 6-8. Cf. Rice 1987, 355-356, Table 12.1; Blitzer 1995, 417-418. According to Younger (1981, 31) steatite (soapstone) has a hardness of ca 2 and Melian obsidian of ca 5 on Mohs’ scale. 341 Blitzer 1995, 420. 342 The stone was identified as eolianite or eolian sandstone. The archaeological term used is ammoudha and means consolidated sand. It is a soft stone, easy to quarry and form into building material. Papageorgakis, Mourtzas & Orfanoudaki 1992, 21-22. For Roussolakkos (Ta Skaria): Driessen et al. 1984, 143-149. For Pelekità: J. Shaw 1973, 30-34. 343 Soles 1983, 33-46; Soles 1991, 24, 28. 344 Driessen et al. 1984, 144. 334



329 Here I want to take the opportunity to thank Lovisa Strand, MA & Dr. Gunnel Ekroth for help with conducting the bone experiments. I would not have been able to perform without Strand’s knowledge and skill in butchering and Ekroth’s knowledge of ancient practices at animal sacrifices. 330 J. Shaw & M. Shaw, Kommos. The Kommos region and houses of the Minoan town, vol. 1:1, 1995, especially the chapters written by Shay, Shay, Frego & Zwiazek and Reese, Rose & Payne; Rackham 1972; Rackham & Moody 1996. The separate articles will be referred to below. 331 Shay & Shay 1995, 121, Table 4.9. 332 J. Shaw 1973, 135-157; Rackham & Moody 1996, 63; Palyvou 2004, 573-585. The use of wood in the Minoan era can for example be seen at Gournia where mortise holes were detected, for example, high up on ashlar blocks. These holes were made so that wooden beams could be placed in them. Wooden beams could also be placed vertically on walls to support the wooden beams placed in the ceiling. The chases (measurements between 0.15-0.25 cm in diameter) for these can still be seen in, for example, Room G 1, Gournia, where nos. 46 and 49 were found. Also in Gournia timber was used as vertical beams in rubble walls, as columns (stone bases), and as door jambs. Soles 1991, 32, 34. Also in Pseira, the use of timber for ceilings, roof beams, framing windows and possibly for thresholds in certain rooms is recorded. McEnroe 1998, 7.

53



The Minoan double axe. An experimental study of production and use cattle bones.354 Sheep or goat bones are present throughout the whole of the Minoan period, i.e. from Early Minoan II to Late Minoan IIIB, though most of these sheep or goat bones come from Middle Minoan IIILate Minoan I contexts. The cattle bones, at Kommos, are represented in the archaeological material from Middle Minoan I to Late Minoan IIIA2-B, with gaps during the Middle Minoan II and Late Minoan I-II periods, when no such bones were found.355

dressing and carving the stone would have been necessary. In order to get varied use-wear from experimenting on stone, granite was chosen instead of limestone which, like sandstone, is a soft stone also used for construction work in Minoan Crete.345 Granite has not, to my knowledge, been used in Crete during the Minoan period as building material but other hard stones are present on the island, for example, quartz and rock crystal (though neither are used in architectural construction).346 Breccia is found locally in Crete (for example, the Ha gorge, near Halasmenos) and depending on the composition of the stone it is classed as a soft or a hard stone. Furthermore, breccia was used for both stone vases and architectural purposes (for example, at Phaistos and Knossos).347 Breccia, rock crystal and quartz were not available to conduct experiments on but it seemed important to experiment on a harder stone after studying the cutting edges of the Minoan axes. Granite was available locally and therefore the experiments were conducted on granite. Granite is an igneous rock containing, among other minerals, quartz.348 Quartzite rock has been recorded from Zakro (amongst many places), where this kind of stone was used for hand-tools.349 The Egyptians used granite already during the Old Kingdom. Granite quarries have been identified and the stone was mainly used for architectural features in Egypt.350

In addition, archaeological reports from the mainland were consulted which include bone material from the Mycenaean period. The palace at Pylos is one example from the Late Bronze Age, where mostly burnt cattle bones were identified. Fortunately the fire did not destroy the bones completely and there are several indications of skinning, dismembering and filleting marks on the bones.356 Furthermore, there is Mycenaean evidence from Ayios Konstantinos, which shows that the sheep or goats sacrificed were chopped up before they were burnt. The individual parts identified are humerus, femur, tibia, scapula and pelvis.357 To cut up the lamb and the cattle bones for the experimental work, the Bronze Age material was not sufficient to base the butchering procedures on; therefore evidence from later Greek contexts were used, from Eretria, Halikarnassos, Tenos and Thasos. At the site of Eretria (western coast of Euboea) the presence of both sheep or goat and cattle could be verified from the Geometric, Archaic and Classical-Hellenistic periods. The bones studied came from the surroundings of the Temple of Apollo Daphnephoros. Knife cuts were, for instance, identified on a femur, but an axe was also used as a butchering tool.358

The bones chosen for the experiments were lamb and cattle bones. The problem when discussing Bronze Age material is that bones and chopping marks seldom are reported in older excavation reports, and yet the aim was to come as close to Bronze Age butchering methods as possible. However, some evidence from the Bronze Age exists. In Chania (Splanzia excavations) there are several pig, sheep, goat and cow bones found from the Late Minoan I period and all the bones seem to have been cut up into smaller pieces.351 In Apodoulou, excavations revealed bones in connection with cooking pots (room 22) from the Middle Minoan II period. The bones were not classified but analysis from a cooking pot from room 2 contained residues from cows, sheep and goats.352 Sheep and goats were common animals on Crete during the Bronze Age and in several locations where double axes were found there were also sheep or goat bones, as, for example, at Pseira.353 Among the many bones reported from the Kommos excavations (9441 bones found in Minoan contexts), there are sheep or goat and

At the Mausoleion of Halikarnassos there were slaughtered goats or sheep and cattle found. Both a knife and an axe were used and there were chopping marks on ribs, spines, pelvises and femurs and tibias.359 The cattle bones from the same site also showed that an axe had been used as a butchering tool and chopping marks were recorded on the ribs and spine.360 The study conducted by Leguilloux on bovine and sheep or goat bones from the Poseidon sanctuary at Tenos was also consulted. Several cuts were identified on both cattle (tibia, metatarsals and

354

Reese 1995, 163, 165. Reese 1995, 166-167. 356 Isaakidou, Halstead, Davis & Stocker 2002, 88, Fig. 1. 357 Hamilakis & Konsolaki 2004, 141. It seems rather clear that the sheep/goats were chopped up and these specific parts were chosen to be burnt; in comparison there were also pigs sacrificed here and these seemed to have been sacrificed whole, because parts of the whole animal could be found. 358 The bone assemblage is associated with sacrifices which probably took place here. According to the sacrificial order the animal was butchered and there were parts for the gods and parts for the humans. The most interesting results of cut marks have been from the parts which were prepared for dining; cf. Chenal-Velarde & Studer 2003, 217, Table 22.1; Studer & Chenal-Velarde 2003, 176 & 178. 359 Højlund & Aaris-Sørensen 1981, 60, 64-65, 69, 71. 360 Højlund & Aaris-Sørensen 1981, 73, 79. 355

345

Becker 1976, 363-373. Warren 1969, 136-137; Bretts 1980 16-17; Younger 1993, 183. Quartz and rock crystal are according to Mohs’ scale 7 in hardness. 347 Fassoulas 2001, 80; Loberg 1999, 21; Warren 1969, 127. 348 Most igneous rocks found at Kommos had been brought there from Thera, Melos or Aigina; Blitzer 1995, 421. Igneous rocks are formed by magma, beneath the earth’s crust, and can become granite-like types of rock; Loberg 1999, 163. 349 Blitzer 1995, 425-440. 350 Klemm & Klemm 1981, 30; Galetti, Lazzarini & Maggetti 1992, 167. 351 Flavours 2002, 106. 352 Flavours 2002, 86 & 90. 353 Reese 1995, 45, 57, 129-130; Reese 1998, 35-36. 346

54

Experiments with modern cast double axes

Figure 35. Axe A after twenty-one minutes of use. spine) and sheep or goat (humerus and tibia).361 Finally, the investigation by Gardeisen of sheep or goat and cattle bones from the Herakleion in Thasos was referred to. The sheep or goat bones showed several striation marks from cutting, for example, the ribs, the spine, the tibia and the radius.362 The bone experiments conducted for this study did not come close to modern butchering, something that Strand commented on during the whole procedure.

After six minutes, the features that had appeared after one minute had built up, but the two dents had a softer appearance now. Tiny mushroom-edges could now be seen on both sides of the cutting edge (less than 0.1 cm in width). Striations on the axe body going in different directions were also identified. It should be noted that it was difficult to tell the difference between striations on the axe body left by the sharpening of the axe and working striations after six minutes.

Considerations were also made of the diameter of cooking pots, which have been analysed for traces of meat.363 This implied chopping up the body into pieces small enough to be suitable to insert for cooking.

After working eleven minutes, there were dents of different depths on the cutting edge. The area affected by the work covered more than the middle of the cutting edge now and the top part had become slightly rounded. The striations on the axe body were now more defined. Most interestingly, the sharpness of the cutting edge had hardly been affected. It was still V-shaped with the cutting edge measuring less than 0.1 cm in width.

Felling a Scotch fir tree The first experimental work undertaken with axe A was felling a Scotch fir, with a diameter of 8 cm. It took 1-2 minutes to fell the tree; thereafter we chopped it up into smaller pieces.

After sixteen minutes, the V-shape of the cutting edge was still visible though the cutting edge had become blunter and the centre part was 0.1-0.15 cm in width. There were two or three dents which really affected the cutting edge. Mushroom-edges could be observed on both sides, though to varying degrees depending on how the axe had hit and penetrated the material. The striations on the axe body were still visible and were the same as after eleven minutes of work.

After one minute of work the cutting edge only had two minimal hard dents (less than 0.1 cm in width). They were situated more or less in the middle of the cutting edge. The part of the cutting edge which first came into contact with the fir had started to build up a mushroomedge, though only with a minimum (less than 0.1 cm) width.

After twenty-one minutes there was still not much change (Fig. 35). There were two areas which were more affected, with deeper and wider dents than the rest of the cutting edge (width up to 0.2 cm).

 361

Leguilloux 1999, 438-443. Gardeisen 1996, 804-809. The cattle bones reported (Gardeisen 1996, 811-813) were from two individuals, but because of the fragmentary state of the evidence, cuts on the bones were hard to define. 363 Several tripod cooking pots have been found at Bronze Age excavations in Crete. Among them are cooking pots which show traces of vegetables and meat. In Chania a cooking pot with residue from a stew containing both vegetables and meat was found. The rim has a diameter of 20 cm, which means that, for example, the tibia would have had to be chopped up into pieces to be prepared for a cooking pot; Flavours 2002, 108. 362

The axe was surprisingly effective and could have been used for at least twice the amount of time without having to be resharpened. We tried to get as varied use-wear as possible by cutting against the grain, stripping off the 55



The Minoan double axe. An experimental study of production and use

Figure 36. Axe A after forty-three minutes of use. eradicted was reinforced and there were very small dents on the lower part of the cutting edge. The edge also started to show a tendency towards mushroom-edges on nearly the whole cutting edge. The striations upon the axe blade were horizontal, vertical and diagonal and looked like those deriving from finishing treatments. To continue the experiment the birch was chopped up into smaller pieces.

bark and branches. On the whole these various actions created the same kind of use-wear. The cutting edge was not affected to a higher degree when cutting against grain, which is harder work. What affected the cutting edge was working-time, not the hardness of the Scotch fir tree. Not only were the changes on the cutting edge recorded, but also the marks which were left on the tree being cut. Marks left by the various dents on the cutting edge were clearly visible. These were recorded for future studies of tool marks left on different kinds of materials.

After eleven minutes, the effect was still minimal and the width of the cutting edge less than 0.1 cm. The cutting edge had, however, started to show slight mushroomedges across the whole centre section. The dents had been somewhat reinforced during these five minutes and one or two new tiny dents had been added. The major change was that the striations on the axe body had become longer and harder (more defined). They were perpendicular to the cutting edge and obviously traces of use-wear.

Felling a birch tree After felling the Scotch fir, axe A was resharpened to enable recording use-wear from the birch tree separately, with no disturbing features from the first experiment. The resharpening of the cutting edge was conducted with sandstone and took five minutes. One dent was difficult to grind out and sharpen until it totally disappeared. The uppermost point of the cutting edge was more rounded than the lowest because the axe was not hammered out again.364

After two more minutes, the shaft broke and we had to reshaft the axe. This was done by shortening the shaft. This was not by any means the optimal shaft length, but we could continue the experiments. The next recording was done after twenty-three minutes. Now the cutting edge started to show use-wear all along. The use-wear consisted of softer dents in different sizes and mushroom-edges of different degrees (maximum width 0.15 cm), both found anywhere on the cutting edge. The V-shape of the cutting edge was still visible. The uppermost point of the cutting edge had now been flattened and even the lowest was affected and rounded. Deeper, vertical striations on the cutting edge were also recorded.

The first recording was done after six minutes of work. This was the time required to fell a birch tree with a diameter of 17.5 cm. The cutting edge was hardly affected by the work. The dent which had not been fully 364

The axe was only resharpened to be used for the next experiment on birch tree. The alternative would have been to redo the finishing treatments and hammer the axe body again towards the cutting edges. The cutting edges would have then become slightly thinner and the cutting edges convex. Repetition of finishing treatments was most probably done when an axe really was battered and the cutting edges severely blunt.

56

Experiments with modern cast double axes After thirty-three minutes, the cutting edge was checked again and it did not show any more wear.

The axe was checked every five minutes but differences were hard to detect. After forty minutes, one could spot a change on the cutting edge. The areas which had several dents in a row had become a bit wavy. The corner of the axe was blunt and horizontal striations had been added. Axe B showed impact-damage on the cutting edge, though we could have worked at least twice the time before having to resharpen it. Axe B had the shortest handle and we found that it was not so effective because there was no real swing in the axe. However, for cutting of branches and barking off, this axe was superb. The axe body also showed signs of use-wear. The deeper the axe body penetrated the tree, the more striations appeared on it. They showed as diagonal thin scratches of different lengths on the axe body.

After forty-three minutes, the V-shape of the cutting edge was still visible (Fig. 36). The dents were more built up and deeper, and a few new ones were added. The mushroom-edges had become wider. The lowest part of the cutting edge was most affected and flattened by a blow, when the axe had partly hit the ground. A new feature was striations, which could be observed running back up onto the axe body beyond the zone of the sharpened cutting edge (maximum 3-4 cm). As when cutting the Scotch fir, we worked against the grain, stripping off bark and branches in order to create as varied a use-wear on the cutting edges as possible. The Minoan axes studied have in some cases striations on the axe body (nos. 1 and 2); the different kinds of work were also an attempt to see if these features could be identified on the experimental axe. We were, again, quite surprised by how much work the bronze axe could sustain without bending or becoming too blunt.

Axe C was also checked every five minutes. After twenty minutes there were individual hard dents, which could be distinguished on the cutting edge. Horizontal striations showed on the cutting edge. The corners of the cutting edges were not affected. After thirty-five minutes, the axe was still in very good condition. The centre part of the cutting edge was more affected than the rest of it. There were traces of use-wear on the axe body because of the axe coming in contact with the tree.

Felling an oak tree To take the experimental work further with wood harder than both fir and birch, an oak tree with a diameter of 28 cm was chosen. Since a greater number of axes were available at the time for this experiment (the Piraeus axes), one axe with 8-9% Sn (B), one (two) with 12% Sn (C and E) and finally one (two) with 15% Sn (D and F) were chosen. These axes were shafted with handles of different lengths: 35 cm on B, 60 cm axe D; 71 cm on axe C (the measurements are taken from below the axe-head, i.e. the handle that one holds when working with the axe). The handles were made of different lengths in order to investigate which was the most ergonomic and powerful one, thinking in terms of kinetic energy. Two of the shafts broke (axes E and F) early in the felling process and ready-made shafts of hickory were purchased in order to continue with the experiment. The shafts probably broke because of the shock that went through the axes when hitting the tree, and the wood chosen for the handles was probably not flexible enough for work on such a hard tree as oak. There was no difference in having an oval (15% Sn, axe F) or round shaft (12% Sn, axe E) since both broke off. Altogether it took one hour and forty minutes to fell the oak tree.

After a total of forty minutes, there were a few areas on the cutting edge which had built up dents. These individual dents had become softer. The cutting edge also showed longer and shorter horizontal striations, due to the kind of work performed with the axe. The corners of the cutting edge were hardly affected. Axe C had the longest handle and we used it for felling the tree and branching and stripping off the bark. The most effective use of this axe was when felling the tree; it performed clean hits and the kinetic energy was at a maximum. For chopping off branches this axe was a bit clumsy because you could not control it as easily as the one mounted on the shorter shaft. However, if the branches were far apart and you could stand solidly on the ground, there was no problem. To strip the bark off with this long shaft was not realistic because of the lack of control of the axe. Axe D was used for the longest period of time, a total of sixty minutes (Fig. 37). The cutting edge was checked after five, twenty, forty, and sixty minutes. It showed hardly any use-wear at all, apart from tiny individual hard dents. Most of the wear consisted of horizontal striations, which came from the contact with the tree. After forty minutes, the wedge worked loose and fell out.

After five minutes of use, axe B started to be affected. Individual hard dents could be identified on the cutting edge. The parts showing the most use-wear were the corners of the cutting edge. There were also striations running parallel to the cutting edge, which had not been visible when the experiment began.

After sixty minutes, the axe began to show dents on the cutting edge. This edge after sixty minutes was comparable in wear-damage to axe B after only five minutes. The most affected part was a blunt corner and the cutting edge itself was hardly affected. This axe could have been used for all the work conducted that day and probably without any need to resharpen it.

After twenty minutes, the axe had built up more dents (some of them in a row), which were softer in appearance. One of the corners was more affected than the other by use. The striations running parallel with the cutting edge were still visible. 57

The Minoan double axe. An experimental study of production and use

Figure 37. Axe D after sixty minutes of use. The most important result is that all axes proved to be excellent tools on wood as hard as oak. As with the other two experiments with felling trees, the axes were used to work against the grain, stripping off bark and branches. One thing to keep in mind is that only one of the cutting edges on the double axes was used, to get as much time as possible on one cutting edge. Imagine the amount of work that could have been done during one day with an axe of 15% Sn! The only reason that would make one bring two axes would be to have them differently shafted, and so capable of doing different kinds of work. But, the Minoans, doing this on a daily or weekly basis, could surely handle an axe with a long shaft much better than I could.

In addition to the use-wear on the cutting edges, striation marks on the axe bodies were also studied. To begin with, they were difficult to separate from the striation marks created by finishing treatments. When felling the trees we could observe the difference between striations caused by finishing treatments and working action, because we knew which were which from the outset. It would, however, be very difficult to identify these with certainty on the Minoan double axes. The different shaft lengths were of importance. A long handle was the best choice to fell a tree because the kinetic energy built up with an axe swing gave better results when hitting the tree. The shorter handle worked excellently when chopping of branches and barking off.

Conclusions from felling trees Three types of woods with different hardness were chosen for the experimental work of felling trees. The dents which appeared after felling a Scotch fir, a birch, an oak tree with modern double axes containing bronze alloys with 8-9% Sn (A and B), 12% Sn (C) and 15% Sn (D) were similar. The real difference consisted of the working time it took to attain the dents and related usewear. The dents built up in the same way and started off as hard ones, and after some twenty minutes of work the dents changed and became softer in appearance. The time it took to build up the dents was not only a result of the different tin contents; generally it also reflected the different hardness of the wood. The hardest wood (oak) gave the fastest build-up of use-wear on the axes containing 8-9% (B) and 12% Sn (C). The experimental axe containing 15% Sn (D) was exceptional. This would, according to modern standards, be too brittle to cast and use because of the high percentage of tin, but axes corresponding to this can be found in the Minoan material (for example, no. 4). This was the best axe for felling trees and could have been used to fell at least another tree without having to resharpen it.

Dressing and splitting stone For the experiments on stone no finishing treatment of axe A’s cutting edge was conducted. Dressing or splitting stone is not the same kind of work as felling a tree. A cutting action is not required here, and indeed a sharp and pointed edge would most likely be destroyed in a blow or two. So the edge with 0.15 cm width would most probably be more suitable for harder material. The sandstone and granite for this part of the experiments were collected by Lowe. Dressing stone is a finishing process when using stone as a building material: getting the surface even. One of the axes (no. 71) found in the Unexplored Mansion was suggested to have been used to dress stone.365 It was decided to dress sandstone first. To dress the piece took 5 minutes. During this time, the width of the cutting edge changed from 0.15 cm to 0.3 cm. Also visible were 365

58

Popham 1984, 44, 53.

Experiments with modern cast double axes

Figure 38. Axe A, the upper photograph shows the sharp cutting edge when used on granite. The lower photograph shows the thicker cutting edge when used on granite. impact marks running diagonally on the axe body, from the cutting edge towards the shaft hole. These marks were created when one side of the axe was in touch with the stone worked on. They were not visible on the axe-body used for felling trees. Such marks were also identified on the Minoan double axes (for example, no. 1), which should imply that they were not used for felling trees. Separate dents could also be identified on the cutting edge, which showed more of an overall bluntness. The damage on the lowest and upper point of the cutting edge varied depending on how the tool was used and by whom it was used.

edge expanded to between 0.3-0.6 cm and if one looked straight on at the cutting edge it appeared “wavy”. The uppermost and the lowest point of the axe showed different thicknesses depending on how the axe had hit the material. Mushroom-edges were created. Splitting stone was perhaps a working task not suitable for a double axe, because of the directness of the blow on the hard material, which would certainly destroy the cutting edge. Although the cutting edge of the axe for the stone experiment was a lot thicker than the ones for felling trees, it was still easily damaged. The granite itself had a vein, suitable for assisting the splitting of the stone. A few hard and direct blows, however, completely destroyed a fine cutting edge prepared for felling trees (Fig. 38). The cutting edge split in three places, which made the width of the cutting edge increase further to 0.50.8 cm. Mushroom-edges were created on both sides. This cutting edge was thereafter both rehammered and resharpened a second time, which took one and a half hours. However, this result is interesting, since battered

Granite was also dressed with axe A to investigate whether this activity would yield different results from dressing sandstone. The granite was not affected at all by the dressing and did not flake off. Instead there were metal traces from the axe left on the hard stone, i.e. the stone had an impact on the axe and not the other way around. Separate dents were more evident here than those created by sandstone (Fig. 38). The width of the cutting 59



The Minoan double axe. An experimental study of production and use in length.367 These three axes also represent the different tin contents in the axes: 8-9% with 30 cm long handle (G), 12% with 47 cm long handle (H) and finally 15% with 20 cm long handle (I).

axes, as axe A became from the granite, can be found in the Minoan material (for example, no. 207). Conclusions from dressing and splitting stone The two different stones used had different degrees of hardness. Dressing the sandstone went perfectly but when trying to do the same on the granite it was impossible. Moreover, the impact on the cutting edges was totally different. With the sandstone the cutting edge became more evenly worn and blunt, while with the granite it showed more individual dents, although the cutting edge became blunter. In addition, the axe body which came in contact with the sandstone when dressing it showed striation marks. The striation marks created by the stone were a lot broader and thicker than the striation marks created by wood.

The reason for doing these experiments was to find out whether the double axe was a useful butchering tool or not. Could it be used in all situations, i.e. from killing to chopping portions for a stew, or was the axe only used for “heavy-duty” work? Fig. 40 presents the bones discussed in this section.

These experiments imply that the double axe would be a good tool for dressing stone, but it would not be of much use for heavy-duty work such as splitting stone.

Cutting up a lamb In order to conduct experiments with animal bones I received help from Strand and Ekroth.366 A whole lamb (which means that it had been skinned and the head, entrails, and hooves were already removed) and cattle bones freed of meat (spine and hind legs) were ordered to conduct the experiments.

Figure 40. The bones discussed in this chapter (modified after Halstead et al. 2004, 32, Fig. 2.10). The lamb’s hind legs were first removed.368 Axe I with the razorblade-sharp cutting edge was chosen. But the axe bounced back and the cutting edge did not penetrate or get a grip on the meat. One reason for this could be that the meat was slippery, and if the meat surface had dried up it probably would have been easier to butcher with the axe. The bronze knife was useful here and it cut through the meat, down to the bones. Another reason why the hind legs were hard to remove was that it was difficult to secure the lamb in place when butchering (it moved under the blows! And no, it was not alive). However, the final blow to release the first hind leg from the spine was accomplished with the axe; it took several blows to chop it off. To cleave the front part of the pelvis in order to separate the hind legs from each other, axe H with the thick cutting edge was used. To chop through the bone, one had to grip the axe with both hands and strike the pelvis very hard. Within a few hard blows the axe had chopped through it. When both hind legs were removed, the meat surrounding the femur was cut out with the bronze knife. The knee joint was then chopped off. The upper part of the femur was then cut off from the pelvis. The femur cracked and the marrow became visible.

Figure 39. The three axes (H, I and G) prepared and shafted for the bone experiments. Three double axes were prepared for the experiments (G, H and I) (Fig. 39). On all three, one cutting edge was sharpened razorblade-sharp and the other one left at a thickness of 0.1-0.15 cm. The reason for the difference in sharpness of the cutting edges was that the Minoan material includes double axes with thicker cutting edges, and I wanted to investigate whether these could be used for butchering. Three different lengths of handles were made, one 20 cm, the second 30 cm and the third 47 cm

367

Lowe also made and mounted the axes on the shafts used for the bone experiments. 368 The butchering of the lamb largely followed the butchering marks recorded on sheep or goats at the Heraklion in Thasos; cf. Gardeisen 1996, Fig. 5. There are also scenes in later vase paintings (475/450 B.C.) that show men who hold a leg of meat, probably from a goat or sheep (van Straten 1995, Figs. 159-162).

366

Strand is an experienced butcher and has a MA in ancient history; Dr. Ekroth is a specialist in Greek religion and sacrifices.

60

Experiments with modern cast double axes

Figure 41. Suitable pieces of lamb for a stew? The lamb was then divided sagitally (to chop in a straight angle from the head towards the body in order to get the body in two equal pieces) with the long axe, using the sharp cutting edge.

To make a stew, smaller parts of meat would be needed; therefore the tibias were chopped into portions of two and three pieces (Fig. 41).369 Axe H with the blunt cutting edge was first used. The blunt cutting edge crushed the bones in an unwanted way and there were a lot of bonesplinters. The sharp cutting edge was used instead and this worked out really well. It took 4-5 blows to chop through a tibia. To release the other hind leg, axe G was used with its sharp cutting edge. The second tibia was then chopped in two parts. Axe I, the shortest handle, with the sharp cutting edge was first used, but this axe did not swing well and no kinetic energy was built up. Axe I simply bounced back. Strand swapped to the axe G and with one blow she was half-way through the bone. It took altogether three blows to get through it completely. For the butcher to chop bits and pieces for a stew, this axe would be a perfect tool.

The foreleg was cut off with a knife because of the experience we had with the hind legs. To separate the humerus (the upper part of the foreleg) from the radiusulna (lower part of the foreleg), axe G was used. On the radius-ulna there is an outgrowth (Os pisiforme) which was removed with the same axe. The radius-ulna was then chopped into three portions. Axe G with the blunt cutting edge was first used, and it took two blows to get through the bone. The next chop was done with the sharp cutting edge (axe G) and, with this it only took one blow to get through the bone. There was not much bonesplintering when chopping the radius-ulna into pieces.

The cutting edges on the axes were so far not affected and there were only striations on the axes from contact with the bones.

The humerus and shoulder blade were chopped into three pieces; here axe G was chosen and the axe was through the bones in three blows.

The next step was to cut off the neck (from atlas or 1st cervical vertebra to 5-6th cervical vertebra). Axe G was used, but was not useful for this. Axe H with the blunt cutting edge was chosen instead and the neck was chopped off with six blows.

The other foreleg was divided between humerus and radius-ulna. The leg was again chopped into portions. The portions were cut up with the sharp cutting edge on axe H.

369

Leguilloux points out that the longer bones from both pig and sheep or goat were cut into three parts (1999, 442, Fig. 13).

61

The Minoan double axe. An experimental study of production and use

Figure 42. Lovisa Strand in action. Cutting the lamb’s ribs. The next step was to chop up the ribs (Fig. 42); the body was already open when we bought the lamb. Axe I was chosen and by reaching inside the lamb attempts were made to chop off the ribs from the spine, but this did not work. Axe H was then chosen and the chopping was done from the outside instead. This was not successful either. The reason why the two first ways of chopping did not work out was probably because there was no resistance to the axe. Instead, axe H was used to chop the ribs off from the inside. This worked to satisfaction. When the ribs were removed they were chopped into three pieces. Axe H with the sharp cutting edge was first used and the bones were cut in one blow. The axe G with the sharp cutting edge was also used. With both axes the chopping of the ribs was conducted with a couple of blows, i.e. without any difficulty at all.

The last thing which was done with the lamb was to cleave it along the spine (the shoulder blades/scapulae had already been removed) with axe H. During the butchering of the lamb the cutting edges were constantly checked, but the butchering did not result in any serious damage. The status of the axes after butchering one lamb was the following. Axe I: on the sharp cutting edge there were several small individual dents. At roughly the centre of the cutting edge, there was one hard, deeper dent. Striation marks from the bones can be identified horizontally and diagonally towards the cutting edge. The blunt cutting edge was hardly affected. A few striation marks from the bones could be identified on the blunt cutting edge. After cleaving the pelvis and spine, axe G was not affected. After the butchering of the entire lamb there were harder individual dents spread out on the sharp cutting edge. One deeper hard dent could be identified on the lowest part of the sharp cutting edge. A slightly wavy mushroom-edge had built up on the upper part of the sharp cutting edge. The blunt cutting edge showed a few dents, though not as many as the sharp cutting edge. A few striations from the bones were identified on both cutting edges, but their origin is uncertain due to the fact

The spine was chopped straight across twice. The first blow was done with axe G with the sharp cutting edge. It took sixteen hard blows to get through. The second attempt was conducted with the same axe. The second time one blow was enough and the axe was through the spine. The different results depend on what the axe actually hits, i.e. bone or cartilage.

62

Experiments with modern cast double axes that the short striations from finishing treatments and cleaving bones look alike.

accomplished with the axe. The axe’s cutting edges were recorded twice during this procedure. The cutting edge was now really affected by the bones, because the cattle bones were much harder than the lamb bones. There were softer dents on the entire cutting edge and the individual dents had become mushroomed, so the appearance of the cutting edge became wavy. The more the cutting edge was used, the wavier it became and the dents became more and more pronounced.

Double axe H was not affected after the cleaving of the hind legs. After the butchering of the whole lamb, the sharp cutting edge was slightly affected. It showed several individual dents, though these seemed wavy and had a softer appearance than on the above-mentioned axes. The blunt cutting edge’s lowest part was mushroomed, to a width ca 0.1 cm. The cutting edge showed several very small hard dents (smaller than on the above-mentioned cutting edges).

The femur was chopped off at the knee to separate the femur from the tibia (Fig. 43). This took a lot of time and energy from the axe and the butcher. The question here was how realistic this cut would be.371 It would probably be more effective to cut off the sinews first, and possibly separate the bones after that. Then, portions of the tibia were cleaved, as was done with the lamb.372 The axe again bounced off the bone, and it took twenty-three very hard blows to chop through it. With the upper part of the femur, two different ways to chop the bone were tried. This way of chopping cattle bones had been observed in the archaeological material by Rixson.373 The calcaneusbone (heel-bone) was also chopped off, which was easy.374 The tibia was also chopped off from the metatarsals; this was probably Bronze Age practice, because this part has very little meat and was therefore probably least wanted.375 These last blows with the axe had the most impact on the cutting edge of all. This was not only because of the hardness of the bones, but also because the axe at some point came in contact with the ground. During the chopping of the cattle bones, we had to put the chopping-board on the ground because the femur and vertebra jumped when hit, which made it a bit dangerous and hard to work with.

The double axe most probably could have been used by a butcher, but it would require skill and determination on the part of the butcher. To kill and work the animal a bronze knife would have been a good complement to the axe. The axe bounced off the lamb’s body if there was too much meat in the way: the only way to continue was by using the bronze knife.

Cutting cattle bones The cattle bones were chopped with axe H. It was chosen in order to get maximum power in the swing, which we thought was needed for these big and hard bones. The axe was used without resharpening after the lamb experiment because it had so little use-wear. For the experiment a femur, tibia and metatarsals as well as half a spine, all freed from meat, were used.

The whole cutting edge was now wavy (Fig. 44). The individual dents were still there, but they were getting erased and amalgamating to form bigger dents within the wavy cutting edge. Mushroom-edges were created because of the hardness of the bones. The uppermost point of the cutting edge was that part that came into contact with the ground, and that was why it was more affected than the rest of the cutting edge. Striation marks could be identified higher up on the axe body, but on the cutting edge they were almost the same as before. To get to the marrow, different methods were undertaken. One was to split the bone on the long side, which was easily done with the axe.376 The second method was to crush the bone using the flat of the double axe’s side. The impact of the blow did not crush the bone, but broke the axe shaft; it did not leave any use-wear on the axe body.

Figure 43. Gunnel Ekroth in action. Cutting all through the femur bone.

 371

This seems to have been performed to some extent but with a knife; cf. Leguilloux 1999, 439, Fig. 10. 372 The femur is recorded as being sawn in two pieces in the archaeological material; cf. Rixson 1989, Fig. 12. 373 Rixson 1989, 59, Fig. 12. As can be seen in, Isaakidou, Halstead, Davis & Stocker 2002, Fig. 1, there are marks from dismembering partly as described by Rixson. 374 Rixson 1989, 51. 375 In the archaeological material there is evidence that the metatarsals were cut in two; cf. Leguilloux 1999, 441, Figs. 10 & 11. 376 Rixson 1989, 52.

370

The spine was first cleaved straight across. It gave strong resistance, although it was a matter of where one hit, between or on the bones. It was much easier if one struck the cartilage than if one chopped through the bone. After this, the ribs were chopped off. This was very easily

 370

Different cuts to the spine are recorded from the bovine bones from the Tenos sanctuary; cf. Leguilloux 1999, 441-442, Fig. 12.

63



The Minoan double axe. An experimental study of production and use

Figure 44. The difference of the cutting edges after cutting the lamb and the cattle bones. The cutting edge used on lamb is the photograph at the top and the lower one was used on the cattle bones. Conclusions from cutting up bones A lamb and cattle bones were chosen for the experiments on bone because the skeletal components were of different sizes and therefore were expected to leave different use-wear on the experimental axes (Fig. 44). For the dismembering three different handle lengths were used and three different bronze alloys (8-9% Sn (G), 12% Sn (H) and 15% Sn (I)).

for example, better done with a sharp cutting edge, while the blunt one split the bones in an unwanted way and left fragments of bone in the meat. The blunt cutting edges were hardly affected by the work on the lamb bones; only a few individual dents were identified, nor were the sharp cutting edges much affected by the work on the same. The impact of the thicker bones, however, really showed on the axe.

The effect on the lamb bones, as on the softer wood cut, was hard to trace on the cutting edges. Small hard dents could be identified at first, but they became softer as more work was performed with the axes. No difference was imparted from the durability of the various bronze alloys that was visible in the use-wear.

In addition, marrow was tried to be extracted from the bones. The marrow was easy to get at if the bones were split from above.

Conclusions

Axe H was the only axe used for chopping the cattle bones because the thicker bones needed a wider swing of the axe to chop through the bones. The cutting edge became wavy and blunt.

Double axes with three different bronze alloys (with 89% Sn, 12% Sn and 15% Sn) were cast in order to experiment on wood, bone and stone. The experimental work was conducted in two stages. The first stage was a study of the manufacturing process in order to compare the modern casts with the Minoan double axes. This was undertaken to investigate and understand casting and casting defects on the Minoan double axes. The second stage was to use the modern cast double axes on different

The length of the axe shaft was chosen depending on the size of the bones to be butchered: the sturdier the bone, the longer the handle. Depending on what kind of cut was going to be performed, the butcher had to choose a sharp or a blunt cutting edge. The chopping into portions was, 64

Experiments with modern cast double axes materials to study what use-wear was built up on the cutting edges and the axe bodies, in order to compare them with the Minoan axes and through this conclude what material had been worked on during the Bronze Age in Crete.

evenly blunt (axe A). The granite was also dressed, but the stone was so hard that, instead of the axe having an impact on the stone, the stone had an impact on the axe (A). The cutting edge became severely blunted. In addition to dressing, we tried to split the granite, using an existing vein in the stone. This was not possible and the cutting edge was completely destroyed. The striation marks which were created on the axe bodies from both dressing sandstone and granite were deeper now.

The result reached through replicating the manufacturing process was that the small holes (impressions of sand) on the axe bodies of Minoan axes were probably derived from using a sand mould, because identical impressions of sand were identified on the modern cast double axes. Therefore casting in flask moulds during the Minoan period in Crete is most likely. Other casting defects which could be identified on the axe bodies were dirt inclusions and shrinkage. The most important deduction from finishing treatments was that the thin striations on the axe body could come from grinding and filing the axe with pumice or sandstone and did not have to be workrelated (i.e. from chopping with the double axe).

The bone experiment was conducted on a lamb and on cattle bones. The different bones were chosen again in order to have different hardnesses to work on. The dismembering of the lamb was not possible using only an axe, and a bronze knife was sometimes needed to cut through the flesh. Three different alloys were used with three different shaft lengths (axes G, H and I). The cutting edges were prepared differently on the double axes; one cutting edge was razorblade-sharp and the other one was left ca 2 mm wide. The alloys were equally good for chopping the lamb bones and the dents on the cutting edges were few. The use-wear was similar to the usewear attained from felling trees. The different cutting edges were used for different tasks; sometimes the sharp edge was favoured and sometimes the blunter one. The difference between the two was that the sharper one did not crush the bones as much as the blunt one did. The different shaft lengths were of importance and the long shaft (axe H) was preferred for dealing with the bigger parts. Axe G was favoured for precision work because it enabled one to have better control of the axe. Striation marks were created, which were similar to those from felling trees.

The experimental axes were used on three different materials: wood, stone and bone. These chopping materials were chosen because a woodworker or a carpenter, a stonemason and a butcher were already suggested in the literature to have used the double axe during the Minoan period. In order to find out what materials the Minoan axes were used on, a variety of materials was therefore necessary. The use-wear built up on the experimental axes from the different materials were then to be compared to the Minoan use-wear in order to find out on what material the double axes in Crete were used. Three different woods (Scotch fir, birch and oak) were chosen in order to study if different woods gave different use-wear. The three different bronze alloys were also used to investigate whether any one of them was more durable than the others. The conclusions were that the use-wear on the experimental double axes was similar and the only thing that was different was the amount of time it took to build up the use-wear, which depended on the hardness of the wood. All the dents on the cutting edges were hard from the beginning and became softer after at least twenty minutes of use. Striation marks were created on the axe bodies, but would be difficult to separate from finishing treatment marks if not able to be studied at once after use. The different bronze alloys all did better than was thought at the start, but the axe with 15% Sn (D) was extremely durable.

For the heavier cattle bones only axe H was used, because G and I did not allow enough kinetic energy to build up and therefore only bounced off the bones. The cutting edge became severely blunt and wavy, but some of the latter was due to the axe hitting the ground. Striation marks on the axe body were identified, though not as deep as the ones created by the stones. A double axe can be used to fell trees of different hardness, dress softer stone and cut up both small and large animals. The experiments show that a woodworker or a carpenter, a stonemason and a butcher could indeed have used a double axe to perform their work. The usewear created was different according to the type of chopping material worked on. To rule out or to confirm any or all of them, the use-wear on the experimental axes needs to be compared to the Minoan use-wear, which I will do in the next chapter.

The shaft length was of more importance than the bronze alloy and the axe with the 70 cm long handle (C) was the most ergonomic axe to fell a tree with; the long shaft made it possible to build up kinetic energy which was of importance for penetrating the tree trunk. The axes (A and B) with the shorter handles were preferred for cutting off branches and barking off the trees because they enabled one to direct the axe with more precision. Two types of stones were chosen for the experiments: sandstone and granite. The stones were chosen in order to try different hardnesses of stone. Dressing the sandstone was easily accomplished and the cutting edge became

Finally, for how long could an axe be used? This depends on the hardness of the material worked on and the sharpening of the cutting edges. A wood-worker could probably use a sharpened double axe for a whole day, and if it needed to be resharpened, a piece of pumice stone would not be difficult to bring to the woods.

65

6. USE AND USERS

There are 229 double axes presented in the catalogue from some 70 locations. To study these find spots further and try to identify users through the find contexts was, at first, one of the aims of this study. However, by itself this is not a rewarding exercise, as Evely already has concluded.377 The reason is that the find locations are not always known and when they are known the recording of the find context has not always been done in the sufficient detail to answer this question. It all makes it impossible to deduce who the users of the axes were. Finally many are stray finds, which at once rules them out of consideration.

problem felled different kinds of trees, dressed softer stone and cut up both a lamb (with help of a knife) and cattle bones. The only work a double axe could not execute was dressing and cleaving granite. The use-wear built up on the double axes was different depending on the material, although use-wear from felling trees and use-wear from cutting up the lamb were similar in appearance. I have demonstrated that the double axe could have been used for three different activities, but can the different types of wear be verified in the Minoan material? Today, there exist axes for different purposes. At least axes used for felling, cutting and carving (dressing?) are all distinguishable.379 The cutting and felling axe is made to chop off the wood’s fibre and to crack and split the wood. The carving axe is made to shape wood or other material.380

However, I believe that the find contexts can reveal something about the users by combining the investigations in Chapters 4 and 5. The different categories referred to in Chapter 4 were used as a preliminary identification of use-wear on the Minoan double axes and gave an indication of what kind of activity could have been performed with the axes. The interpretations conducted by Gordon on Machu Picchu axes and Kienlin and Ottaway on flanged axes were that the axes were used for cutting, chopping and breaking on either wood or stone.378 The same activities and materials are assumed for the Minoan double axes because of the use-wear identified on the cutting edges in Chapter 4.

There are axes for cleaving bones and chopping meat. The modern axes used for cutting up meat do not have the cutting edges formed as an axe; they rather have the appearance of a large knife. If one looks back a generation, however, meat axes resembled an ordinary axe. The axe did not have two cutting edges, but one cutting edge and the other edge was “a hammer with spikes”, nonetheless an axe.

The different categories from Chapter 4 are: 1. Dents that appear both randomly and concentrated on the cutting edge. 1A. Dents and bending (mushroom-edges) of the cutting edge. 2. Overall bluntness of the cutting edge of approximately 2-4 mm width and different degrees of mushroom-edges. 2A. Blunt cutting edges with dents and striations within the dents. 3. Severely blunt cutting edges, minimum 5 mm width. 4. Other use-wear on the cutting edges, not comparable with the above categories. 5. Cutting edges that show no dents.

Bessac has identified tool marks on architectural work from the 19th dynasty in Egypt, which he thinks came from a double axe.381 If there are axes from the Bronze Age which were used on stone they were probably preferably manufactured of hard stone and could on occasion be of metal.382 The shapes of modern axes are suited to their fields of application. Consequently, different materials need different thickness and sharpening of the cutting edges.383 In addition, different lengths of the shafts would also be 379

Berg 2001, 8-11. Berg 2001, 27. Bessac (1986, 39, 49) calls it a hammer with two (cutting) edges. However, he does not explain how one should tell the difference between an axe used on stone and one used on wood. Furthermore he states that other tools with vertical blades also could result in striation marks like the ones created by an axe. 382 Vandier 1952a, 162; Vandier 1952b, 716, Fig. 473, 823, Fig. 552; Lauer 1974, 265; Bessac 1986, 49, 50. The references given by Bessac to Vandier and Lauer do not give further information on whether the axe, in fact, was used as a tool for preparing or cutting rock. The only statement is that in Egypt, flint axes (with a single cutting edge) found already in Neolithic contexts and the third dynasty could have been used to work on softer stone. 383 Berg 2001, 34. 380

The chopping experiments conducted with the modern cast double axes (Chapter 5) will also be brought forward. The most significant results for an interpretation of use and users were that the double axes without any

381

377 Evely (1993, 51) concluded that several axes could be considered as wood working tools because they were associated with chisels, blades, adzes, saws, awls and drills. Some of the double axes were also most probably used as an all-round tool. Furthermore Evely comments that there is no evidence substantiating that the axes were used by a stone mason. 378 Gordon 1985; Kienlin & Ottaway 1998.

66

Use and users

 slim double axes (group III above).389 These were used for felling, barking off trees, dressing stone and cutting bones. The difference was in how the cutting edge was prepared.

of importance as demonstrated by the chopping experiments (Chapter 5). Also for the Minoan double axes there exists a range in the thickness and lengths of the axe bodies and in the thickness of the cutting edges, which could reflect different use and users.

The double axes considered will be the twenty-one Minoan ones which I have had permission to study and also four double axes on display in the Heraklion Museum which have extensive use-wear visible and can therefore be discussed.

I propose that the axe bodies have three different shapes, which also directly involve the nature of the cutting edges.384 The examples of the examined double axes can be divided into:385 I II III

Finally, the find locations and the find contexts of these twenty-five double axes will be considered and discussed as far as possible from the perspective of the use-wear on the Minoan axes. At first the find locations of the axes will only be mentioned and in the last part of the chapter a longer discussion will follow on the find locations and the find contexts.

Short and thick (for example, nos. 1 and 21). Medium length and medium thickness (for example, nos. 10 and 18). Long and slim (for example, nos. 13 and 16).

Groups I-III can be compared to modern axes. In woodworking today, there are three thicknesses and manner of sharpenings of the cutting edges: one thicker cutting edge which is used for hard wood, one with a medium thickness which is for softer wood, and a third, thin cutting edge which is used for carving. The convexities of the modern axes’ cutting edges are also different. The ones for harder and softer wood are convex and the one for carving has a straight cutting edge.386 I do not believe, however, that the differences in the Minoan axes only reflect different uses on wood. The modern axe discussed above shows, for example, that axes used for other activities than on wood also have straight cutting edges.387 Finally, the axe for meat and bone, which was used during at least the last century, has a convex cutting edge, although on the modern ones the cutting edges are straight.

The use of the Minoan double axes I will begin by analysing use through an identification of the above-mentioned use-wear categories 1-5. Because of the constant reference to different axes I will, in order to make it less confusing, refer to my experimental double axes described in Chapter 5 and Appendix I as A-Q; the flanged axes experimented with and the Bronze Age ones studied by Kienlin and Ottaway will be referred to as flanged axe(s); the axes studied by Gordon from Machu Picchu will be referred to as the Machu Picchu axe(s); and finally the Minoan double axes will be referred to with their catalogue number.

Axes with dents on cutting edges and small degree of mushroom-edges (categories 1 and 1A)

How do these three groups reflect different use and users during the Minoan period? The small and compact axe (group I above) could be more appropriate for harder materials such as stone, and perhaps particularly for the work of dressing stone as shown by Bessac and my chopping experiments.388

A combination of wear-categories 1 and 1A is identified on nos. 17 and 19. This means that the axes show cutting edges with randomly placed and concentrated dents (category 1) and also combined with mushroom-edges (category 1A). The use-wear on no. 17 can be interpreted in three different ways. It is comparable to the use-wear on the flanged axes (used on wood) and experimental axes A-D used on wood and G-I used to cut the lamb.

The medium and the long, slim axe (groups II and III above) should be excellent for felling trees and butchering. One interesting detail is that these axes are found with both straight and convex cutting edges. The axes used for the chopping experiments were long and

The first point to make is that the different use-wear patterns on the cutting edges could result from being used either for different lengths of time or for two different purposes: felling trees with the sharper cutting edge, while reserving the other cutting edge for chopping off branches, which could mean that the cutting edge hit the ground and got partly destroyed. Secondly, if no. 17 was used to cut bones, one cutting edge was for clean cuts and the other cutting edge for cuts which could come into

 384

I and II could be products of one and the same cast; depending on finishing treatments, use and resharpening, the different results could be attained. The only way to determine this would be to examine the axes as Tselios (2004, 45; 2006, 193-197; 2008a) has done with daggers from Crete. 385 The three groups are based on the different lengths of the axes: short and thick are below 15 cm in length; medium length and thickness are between 15 and 18 cm in length; long and slim axes are over 18 cm in length. 386 Berg 2001, 34. 387 Bessac 1986, 39. 388 Bessac (1986, 39, 41, 46, Figs. 11-12) demonstrates different working situations for the axe when dressing stone.

 389

The reason for all the experimental axes being of group III, is that the patterns were made when I was studying the different typologies. Then the main point was to get different convexities of the cutting edges, which are represented by nos. 13 and 14.

67



The Minoan double axe. An experimental study of production and use

 dents which have started to build up a mushroom-edge.391 The experimental axe which resembles this cutting edge is A, used for dressing stone. However, one difference is that A became blunt over the whole cutting edge and no. 16 still has the upper and lowest part of the cutting edges left fairly intact (sharp). On the other hand, the individual dents on the other cutting edge correspond to dents on the experimental axes A-D used to fell trees. Varying lengths of striations are detected on the axe body, the longer ones (maximum of 7 cm) are too deep to come from finishing treatments. Judging from experimental axe A, the striations on the axe body on no. 16 are not as deep as would be expected from dressing granite, but resemble those from dressing sandstone. The proportions of no. 16 correspond to the long and slim axes, which would be most suitable for felling trees. This axe was most probably used for felling trees or working on a softer type of stone. No. 16 has no recorded find location.

contact with the cutting board. Finally, the third way of interpreting the different degrees of use-wear on the two cutting edges could be that the axe had been partly resharpened and therefore does not show the same usewear patterns. To draw further conclusions I studied the axe body but no work-related striations could be interpreted. Turning to the proportions, no. 17 corresponds to the long axes which supposedly were good tools for felling trees and other related wood work. No. 19 is interpreted in the same way as no. 17 and they are both considered as tools for woodworking or cutting bones. The find locations of both nos. 17 and 19 are unknown. No. 12 found at Samonas belongs to category 1A, which means that both cutting edges have dents and mushroomedges. The use-wear on no. 12 is comparable to the flanged axes.390 Furthermore, the cutting edges also resemble experimental axe A used for felling the birch tree. Further interpretations cannot be drawn from striations on the axe body due to oxidation. However, the axe’s proportions correspond to the medium-length axes and it is considered as a woodworking tool.

A combination of categories 1A and 2 can be identified on three double axes: nos. 13, 14 and 18. This means that the cutting edges have dents and mushroom-edges (category 1A) but with different degrees of bluntness (category 2). On no. 13 one cutting edge is comparable to the flanged axes and there are dents which correspond to the experimental axes A-D used to fell trees.392 Judging from the mushroom-edges and the softer dents, this cutting edge was used for a long period of time. The other cutting edge is difficult to interpret because a sample for metal analysis was taken from the blunted edge. However, this can be compared both to Machu Picchu axes and to experimental axe A used to dress sandstone.393 The experimental axes A-D used to fell trees or G-I used to cut up bones did not acquire this jagged appearance on the cutting edges. Therefore no. 13 from Selakhanos probably was used on stone although the proportions of the axe are long and slender (indicating woodwork). Unfortunately, there are no striations on the axe body to give further indications of use.

Axes with dents on cutting edges, an overall bluntness and mushroom-edges (categories 1, 1A and 2) A combination of categories 1 and 2 is found on nos. 10 and 16. This means that the axes have cutting edges with randomly placed and concentrated dents (category 1) along with a cutting edge which is blunt and to some degree has a mushroom-edge (category 2). On no. 10 the cutting edge with the overall bluntness is rounded and corresponds to the blunter cutting edge on experimental axe G used on the lamb. The other cutting edge on no. 10 is sharper, but one deep dent can be identified on the centre of the cutting edge. This cutting edge corresponds to the experimental axes A-D used to fell trees and G-I used to cut lamb bones. There are longer striations (maximum of ca. 6 cm) upon the axe body which are deeper than striations left from finishing treatments, and in comparison with the experimental axes they correspond to G-I. The proportions of no. 10 correspond to the medium-long axes with medium-thick cutting edges. This means that one cutting edge could be sharpened to have a razorblade-sharp cutting edge but also to have a blunter cutting edge which would be an advantage when cutting bones. Depending on what is being cut, the blunter cutting edge could be used for more inexact cuts and the razorblade-sharp for clean cuts where as little bone splinter as possible is wanted. Altogether, judging from the experiments conducted with axes A-C and G-I, no. 10 found at Psychro seems to correspond to the axe G used for cutting up lamb.

Both cutting edges on no. 14, also from Selakhanos, were initially razorblade-sharp. One cutting edge has been partly destroyed with mushroom-edges and hard dents, which indicates that it was used for a short period of time. This cutting edge corresponds to the flanged axes and can also be verified by experimental axes A-D used to fell trees.394 The other cutting edge corresponds to experimental axe A used on sandstone. Unfortunately, I could not identify any striation marks on the axe body which could give further indications of use. But no. 14 belongs to the long and slim double axes, which would have been suitable for woodworking. The differences in the two cutting edges, one of which corresponds to that required for felling trees and the other to dressing stone, make this axe a multipurpose tool.

On no. 16 one of the cutting edges can be compared to two flanged axes which both show bluntness and several

 391

Kienlin & Ottaway 1998, Figs. 4 & 5. Kienlin & Ottaway 1998, Figs. 1 & 2. 393 Gordon 1985, Figs. 8 & 9. 394 Kienlin & Ottaway 1998, Figs. 2 & 3. 392

 390

Kienlin & Ottaway 1998, Figs. 1, 2, 4 & 5.

68



Use and users

 On no. 18, an axe without known find location, one of the cutting edges shows several dents and areas that are slightly mushroomed. This cutting edge can be compared to a flanged axe (used on wood) and was verified with experimental axes A-D used on wood.395 The other cutting edge partly resembles the cutting edge on experimental axe A used to dress sandstone, but the area identified with this kind of use-wear is so limited that stone work is unlikely. The thickness of the cutting edge resembles the blunt cutting edges on experimental axe G used to cut up the lamb. Experimental axe A used to fell the birch tree also showed this kind of bluntness but not over so large an area as on no. 18. I could not identify striation marks on the axe body which could indicate the use of the axe. The proportions of the axe are within the medium-length double axes. If this axe was used to fell trees it was not, during its finishing treatments, given a razorblade-sharpness. And if, contrary to my expectation, it was razorblade-sharp I would interpret no. 18 as an axe used to cut bones.

could be interpreted as work-related. I interpret this axe as used on stone. No. 6, from the house NW of the Knossos palace, is difficult to interpret and compare with the flanged axes, the Machu Picchu axes and the experimental axes A-I. The cutting edges on no. 6 share the same type of rounded bluntness and only one separate dent on one of the cutting edges could be identified. The axe is asymmetrical, which most probably was due to the mould because if the asymmetrical appearance was work-related it would certainly have left more use-wear. In addition, I could not identify any striation marks on the axe body. Therefore I believe that this long and slim axe is brand new, but the Linear A sign incised on the axe body shows that finishing treatments at least had been executed. No. 7, like no. 6 above, is difficult to interpret and compare with the flanged axes, the Machu Picchu axes and the experimental axes A-I. One of the blades of the axe is more or less destroyed due to cold lapping (a casting defect) and also has a crack and is bent. I do not believe it was ever used. The other cutting edge could have been used for a short period of time and in that case on material which would leave long and pronounced dents, probably stone. Experimental axe A used to dress sandstone and granite is the best comparison. I could not detect any striation marks on this medium-long axe body which could have indicated use. No. 7 was found in the Knossos palace area.

Axes with blunt cutting edges (categories 2, 2A and 3) There are a total of fifteen axes which have blunt cutting edges and on seven of these axes (nos. 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, 11 and 20) both cutting edges belong to category 2. This means that both cutting edges are blunt and have mushroom-edges of different degrees and could imply a use on both wood and stone. The cutting edges on no. 2 were not razorblade-sharp but more like experimental axes G-I prepared with the blunter cutting edges. Furthermore, the use-wear could be compared to experimental axes G-I used on lamb and cattle bones, but if no. 2 was used on bones it was used for a long period of time because the cutting edges are worn and rounded.396 The use-wear could also be considered to come from dressing soft stone as on experimental axe A. The body of no. 2 reveals deep and broad striation marks which are comparable to those identified on a Machu Picchu axe used on stone.397 Even though the proportions (long and slim) of the axe indicate woodworking, the striations on the axe body and the use-wear on the cutting edges imply that the axe was used to dress stone. No. 2 was found in a Chania cemetery.

Both cutting edges on axe no. 8, from Praisos, show the same kind of bluntness. The only difference between the two cutting edges is that one of them has more extended dents. The bluntness can be compared to experimental axe H used to cut cattle bones, but no. 8 would have had to have been used for a longer period of time and did not come in contact with the ground. However, it is more likely that the axe was used for stone work of some kind; the cutting edges are better compared with experimental axe A used to dress sandstone. No. 8 has deep striations all over the axe body, which most certainly are workrelated. The axe is of medium length and appears rather compact, which makes it probably more suitable for harder materials like stone, which most of the evidence presented also indicates.

The cutting edges on no. 4, found at Nerokourou, have approximately the same width, but one of the cutting edges is more rounded than the other one. Both cutting edges can be compared to one of the axes from Machu Picchu which was used on stone.398 In addition, the cutting edges on no. 4 can also be compared with experimental axe A used for dressing sandstone and granite. Unfortunately, I could not identify any striation marks on the axe body of this medium-long axe, which

The cutting edges on no. 11 can be compared to the usewear on one of the flanged axes (used on wood).399 The separate dents could also be compared to experimental axe A used to fell the birch tree (especially the use-wear which had built up after 43 minutes of use), but A did not become as blunt as no. 11. Oxidation on the axe body makes striations on the axe body impossible to identify, but the long and slim proportions of this axe, from Samonas, indicate that no. 11 would be considered suitable for felling trees or other wood-related activities.



No. 20, from an unknown location, was probably left with blunter cutting edges because a corner of one of the

395

Kienlin & Ottaway 1998, Fig. 2. The axes used for the bone experiments were used to butcher a lamb and cut cattle bones. 397 Gordon 1985, Fig. 10. 398 Gordon 1985, Fig. 9. 396

 399

69



Kienlin & Ottaway 1998, Fig. 4.

The Minoan double axe. An experimental study of production and use

 cutting edges broke off. Experimental axe I broke off in the same way when conducting finishing treatments, and was therefore left blunter (ca 0.15 cm in width). Furthermore, the cutting edges if razorblade-sharp would, judging from the dents, have built up a mushroom-edge, which is not present. However, the dents on no. 20 are comparable to a flanged axe (used on wood).400 There are long diagonal striation marks on this long and slim axe body, though it is impossible to decide whether these are work-related or post-depositional. The most probable work conducted with this axe is woodworking.

a sharp cutting edge would create this kind of use-wear. As to the proportions, this axe, found at Aghios Konstantinos, Praisos, is a medium-long axe, which preferably would have been used as an axe for cutting wood or bone. In addition no. 68, from the Isopata grave (Knossos area), now on display at the Heraklion Museum, has thick and cracked cutting edges partly due to cold lapping. There are visible dents on both cutting edges. Without the cold lapping the cutting edges would belong to category 2 or 3, i.e. blunt or extremely blunt cutting edges. The kind of use-wear identified on no. 68 resembles experimental axe A used on stone and therefore I believe that it was used for working activities involving stone. However, the proportions are long and slim and the axe would not be expected to be used on stone.

The cutting edges of no. 1 carry a combination of categories 2 and 2A, which means that the dents on the blunt cutting edges have striations within them indicating that a hard material was worked on.401 The cutting edge most affected has hard dents as shown on a flanged axe (used on wood), but the dents have striations within them as shown on a Machu Picchu axe used on stone.402 The other cutting edge is similar to experimental axes A-D used to fell trees, but the hardness of the dents is closer to axe G used on the lamb. The axe body is small and compact with long striations and some of them are deep, which could come from stone working. However, the pattern of the striations are not comparable to either the Machu Picchu axe or experimental axe A used on sandstone and granite. No. 1 found in a Chania cemetery has most probably been used for stone work.

The two cutting edges of no. 21 belong to category 3, which means that the cutting edges are extremely blunt. Both the cutting edges correspond to an axe profile found at Machu Picchu used for stone work.404 No. 21 could have been used to break chips out of stone, which would explain the width of the cutting edge and also why there are no deeper striations on the axe body. The striations are absent because the axe body would not have had a sliding contact with the stone. Experimental axe A showed this kind of use-wear on the cutting edge after dressing granite and sandstone. No. 21, which is short and compact could be a stonemason’s axe or could also have been used as a ball-peen hammer (Fig. 45), used by metal workers for finishing treatments. No find location is reported for no. 21.

No. 15, with unknown find location, has both cutting edges belonging to category 2A, which indicate blunt cutting edges with striations within the individual dents. On this specific axe, softer dents were recognized with striations within them, meaning that the axe was used on material harder then the bronze axe itself.403 The cutting edges were probably razorblade-sharp from the beginning but they were destroyed because of its use on hard material. Experimental axe A, used on stone, most closely resembles no. 15. Unfortunately no striations could be identified on this medium-long axe which could further indicate working activities, though its proportions and use-wear point to use on bone or stone.

In addition, three axes on display at the Heraklion Museum have extensive use-wear, corresponding to the extremely blunt cutting edges found in category 3. The cutting edges of no. 207, found somewhere in the Zakro palace, are slightly different; one cutting edge shows deep dents, and the other one is more evenly worn, but both are mushroomed. These two cutting edges can be directly compared to experimental axe A used to try and split granite. In addition to splitting stone this could have been used as a hammer. Unfortunately, there are no measurements for this double axe, which could give further indications of use.

Axe no. 9 has cutting edges belonging to categories 2 and 3, which means that the cutting edges have different degrees of bluntness. One of the cutting edges has dents and a mushroom-edge; the middle section of the cutting edge is most affected. This can be compared to experimental axe H, but here the cutting edge came into contact with the ground and how much of its waviness and mushroom-edge were actually affected by the bone is uncertain. Therefore no. 9 should more probably be compared to experimental axe A used to try to split granite. The other cutting edge on no. 9 has bent and split in the same way as experimental axe A used to split granite. I believe this axe was used on stone but was not initially meant for such hard material; dressing stone with

The cutting edges on no. 51 are extremely blunt (category 3); they probably bent because of the pressure put on the axe when using it. The cutting edges can be compared to experimental axe A used on stone. Mosso has interpreted this axe as a mining-tool but also points out that the axe is so worn because of the low content of tin.405 The content of tin probably has nothing to do with the fact that the cutting edges are so worn; as has been shown in Chapter 5, the axes with low tin content (for example, experimental axe A) did excellent work and the material worked on explains the worn appearance of this short and





400

Kienlin & Ottaway 1998, Fig. 4. Gordon 1985, 322, Fig. 8. 402 Gordon 1985, 322, Fig. 8; Kienlin & Ottaway 1998, Fig. 3. 403 Gordon 1985, 322, Fig. 8. 401

404

Gordon 1985, 325, Fig. 5.3. Mosso 1908, 501; Mosso 1910, 242, Fig. 159; Mosso 1910b, 316317, Fig. 178a.

405

70



Use and users

 This could also imply that one and the same user performed several working activities or that such an axe was used by different persons. To further understand these axes the find locations and the find contexts need to be studied.

compact axe. In addition, no. 51, which was found in Gournia, could have been used as a hammer. On no. 115, found at Nirou Chani, one of the cutting edges shows traces of extreme use (category 3). This short and compact axe is interpreted as used on hard materials because it can be compared to experimental axe A, which conducted work on stone. In addition, no. 115 could have been used as a hammer. Nos. 51, 68, 115 and 207 have not been studied as closely as the other axes; therefore to reach truly conclusive results further studies need to be conducted.

The next question is whether these activities, working on wood, stone and bone can be verified through the find locations and the find contexts. In order to answer this and further reveal a user or users for the 25 Minoan double axes, the next step will be to connect the use-wear and the interpreted working activities to the find locations and the find contexts. Can the interpretations be further verified through the associated archaeological material?

Axes with other types of use-wear No axes have use-wear on both cutting edges which correspond to category 4 (other use-wear not comparable with the above categories). But no. 3 has a combination of use-wear including category 4. On no. 3, found at Helenes, one of the cutting edges has flaked in several places most certainly due to cold lapping and it is uncertain if this cutting edge was ever used. No use-wear can be compared with this cutting edge. The other cutting edge on no. 3 seems unused (category 5): if used it was not for many blows. On this long and slim axe there are no striation marks on the axe body identified as workrelated, but the proportions suggest that this axe would be suitable to fell trees with.

Find locations and find contexts Of the double axes (nos. 11, 12, 18 and 20) identified as used on wood, two came from the probable habitation area of Samonas and two from unknown locations. There are also four double axes which are interpreted as multipurpose axes. No. 14, which was found at Selakhanos could have been used on wood and stone. Nos. 17 and 19 could have been used on bone and wood, unfortunately there is no find locations reported for these two axes. Finally no. 16, which could have been used on wood or stone, has no find location reported.

Only one double axe, no. 5, can be placed in category 5. It was most probably not used at all. The cutting edges show no dents, but judging from the long and slim proportions of no. 5 it would be most suitable for felling trees. The find location is near Nerokourou.

The double axes (nos. 1, 2, 4, 7, 8, 9, 13, 15 and 21) interpreted as used on stone came from different locations; two from chamber tombs (Chania), four from habitation areas at Knossos, Nerokourou, Selakhanos and Praisos (though the last axe was most probably manufactured for felling trees), and finally two from unknown locations. The four double axes from Heraklion Museum (nos. 51, 68, 115 and 207) which were used on stone came from the habitation areas of Gournia, Nirou Chani and Zakro and from the Isopata tomb (Knossos area).

The information from Chapters 4 and 5 has now been collated: the conclusions are that the double axes were tools used for three different activities (Table 9 below). There are axes which were used for one purpose only, for example woodworking or stone-working, though four axes can be interpreted as multipurpose tools: nos. 14, 16, 17 and 19. The question of a multipurpose tool is interesting and could reveal the real advantage of a double axe, with one cutting edge for one working activity and the other one for a second. When taking a closer look at these four axes, two of them (nos. 17 and 19) are interpreted as used on wood and bone, no. 16 on wood and stone and the fourth axe, no. 14, on wood, stone and bone.

The double axe no. 10 identified as used solely on bone came from the Psychro cave. In addition to the above-mentioned double axes there are three double axes which probably were not used at all (nos. 3, 5 and 6). No. 3 was found in the habitation area of Helenes, no. 5 in the surroundings of Nerokourou, and finally, no. 6 in the house NW of the Knossos palace.

Table 9. The suggested working activities of the Minoan double axes.

Woodworking

Stoneworking Axes nos: 11, Axes nos: 1, 12, 14, 16, 17, 2, 4, 7, 8, 9, 18, 19, 20 13, 14, 15, 16, 21, 68, 51, 115, 207

The conclusions which can be drawn from the abovepresented categories of different uses of the double axes are that several different locations are identified: a cave, several habitation areas and two mortuary contexts. What can the different locations reveal of the users if the contexts of the double axes are investigated?

Cutting bones Axes nos: 10, 17, 19

Mortuary contexts Two of the axes (nos. 1 and 2) interpreted as used on stone were found in the two chamber tombs in a cemetery 71



The Minoan double axe. An experimental study of production and use

 in Chania. Unfortunately there are no other finds recorded with the double axes and the position of the axe in the tomb is not known, which could give further information about the user. However, it is interesting that nos. 1 and 2 were found in graves and this could imply that the tombs belonged to two stonemasons. This would indicate that they were buried with the tool they used.

been a perfect tool for felling trees; however, the character of the double axe is not enough to identify woodworkers here. Knossos No. 6 was found in or in the surroundings of the house NW of the Knossos palace, and its find context is therefore unknown. Because the axe is unused it cannot be further interpreted. The slim proportions of the axe imply that it would have been a tool for woodworking.

The double axe found in Isopata tomb, no. 68, must be considered in a different way. The axe was found within the grave’s door blocking at a height of 120 cm. The grave gifts, which were found in the two chambers, seem too expensive to belong alongside an item from a practical toolkit and thereby reveal the user of the axe.406 The metal objects which could have functioned as tools (knives and double axes) are made of thin sheet bronze.

No. 7 was also reported from the Knossos palace, but the exact find location and the find context are also unknown. However, this axe was interpreted as a probable stone tool, which could imply a stonemason working at Knossos. This would not be unlikely, for the building and rebuilding of the palace of Knossos would have required workers with various skills.

Evans, who excavated the grave, thought that the double axe was left by mistake while constructing the doorblocking for the tomb.407 Altogether, the position the axe was found in, the deep dents and the rather thick cutting edges indicate that the axe was used for breaking and shaping stone. I therefore agree with Evans and I believe that the axe was used by the stonemason who was blocking the doorway.

Nerokourou Two double axes (nos. 4 and 5) were found at Nerokourou, a habitation area in the country, close to Chania. No. 4 was found in direct association with the house and no. 5 was found at a spring nearby. The house at Nerokourou was unfortunately destroyed by a bulldozer and the exact context of the double axe is therefore unknown. However, scattered over this area a seal, a metal smith’s tong, a spear blade, a sword and pottery were discovered. No. 4 was interpreted as used on stone, but none of the above-mentioned items imply a stonemason active at the house. The site of Nerokourou has been interpreted as a workshop because of the items found. Therefore the user of this axe could be a metal smith. The other axe, no. 5 which was found nearby, was unused and could have been manufactured here. However, whether the metal smith produced double axes cannot be concluded because there are no items which relate to double axe production at this site.

The axes presented above could imply in two cases that the user was buried with the tool used in life as a stonemason. The Isopata grave gives a slightly different picture and the man buried in the tomb was most certainly not the user of the axe. But there are indications of a stonemason, i.e. the stone packing which had to be split up from bigger stone blocks. The door blocking could have been made with the axe found within the stone packing.

Habitation areas Helenes Three double axes (no. 3 and two others whose present location is unknown) were found together at Helenes in 1930. The excavations conducted show traces of several houses, though only pottery and the three double axes are reported as excavation finds.408 Unfortunately the three axes’ find contexts are not known. The conclusion drawn was that this site could have been a habitation for woodcutters. They would probably not have needed as many tools as a carpenter and the double axes would be perfect. No. 3 is a long and slim axe which would have

Nirou Chani The villa at Nirou Chani more than likely did not stand in the Minoan countryside all by itself, and a habitation area in the near surroundings of the house is most probable.409 Axe no. 115, interpreted as used on stone, is from the surrounding settlement. No further information on the settlement is known; therefore one can only speculate that a stonemason lived or worked there, but this is probably not far-fetched. Praisos Four double axes were found at Praisos (nos. 8, 9, 144 and 145), an area with many different archaeological locations, and the axes should probably be connected with settlement areas.410 However, this cannot be verified with certainty. No. 8 is reported from an unknown location in this area while no. 9 was found at the megalithic house at Aghios Konstantinos. Both nos. 8 and

 406

Two gold beads, gold plated studs of a sword, weapons, bronze implements, small pieces of jewelllery, a thin leaf-shaped blade, two bronze knives, 20 barbed arrow heads of thin bronze plate, two golden beads of a necklace, a handle of a silver cup, a bronze ritual axe and parts of another. A perforated lentoid gem of red cornelian, an amber disc, two flat beads of amber. Wooden disc. Fragments of 2 ewers, 4 amphorae, alabastron, plain pedestalled cup with two handles, ritual vessel, fragments of a brazier or a chafing-dish, fragments of a bull rhyton. 407 Evans 1914, 34-35. 408 Bequignon 1931, 518; Karo 1932, 177; Heffner, Blegen & Burrows 1932, 60-61; Mavriyannaki 1978, 198; Touchais 1980, 679, Fig. 200. Sp. Marinatos excavated here but his excavations are referred to by the above-mentioned writers.

 409

Xanthoudides 1922, 1-25; Evans 1928a, 280-281; Rehak & Younger 2001, 397. 410 Platon 1957, 340; Schachermeyr 1962, 169; Davaras s.a., Pl 67c; Evely 1993, 46, no. 70, 49, no. 201.

72



Use and users

 9, because of the use-wear, were interpreted as used on stone, though no. 9 was probably not manufactured for this use. No further find contexts were reported for nos. 8, 9 and 144. No. 145 was reported to have been found with a knife and other unaccounted bronze objects. There is nothing that reveals the user here, except for the use-wear on the double axes.411

woodworker. The tool for multipurpose use suggests the presence of a worker of a more general kind. Two double axes from Knossos were studied. One was unused and the other one was probably used for stonework, but there is nothing in the find contexts which support this interpretation. Nerokourou where two double axes were found is difficult to interpret. The user of the workshop could have used the double axe, but exactly for what is impossible to guess. Zakro most probably had both stone workers and woodworkers active either in the palace or in the stone quarry nearby. Nirou Chani and Prasisos are difficult to interpret because there is no further information on find contexts.

Zakro The find circumstances at Zakro are difficult to comprehend and unfortunately no. 207 has no recorded find context. However, several other double axes and tools are recorded from the Zakro palace which can help to reveal the user of no. 207. In a narrow corridor outside the lustral basin (ī/63, the west wing of the palace) several tools were found which probably had fallen down from the upper floor when the palace was destroyed. Together with double axes nos. 197-205 were also two saws, one for wood and one for stone, picks, needles, cutters, chisels, pins, small knives, carving chisels, engraver’s tools and drills. Because of the different saws these tools have been interpreted as used by a stonemason and a woodworker.412 No. 207 was interpreted as used on stone because of the extensive use-wear. This axe could therefore belong to the toolkit of a stonemason working at the palace, but there is also a quarry (Pelekitá) not far from Zakro which could have been the working place for the stonemason.413

Psychro cave Altogether there are four axes found in the Psychro cave (nos. 10, 150, 151 and 152) without more exact find contexts reported, except for no. 150.415 No. 10 is interpreted as used on bones. The find context of no. 150 does not reveal anything which could indicate the user. However, by studying the use of the Psychro cave further conclusions can be drawn. The cave was used for cult purposes from the Neolithic period to the medieval period (except for the Early Minoan period). The double axes found here are dated between Middle Minoan III and Late Minoan III. The several excavations conducted have revealed many finds of various materials. The most interesting finds, in the light of no. 10, are those of bone. The bones found belong to the Neolithic, Middle Minoan and Late Minoan strata.416

The Unexplored Mansion, Knossos The find context of one double axe found at the Unexplored Mansion, Knossos (no. 71) was in a fill beneath the floor which contained stone chippings. The stone chippings were interpreted as coming from the construction of the Unexplored Mansion and the axe which was found in the fill was interpreted as used by the stonemason who was dressing the stones.414 Therefore, using the double axe for stone work is a probable interpretation.

During the Middle Minoan III-Late Minoan I, there were finds of oxen, pig, deer and goats outside the cave, which according to Watrous were sacrificed and eaten here.417 During the Late Minoan II-IIIB1 period no bones were reported but a layer of black earth with bronze tools and weapons was reported; this stratum seems to be connected with layers of ash, but no more can be concluded from the report.418

The double axes found in habitation areas suggest that both woodworkers and stonemasons were active there or elsewhere (i.e. they lived at the site and worked in the region). In the case of Helenes it can be interpreted as a shelter for woodworkers. Selakhanos with the many finds of double axes can be said at least to have had an active

In the light of the above information it does not seem unacceptable to believe that the axe was used for slaughtering animals. The slaughtering and cutting up of bones were part of the ceremonies conducted here, and the meals prepared after perhaps dedicating parts of the animals to the god or gods.



The user of no. 10 cannot be pinpointed but there are at least two possibilities. The axe could have been used to slaughter the animals for sacrifice. However, the person

411

The area of Praisos has several Minoan remains from the Early Minoan to the Late Minoan period. The Minoan remains are for example three (or more) Late Minoan walls left on the so-called First Acropolis from a wall or house. In the surroundings there are also tholos tombs and one larnax from tholos B is of Minoan date. Furthermore a megalithic house at Aghios Konstantinos was already recognized by Bosanquet. Cf. Bosanquet 1902, 236-240, Fig.7; Whitley, O’Conor & Mason 1995, 406, 409, 412-414; Whitley, Prent & Thorne 1999, 215264. 412 The interpretations of the different use of the saws are probably done by studying the teeth. A stonemason used a saw which, had no teeth, but a woodworker would have used a saw with teeth. Cf. J. Shaw 1973, 73; Evely 1993, Fig. 11. 413 The Pelekità quarry is referred to by J. Shaw (1973, 30-34) and he has estimated that it took ca 30 minutes by boat or 1.5 hours by foot to reach the quarry from Zakro. 414 Popham 1984, 44.

 415

No. 150 was found together with three discs of bronze, a shield, a lance’s arrow, a knife blade, a sword’s handle, small bronze bulls and rams, a fibula and a small double axe, bronze statuettes of men and many small cups, a goblet, a vase, a tripod, an idol, and finally bulls, sheep and two doves or pigeons in clay. Halbherr & Orsi 1888, 218222, Pl. XIII, no. 3; Buchholz 1959, 42, no. 30; Boardman 1961, 42, 44, Fig. 19, Pl. XIV, Appendix I; Evely 1993, 42, no. 24. 416 The cave was used for habitation during the Neolithic period and several bones from oxen, goat and sheep, pigs and dogs were identified from this period; cf. Boyd-Dawkins 1902, 162-165; Watrous 1982, 9; Watrous 1996, 45. 417 Evans 1921, 627; Watrous 1996, 49. 418 Hogarth 1899-1900b, 99.

73



The Minoan double axe. An experimental study of production and use

 who slaughtered and cut up the animals could either be the person responsible for the cult activities with this kind of knowledge or it could be a butcher who was appointed for this special activity.

Crete as a reported find location. In general, the axes above seem to correspond with the twenty-five cases discussed in this chapter; most axes are found in habitation areas, followed by graves and caves.423

Uncertain find locations Before turning to the find locations of the other double axes found in the catalogue I will briefly discuss Selakhanos. It is a plausible habitation area but no evidence exists to prove this. Selakhanos is somewhat problematic and one of the few referring to the site is Pendlebury, who records that Evans identified rockshelters there in 1898. Selakhanos is situated above the site of Malla, which later became an important city state in Crete; however, the Bronze Age material from this area is insufficient to allow a certain interpretation as a habitation area.419 The double axes found here could imply that both wood and stone work were carried out in the surroundings.

Conclusions The uses of the twenty-five double axes where the find context can be combined with the use-wear analysis can be attributed to three separate working activities: wood working or felling trees, stone-working and butchering. The three types of find locations are mortuary contexts, habitation areas and a cave. The contexts of the twentyfive axes were further studied but were difficult to interpret. Nonetheless, three distinct professions can be confirmed through this investigation. The stonemason at the Isopata grave did not leave anything else behind except his double axe. In the habitation areas the stonemason and the woodworker could be detected at the Zakro palace: not only by the use-wear but also by other tools which were found together in a small area. The axes which have been used for several different purposes were found at four different locations, but only no. 14 from a known location (Selakhanos) can be interpreted in the light of a multipurpose tool. A butcher or a person who had knowledge of butchering was active at the Psychro cave.

Altogether thirteen double axes were found at Selakhanos of which I have studied two (nos. 13 and 14).420 A hoard was reported from Selakhanos which contained no. 14 together with four more double axes (nos. 163-165 and 167) and two chisels.421 But exactly where this hoard was discovered is unknown. No. 13 is reported to come from Selakhanos, although no further details of its context are known.422 Judging from the use-wear, this axe was used on stone. The interpretation of the use of no. 14 is wood or stone working. The chisels suggest that a woodworker most probably was the user of no. 14. The other cutting edge of no. 14 was interpreted as used on stone. Furthermore no. 13 was used on stone. The axes suggest that a stonemason and a woodworker lived or worked at Selakhanos or in its surroundings. It is also possible that one person had the skill to use both axes. If one could study both the environment and the other axes found at this location, perhaps a habitation area and its different workers could be identified.

By studying the rest of the catalogue one can see that most of the double axes came from habitation areas, followed by mortuary contexts and caves, in the sorts of proportions as the twenty-five examples discussed. Previous researchers who suggested that the probable user of a double axe was a woodworker, a stonemason or a butcher were right. Deciding which one of these workers was the actual user has been felt to not be amenable to ready determination. I believe that I have come a bit further in answering this question with respect to individual tools.

Finally, considering the find locations of the other double axes in the catalogue, there are six more axes which come from six different funerary contexts (though two are uncertain and could come from graves). Six more double axes come from six different caves (though two are uncertain and could also come from graves). Furthermore, double axes are found in sixteen different habitation areas (a total of 86 double axes). There are also axes which have a find location but the location is not further investigated; there are 31 such sites (a total of 48 axes). Finally, there are 28 double axes which only have

If the opportunity arises to expand this research into the unrivalled collection of axes held at Heraklion Museum, I feel certain that this picture can be expanded and made yet clearer.



419 Pendlebury 1939, 299. I have not been able to consult Evans, Diary 1898. 420 For further information see the catalogue nos. 160-170, 13 and 14. 421 Evans 1894, 280; Mosso 1908, 501, Pl. III, Fig. 9; Mosso 1910, 242243, Figs. 158 & 159c; Mosso 1910b, 316, Fig. 178c; Montelius 1924, Pl. 4, no. 10a-b; Pendlebury 1939, 299; Buchholz 1959, 43, no. 33a, b & c; Deshayes 1960, 105, no. 2018, 106, nos. 2038 and 2045, 107, no. 2062, 256-257, 256 note 2; Branigan 1969, 2-4, Fig. 1 (the whole hoard). 422 Evans 1894, 280, Fig. 6; Buchholz 1959, 43, no. 33; Pendlebury 1939, 10, 299.

 423

The total is not 229 if all the axes here are added together, because, for example, Knossos has more than the two axes discussed under Knossos and is therefore not accounted for again under habitation areas.

74





7. SUMMARY

“ears”. Both these phenomena, however, can be explained in terms of the mechanics of the casting itself. The “wedging grooves” are a result of the inclusion of a running system and the “ears” are shrinkage cavities which are a result of the molten metal cooling off in the mould. The results lead me to rename these features as trace/s of runner/s instead of “wedging groove/s” and shrinkage cavities instead of “ears”. The traces of runners (“wedging grooves”) could most definitely be used secondarily in a practical way, which the shape of some of the grooves implies. But there are many of them which are unworked (left crude) and several that are not connected to the shaft hole.

This study investigates the double axe as a tool in Crete during the Minoan period. Previous scholars have attributed the double axe to the equipment of a woodworker, a carpenter, a stonemason and a butcher. The working activities performed by the different users plausibly would have left various kinds of use-wear on the axe, but this has not been studied until now. Therefore the aim was to either exclude or confirm use and users of the double axes by conducting diverse investigations. In order to reach such conclusions twenty-three double axes were closely examined for traces of manufacturing methods and different use-wear, and in addition experimental work was conducted to substantiate my interpretations of the Minoan double axes. Past research has often included a new typology and, after studying the already existing ones, I concluded that they did not meet the requirements needed to study the double axes with all their variations and individual features. My new typology, which considered every feature of the double axe, did not develop as expected. It became too complex and more difficult to use than any of the earlier ones; this became apparent when working with the double axes housed at the archaeological museums at Rethymnon and Chania. To construct a typology and place the axes within it is not the most effective way to approach and understand what the double axes were used for. I was led to conclude that the different types of axes identified were a product primarily of different finishing treatments, which means that all the axes were cast in similar moulds and then worked into the required shape. In addition, resharpening could have had an effect on the axe shape.

The identification of finishing treatments together with use-wear on the axe body was problematic, because the influences of age, weather, find context and modern treatment have an impact. In addition there is the difference between finishing treatments and use-wear; to visually identify the difference between them was sometimes impossible. Even so, finishing treatments could be identified on the axe bodies as hammering marks towards the cutting edge, which were made in order to attain a thin and sharp cutting edge. Chisels were also used conducting finishing treatments and mostly to remove the runners and additional flash. Traces of polishing and grinding were identified but should be interpreted with caution. The long sides have in some cases been hammered, which has made the cutting edges convex. The cutting edges would be the most important part to finish off. A V-shaped cutting edge can be identified and these were ground and polished to become razorblade-sharp.

The whole manufacturing chain was studied because this approach allowed conclusions to be drawn about the casting techniques during the Bronze Age in Crete. This also exerts influence on the quality of the axes, which in turn would directly affect the suitability of the end product for this or that purpose.

Finishing treatments also included incised motifs and cast motifs. There are two broad groups of motifs on the double axes. The incised ones are Linear A signs and the cast ones are more complex motifs like lions or sacral knots. These can probably be interpreted as signs of ownership.

Several aspects of the manufacturing process were studied and identified: casting and casting defects including casting joints, impressions of sand, scabs, dirt inclusions, gas- and blowholes, position of runners, shrinkage cavities, hot tearing, hot cracking or cold tearing and, finally, cold lapping.

Metal analyses of the double axes were studied: a conclusion was reached that the hardening contents (tin and arsenic) in the alloys can be usefully divided into a low, a medium and a high range. The ranges could reflect the intended use of the axe on a hard or soft material, relative to the different durability of the casts. This reason lay behind the casting of the modern replica-axes with three different tin contents, to see if they would manage the same kind of work and material.

The most illuminating result of this part of the study concerned the so-called “wedging grooves” and “ears”, both addressed by earlier scholars. It was thought that a specially made core was used when casting, with projecting arms to create the “wedging grooves” and the

After studying the use-wear on the Minoan double axes, they were divided into five categories depending on 75



The Minoan double axe. An experimental study of production and use

 whether the dents were concentrated at the cutting edge, whether the cutting edge was mushroom-edged, and finally on the thickness of the cutting edges. The material for comparison with the Minoan double axes comprised studies and experiments conducted by Kienlin and Ottaway with bronze flanged axes from the North-Alpine region and Gordon’s work with bronze axes from Machu Picchu.424 Their research implied that the Minoan double axes could be interpreted as having been used on wood and stone and for three different working activities: cutting, splitting and breaking.

wear built up on the axes consisted at first of hard dents, which became softer during the working process. The experiments on stone were conducted on sandstone and granite with axe A. Dressing sandstone was conducted without any problems and the cutting edge became blunt, even though it was not razorblade-sharp to begin with. The granite was also dressed but it proved too hard: the result was that the stone remained intact but the axe was very much affected. In order to experiment further with stone we tried to split the granite – and the cutting edge became totally destroyed.

Use-wear on the axe body was also identified and interpreted. They were divided into two groups, one with short striations and the other with long striations. The striation marks to some extent came from sliding contact with the material worked on. But different hardness and depth of penetration in the material created different striations.

The bone experiments were conducted on lamb and cattle bones with axes G, H and I which contained different tin contents and also had shafts of three different lengths. The double axes were also sharpened differently; one cutting edge was razorblade-sharp and the other one was left blunter, at 0.1-0.15 cm width. Cutting up the lamb using only a double axe turned out to be difficult; therefore a bronze knife was also used. There were no differences in the three different bronze alloys; they all cut the bones but the different sharpness of the cutting edges was effective for different kinds of cuts. For example, the sharp cutting edge was preferred when cutting a carcass into smaller portions, because compared to the blunt cutting edge it hardly left any bone splinter. Only a small amount of use-wear was built up and was similar to those on the axes used during the experiments of felling trees. To cut the cattle bones only axe H was used, because the other axes had too short a handle to allow a swing sufficient to build up enough kinetic energy to penetrate and cut the cattle bones. The use-wear built up was more pronounced than from the lamb bones and the cutting edge to some extent became wavy.

To understand, compare and verify the results from the Minoan double axes experiments were conducted in two stages with modern replicas. First, manufacturing and finishing treatments were focused upon; second the experimental double axes were used on wood, stone and bone, and finally the use-wear left by the experimental work was studied. Seventeen double axes were cast using the flasktechnique. The features of sand impressions and shrinkage could be identified on, for example, the modern double axe A just as on the Minoan ones (for example, nos. 4 and 13). Finishing treatments were conducted with bronze tools and different stones (sand, pumice and igneous stone). The experimental axes were cold worked: during this the straight cutting edge gradually became convex (which can, for example, be identified on the Minoan axe no. 18). This strengthened my theory that different moulds for different convexities and concavities of the axes were not required. The moulds rather were more or less of the same rectangular shape, but varied in length, width and thickness. For the final treatments of the axe body and to sharpen the cutting edges, the abovementioned stones were used again and the striations after grinding and sharpening the axes can be compared to, for example, those on the Minoan axe no. 20.

During all the experimental work the axe bodies were studied to record striation marks, but even though one could identify the difference between polishing marks and striation marks created by work, the only striations which really could be separated off with ease were those created by working stone. To identify Minoan use and users, the modern experimental double axes were compared with the Minoan double axes which I had studied and four double axes housed at the archaeological museum in Heraklion. In addition, the find locations and find contexts of these 25 double axes were reviewed. The results of comparing the Minoan axes with the modern double axes were that three different users could be identified: a woodworker, a stonemason and a butcher. Further, there were four double axes which could not be attributed to only one working activity, and the axe as a multipurpose tool is therefore an interpretation.

The chopping experiments with the modern cast double axes included wood, stone and bone. Three types of trees (Scotch fir, birch and oak) with different hardness were felled, branched and barked off, and for this work double axes with three different tin contents were used. The axes felled the trees without any problem; the hardness of the wood only meant that it took more or less time to fell a tree. The different contents of tin in the axes did not make any appreciable difference, though the one with 15% tin turned out to be extremely durable. The biggest difference in efficiency was in the shaft length: a longer shaft was more ergonomic and built up more kinetic energy, which helped when felling the trees. The use-

The find locations of the Minoan double axes were concentrated in three different groups: mortuary contexts, habitation areas and a cave. The different find contexts were studied, but because of the circumstances of how the contexts were recorded, the discussion has been limited. However, the contexts could further verify that a

 424

Gordon 1985; Kienlin & Ottaway 1998.

76



Summary

 stonemason worked in, for example, the Isopata tomb, a woodworker or carpenter and a stonemason was active at the Zakro palace, and probably a person who had butchering knowledge was connected with the Psychro cave. The aim of this project was to investigate which working activities were performed with the Minoan double axes, in the light of what other scholars have concluded. The study has shown that the double axes were used for three kinds of activities, which confirms previous research. Yet contrary to what has been thought possible, I have shown that different activities executed with the double axes can be distinguished and therefore specific axes can be attributed to specific activities.

77





8. CATALOGUE

The catalogue contains descriptions of find contexts, metal analyses, casting and casting defects, finishing treatments and use-wear.

Catalogue of studied double axes

Several double axes have different measurements given by scholars. When measuring those I have had permission to study, it became obvious that the different measurements given depend on how you measure the double axes. The measurement which varies the most is the length of the axe. If you measure the long side, putting the axe on the measuring device, as I have done, from edge to edge you get one length. If you measure the long side by placing the measuring device on the axe body, you get a longer measure of the axe. The axe body, not being flat, has its highest point where the shaft hole is situated and the axe body then slopes downwards to the cutting edges which causes the result of the second way of measuring. All measurements are in cm if not otherwise stated.

1. CHANIA Present location: Chania Museum, inv. no. 120. Measurements: L 13.6; Th 2.2/2.3;W m 5.1; C.e. slightly convex W 5.9 & 6.2; Ls straight (edge points are very pronounced); Rsh 1.6/1.7. Date: LM III. Context: No. 1 was according to the museum found in a chamber tomb in the Chania cemetery. No further details are known. Metal analysis: Bronze, composition unknown. Casting and casting defects: Traces of two runners and shrinkage in shaft hole. Finishing treatments: Not identified. Use-wear: Striations on the axe body. Own observations: Casting and casting defects: Traces of two runners are identified on one long side; one groove (L 2) was worked all the way to the shaft hole, which is probably due to the runner having ripped off a piece of metal towards the shaft hole. The other trace of a runner (L 2.5) is not connected with the shaft hole. The uneven axe surface most certainly comes from the mould and is due to dirt inclusions. Finishing treatments: Tool marks are visible around the shaft hole and the grooves caused by the runners were worked on. There are several striations on the axe body, which could be tool marks. Both long sides were worked on and the surface is uneven, especially towards the points of the cutting edges. The long sides are worked bevel edged and when manufacturing these, the tool slipped over to the axe body and marked it. The face where the inv. no is marked shows areas where the axe was cold-worked after casting, probably hammered to form the axe (the other axe face was hard to interpret due to oxidation). There are finer grinding marks, which could come from finishing treatments. One of the cutting edges was probably worked on after casting, although the cutting edge is rather thick. Use-wear: The axe face where the inv. no is marked shows areas of oxidation (especially one corner), and the whole surface is uneven. Even so, some long and deep and some short and deep striations are visible on the axe body (some go from the centre of the axe body and diagonally upwards). Not all of the striations are caused by working actions; some of them are most probably from the mould. The other axe face has more oxidized areas; even so, deep and short striations are visible (the parts affected by oxidation appear to have underlying striated areas). One of the cutting edges shows extensive

Abbreviations: C.e.= Cutting edge EM= Early Minoan (ca. 3000-2000 B.C.) L= Length LM= Late Minoan (ca. 1600-1200 B.C.) Ls= Long side of the double axe MM= Middle Minoan (ca. 2000-1600 B.C.) Osh=Oval shaft hole Rsh= Round shaft hole Th= Thickness W= Width W m= Width middle (centre) of the double axe The measurements of, for example, no. 1 should therefore be read: length 13.6 cm; thickness 2.2/2.3 cm; width of the middle (or height of the centre of the axe body) 5.1 cm; cutting edges slightly convex with the widths (heights) of 5.9 & 6.2 cm; long sides straight; round shaft hole 1.6/1.7 cm in diameter. In order to separate the long sides and to be able to describe the cutting edges I decided to refer to the long side where the traces of runners as the upper long side. The lowest long side, then of course, refers to the opposite one. When describing the cutting edges as, for example, the upper part of the cutting edge and the lowest part of the cutting edge, the upper part of a cutting edge is the one joined to the upper long side.

78



Catalogue

 Bibliography: Evely 1993, 46, no. 99.

use-wear and the lower part is blunt and has soft dents (W 0.2). Following the cutting edge upwards, the dents change and the cutting edge is flatter (W 0.3). The dents here are hard and lie in a row, just above these dents, nearly at the top point of the cutting edge there are some dents that have striations within the dents (W 0.2). The other cutting edge is also worn blunt, though the dents are not as individual as on the previous cutting edge. The cutting edge is flat and varies from 0.2-0.25; the lowest point is the thinnest and measures below 0.2. The dents are hard to interpret due to oxidation, though the dents on this side are softer compared to the other cutting edge. The two cutting edges look as if they are used for two different purposes (activities). Examined in Chania Museum, 23-25 September, 2004. Bibliography: Evely 1993, 46, no.100.

3. HELENES Present location: Rethymnon Museum, inv. no. 138. Measurements: L 19; Th 2.2; W m 5.3; C.e. almost straight W 5.8; Ls straight; Rsh 1.6/1.7. Date: LM I or earlier. Context: No. 3 was found together with two other double axes (there are no record of these other two axes and therefore they are not accounted for) during road works west of the mountain village of Helenes in 1930. The three double axes were found to the NW, directly above the village (eastern side of Petres hills). Pottery sherds (coarse ware), among them Pyrgos and Kamares style, together with two Neolithic axes (?), one of serpentine and one of diorite, and a larnax with bones, were also reported from the area. Metal analysis: Copper, composition unknown. Casting and casting defects: The trace of a runner, according to Mavriyannaki, proves that this axe was cast in an open mould and the long side showing the groove is where the molten metal was poured into the mould. The question whether the bucranium (ox-skull) and the lines following the long sides of the axe faces were manufactured while casting or not is uncertain; Mavriyannaki gives two alternatives, either that it was cast by placing a flat relief piece inside the mould before casting or it was incised after casting. Finishing treatments: Not identified. Use-wear: Cutting edges damaged. Own observations: Casting and casting defects: The trace of one runner is identified and it was probably polished or ground. This axe seems to be the product of a two-part mould, which the trace of the runner indicates (no runner would be necessary if cast in an open mould). Shrinkage cavities are present and are undulating and because of this the shaft hole is irregular (on the long sides the shaft hole appears to be round, but in the centre it is oval). Regarding the motif on the axe, no starting point from a tool can be detected on the axe, if incised; therefore casting is more probable. Cold lapping can be identified on one of the cutting edges. Finishing treatments: Due to extensive oxidation, hammering or striation marks from finishing treatments are difficult to identify. Both long sides were slightly bevel edged, though specific tool marks cannot be detected due to probable post-depositional changes. Opposite the trace of the runner there is a small crack. Use-wear: Because of extensive oxidation, use-wear cannot be detected on the axe body. One cutting edge appears to have flaked in several places and sections of this cutting edge are missing, which is probably due to cold lapping. A number of dents are recognized on the lower part of the cutting edge, though they are so oxidized that analysing them is extremely difficult. The other cutting edge has a few soft dents, though whether they are work-related is not obvious. The cutting edge could have hit something, not very hard probably once, but it appears to be brand new.

2. CHANIA Present location: Chania Museum, inv. no. 155. Measurements: L 18.5; Th 2.5/2.6; W m 5/5; C.e. slightly convex W 6.1 & 6; Ls slightly concave; Rsh 2/Osh 2x1.8. Date: LM III. Context: No. 2 was according to the museum found in a chamber tomb in the Chania cemetery. No further details are known. Metal analysis: Bronze, composition unknown. Casting and casting defects: Shrinkage in shaft hole and flash line on one long side. Finishing treatments: Not identified. Use-wear: Striations on the cutting edges. Own observations: Casting and casting defects: A casting joint from a two-part mould can be identified on one of the long sides. Both long sides show evidence of hot- or cold tears close to the shaft hole and where the running system was removed. The axe body shows areas of small holes, possibly sand inclusions. Finishing treatments: The area around the shaft hole was worked upon. On the other long side the area around the shaft hole also has possible tool marks which made it asymmetrical. The edges of the long sides were worked slightly bevelled. The axe body, near the centre, was probably hammered after casting. The cutting edges were ground and filed to form a V-edge; traces from this activity vary between 0.3-0.5 cm up on the axe body. The finishing treatments of the cutting edges and the hammering should be enough to create the slightly convex cutting edges. Use-wear: The axe face where the black inv. no 155 is marked shows most use-wear. There are broad striations from the centre of the axe which go toward the cutting edges and some of the striations reach the cutting edge. The face where the white inv. no 155 is marked, has areas of deeper striations, showing the bronze colour of the axe. These striations are not oxidized, therefore probably modern. Both cutting edges are blunt and show only a few individual dents. One has a small crack and a few dents. The other cutting edge has a few dents and a mushroom-edge. Examined in Chania Museum, 23-25 September, 2004. 79



The Minoan double axe. An experimental study of production and use

 Examined in Rethymnon Museum, 21-22 September, 2004. Bibliography: Bequignon 1931, 518; Karo 1932, 177; Heffner, Blegen & Burrows 1932, 60-61; Touchais 1980, 679, Fig. 200; Mavriyannaki 1978, 198, 200-201; Mavriyannaki 1983b, 212; Evely 1993, 44, no. 41.

5. NEAR NEROKOUROU Present location: Chania Museum, inv. no. Ner 80 M 8 or M 815. Measurements: L 19.1/19.6; Th 2.2/2.4; W m 5.3/5.4; C.e. slightly convex W 6 & 5.8; Ls almost straight; Rsh 1.6-1.7/1.9. Date: Probably MM III-LM I. Context: No. 5 was found together with 30 vases, by the spring of Rafioli. Metal analysis: Cu 84.7; Sn 14.3; As 0.21; Pb