DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.12762#0130
PLATANOS
103
groove to mark the end of the shell which has lines incised upon it. The cavity the
of the vessel is cylindrical. Height -045 m., length -11 m., breadth -08 m. cemetery
(2) 1895 (Plate LIV). A globular vessel with sides divided by vertical stone objects
grooves into eight divisions like a cantaloup melon. Height -04 m., diameter
of mouth '04 m.
2. Observations on the Stone Vases of Mesard.
The stone vases of Mesara are for the most part small, the material is Remarks on
generally a soft stone, and in particular the different varieties of steatite are Stoue Vases
much affected, but there are some examples of harder stones such as marbles,
white and coloured, alabaster and breccia. All are made by hand without the
use of a lathe or other mechanical aid. The cavity is drilled by means of a
stick or reed, with sand or emery dust. Many show on the inside the grooves
left by the revolving tool and the little knob at the bottom. .
The small size of most of the vessels and the frequent shallowness of the
cavity point to their not being intended for daily use but merely for the tomb,
or for ritual purposes. They may have been gifts to the dead man for his use,
or may have served to pour a libation to him.
In size, in variety of shape, and in the mastery shown over the material
the stone ware of Mesara is in general inferior to that of Mochlos, where the
vases are larger, are cut out of harder and choicer stones, and have more varied
and more elegant forms; although, as we have seen, there are not wanting
some examples from Mesara that can compete with them.
Two reasons can be advanced for the difference, firstly, the possibly greater
wealth of the inhabitants of Mochlos, who were merchants and seamen, a
wealth postulated by the amount of gold in the Mochlos tombs ; and secondly,
the difference in date ; for Mr. Seager 1 refers the finest and most elegant of his
vases to E.M. II, while the Mesara ware is placed by the bulk of the objects
found with it to E.M. Ill or M.M. I.
Both in Crete and in Egypt it has been observed that the art of making
these stone vases declines with the passage of time; that the later products
show inferior material, less elegant shapes, and more careless execution, and
that many of the older types are forgotten and lost. The art did not exist in
Crete either in the neolithic or in the first Early Minoan age, but appears
suddenly at its full height in the second Early Minoan age. Most writers
therefore believe that it was introduced from Egypt, where it had begun to be Introduction
practised far earlier, in the predynastic epoch, and we know that it went on to from Egypt?
flourish greatly under the early dynasties, for vessels of the choicer kinds of
stone have been found by thousands in the tombs of that time.2
1 Seager, Mochlos, p. 101. Hall, The Ancient History of the Near East, p. 81.
2 Dechelette, op. at., II, pp. 391-392. Mgean Archaeology, p. 49.
Petrie, Diospolis Parva, p. 18. Reisner, Naga-ed-Der, op. cit., pp. 99 ff., Plates
Royal Tombs, I, Plates IV-X ; II. Plates XLVI- 70, 71, 72, 73.
LIII g. Evans, Palace, p. 17 and pp. 88-92,
103
groove to mark the end of the shell which has lines incised upon it. The cavity the
of the vessel is cylindrical. Height -045 m., length -11 m., breadth -08 m. cemetery
(2) 1895 (Plate LIV). A globular vessel with sides divided by vertical stone objects
grooves into eight divisions like a cantaloup melon. Height -04 m., diameter
of mouth '04 m.
2. Observations on the Stone Vases of Mesard.
The stone vases of Mesara are for the most part small, the material is Remarks on
generally a soft stone, and in particular the different varieties of steatite are Stoue Vases
much affected, but there are some examples of harder stones such as marbles,
white and coloured, alabaster and breccia. All are made by hand without the
use of a lathe or other mechanical aid. The cavity is drilled by means of a
stick or reed, with sand or emery dust. Many show on the inside the grooves
left by the revolving tool and the little knob at the bottom. .
The small size of most of the vessels and the frequent shallowness of the
cavity point to their not being intended for daily use but merely for the tomb,
or for ritual purposes. They may have been gifts to the dead man for his use,
or may have served to pour a libation to him.
In size, in variety of shape, and in the mastery shown over the material
the stone ware of Mesara is in general inferior to that of Mochlos, where the
vases are larger, are cut out of harder and choicer stones, and have more varied
and more elegant forms; although, as we have seen, there are not wanting
some examples from Mesara that can compete with them.
Two reasons can be advanced for the difference, firstly, the possibly greater
wealth of the inhabitants of Mochlos, who were merchants and seamen, a
wealth postulated by the amount of gold in the Mochlos tombs ; and secondly,
the difference in date ; for Mr. Seager 1 refers the finest and most elegant of his
vases to E.M. II, while the Mesara ware is placed by the bulk of the objects
found with it to E.M. Ill or M.M. I.
Both in Crete and in Egypt it has been observed that the art of making
these stone vases declines with the passage of time; that the later products
show inferior material, less elegant shapes, and more careless execution, and
that many of the older types are forgotten and lost. The art did not exist in
Crete either in the neolithic or in the first Early Minoan age, but appears
suddenly at its full height in the second Early Minoan age. Most writers
therefore believe that it was introduced from Egypt, where it had begun to be Introduction
practised far earlier, in the predynastic epoch, and we know that it went on to from Egypt?
flourish greatly under the early dynasties, for vessels of the choicer kinds of
stone have been found by thousands in the tombs of that time.2
1 Seager, Mochlos, p. 101. Hall, The Ancient History of the Near East, p. 81.
2 Dechelette, op. at., II, pp. 391-392. Mgean Archaeology, p. 49.
Petrie, Diospolis Parva, p. 18. Reisner, Naga-ed-Der, op. cit., pp. 99 ff., Plates
Royal Tombs, I, Plates IV-X ; II. Plates XLVI- 70, 71, 72, 73.
LIII g. Evans, Palace, p. 17 and pp. 88-92,