INTRODUCTION
When Minoan iconography is concerned with depicting forms from the real world it is characterised by a variety of styles ranging from the quasi-naturalistic to the essentialist. By ‘essentialist’, we refer to the representation of essential characteristics rather than a meticulous, detailed, depiction of forms (Warren Reference Warren1995; Reference Warren2000, 364–5). The inevitable difficulties that therefore arise in identifying and interpreting its varied motifs are exacerbated by the use of conventions or rules of perspective that differ from those used in more modern art with which scholars are undoubtedly more familiar (Morgan Reference Morgan, Darcque and Poursat1985; Reference Morgan1988, 10–16; Reference Morgan and Müller1989, 149; Sourvinou-Inwood Reference Sourvinou-Inwood and Müller1989, 241–3). Despite all this, and allowing for the artists' focus on depicting essential details, progress can be made through the careful and detailed description of a scene combined with an understanding of the relationship between it as a three-dimensional object and it as a two-dimensional image constructed according to the rules of perspective in use at the time it was created; this might lead to new interpretive approaches.
THE ENIGMATIC ‘STRUCTURE’ ON THE MINIATURE FRIEZE OF THE WEST HOUSE
One of the images of Aegean iconography that remains enigmatic is the structure depicted on the south wall of the miniature frieze that decorated the upper register of the walls in Room 5 on the upper floor of the West House, a private building in the Late Cycladic Ι/Late Minoan ΙΑ settlement at Akrotiri on Thera (Morgan Reference Morgan1988, 71, 85 no. 33, pls 101, 102 no. 33, col. pl. C; Doumas Reference Doumas1992a, 70 fig. 35, 78–9 fig. 38; Televantou Reference Televantou1994, 112–13 Κ8, 274 folded col. pl. 4, folded drawing 3; Figs 1, 2). The voyage depicted in the miniature fresco, featuring the fleet sailing from four cities, has a celebratory conclusion which is ‘narrated’ by the artist on the south wall.Footnote 1 The ships of the fleet, decorated for the occasion, are depicted on the south wall approaching the coastal City V (Arrival Town), which, as has been convincingly argued, represents the settlement of Akrotiri in abbreviated form.Footnote 2 To the west of the city, at the top of the second hill, a tripartite building is depicted (Morgan Reference Morgan1988, 71 nos 30–2, 78–9, 161, pls 101, 102 nos 30–32, col. pl. C; Televantou Reference Televantou1994, 112–13 K9, 274, col. pl. 66, folded col. pl. 4, folded drawing 3; Figs 1, 2). Three male figures wearing white loincloths are running towards it, while two others, in this instance naked, are seen running in the direction of the city (Morgan Reference Morgan1988, 116 pl. 101; Televantou Reference Televantou1994, 113 A256–A260, 216, col. pls 66–7, folded col. pl. 4, folded drawing 3; see also Boulotis Reference Boulotis, Carinci, Cucuzza, Militello and Palio2011, 263–4 fig. 5). Four men clad in animal skins appear to be waiting for them (Televantou Reference Televantou1994, 117 A284–A287, 215–16 fig. 48, pl. 46β, folded col. pl. 4, folded drawing 3). On the shoreline of the second little bay to the west, i.e. on the slope of the hill with the building on top, there seems to be a strange architectural construction, as yet of unknown function (although various theories have periodically been put forward from time to time; see below). With a view to re-examining this structure I shall first give a detailed description of it, based on first-hand study of this part of the wall painting.
Fig. 1. The ‘Flotilla Wall Painting’ from the south wall of Room 5, West House, Akrotiri (Akrotiri Excavations, Photographic Archive).
Fig. 2. Detail of the ‘Flotilla Wall Painting’ with the structure on the west of the City V and (highlighted) the outlines of the road/path connecting the City V with the building on the top of the hill (Akrotiri Excavations, Photographic Archive).
The structure, which covers almost the whole of one side of the hill, with a length of 16 cm and a height of 8.5 cm, is painted all over in a pinkish-brown colour that matches the surrounding landscape (Figs 1, 2, 3, 4). It is bounded to the west by two narrow, vertical, bands of a bluish hue outlined with a thin black line and with other fine black, horizontal and parallel lines. This is a well-known convention in Aegean Bronze Age wall painting for representing a stone-built wall with two courses of masonry. A horizontal band of bluish colour is joined to the upper edge of these two bands, extending to the right with traces of oblique black lines where the plaster is preserved. Above and below this, over the pinkish-brown painted surface, a series of black triangles are depicted, arranged at more or less regular intervals. Further below there are another three bluish horizontal bands, upon the second and third of which (i.e. the bottom band and the one above it) can be seen fine black vertical and oblique lines, perhaps another indicator of masonry construction (Figs 3, 4). Alternating with the blue bands are five series of black triangles. The bottom series of triangles is very close to the shoreline. Above the uppermost triangles there is a horizontal wavy black line, which adjoins a blue rocky mass on the left and yet has nothing to do with the vertical western edge of the enigmatic structure, the upper part of which is some distance from the wavy line. It is worth noting that the vast majority of the surviving triangles that appear on the pinkish-brown background do not touch the outlines of the horizontal blue bands. Furthermore, at some points black triangles are painted upon the horizontal blue bands or slightly overlap their outlines (Figs 3, 4). Starting at the top, in the first register there are seven fully preserved triangular features and parts of two more; nine fully preserved and part of one more in the second; eight fully preserved and parts of two more in the third; eight fully preserved and parts of two more in the fourth; and four in the fifth, almost at the shoreline. Again, from the top, there are three fully preserved triangles in the first blue horizontal band, three in the third and one in the fourth.
Fig. 3. Detail of the ‘structure’ on the west of the City V (Akrotiri Excavations, Photographic Archive).
Fig. 4. Drawing of the ‘structure’ and its surroundings with the road/path and the pond (drawing by D. Stampolis).
It is striking that all the extant black triangles have an opening at their bases. This opening is rounded, sometimes small, sometimes large, but nevertheless always there, so that the only explanation must be that it is intentional (Figs 3, 4). It should be noted that on the eastern side there is absolutely nothing to suggest the limits of the building.
PROPOSED INTERPRETATIONS OF THE ‘STRUCTURE’ AND THEIR RECONSIDERATION
This structure takes up a lot of space, being disproportionately large compared with the adjacent buildings depicted there in the coastal settlement. This sort of size does not correspond to a dovecote, a suggestion put forward by S. Marinatos (Reference Marinatos1974, 43), who was perhaps influenced by the similarities of the triangular features to the three-sided openings on modern dovecotes in the Cyclades. And this theory is all the less convincing given that this structure is open on one side. Its situation immediately above the shoreline later led to the theory that it was a building with some maritime connection, and more specifically a shipshed (Stucchi Reference Stucchi1976, 39, fig. 13a–b, pl. V.2; see also Benzi Reference Benzi1977, 11), though that would undoubtedly need some sort of entrance way or entrance ways, which definitely do not exist here.Footnote 3 If the identification of the low building on the shoreline of the City II in the miniature frieze with a shipshed is correct (and this hypothesis is strengthened by the architecture of the shipsheds that have been excavated on Crete),Footnote 4 then it should have three openings in its facade (Shaw, M.C. Reference Shaw, Shaw and Shaw1985, 23 pl. IIIb). Nevertheless, the absence of a boundary wall on the east side of the construction tends to undermine any suggestion that it should be identified with a shipshed or even a warehouse (Giesecke Reference Giesecke1983, 127). Where scholars have taken this approach, the triangular elements have been interpreted as openings for ventilating the space, which is assumed to be enclosed. The suggestion, briefly made but not elaborated by Page (Reference Page1976, 144), that the triangles might be beehives set upon a series of terrace walls, has found almost no supporters (exceptionally see Shaw, J.W. Reference Shaw1990, 433, ‘a very attractive suggestion’).
As Morgan (Reference Morgan1988, 85) and Televantou (Reference Televantou1994, 112–13) have noted, the pinkish-brown colour given to the structure is reminiscent of the rocky landscape that surrounds the scene, and is used by Theran artists to depict the various shades of the rocks or massifs and is not found in buildings. The exceptional nature of this construction and the lack of iconographic parallels in Aegean art of the second millennium bce encouraged Televantou to characterise it as a peculiar building carved out of the rock that was problematic to interpret (Televantou Reference Televantou1994, 274; see also Alexiou Reference Alexiou, Macdonald, Hatzaki and Andreou2015, 155). According to Morgan (Reference Morgan1988, 85) it is a rock-cut structure built into the vertical face of a cliff. Indeed, in looking for parallels in Islamic fortified storage buildings in North Africa or later limestone caves in Palestine, she identifies the triangular shapes as places for storing salt or grain, as domed spaces suitable for practising some religious cult, or for industry or similar (Morgan Reference Morgan1988, 85, 195 nn. 160–1). Yet their regularity and the way they are lined up in straight horizontal lines is not consistent with the untidy arrangement that niches created in a building cut into the rock would be likely to present. We should also take into account the difficulty in this period of carving triangular niches in a rock face, in which rectangular or bell-shaped ones would be more usually cut (we might compare also the niches hewn from the rock in the later open-air sanctuaries of Aphrodite at Daphni and on the northern slope of the Acropolis: Machaira Reference Machaira2008, 20–2 fig. 9, pls 6α, 7, 8α, 41–5α). Moreover, the building's close proximity to the sea and the damp sea air would not create the right conditions for storing foodstuffs. The four horizontal blue bands are thought by the same scholar to be ‘wooden struts, which supported the structure from possible collapse (caused by the weakening effect of the openings)’ and which may have facilitated the ascent to the building ‘as a form of ladder for reaching the storage units’ (Morgan Reference Morgan1988, 85).
What remains unexplained in all these approaches is the lack of an external boundary on the east side. Even if we accept that the masonry on the western edge was intended to prop up the building, we would expect to find something similar on the other side too. The bands of blue are bounded at the top and the bottom by fine black lines that form an outline and it is difficult to accept that blue would be used to depict wood, when Theran painters used yellow ochre. They often used blue to render grey, i.e. the colour of stone. However, if we suppose that the blue bands depict stone struts, they would still be problematic to account for in a rock-cut structure.
Most recently, Strasser and Chapin (Reference Strasser and Chapin2014) suggest that the structure represents geological formations in the Theran volcanic landscape. They suggest that the black triangles may represent tafoni (small cave-like features in rock surfaces caused by weathering), whereas the vertical blue bands on the west side could be depicting volcanic dikes (fractures in the rock that once served as pathways for pressurised lava rising from the magma chamber) which resemble columns or pillars of rock. Apart from the fact that Strasser and Chapin fail to interpret the five horizontal blue bands of the structure – a significant feature – it should also be noted that in nature tafoni do not, unlike the black triangles in the fresco, form regular patterns. Nor do they have the same regular shape or a curved bottom. Furthermore, this suggestion does not account for the sparsity of black triangles on the blue surface of the horizontal bands. For the same reasons the identification of the triangles as caves in Vlachopoulos and Zorzos (Reference Vlachopoulos and Zorzos2014, 192) is not convincing either. It is relevant also to take into account that dikes are usually formed in steep cliffs. The hillside in the wall painting gives the impression that it has a gentle slope, as we may deduce from the fishermen walking up carrying paddles on their shoulders with nets full of their catch (Figs 1, 2).
The suggestion – one only briefly sketched – that the four horizontal blue bands possibly represent terrace walls (Harfouche Reference Harfouche2007, 153; Watrous Reference Watrous2012, 538) conforms more closely to the strict iconographic content of the scene (see also Vocotopoulos, Plath and McCoy Reference Vokotopoulos, Plath and McCoy2014, 254 n. 16, who are undecided between this last proposal and the view of Strasser and Chapin, Reference Strasser and Chapin2014). According to Vocotopoulos, Plath and McCoy (Reference Vokotopoulos, Plath and McCoy2014, 254 n. 16) the black triangles are meant to render young shoots or haystacks, whereas according to Watrous (Reference Watrous2012, 538) they represent vines.
A NEW PROPOSAL
Detecting the road that connected City V with the ‘structure’
In attempting to understand just what the enigmatic structure to the west of City V represents, the first thing we must note is the existence of a blue band, which starts from the area of the settlement just behind the place where an altar crowned with horns of consecration is depicted (Televantou Reference Televantou1994, 115–16, 268–70 fig. 58α, col. pl. 67) or, according to another version, an urban shrine.Footnote 5 The band curves around the place where the male figures wearing animal skin cloaks are standing and goes straight on to the tripartite building at the top of the hill, where it would stop (Figs 1, 2). This band, with a width varying between 1 and 1.6 cm, on which five male figures are depicted as running, can only represent a road (for Minoan roads see Tzedakis et al. Reference Tzedakis, Chryssoulaki, Voutsaki and Venieri1989; Müller Reference Müller1991; Warren Reference Warren, Eveley, Hughes-Brock and Momigliano1994). There is no trace anywhere in this band of the black lines that would suggest paving.Footnote 6 Since it is usually accepted that City V in the Miniature Wall Painting depicts the city of Akrotiri, it is interesting to note that the second harbour to the west of the city in the fresco has been identified as the valley of Hagios Nikolaos between Mesovouna Hill and the Cape Mavro Rachidi to the south-west of the ancient settlement, which starts from the sea and tapers off until it reaches the modern village (Figs 5, 6; Doumas Reference Doumas1983, 55; Marinatos, N. Reference Marinatos1984, 42; Morgan Reference Morgan1988, 161–2; Shaw, J.W. Reference Shaw1990, 432–3 figs 18–19, 21; Doumas Reference Doumas1992a, 49; Televantou Reference Televantou1994, 336–7).Footnote 7 Regardless of the location of the first harbour to the west of the settlement, the second one was most probably in the valley of Hagios Nikolaos (Fig. 6), as the outlines of the hills bordering the harbour where the fleet is arriving have been recognised as the range of hills of Mavro Rachidi (Doumas Reference Doumas1992b, 25; Palyvou Reference Palyvou2005b, 22–3 fig. 22; Doumas Reference Doumas2014a). In addition to that, the slope of Mavro Rachidi is approached through a natural cleft in the volcanic rock that creates a path to the summit of the hill (Doumas Reference Doumas1992b, 25; 2014a, 143), which could be convincingly identified with the blue band in the wall painting. In any case it is worth noting that in the area to the west of the settlement, above the chapel of Hagios Nikolaos and around Mount Loumarades, where, in the absence of volcanic deposits, the pre-eruption landscape of Santorini has been preserved, there are impressive topographical similarities with this specific part of the Miniature Wall Painting (Marinatos, S. Reference Marinatos1969, 34–5; Morgan Reference Morgan1988, 161–2; Doumas Reference Doumas1992b, 24–6; 2014a, 142–3). However, careful observation of the route of the road in the fresco suggests something extraordinarily interesting, namely that the last remaining part of the road cuts through the upper right corner of the mystery structure (Figs 1, 2, 4), the roof of which is thought to be delineated by the black wavy line at its upper edge, if indeed this was the facade of a roofed building. There are two possibilities: either that the painter made a mistake, which does not seem likely given that he had sufficient space to reduce the height of the ‘building’, or that we should not see the ‘building’ as being depicted in a frontal view. At this point we must emphasise that this particular painter uses the black wavy line in other places within the miniature fresco in order to show the edges of the rocky landscape, where it exists (Televantou Reference Televantou1994, col. pls 54–6). So, if we remove the element of the roof, we are left with a ‘building’ of pinkish-brown colour, exactly the same as the colour used to depict its surroundings, with black triangles on its facade and on top, though the latter do not touch the upper black line, as one would expect.
Fig. 5. Akrotiri area plan, indicating the suggested location of Bronze Age harbour (after Doumas Reference Doumas1983, fig. 2).
Fig. 6. The valley of Hagios Nikolaos seen from the north (photo: C. Palyvou).
Discussing perspective issues
These observations and the special characteristics of the structure – the lack of a vertical edge on the eastern side, absence of a roof, triangular features with arched openings at their bases lined up at more or less regular intervals, presence of horizontal courses of masonry and the existence of a road/path that cuts through the upper right-hand corner – inevitably lead us to a different interpretation. In order to proceed, we shall focus upon the rules of perspective that the painter was using to depict particular iconographic motifs, rules that were also being used in Minoan Crete in this same period.
For anything to do with bodies of water or specific architectural structures, the depiction of which called for the use of a system of perspective, the artist represented them as if seen from above, like a ground plan. This can be observed, for example, with the sea, the rivers in Cities ΙΙΙ and IV on the east and south walls, the road mentioned above, the well (Televantou Reference Televantou1994, 70 K3, 273 col. pl. 35, folded drawing 1), the little enclosure with the two trees inside (Televantou Reference Televantou1994, 71 K4, 273 col. pl. 35) and possibly also the ashlar wall surrounding a building in City II on the north wall (Televantou Reference Televantou1994, 274). Alongside them he paints trees, animals and people in frontal view, using a perspectival approach that combines a frontal view with a bird's-eye view (also known as cavalier perspective); to depict depth he superimposes forms and figures that are supposed to be one behind the other,Footnote 8 sometimes depicting those elements intended to be further away at a smaller scale in an attempt at perspectival diminution (Blakolmer Reference Blakolmer, Blakolmer, Krierer, Krinzinger, Landskron-Dinstl, Szemethy and Zhuber-Okrog1996).
The combination of the bird's-eye view with other methods, such as the frontal view, is considered an Aegean characteristic that influenced Egyptian art (Walberg Reference Walberg1986, 116–38, esp. 136–8; Laffineur Reference Laffineur1990; Betancourt Reference Betancourt2000, 359–63; Bietak Reference Bietak2000, 230–3) and is also seen in the scene on the Late Minoan ΙΒ ‘Peak Sanctuary’ relief rhyton found in the palace at Zakros (Platon, N. Reference Platon1971, 161–9; Shaw, J.W. Reference Shaw1978, 432–40 figs 5–9; Platon, L. Reference Platon2003, 342, fig. 4). In this case the side walls of the enclosure of the sanctuary are depicted in an overhead view as vertical, rectangular, bands. Although, according to the usual (i.e. linear) perspective, they appear to depict pillars supporting the sanctuary depicted above them, in reality they correspond to the upper part of the cornices on the walls (Shaw, J.W. Reference Shaw1978, 435). In this same image the flight of steps leading up to the entrance to the sanctuary is depicted using a series of horizontal parallel lines, and on the first step we see a portable altar shown in frontal view (Shaw, J.W. Reference Shaw1978, figs 7–9). This is exactly how the steps in the Temple Fresco from Knossos are depicted, in front of which are columns viewed frontally (Evans Reference Evans1930, 63–4 n. 1 figs 28, 36, col. pl. XVI, who interprets the steps as a depiction of ‘masonry’; Davis Reference Davis, Hägg and Marinatos1987, 159–60; Evely Reference Evely1999, 194–6 no. 22). A combination of a ‘ground-plan’ view (i.e. a bird's-eye view) with frontal depiction of subjects is found also in a number of broadly contemporary compositions: those in the House of the Frescoes at Knossos (Cameron Reference Cameron1968; Chapin and Shaw Reference Chapin and Shaw2006), in the Late Minoan I miniature fresco of the ‘Sacred Grove and Dance’ with the bird's-eye view of the causeways or walkways and the space in which the moving women are depicted (Evans Reference Evans1930, 66–7 col. pl. XVIII; Davis Reference Davis, Hägg and Marinatos1987, 157; Hood Reference Hood2005, 63–4 no. 6, fig. 2.12, pl. 10.2), and in the Late Minoan ΙΒ composition from Avaris with the bullfighting contest against the background of a maze pattern (probably rendering the pavement of a court: Bietak Reference Bietak, Bietak, Marinatos and Palyvou2007), and on the Late Helladic I dagger from the Mycenae Shaft Grave V (Marinatos and Hirmer Reference Marinatos and Hirmer1960, pls XXXV, top; XXXVIII, bottom).
Identifying an apiary
If in our reading of the structure in the miniature fresco we bear in mind the iconographical convention according to which the viewer is intended to see the image as if he were in mid-air and looking down on masonry structures with a bird's-eye view, then it appears to depict a large plot of land with a built boundary on the west side and some other horizontal built areas adjacent to a road, which almost runs right into it. In other words, there emerges a depiction of a stretch of land with terraces, i.e. small, horizontal patches of land, retained by dry-stone walls, similar to those found around Minoan urban centres indicating intensive exploitation of the countryside from the Middle Minoan Period onwards (Vokotopoulos, Plath and McCoy Reference Vokotopoulos, Plath and McCoy2014, 251 nn. 2–3 with bibliography). They are similar also to the terrace walls still constructed in the Aegean islands today on the sides of hills or mountains to facilitate cultivation and to exploit the small amount of cultivatable soil as efficiently as possible (Fig. 7). The western masonry boundary that corresponds to a dry-stone wall with two courses would undoubtedly have protected the crops from strong winds. Indeed, if this part of the fresco has been correctly identified as representing the slopes of Mavro Rachidi, it is interesting to note how appropriate a well-built western wall would have been against the strong south-west winds that today blow in this area from the end of summer throughout the autumn and winter.
Fig. 7. A possible reconstruction of the apiary on the west of City V (drawing by D. Stampolis).
The shape of the black triangular features is initially reminiscent of the triangular projections that appear on the tops of buildings both on seals (Müller and Pini Reference Müller and Pini1998, 239; Hallager Reference Hallager1985, 19–20, figs 10–11, 15–17) and in wall paintings of the period, such as the Miniature Wall Painting from AkrotiriFootnote 9 and the composition that decorated the northern room (N.18) in the north-east bastion of the city in Ayia Irini on Kea (Morgan Reference Morgan, Mendoni and Mazarakis Ainian1998, 203 figs 4–5).Footnote 10 They nevertheless differ from them inasmuch as they are not drawn with the same care, and their outline is not completely triangular, as would happen if they were, in fact, architectural features: the sides of some of them are more curved and of others less so; but they are distinct also as regards the arched openings at the base. Seen face on, in accordance with the usual rules of perspective employed here, they present a shape that we could call a triangle with curved sides and a base in the shape of an omega (Ω). These forms that are seen placed on terraces show very close similarities with woven beehives (known as ‘skeps’), made from reeds or twigs, which have a small opening near their base for the bees to come and go (Figs 8, 9, 10). In other words, they are most probably a representation of the upright pointed baskets (epistomo kofini [open at the bottom]), called ‘fixed-comb’ hives, a traditional type of beehive made using basket-weaving techniques (Crane Reference Crane1983, 99–111 figs 105–9; Crane Reference Crane1999, 219–21 fig. 25.4b, 238–57; Beloyianni Reference Beloyianni2007, 72 fig. 33). They range in height from 50 to 75 cm and the diameter of the opening can be between 25 and 40 cm (Crane Reference Crane1999, 221). Woven baskets of this type continued to be used until relatively recently throughout mainland Greece, on Andros and in some islands of the Northern Aegean (Anagnostopoulos Reference Anagnostopoulos2000, 301–2, fig. 6; Mavrofrydis and Chatzina Reference Mavrofrydis and Chatzina2015, 21 with fig.), and are still used today, mostly in northern Greece. Since they are coated with clay or cow dung or a mixture of the two to insulate them, keeping the inside of the hive at a stable temperature, they acquire a dark-brown appearance on the outside, here depicted in black (Figs 3, 8). Though this particular type of hive is considered primitive, it nevertheless ensures ease of transportation for transhumant beekeeping: they are lighter than ceramic hives, and maintain more stable interior temperature levels (Crane Reference Crane1999, 219). Roman agricultural writers – a key source of our knowledge on ancient systematic beekeeping, since we lack similar sources from ancient Greece – also count the large temperature fluctuations inside the ceramic hives among their disadvantages (Varro 3.16.15–16; Columella 9.6.1–2; cf. also Fraser Reference Fraser1951, 54). Although the earliest written mention of wicker hives goes back to the Roman period,Footnote 11 their presence in the prehistoric Aegean, though not to date attested iconographically,Footnote 12 has long been suspected, mainly on the basis of common sense but also because of the general conservatism seen in traditional husbandry (Davis Reference Davis, Jameson, Runnels and Andel1996, 461; Harissis and Harissis Reference Harissis and Harissis2009, 60–1 fig. 52; D'Agata and De Angelis Reference D'Agata and De Angelis2014, 355; Triantafyllidis Reference Triantafyllidis2014, 469). In this context Paul Faure suggested reading the ideogram *179, a hapax which appears on the linear B tablet Kn U 96 accompanied by a numeric, as a wicker beehive (Fig. 11).Footnote 13 Although this reading was considered likely, it has not been discussed further for lack of any related archaeological material (Vandenabeele and Olivier Reference Vandenabeele and Olivier1979, 287). In any case, it is interesting that the ideogram depicts a conical object with what are clearly curved sides and an open base, features that are also found in the hives of the apiary in the miniature frieze. The double lines that form its sides and the three parallel horizontal lines on the body may indicate its wicker construction.
Fig. 8. A woven skep from Andros island (after Beloyianni Reference Beloyianni2007, fig. 33.1).
Fig. 9. A woven skep from Macedonia (after Crane Reference Crane1999, fig. 25.4b).
Fig. 10. A Pomak woven skep from northern Greece (photo: The Roma Basketry Museum, Komotini).
Fig. 11. The ideogram *179 (after Vandenabeele and Olivier Reference Vandenabeele and Olivier1979, pl. CXLVI:2).
Bolstering this view that we are dealing with an apiary (Fig. 7), is the blue, virtually trapezoidal-shaped mass seen to the east of the area in question, not attested in any of the known drawings of the frieze and consistently left out of the discussion on the identity of the mysterious structure (Figs 1, 2, 4, 7). The way in which it has been depicted is quite different from the approach used for the rocks in the Theran frescoes and in Minoan art in general. They have strong dark outlines and, also outlined, oval or triangular areas on the inside, variously depicted in yellow, red or blue. In this case these characteristics are absent, as the blue area, despite some losses of plaster here and there, seems to have an irregular, trapezoidal shape and a very faint outline. The colour infill added in the restoration has somewhat changed the original picture, as it has applied some blue to the upper right of this area. Indeed, this overpainting covers part of the area in which a segment of the road/path may have once been depicted. Given that it is well known that there must be natural or artificial sources of fresh water near apiaries, it is logical to suppose that what is depicted here in bird's-eye view is a pond for collecting rainwater or surface water, essential not only to beekeeping (Columella 9.5.5; Varro 3.16.27; cf. also Fraser Reference Fraser1951, 55; Crane Reference Crane1999, 206, 312, 562, 564) but also to agriculture, livestock and possibly the activities hosted in the building on the top of the hill (for water management systems in Minoan Crete see Betancourt Reference Betancourt2012; Vokotopoulos, Plath and McCoy Reference Vokotopoulos, Plath and McCoy2014, esp. 255–61). The relatively large dimensions of the pond could lead us to assume that its waters may have been employed to irrigate the terraced area, if this was initially used for agriculture before serving as an apiary.
It is also common practice in beekeeping to erect a wall to windward in order to protect the apiary from strong winds. Indeed, sometimes the colony is protected by walled enclosures with well-finished outer and inner sides (Columella 9.7.1; cf. also Fraser Reference Fraser1951, 55; Rackham-Moody Reference Rackham and Moody1996, 152 and fig. 12.9; Crane Reference Crane1999, 323–5; Blitzer Reference Blitzer, Watrous, Hadzi-Vallianou and Blitzer2004, 162 figs 6.44–5). Siting apiaries near to the sea is commonplace in areas with little vegetation in the dry heat of the Cycladic islands. Even now, in those Cycladic islands where beekeeping is practised, a colony of bees is often found next to the sea, where various bee-friendly plants, above all thyme, make it possible to produce honey of an exceptionally high quality (Fig. 12). And it is worth noting that the best-quality thyme honey is produced from the harvesting of coastal rather than mountain thyme – mainly because of the wet conditions that prevail by the sea, which also explains the presence of so many apiaries near the sea on the hot, dry islands of the Aegean (Giorgos Mavroyiannis, pers. comm.). Moreover, the fact that the temperature by the sea does not drop to very low levels in the winter allows beekeepers in many places with abundant vegetation to move their bees from mountain sites to somewhere at sea level sheltered from the wind towards the end of the autumn. We cannot know whether the apiary in Akrotiri, if my reading is correct, sited in a place sheltered at least from the north and south-west winds, was a seasonal or a permanent installation. However, recent data from charcoal analysis and archaeobotanical research based on phytolith evidence, suggests that near the area of the settlement there must have been forested areas with pines and oaks as well, of course, as large stretches of shrubs and maquis (Vlachopoulos and Zorzos Reference Vlachopoulos and Zorzos2014, 186–9). The more humid climate of the island before the eruption would have certainly encouraged the growth of vegetation. Bearing this in mind, we cannot exclude the possibility that beekeeping was practised in the spring and summer months in areas with abundant vegetation and that towards the end of the autumn the hives would be moved to a coastal area, where they would stay throughout the winter, during which period the bees would need very little food but at least a constant supply of fresh water.Footnote 14 In addition to all this, the siting of the beekeeping establishment in relation to the settlement at City V also fulfils other essential requirements that still apply today: while it is situated at a considerable distance from any inhabited area, there is an access route and the hives are oriented east or south-east.
Fig. 12. A modern apiary near the shoreline at Lefkes, on the northern part of Amorgos island (photo: Y. Kastanos).
Compared with the area of the settlement itself, the area occupied by the apiary is particularly large, and an estimate of the original number of hives depicted (approximately 67, including those that could have been depicted in parts of the fresco from the areas that have not survived) would not, of course, correspond to their actual number. But this extensive installation suggests an undoubtedly thriving beekeeping industry, which apart from meeting the settlement's needs in terms of honey and wax, would also probably have contributed significantly to its economy. And, of course, this is without allowing for the probability that there were other apiaries in other spots near the city.
If this is how things stood and the proposed identification is correct, then we can claim the earliest – and to date the only – depiction of an apiary in the Aegean of the second millennium bce, a unique topographical witness to the organised and intensive practice of beekeeping in the coastal settlement of City V. Moreover, it highlights the use of the vertical-type, wicker or woven beehives in the second millennium bce, something which could not have been deduced using material remains on account of their perishable nature. Though this theory has been proposed before, no iconographical evidence had hitherto been identified.
EVIDENCE OF BEEKEEPING IN THE PREHISTORIC AEGEAN
Identification of wax as sealant and illuminant; assuming the existence of honey
The iconography of prehistoric rock-art suggests that honey has been gathered in the Mediterranean from at least as early as the Mesolithic period (Crane Reference Crane1999, 36–7, 43–4 figs 7.1a–b; Roffet-Salque et al. Reference Roffet-Salque, Regert, Evershed, Outram, Cramp, Decavallas, Dunne, Gerbault, Mileto, Mirabaud, Pääkkönen, Smyth, Šoberl, Whelton, Alday-Ruiz, Asplund, Bartkowiak, Bayer-Niemeier, Belhouchet, Bernardini, Budja, Cooney, Cubas, Danaher, Diniz, Domboróczki, Fabbri, González-Urquijo, Guilaine, Hachi, Hartwell, Hofmann, Hohle, Ibánez, Karul, Kherbouche, Kiely, Kotsakis, Lueth, Mallory, Manen, Marciniak, Maurice-Chabard, MacGonigle, Mulazzani, Özdoğan, Perić, Perić, Petrasch, Pétrequin, Pétrequin, Poensgen, Pollard, Poplin, Radi, Stadler, Stäuble, Tasić, Urem-Kotsou, Vuković, Walsh, Whittle, Wolfram, Zapata-Pena and Zoughlami2015, 226 and nn. 2–3). The exploitation of the produce of bees is attested for the first time in the Aegean in the Neolithic period, suggested by the traces of wax identified by organic residue analysis on Middle and Late Neolithic perforated sherds from the settlements of Limenaria, Thassos and Dikili Tash in Eastern Macedonia; this residue was perhaps left behind after filtration of the honey, which may or may not have come from wild honeycombs (Decavallas Reference Decavallas, Mee and Renard2007; see also Renfrew Reference Renfrew2011, 287). Recent analyses have confirmed the presence of beeswax in Neolithic sherds from Attica, the Peloponnese and also the Cyclades (Roffet-Salque et al. Reference Roffet-Salque, Regert, Evershed, Outram, Cramp, Decavallas, Dunne, Gerbault, Mileto, Mirabaud, Pääkkönen, Smyth, Šoberl, Whelton, Alday-Ruiz, Asplund, Bartkowiak, Bayer-Niemeier, Belhouchet, Bernardini, Budja, Cooney, Cubas, Danaher, Diniz, Domboróczki, Fabbri, González-Urquijo, Guilaine, Hachi, Hartwell, Hofmann, Hohle, Ibánez, Karul, Kherbouche, Kiely, Kotsakis, Lueth, Mallory, Manen, Marciniak, Maurice-Chabard, MacGonigle, Mulazzani, Özdoğan, Perić, Perić, Petrasch, Pétrequin, Pétrequin, Poensgen, Pollard, Poplin, Radi, Stadler, Stäuble, Tasić, Urem-Kotsou, Vuković, Walsh, Whittle, Wolfram, Zapata-Pena and Zoughlami2015, 228).
The only indication to date of the existence of organised beekeeping in Akrotiri lies in the traces of wax identified by organic lipid analysis on the inside of sherds from storage jars, in which goods in liquid form were kept, probably wine (Karnava and Nikolakopoulou Reference Karnava and Nikolakopoulou2005, 224; Doumas Reference Doumas2014b, 42). The use of wax as a sealant on the inside of jars has also been confirmed in Middle Minoan III – Late Μinoan Ι Crete (Christakis Reference Christakis2005, 52; Christakis and Rethemiotakis Reference Christakis and Rethemiotakis2011, 180–2), while chemical analysis of the inside of lamps and handleless conical cups that had been used as lamps in Late Minoan Ι Mochlos showed signs also of its use as an illuminant (Evershed et al. Reference Evershed, Vaughan, Dudd and Soles1997). This practice could be considered to be in use at least from the Middle Minoan or even Early Minoan period, as indicated by the results of analysis of an Early Minoan – Middle Minoan II rim sherd of a lamp from Pseira (Beck et al. Reference Beck, Stout, Wovkulich and Phillips2008, 62, 72). Its likely uses in shipping and in other sectors of technology, like vessel burnishing, sealing and other uses (Decavallas Reference Decavallas, Mee and Renard2007, 154 with collected bibliography) are to be added to its self-evident presence in the technique of lost-wax casting, known in the Aegean from as early as the Early Bronze Age (Bernabò-Brea Reference Bernabò-Brea1964, 64, 591 pl. 85d; Branigan Reference Branigan1974, 82 fig. 4; Davay Reference Davay, Mei and Rehren2009, 147, 151).
The identification, through chemical analysis, of a mixture of fermented liquids (resinated wine and barley beer) that may have contained honey mead,Footnote 15 not only on the inside of Late Minoan ΙΑ handleless conical cups from Chania-Splanzia,Footnote 16 but also inside Late Minoan ΙΙΙA2–Β vessels from the cemetery at ArmenoiFootnote 17 or in a Late Minoan ΙΙΙC cooking vessel from Chamalevri (Tzedakis and Martlew Reference Tzedakis and Martlew1999, 170 no. 161 [M. Andreadaki-Vlazaki]; MacGovern et al. Reference MacGovern, Glusker, Exner and Hall2008, 176, 195) suggests that honey was used throughout the Late Bronze Age, not only as food and as a natural source of sugar and a foodstuff with a high nutritional index, but also in rituals, as the written sources of the historical period clearly convey (Weilhartner Reference Weilhartner2003, 46–7). The fact that it may have been mixed with wine undoubtedly recalls the documentary evidence from Mycenaean Pylos, where one of the sealings from the Wine Magazine may record wine treated with honey (Aura Jorro Reference Aura Jorro1985, 440–1 s.v. meritijo; Bendall Reference Bendall2007, 150).
In addition to all this it seems that from as far back as the Old Palace period, if not before, honey had gained a place in the Cretans' perceptions of the afterlife and the myths that sprang up around them, as the unique clay model of a boat with a honeycomb in the hull, presumably from a tomb in the environs of the Hodegetria Monastery, Asterousia, seems to suggest (Davaras Reference Davaras1984; Reference Davaras and Marangou1992). It may also be suggested by the famous early Middle Minoan gold pendant from a richly endowed tomb at Chrysolakkos, Malia, with the very abbreviated depiction of the cycle of production of honey.Footnote 18
Clay beehives and tools related to beekeeping
Suggestions have been made about the use of clay vessels with holes under the lip as beehives both for the Neolithic Argolid (Vitelli Reference Vitelli1993, 187 and n. 6) and for Early Bronze Age Attica (Liaros Reference Liaros2003, 239–40), though these have not been taken into consideration in later discussions. The theory that there may have been clay beehives on Minoan Crete was expounded on the basis of the convincing identification of ideogram *168 with a clay, ‘pipe-like’ horizontal-style beehive by Davaras (Reference Davaras1986). Indeed, all over Crete and on the islands of Antikythera, Kasos, Karpathos and Rhodes numerous parts and fragments of clay beehives have come to light, most probably of a horizontal type and all undecorated (Melas Reference Melas, Betancourt, Karageorghis, Laffineur and Niemeier1999; D'Agata and De Angelis Reference D'Agata and De Angelis2014), which confirm the practice of organised beekeeping, though at present there exists no confirmation of their use from chemical analysis and they do not seem to have been depicted in Minoan art.Footnote 19 They are coarse vessels, cylindrical or truncated cone-shaped in form, with horizontal or vertical handles and a flat base, dated to the third or second millennium bce and not very different from the horizontal type of pottery beehives, which have been identified in sites of the historic period in Greece (Lüdorf Reference Lüdorf1998–9, 71–6; D'Agata and De Angelis Reference D'Agata and De Angelis2014, 350–1 nn. 8–9 with extensive bibliography; Triantafyllidis Reference Triantafyllidis2014). They all have incisions on the middle and lower part of their inside walls, mostly criss-crossed diagonally but in a few cases simple oblique lines and impressed spirals on the inside of the bottom (D'Agata and De Angelis Reference D'Agata and De Angelis2014, 352). According to a very recent opinion, these distinctive characteristics recall the structure of the corresponding wicker beehives (D'Agata and De Angelis Reference D'Agata and De Angelis2014, 351–2), the use of which has been proposed from as far back as the prehistoric period in the Peloponnese too (another place where there is no sign of ceramics with incised marks on the inside that are so characteristic of beehives: Davis Reference Davis, Jameson, Runnels and Andel1996, 461), as well as in Crete after the Late Minoan ΙΒ period when examples of clay beehives are rare (D'Agata and De Angelis Reference D'Agata and De Angelis2014, 355). In any case, nothing precludes wicker beehives having been in use in Crete at the same time as the clay ones and before the Late Minoan IB, a suggestion supported by the small number of sherds identified to date, a number that is disproportionately low in relation to the size of the island.Footnote 20 And the same has been alleged for beekeeping in the historic period too, when horizontal-type clay beehives abound, whereas the vertical sort – that may have been represented by wicker beehives – is rare (Triantafyllidis Reference Triantafyllidis2014, 469). Indeed, given that wicker beehives are made with materials found in abundance in these particular areas (Anagnostopoulos Reference Anagnostopoulos2000, 301–2), it is logical that they would have been used in Late Cycladic Akrotiri too, where basket weaving apparently had a long tradition and the osier and the reed were endemic (Beloyianni Reference Beloyianni2007; Beloyianni Reference Beloyianni2008, esp. 201).Footnote 21
At this point the identification of two cylindrical clay vessels decorated with painted plant motifs from Akrotiri as beehives should be noted (Doumas Reference Doumas1976, 309–10 fig. 1, 556, pl. 284β; 1983, 118 fig. 19; 2014b, 42 fig. 38a–b). These vessels have open bases, perforated bottoms and a four-sided opening between bottom and base with a removable, clay lid. The proposed identification is untenable for the following reasons: the size of the opening, which would have allowed rodents and other small animals to get in, and the lavish painted decoration (with crocuses and spirals) which would be unsuited to the intended function of the vessels and their permanent exposure to the elements. Moreover, this sort of vessel shows no similarity to any of the types of clay beehive known to date (Aravantinos Reference Aravantinos1985, 25; Crane and Graham Reference Crane and Graham1985, 30), nor does it have any incisions on its inside walls, a sure sign that a clay vessel can be identified as a beehive (see above). Furthermore, no such marks have been found on the insides of any of the ceramics found to date in Akrotiri (Irini Nikolakopoulou, pers. comm.), which may indicate the absence of clay beehives in the settlement. Even the two clay vase-shaped rhytons with conical tops from Xeste 3, which were once thought to be miniature beehives (Marinatos, S. Reference Marinatos1976, 30–1 pl. 52c; Doumas Reference Doumas2014b, 42 fig. 38c) and which are depicted in the same form on Theran vessels and Minoan talismanic seals (Marthari Reference Marthari2008, 375–7 figs 26–31), do not seem to represent any recognisable type of beehive.
The fragments of clay beehives of the third and second millennia bce from Crete and neighbouring islands suggest, however, that there was organised beekeeping from the Early Bronze Age. In addition, the Middle Minoan I – Late Minoan IIIA clay beehive smokers found at Zakros (Davaras Reference Davaras, Chatzidakis, Platon, Sakellarakis, Travlos and Zepos1989, 1–4 figs 1–2, pl. 1α–δ; Kopaka Reference Kopaka2011, 277 fig. 24.8 [top], 280–1 and n. 24) and perhaps Palaikastro (Late Minoan IIIA2: MacGillivray et al. Reference MacGillivray, Sackett, Driessen, Bridges and Smyth1989, 433–4 pl. 66d), at Κnossos (Middle Minoan IIIB – Late Minoan IA: Davaras 1989, 4–6 fig. 3, pl. 1ε), Phaistos (Middle Minoan II: Davaras Reference Davaras, Chatzidakis, Platon, Sakellarakis, Travlos and Zepos1989, 6 and n. 30) and Ayia Irini in Kea (Late Minoan IA/Late Helladic I – Late Minoan IB/Late Helladic II: Georgiou Reference Georgiou1986, 42–3, 48 nos 169–70, pls 11, 20; Davaras Reference Davaras, Chatzidakis, Platon, Sakellarakis, Travlos and Zepos1989, 6 and n. 33) offer vital evidence for the second millennium bce. These vessels, whose function was initially puzzling, were identified as beehive smokers, not only by Davaras (Reference Davaras, Chatzidakis, Platon, Sakellarakis, Travlos and Zepos1989), but also as a result of a recent experimental application of a replica Minoan vessel of this type from Zakros in an apiary (Tyree, Robinson and Stamataki Reference Tyree, Robinson, Stamataki, Mantzourani and Betancourt2007; see also Moody Reference Moody, Cadogan, Iacovou, Kopaka and Whitley2012, 254).
Middle Minoan I – Late Minoan IIIA tools and pots related to beekeeping have been found in a cave at Zakros (Kopaka Reference Kopaka2011). Another set of Middle Minoan III – Late Minoan II vessels from the so-called ‘snake room’ of a private house south-west of the ‘South-West Treasury House’ (actually the North-West Treasury House: Evans was mistaken) next to the palace at Knossos (Evans Reference Evans1935, 138–56 figs 109, 111, 115a, 118–19) also seem to be related to beekeeping (Harissis and Harissis Reference Harissis and Harissis2009, 32–40). The identification of an Old Palace miniature vessel from Quartier Mu in Malia as a small-scale copy of a clay beehive (D'Agata and De Angelis Reference D'Agata and De Angelis2014, 355 pl. CXIIb–c) reminds us moreover of the importance of beekeeping, since miniature vessels were sometimes used in ritual contexts (Tournavitou Reference Tournavitou, D’ Agata and Moortel2009; Knappett Reference Knappett, Jessen, Johannsen and Jensen2012).
Evidence from Linear B
The data from the Linear B tablets should be added to the evidence that demonstrates the practice of organised beekeeping in the Aegean of the second millennium bce. Apart from the possible identification of the ideogram *179 with a wicker hive (see above, Fig. 11) and of the ideogram *168 with a horizontal-type clay beehive (see above), the appearance in the entries in Linear B tablets of the ideograms *142 and *172 should be noted, since they may represent beeswax and honeycomb respectively (Killen Reference Killen2015a, 1029–30);Footnote 22 the latter is sometimes ligatured with KE-RO2, possibly κηρίον (kērion, i.e. wax or honeycomb).Footnote 23
Additionally, the records of the ligature ME-RI and the word me-ri = /meli/ (honey) on Linear B tablets from Knossos and Chania point to beekeeping occupying a particularly important place in the economy of Crete. Indeed, at Knossos, honey emerges as a highly important commodity, second only to olive oil, and was used as an offering. It is recorded as being offered to deities, usually accompanied by the ideogram *209 that corresponds to the amphora, or by a unit of liquid measurement other than the amphora.Footnote 24 As the ultimate use of the product remains unclear from the shorthand records of the tablets, combining consideration of them with the references in the sources of the historic period has led to the theory that honey was an ingredient in libations made in the sanctuaries of the gods (Weilhartner Reference Weilhartner2003). In some of the Knossos Linear B tablets (Gg(2) set) honey is also mentioned in connection with people involved in the perfume industry.Footnote 25 In this regard, the probable identification of traces of it on the inside of Middle Minoan IA vessels from Chamalevri (Andreadaki-Vlazaki Reference Andreadaki-Vlazaki1999, 48, 51 nos 16, 19) as an ingredient in the production of aromatic oils and pharmaceutical substances acquires a certain added interest (for honey as an ingredient of perfumes, see Foster Reference Foster1974, 103–4; Shelmerdine Reference Shelmerdine1985, 19; and as a component of remedies, see Arnott Reference Arnott2008, 112).
The Linear B tablets from Knossos also allow us to make suggestions about financial aspects of the exploitation of the products of beekeeping, which would certainly have been taken into account. In the Knossian Gg (4) set of Linear B tablets, most probably concerned with tax payments, the recorded quantity of honey (47 amphorae) is apparently owed to the palaceFootnote 26 (Weilhartner Reference Weilhartner2005, 44–5; Bendall Reference Bendall2007, 144–5; Fappas Reference Fappas2010, 55). The honey ideogram appears also on tablet Gg 995 from Knossos together with the term ku-pi-ri-jo (Aura Jorro Reference Aura Jorro1985, 405–6 s.v. kupirijo; Bendall Reference Bendall2007, 143–4), which, apart from being a simple anthroponym (‘the Cypriot’), seems in certain contexts to indicate a ‘collector’, in other words a commercial agent of the palace in charge of various economic activities including the exchange of products consigned to him by the palace for others (Killen Reference Killen, Laffineur and Niemeier1995; Bendall Reference Bendall2007, 121–2, 143–4; Sacconi Reference Sacconi and Daniilidou2009). If that is the case, then honey was undoubtedly considered part of the produce destined for export from Cretan territory, whose abundant flora, full of aromatic plants, seems likely to have made it much sought after in the markets of the time.Footnote 27
It is interesting to explore the relationship between beekeeping as practised by specialist beekeepers, the products it produced, and political and perhaps also religious authorities. We should also add to what has already been said about the information that can be gleaned from the Linear B tablets from Knossos about the trade in honey (which appears to have been carried on under the aegis of the palace) a probable reading of the term me-ri-te-wo μελιτεύς (beekeeper?) in the land-tenure tablets from Mycenaean Pylos (Aura Jorro Reference Aura Jorro1985, 440 s.v. meritewo; Bendall Reference Bendall2007, 150–2), as well as the occupational titles me-ri-du-ma-te and me-ri-da-ma-te (μελιδάμαρτες?) in the Pylian tablets. The latter appear in lists of temple servants and may correspond to religious functionaries, whose duties are related in some way to the production of honey, perhaps as its superintendents (Aura Jorro Reference Aura Jorro1985, 439–40 s.v. meridamate, meridumate; Bendall Reference Bendall2007, 50, 61, 150 n. 47; Killen Reference Killen2015b, 1093–4).
The religious and royal associations of honey in Egypt are clear. There, where the earliest depiction relating to the extraction of honey from horizontal-type clay beehives is dated to the Fifth Dynasty of the Old Kingdom and comes from a stone bas-relief from the sun temple of the King Niuserre (2445–2421 bce) at Abu Gurab,Footnote 28 we know of the beekeepers of the god Amun (Erman and Grapow Reference Erman and Grapow1971, 434), while in the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Dynasties the priests of the god Min also seem to be associated with the collection of honey (Montet Reference Montet1950, esp. 23–7). The honey bee is above all strongly linked with sacred kingship, appearing as far back as the Second Dynasty, symbolising Lower Egypt (the Kingdom of the North), as an integral part of the king's titulary (Gardiner Reference Gardiner1957, 73–4; Faulkner Reference Faulkner1962, 79–80 s.v. bíty; Helck and Otto Reference Helck and Otto1975, col. 787–8 s.v. Biene [J. Leclant]).
THOUGHTS ON THE MANAGEMENT/EXPLOITATION OF THE APIARY TO THE WEST OF THE CITY V
On the basis of the Linear B data from Mycenaean Crete and Mainland Greece we can assert that at least some beekeeping would have been practised under the supervision of the palace. Although the chronological discrepancy between the archives of Linear B tablets and the data from the earlier settlement at Akrotiri is by no means negligible, we should bear in mind that the management of extensive beekeeping as an industry demanded in both cases the existence of a structured social hierarchy. In the case of a flourishing trading and maritime society like that at Akrotiri the question that inevitably arises is: who managed the output of such an extensive apiary? Did it belong to some wealthy individual, who was either a beekeeper himself or who delegated to others the supervision and production, and then traded the produce, not just to meet the needs of the local settlementFootnote 29 but also outside the island? In the case of an independent beekeeper/producer and/or trader,Footnote 30 it is also reasonable to ask to whom the land belonged on which his apiary had been set up, and all the more so because it included the slopes of a hill. From the land-tenure tablets from Mycenaean Pylos relating to a palatial society it can be deduced that plots of land beside the palace could also belong to sanctuaries, communities and/or private individuals (for the extensive treatment of the subject with collected bibliography see Palmer Reference Palmer, Bennet and Driessen1998–9; see also Bendall Reference Bendall2007, 65–77). Or was the administration perhaps done by some sort of central authority, for which clear archaeological evidence is lacking at Akrotiri? The close proximity of the extensive beekeeping installation to City V in the Miniature Wall Painting and the road that connects it with the settlement (and seems to end in the tripartite building at the top of the hill) may not be merely topographical data but could also reflect other associations, as they seem to make up part of an iconographic ensemble. In other words, perhaps the apiary would have had some kind of communal management and the community would have been the body exploiting its produce.Footnote 31 Given the link this would involve between intensive cultivation and complex social structures, it should be stressed that the nature of the latter in Late Cycladic Akrotiri is difficult to elucidate, all the more so since such a small sample of the settlement has been excavated. Nevertheless, there is a little evidence of some kind of group management from the excavated kitchens that seem to have served a number of households (Devetzi Reference Devetzi, Brodie, Doole, Gavalas and Renfrew2008, 363).
In this case, investigation of the complex web of ownership, production and trade would be significantly helped by knowing the use of the building at the top of the hill in the fresco, which has been thought to be an observation post or watchtower (Doumas Reference Doumas1983, 106; Hallager Reference Hallager1985, 17; Morgan Reference Morgan1988, 71 nos 30–2, 78–9, 161, pls 101, 102 nos 30–2, col. pl. C; Televantou Reference Televantou1994, 112–13 K9, 274, col. pl. 66, folded pl. 3; Figs 1, 2, 4). However, its tripartite articulation and the dressed stone masonry of its walls justifiably raise doubts about the correctness of this suggestion. In organised, outdoor, beekeeping establishments it is often judged necessary to have a neighbouring building for storing the tools needed for this occupation and for the initial processing of the produce from the hive, consisting of straining the honeycombs and extraction of the wax. This is essential, given that apiaries are generally situated at some distance from inhabited settlements. The spatial contiguity of the extensive installation on the hillsides to the buildings on the hill, with which they are connected by a roadway, allows us to suppose that one of them was related to the business of beekeeping. If this were the case, what of the use of the other buildings? The strategic position they occupy – at the summit of a hill, allowing surveillance of not just almost all the coastline but also of the harbourFootnote 32 while at the same time having direct visual contact with the settlement – combined with their carefully constructed facade, might give the impression that what is depicted here is a building in the manner of a Minoan rural villa.Footnote 33 In a Minoan context, this would describe a free-standing building built in a strategic location in the hinterland of a settlement with the aim of controlling a micro-region of special political, administrative or economic interest (Sakellarakis and Panagiotopoulos Reference Sakellarakis, Panagiotopoulos, Gavrilaki and Tzifopoulos2006, 62–3).Footnote 34
On the crest of Mavro Rachidi, on the summit of the Red Mountain, which is generally identified with the hill in the wall painting, architectural remains have been found, offering one more indicator of the identification of City V with Akrotiri. And from this area too ceramics have been collected as well as good quality plaster, a piece of metal and part of a vase made from veined marble (Marinatos, S. Reference Marinatos1969, 35–6; Doumas Reference Doumas1983, 55–6), though it remains unclear how big a space the building(s) occupied, how many there were and where exactly the portable finds came from. These questions will remain unanswered until the area is properly explored and the character of the architectural remains found on the Red Mountain elucidated. For now, any theory about the connection between the function of this building and the beekeeping installation that seems to spread over the hillside must also be treated with caution.
The proposal for the existence of an extensive apiary to the west of City V obviously raises a series of new questions. The identification of the structure, until now considered enigmatic, as an apiary is based on the observation of certain details, the use of the rules of perspective current at that time, and the similarity of the black triangular elements to the woven skeps. If this is the case, then what we have is the earliest, and, so far, unique depiction of an apiary in the Aegean art of the second millennium bce. Moreover, as far as we know, it seems that this iconographic subject is absent from the repertoire of both ancient Greek art and the art of the Roman period.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Special thanks go to the Director of Excavations at Akrotiri, Prof. Christos Doumas, for our fruitful discussions, his constant encouragement and, of course, permission to publish the photographs of Figs 1, 2 and 3. Thanks are due also to the conservator, Mr Panayiotis Angelidis, to archaeologists Mrs Kiki Birtacha and Dr Tania Devetzi and to the Senior Researcher at the Ormylia Foundation, Dr Sophia Sotiropoulou, for their useful advice; to the beekeepers, Mr Giorgos Nikolaidis and Mr Giorgos Mavroyiannis, who shared their precious knowledge about beekeeping with me; to Prof. Clairy Palyvou, to Mr Antonis Liapis from the Roma Basketry Museum, Komotini, and to Mr Yannis Kastanos, to whom I am indebted for the photographs in Figs 6, 10 and 12; to archaeologist Mr Nikos Liaros for his generous help with bibliography relating to traditional beekeeping, and to Dr Vassilis Chrysikopoulos for his warm response to questions about ancient Egyptian beekeeping; to civil engineer Mr Dimitris Stampolis for his patience and the drawings in Figs 4 and 7; to Mrs Valerie Nunn for the translation of the text into English and to Dr Colin Macdonald for editing the English text; and to the two anonymous referees for their most useful suggestions. Special thanks also go to the Friends of the Benaki Museum and above all to their president, Mrs Roxanni Tsimbiropoulou, without whose financial support it would not have been possible to complete this article. A previous version of this paper was prepared for the volume edited by P.P. Creasman and R.H. Wilkinson, Ancient Mediterranean Interconnections: Papers In Honor of Nanno Marinatos (Journal of Ancient Egyptian Interconnections, vol. 7, no. 3, 2015), but for reasons beyond my control my contribution was not ready in time. In any case, this revised approach to an obscure motif in the Theran frescoes meets Prof. Marinatos' belief that it is not only new discoveries that give rise to new ideas, but also well-established facts, as long as they are suitably illuminated from another point of view. This article is therefore dedicated to her.
