The Missing “Barbarians”: Some thoughts on ethnicity and identity in Aegean Bronze Age iconography, in Talanta 44, 2012, 53–77 (original) (raw)
Related papers
"Iconography in Context: The Visual Elements of Aegean Art"
Current Approaches and New Perspectives in Aegean Iconography, edited by Fritz Blakolmer. Aegis 18 (2020), 369-384., 2020
Abstract: The iconographic meanings of Aegean art have long been the subject of scholarly investigation, but comparatively little attention has been paid to that other major component of artistic content: emotion, and the emotional impact that art makes upon the viewer. This investigation explores how artists of the Aegean Bronze Age incorporated expressive content through intentional engagement of artistic form as developed through the visual elements (line, texture, color [hue], value, shape and space) and the principles of organization (harmony, variety, balance, proportion, dominance, movement, and economy). Three canonical artworks (the Spring Fresco of Delta 2, Akrotiri, Thera; the Cupbearer and Procession Frescoes of Knossos, Crete; and a Mycenaean phi figurine) are discussed to explore how each artwork’s expressive and emotional content was purposely developed to support its symbolic meanings as understood through traditional iconographic method. It is suggested that formal analysis of the elements and principles of prehistoric art can be engaged in alliance with iconographic study, not only to define the characteristic features of Aegean art, as has been done in the past, but also to explore Aegean art’s deeper emotional meaning as it impacted the viewer and shaped the prehistoric visual environment.
2024
Ikonografische Darstellungen von Kampfszenen gehören zu den faszinierendsten Motiven Ihrer Zeit innerhalb der Kunst der späten Bronzezeit. Diese Kampfdarstellungen überraschen mit ihrer Vielfältigkeit und wurden im Verlauf der Spätbronzezeit auf einem heterogenen Material verewigt. Ziel dieses Beitrags ist es, die ikonographischen Aspekte dieser Darstellungen vorzustellen und zu untersuchen. Dazu verwende ich eine typologische Methode, die auf thematischen, chronologischen, materiellen und kontextuellen Kriterien beruht. Es wird der Frage nachgegangen, ob sich diese Darstellungen auf mythisch-fiktionale oder historisch-reale Ereignisse beziehen. Darüber hinaus stellt sich die Frage, inwieweit diese Kampfszenen ein häufiges Thema der ägäischen bronzezeitlichen Kunst waren und in welchen chronologischen Perioden sie auftraten. Die Bedeutung solcher Motive in der damaligen Gesellschaft wird ebenso untersucht wie die Frage, ob es sich um Produkte minoischer oder mykenischer Werkstätten handelt und ob sich unterschiedliche künstlerische Tendenzen erkennen lassen. Die Analyse der Daten zeigt, dass es zumindest für die frühe Phase der Spätbronzezeit möglich ist, zwischen künstlerischen Stilen zu unterscheiden. Sie belegt ferner, dass jede Kampfszene der spätbronzezeitlichen Ägäis eine vielfältige Bedeutung für die Gesellschaft dieser Epoche haben konnte, vor allem, weil die symbolische Bedeutung des Kampfes in das praktische Kriegsgeschehen integriert war.
Objects of foreign origin found within a certain ‘local’ archaeological context have often been interpreted as objects of high social value (due to their exotic character and origin). However, such interpretations have often dealt with the unusual character of these objects rather than examined the dynamic process through which they have been received into a new cultural context. This paper aims to examine specific objects and their dynamic biographies, while at the same time analysing the oversimplified concept of foreignness. It deals with two specific objects of foreign origin which have been appropriated into new cultural contexts. Rather than being treated as passively received objects of great value, they are interpreted as active creators of their own biographies within the context of the Late Bronze Age Aegean. The first example addressed in this paper is a Mycenaean‑style krater found in the grave on the Ayasoluk hill near Selçuk (Ephesos). The krater was used as an urn for the deposition of cremated remains. As such a burial practice is not known from the Greek mainland at the time, its appearance in the context of West Anatolia directly questions its ‘Mycenaean’ character and shows a more dynamic relationship to the object itself. The second example is a well‑known Egyptian stone vase found in the Neopalatial context at Kato Zakro. In this paper, its complex biography is presented and used to argue for a more dynamic character of personal biographies, which could have significantly influenced their perception in past societies. The paper aims to question the concepts of foreignness, ethnicity and hybridity in the Late Bronze Age Aegean using the aforementioned examples. With its concluding remarks the paper aims to challenge some of the grand narratives of the Aegean prehistory, which are often hard to avoid in the newly proposed interpretations.
The Bronze Age Aegean lacks a clearly discernible iconography of rulership, permitting widely contrasting speculation on the character of Minoan society; that it was egalitarian, heterarchical, gynocratic or a theocracy overseen by priest-kings. That elites did exist is amply attested through mortuary, iconographic and architectural evidence including the Throne Room of the Late Minoan palace at Knossos in which a centrally-oriented throne is incorporated into the architectural fabric of the room. Frescoes adorn the wall into which the throne is set, griffins flanking its large, mountain-shaped seat-back. Iconographic representations of human figures holding sceptres and standing upon mountains, and evidence for the increased palatial control of cultic activity at rural peak sanctuaries during the Neopalatial period (1750–1490 B.C.E.) emphasise an association between rulership and the mountainous landscape. Close analysis of seated figures within Minoan iconography reveals architectonic parallels to the Knossian Throne, stepped structures surmounted by seated female figures functioning as abstract representations of the mountain form. It will be argued that literal and metaphoric representations of a mountain throne function within an ideological program associating rulership with the natural landscape, offering new insights into the construction of power in the Aegean Bronze Age.----------- Paper presented at the 10th International Congress on the Archaeology of the Ancient Near East (ICAANE) on 27 April 2016.