Pylos Combat Agate, Minoan Seal circa 1450 BC that almost looks like it came from late Archaic or Classical Greece

[Roma_Victrix]

Copyrighted picture of it in the Wikipedia page here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pylos_Combat_Agate

Initially discovered in 2015 in the Griffin Warrior Tomb near Nestor's Palace at Pylos in the Peloponnese, Greece, this item was originally covered in limestone and thought to be a simple bead until it was cleaned up and presented in 2017. Arguably the most finely detailed specimen among the large corpus of surviving Minoan seals, it is thought to have been imported or looted from a Minoan site in Crete by mainland Mycenaean Greek invaders or traders during the mid-15th century BC. It depicts a long haired semi-nude warrior who, after having already killed one foe lying at his feet, beheads another while gripping the crest of his helmet and stabbing his sword above the shield to pierce the exposed neck, twisting the head of his enemy around like a bottle cap. Although dated to the Aegean Bronze Age, the fine naturalistic details of the human bodies depicted with flexing muscles possess anatomically correct and realistic qualities comparable late Archaic if not Classical era Greek artworks a millennium later.

On top of that, this miniature work of art measures only 3.4 centimetres (1.3 in) in diameter. The incredibly small size suggests that it was made with the aid of a magnifying glass, and yet none have been found in Crete belonging to the Bronze Age. The first known references to magnifying glasses belong to the Classical Greek comedic play "Clouds" (424 BC) by Aristophanes, and by Romans with Pliny the Elder's Naturalis Historia (mid-1st century AD). The discovery of this single seal puts into question long held scholarly consensuses about the history of Greek art, even with the breakdown of civilization during the subsequent Greek Dark Age. One must wonder how much of a potential impact and influence surviving Mycenaean and Minoan artworks had on late Archaic Greek artists, in making works such as the sculpted frieze of the Siphnian Treasury at Delphi. They could of course be totally unrelated or only loosely related. Regardless, the craftsmanship that went into making this tiny seal is remarkable.

From Imgur:
https://imgur.com/gallery/eHDBz/comment/1204705839


Again from Imgur, an idea of just how small each warrior figure is compared to the head of George Washington on a US Quarter Dollar coin:

[Cyclops]

Poor Loki!

Its extraordinarily detailed given the scale and hard material.

Naturalistic is the word, the slumped corpse lacks all formality and the expressive liquidity is like a snapshot rather than a composition. To my untrained eye it would be out of place in the 5th century BCE let alone 1500 BCE, it seems Hellenistic in its expressive agony.

I have only the briefest experience of seals across Harrapan Mesopotamian and East Mediterranean cultures but I'd say that's by far the most expressive bit of work I've seen.

Is there much chance its an intrusion into an older strata? That said this piece may represent a tour-de-force by a master crafter, and doesn't speak to the general level of "civilisation" or cultural continuity in "Dark Age" pre-Hellas. The loss of literate culture did not mean there were no elite individuals in society (and likely a warrior elite rather than a theocratic one-there's no writing on the seal, unlike many other examples) and valuable items would remain in circulation as models for later crafters.

This might represent a skilled genius but as an individual item can't support the scenario of a generally complex or widespread cultural system in the way that the buckets of Mesopotamian (etc) do, with their formalised designs, written inscriptions and widespread everyday use.

[Roma_Victrix]

Poor Loki!

Loki got what we call the Minoan twist.

Its extraordinarily detailed given the scale and hard material.

Naturalistic is the word, the slumped corpse lacks all formality and the expressive liquidity is like a snapshot rather than a composition. To my untrained eye it would be out of place in the 5th century BCE let alone 1500 BCE, it seems Hellenistic in its expressive agony.

Yes, the way the bodies are stretching and twisting, one is almost reminded of Lacoon and His Sons, the Sperlonga group Blinding of Polyphemus, or the Ludovisi Gaul. However, the two figures fighting each other each have that "Archaic Smile", which was abandoned in Greek art even by the beginning of the Classical period. There are previous Mycenaean artworks, though, that have a similar quirky smile as the Archaic period one in kouroi and korai. For instance, some frescoes of women from Mycenae and even the little slight smirks on marching soldiers in the "Warrior Vase" krater.

I have only the briefest experience of seals across Harrapan Mesopotamian and East Mediterranean cultures but I'd say that's by far the most expressive bit of work I've seen.

Is there much chance its an intrusion into an older strata? That said this piece may represent a tour-de-force by a master crafter, and doesn't speak to the general level of "civilisation" or cultural continuity in "Dark Age" pre-Hellas. The loss of literate culture did not mean there were no elite individuals in society (and likely a warrior elite rather than a theocratic one-there's no writing on the seal, unlike many other examples) and valuable items would remain in circulation as models for later crafters.

There were some neat pieces of art made in the Greek Dark Age, but overall the artistic excellence had largely vanished and human figures became either very primitive looking or nonexistent in favor of very simple geometric patterns in ceramics. One must wonder how many Mycenaean and Minoan artworks still floated around in private hands as you suggest, though. Some Mycenaean works undoubtedly had a great influence on Archaic art, not just the Orientalizing art of Phoenicia and Egypt.

As for the provenance of the Pylos Combat Agate, as far as I know the Griffin Warrior Tomb was not disturbed by later generations and all the items within the tomb are reliably dated to the middle of the Mycenaean age. There's certainly no sign of graverobbers or the like. This Mycenaean shaft tomb tomb also contains four Minoan gold signet rings, also with intricate details, but not quite as perplexing or amazing as the Pylos Combat Agate.

This might represent a skilled genius but as an individual item can't support the scenario of a generally complex or widespread cultural system in the way that the buckets of Mesopotamian (etc) do, with their formalised designs, written inscriptions and widespread everyday use.

One must wonder if the same artist created other works that are lost such as a fresco with a similar scene. It almost seems like the seal is an imitation of a larger scene from a more well known fresco that a Minoan might instantly recognize even though the seal is very tiny.

[conon394]

The incredibly small size suggests that it was made with the aid of a magnifying glass

Not sure I agree on that. I suggest a really steady hand(s) and good eyesight and working probably in the best lighting available.

[Lord Oda Nobunaga]

That is so detailed that I almost want to say it is a forgery.

Now if only the Minoans were this meticulous about recording their own history.

BTW, was I supposed to make 50 posts on unrelated Bronze Age topics or?

[Roma_Victrix]

That is so detailed that I almost want to say it is a forgery.

Now if only the Minoans were this meticulous about recording their own history.

BTW, was I supposed to make 50 posts on unrelated Bronze Age topics or?

Fire away!

The Minoans left some writing, but we'll probably never decipher Linear A, unfortunately. Would be cool to know what family their language even belonged to.

It's most certainly not a forgery. It was covered in limestone when found in the middle of a tomb that was unknown and buried beforehand.

Not sure I agree on that. I suggest a really steady hand(s) and good eyesight and working probably in the best lighting available.

That eyesight would have to be incredible given how the head of George Washington on a quarter coin is literally larger than any of the entire bodies seen on the agate.

[conon394]

That eyesight would have to be incredible given how the head of George Washington on a quarter coin is literally larger than any of the entire bodies seen on the agate.

Yet in cities that unlike Athens ( which was interested in just mass production of coins and keeping a standard look) ... 5 mm fractional obols have quite fine images. Making allowance for the distortion of striking. To my knowledge I am unaware of archeology that locates any magnifying device in any excavated mint. You only need a few master craftsmen to produce true master works.

[sumskilz]

To my knowledge I am unaware of archeology that locates any magnifying device in any excavated mint.

It's hard to know how to approach negative evidence like this. We've been excavating an Assyrian siege ramp at Azekah. I expected to find a lot of arrowheads, but so far, we haven't found any. So it occurred to me that the metal used to make arrowheads would have been quite valuable back then, and just as we would expect to find arrowheads there, so would the Assyrians after the battle and so would locals from the area if any were still left behind. Where arrowheads from sieges are usually found are in collapsed buildings, in contexts where they were likely imbedded in the roof before the building collapsed during the subsequent burning of the city.

Of course my example isn't exactly parallel. We're obviously much safer in assuming that the defenders loosed arrows against the attackers constructing the siege ramp than we are assuming that magnifying glasses were used in mints or for etching stones, but if they had them, they may have been.

Relevant to that:

Lenses found in October 1983 by Sakellarakis in the Idaean Cave of central Crete are of unusually fine optical quality. The discovery prompted an investigation of similar finds, and speculation on the likely use of lenses in antiquity and on the methods of their manufacture.

In Figure 1 is shown a plano-convex lens, 8 mm. in diameter and 4 mm. thick, which has a focal length of 12 mm., thereby giving a nominal magnification of 20X. The useful magnification is limited by distortions and is a subjective evaluation; this lens has at least a 7X useful magnification. The high quality of the polish and the perfection of the shape are evident. It is made of rock crystal (single crystal quartz), as is revealed by its birefringence when rotated between crossed polaroids. When viewed under a 7X loupe, very shallow, slight, circumferential polishing marks can be seen on the convex side.

A similar lens was found at the same time and place (fig. 2). It is 15 mm. in diameter, 6 mm. thick, with 25 mm. focal length, which gives a nominal magnification of 10X; but its useful magnification is limited to about 2.5X. The edge of this lens has light tooling marks around the circumference inclined at 30 degrees from the axis of the lens. These marks are consistent with shaping the periphery with a cutting stone harder than quartz and using a round template. The two lenses were found in a disturbed stratum in the cave, but they are presumed to be Archaic Greek in keeping with the majority of objects found with them. From the studies by Boardman of artifacts from earlier excavations of the cave, it could be inferred that the cave was not used as a shrine after the sixth century B.C.2 Recent excavations, however, show that the shrine was in use much later than the Archaic period.3

These lenses should be considered in context with the much older ones found by Sir Arthur Evans in the Palace of Knossos and in the nearby Mavro Spelio Cemetery which date from 1400 B.C. The Bronze Age lenses received some attention in 1928 soon after the time of their excavation,4 but subsequently have received little mention. There are now 23 ancient lenses on display in the Archaeological Museum at Herakleion and many more are in storage there. They are also made of rock crystal and are of optical quality, with generated plano-convex surfaces. However, many have one surface lightly etched, presumably from the action of the chemicals in the soil during their long burial. A typical example is shown in Figure 3. Its diameter is 14 mm., with a thickness of 4 mm., and the focal length is 22 mm., which gives a nominal magnification of 11X. When the concave surface is wetted to minimize the scatter of the light from the etched surface, it magnifies objects without appreciable distortion.

Two plano-convex rock crystal lenses were found in central Anatolia at Gordion by Gustav and Alfred K6rte in 1901 but cannot be dated.5 These lenses also magnify with little distortion. Recently four similar lenses were found on Cyprus but have not yet been studied in detail.6 Also a number of rock crystal objects were found at the Temple of Artemis at Ephesos by Hogarth;7 their precision led him to identify them as "lathe-turned." These objects are plano-concave and therefore could not have served as burning glasses or as magnifiers. The optical quality of one of these objects is demonstrated in a photograph by B. Freyer-Schauenberg, in which it is shown reducing print about 20% without distortion.8 There has been speculation over the possible use of these objects, but recently Brein has presented a convincing demonstration that they were used as ear ornaments by the Archaic Greeks.9 ...

There are several probable uses for lenses in antiquity. One use, as a burning glass to kindle fires, is mentioned by Aristophanes in his comedy, The Clouds.25 The lenses found by Schliemann that had a central hole were probably burning glasses. A very convenient way to carry such a useful and valuable object would be by a cord through a central hole, a less expensive and safer method than a metal frame with an attached ring. A central hole would only slightly reduce the effectiveness of a burning glass; however, it would reduce the usefulness of a magnifying glass. Manufacturing a burning glass was well worth the effort; consider the inconvenience of preserving hot coals or the effort of igniting a fire by a bow drill or by striking flint and pyrites.

The wide use in antiquity of finely engraved seal stones to seal storage jars, inventory lists, and messages in the Middle East is apparent from the multitude of seal impressions and seal stones displayed in museums, and usually only a small fraction of the collection is on display. The collection at the Archaeological Museum at Herakleion from the Minoan Palace of Knossos is an impressive testimony to the extensive use of seals. At Ur clay seal impressions were so numerous that Sir Leonard Woolley defined excavation strata in terms of their relative presence. The high cost of making seal stones is revealed in Assyrian texts of 1800 B.C. studied by Larsen; the cost of manufacture was approximately equal to that of an ox and slightly less than that of a slave girl.26 Although many seals have high ornamental value, their function of ensuring the security of stores and of authenticating information must have been very important in order to warrant such expense.

Gorelick and Gwinnett believe that the fine details of these seal stones could have been carved by young men, whose eyes could focus on objects held at close distance, or by older men with myopia, and that the use of magnifying glasses would not have been necessary.27 Of course, a magnifying glass would have been helpful. The official in the royal storeroom probably was neither young nor myopic, but he would have had to compare seal impressions with authentic exemplars to detect forgeries. As this required very close observation, a magnifying glass with a magnification between 3X and 7X would have been indispensable. The ownership of magnifying glasses may even have been restricted in order to reduce the quality of forged seals. The details of the imperfections of impressions from somewhat crudely carved seal stones might have been more revealing of authenticity than the perfection of an impression from a smoothly finished seal.

It's fair to say it's not a settled issue.

[conon394]

re the last paragraph of quote. Seems like a nice conclusion that a lens might be used by people who need to verify the seals. The craftsmen to use them would it seems to me if using a lens would need some way to mount to use hands free. That I think would leave traces of not particularity value material or some kind of rim mounting.

On the mints goods points. Its to bad most Greek states were not as fastidious as the Athenian in recording every last bit of state property and saving even the broken stuff until they could auction it off.

[Roma_Victrix]

It's hard to know how to approach negative evidence like this. We've been excavating an Assyrian siege ramp at Azekah. I expected to find a lot of arrowheads, but so far, we haven't found any. So it occurred to me that the metal used to make arrowheads would have been quite valuable back then, and just as we would expect to find arrowheads there, so would the Assyrians after the battle and so would locals from the area if any were still left behind. Where arrowheads from sieges are usually found are in collapsed buildings, in contexts where they were likely imbedded in the roof before the building collapsed during the subsequent burning of the city.

Hunting for arrowheads, a tale as old as time. Really neat stuff, thanks for sharing that. Makes a great deal of sense when considering the utility of reusing missiles more generally and the concern about that by the Romans, for instance, when they designed their pila javelins to bend and break upon impact. That way they couldn't be immediately reused by the enemy.

Of course my example isn't exactly parallel. We're obviously much safer in assuming that the defenders loosed arrows against the attackers constructing the siege ramp than we are assuming that magnifying glasses were used in mints or for etching stones, but if they had them, they may have been.

Relevant to that:

It's fair to say it's not a settled issue.

Fascinating! Thanks for sharing and +1 rep to you for that. Although it's not direct evidence or generally supported by contemporary texts like we have from Classical Greece, it sure seems like more than a coincidence that Mycenaean/Minoan lenses (and Archaic ones also predating mention of magnifying and burning glasses by Aristophanes) are lying about in multiple locations. I'm intrigued by the idea that Bronze Age peoples perhaps had to utilize optical technology to detect forgeries or even worry about the use of rock crystal lenses in the hands of forgers.

Sounds reminiscent of modern cloak and dagger secret agent espionage stuff, almost as if some James Bond level was going down before the Iron Age.

At the very least, as your article mentions, we have direct evidence of the Romans using magnifying glasses for purposes of engraving, given how such lenses were found in the house of an engraver at Pompeii and in the house of an artist at Tanis. Roman gold glass portraits really are marvelous miniature works of art, most of them measuring between 3-5 cm in diameter, and the incredibly fine details on them are easier to understand in the context of optical aids. The fact that we have a decent amount of surviving lenses from previous eras lends credence to the idea that this was a practice that had a long history before Classical Greece and Rome.

[Morticia Iunia Bruti]

Or the details of the seal were made by kids or myopic man, which were artisans from childhood on?

Similar miniatur objects from 2000 BC Bronze Age Britain were probably made in this way.

Like the gold studs of the famous Bush Barrow Daggers:

Two of the bronze daggers have the largest blades of any from their period, whilst a third had a 30 centimetres (12 in) long wooden hilt originally decorated with up to 140,000 tiny gold studs forming a herringbone pattern. The studs are around 0.2 millimetres (0.0079 in) wide and 1 millimetre (0.039 in) in length with over a thousand studs embedded in each square centimetre.^[6][7] David Dawson, Director of Wiltshire Heritage Museum has stated that: "The gold studs are remarkable evidence of the skill and craftsmanship of Bronze Age goldsmiths – quite rightly described as 'the work of the gods'"^[8] Optician Ronald Rabbetts has said that "Only children and teenagers, and those adults who had become myopic naturally or due to the nature of their work as children, would have been able to create and manufacture such tiny objects."^[6]
It is thought that the gold came from Ireland, and the dagger was made in Brittany. The hilt lay forgotten for over 40 years from the 1960s, having been sent to Professor Atkinson at Cardiff University, and found by one of his successors in 2005.<sup>[8]

Bush Barrow - Wikipedia</sup>

[Lord Oda Nobunaga]

I don't know enough about these kinds of Bronze Age trinkets. Nor about Bronze Age Crete to really add anything of value. In academia the most I did was analyze finds from Roman ruins in Crete and the Peloponnese. I didn't actually go to Crete myself and the work was tiresome. Not that I mind since I wasn't willing to put in the money and it was a really hot summer. Ask me about Late Imperial Hittite seals though.

[Spyrith]

Besides the historical significance of this, I simply have to appreciate the artistry of it all and how it depicts combat. The man on the left pushing the sword inward while the warrior on the right pierces the adversary with a spear. It reminds of various Greek mythological fights like Achilles vs Hector, or a lesser known one like one of the fights between the Aeacidae brothers where Peleus (father of Achilles) kills his brother Phocus "accidentally".

[Cyclops]

I don't know enough about these kinds of Bronze Age trinkets. Nor about Bronze Age Crete to really add anything of value. In academia the most I did was analyze finds from Roman ruins in Crete and the Peloponnese. I didn't actually go to Crete myself and the work was tiresome. Not that I mind since I wasn't willing to put in the money and it was a really hot summer. Ask me about Late Imperial Hittite seals though.

Ah don't let that stop you commenting, it doesn't stop me!

awesome shoop skills incoming

Hearing you about the field work, had a very kind offer to work in Cyprus and I could've scrounged the cash (it was the 90's and there was work aplenty if you didn't mind getting your hands dirty) but I wanted to go to London for the night life. Probably saw more artefacts in London than I would've in Cyprus though, I used to visit the British Museum all the time. Not for the night life though.

The guy running the dig did not like me personally, but I did not take offence (indestructible ego and I learned by then you can't please everybody) but he was a disciplined and effective interpreter of the past, who did not give a **** about politics and managed to offend the Greek and the Turks at times. In retrospect I would have loved to go, even though he had enjoyed busting my balls on trips inside Australia.

[Roma_Victrix]

Ah don't let that stop you commenting, it doesn't stop me!

awesome shoop skills incoming

That's +1 rep for the awesome original meme. Nice work.

Besides the historical significance of this, I simply have to appreciate the artistry of it all and how it depicts combat. The man on the left pushing the sword inward while the warrior on the right pierces the adversary with a spear. It reminds of various Greek mythological fights like Achilles vs Hector, or a lesser known one like one of the fights between the Aeacidae brothers where Peleus (father of Achilles) kills his brother Phocus "accidentally".

Great points, but I don't think the warrior on the left has been pierced by the spear of the warrior on the right. It looks like he missed his opponent entirely and got killed instead by decapitation with the sword. In either case yes, it really reminds one of later Greek motifs and tropes depicting various legendary heroes in combat.

I don't know enough about these kinds of Bronze Age trinkets. Nor about Bronze Age Crete to really add anything of value. In academia the most I did was analyze finds from Roman ruins in Crete and the Peloponnese. I didn't actually go to Crete myself and the work was tiresome. Not that I mind since I wasn't willing to put in the money and it was a really hot summer. Ask me about Late Imperial Hittite seals though.

Feel free to absolutely destroy and litter my thread with the most arcane and exasperatingly detailed knowledge about Late Imperial Hittite Seals.

This thread doesn't have to be so narrow, so long as we're talking about the use of seals in the Bronze Age by Mycenaeans, Minoans or other contemporaries. Feel free to even make comparisons between the Hittite seals and those of others.

Or the details of the seal were made by kids or myopic man, which were artisans from childhood on?

Similar miniatur objects from 2000 BC Bronze Age Britain were probably made in this way.

Like the gold studs of the famous Bush Barrow Daggers:

Interesting comparison, and quite possible indeed, but you're ruining all the mystery and all of my fun in thinking that magnifying glasses were used before Classical Greece.

[Morticia Iunia Bruti]

...
Interesting comparison, and quite possible indeed, but you're ruining all the mystery and all of my fun in thinking that magnifying glasses were used before Classical Greece.

At your service.

Would magnyifying glasses not make more sense for the astrology obsessed Babylonians and Sumerians as for the Myceneans?