BMCR 2009.04.04, Robert B. Koehl, Aegean Bronze Age Rhyta

Robert B. Koehl, Aegean Bronze Age Rhyta.  Philadephia:  INSTAP
Academic Press, 2006.  Pp. xxxiii, 423; pls. 61, ills. 17, tbs. 26,
figs. 47.  ISBN 1-931534-16-0.  $120.00.

Reviewed by Judith Weingarten, Belforte (Siena), Italy
([email protected])
Word count:  1814 words
-------------------------------
To read a print-formatted version of this review, see
http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/bmcr/2009/2009-04-04.html
To comment on this review, see
http://www.bmcreview.org/2009/04/20090404.html
-------------------------------

Every student familiar with the material culture of the Aegean Bronze
Age would readily acknowledge that rhyta are among the most appealing,
yet enigmatic classes of artifacts. While by no means the most common
vessels, they are surely one of the most conspicuous.  No
other...vessel was made in so wide a range of forms and media, nor with
such a consistently high degree of artistry.(1)

This statement from the Introduction to Aegean Bronze Age Rhyta
(hereafter ABAR) is so obviously true that one simply assumes that
whole of the subject has often been scrutinized and written about.  So
it is startling to realize that ABAR is the first comprehensive study
of this polymorphic vessel since G. Karo's 1911 article "Minoische
Rhyta" established the basic typology and functional analyses.  Since
1911, of course, the number of rhyta and the range of their
archaeological contexts have increased dramatically, so it is not
surprising that ABAR has been many years in the writing.  Publication
has been also been held up by delays beyond the author's control (which
did, however, allow some last-minute inclusion of recently-identified
rhyta).

The Greek word rhyton (<greek>to\ r(uto/n</greek> ) is derived from the
verb rhein (<greek>r(ei=n</greek>), "to flow".  Just like rhyta of the
Classical period, Bronze Age rhyta have two openings: a larger
'primary'opening and a smaller, 'secondary' one--the latter at the tip,
base, or lower body of the vase, or, in zoomorphs, usually at the
muzzle. From the very earliest EM II-III rhyta to the latest LM/LH IIIC
specimens, the diameter of the secondary opening remains a remarkably
consistent +/- 0.5 cm.  It is the diameter of the primary opening (wide
or narrow) that varies and that, rather than the range of shapes,
affects the function of each type of rhyton.

ABAR is essentially divided into two parts.  In the first part, the
author proposes a typology of four types of rhyta--two with wide
primary openings and two with narrow--each sub-divided into two classes
(Footed or Footless), with each class described and documented by
profile drawings and photographs (Chapter 1).  Koehl then considers the
formal development and origin of each class.  This analysis of a very
complex 'shape' will surely be the basis for all subsequent studies of
chronological sequences and regional distinctions.  The typology is
followed by a complete catalogue of  the 1,340 rhyta known to the
author (Chapter 2).  Organized by type and class, and further
sub-divided into 'groups' (contemporary rhyta made of the same material
and having the same profile), this, too, will be invaluable for future
comparative studies and for placing new finds within a firm structure.

Each of these chapters includes 'Foreign imitations of Aegean Rhyta',
classifying and cataloguing rhyta made outside the Aegean but clearly
dependent on Aegean prototypes and having no close equivalents in the
local repertory (13 Egypt, 21 West Asian, 10  Cypriot).  Chapter 2 also
catalogues 'Representations of Aegean Rhyta' within and outside the
Aegean, from frescoes (36 examples), seals and sealings (5 ex.), and in
Linear A and B texts (5 ex.)

The second part of ABAR will probably be the 'meat and drink' for many
readers: why rhyta, how did they function, who used them, where were
they used?

Chapter 3 ('The Mechanical Functions of Aegean Rhyta') examines how
rhyta were handled, filled, and emptied.  The author rightly insists
that the consistently small size of the secondary opening means that
only liquids could have been used in rhyta--as anything else would have
clogged this opening.  Koehl conducted extensive experiments to
determine how each rhyton type worked, testing his hypotheses, first on
a cache of 5 diverse MM III rhyta from Kommos, and later with
full-scale reproductions of seven different types.  Two examples:

1. Type I rhyta--  almost all figural zoomorphs with a secondary
opening in the muzzle--can best be filled by immersing the vessel in
the liquid up to the handle so that liquid seeps into the secondary
opening-- making it appear that the animal was drinking.  By placing
the thumb over the primary opening, the rhyton is sealed and may now be
removed from the liquid without the loss of more than a few drops.  To
empty the rhyton, lift the thumb and tip the vessel forward.  Wine and
oil were both tested and behave exactly the same.  The Type I rhyton
may thus be understood as a libation vessel, most likely for wine or
oil, or possibly water.  (260-63)

2.  Type III (wide opening, footless) includes the conical rhyta, the
most popular type in the Aegean and the only ones depicted in art.
Koehl experimented with placing wool in the tip, adding crushed
coriander, and pouring in wine while holding the tip closed with a
finger.  Once the rhyton was filled, the finger was removed and a
lightly-scented wine emerged in a thin but continuous stream; at the
same time, the wool trapped the lees and bits of coriander.  Thus,
Koehl concludes that these rhyta simultaneously purified, strained, and
flavoured liquids, and then filled other vessels with this 'perfumed'
drink. (269-71)

Chapter 4 ('The Uses of Aegean Rhyta') first analyzes the find contexts
of rhyta, noting synchronic and diachronic distribution patterns.
Tables 5-13 give details of 165 contexts from 39 different habitation
and cemetery sites. Comparisons are difficult: the number of Pre- and
Palatial contexts is much smaller than the Neopalatial contexts; and
most Neopalatial rhyta are from domestic contexts while most Mycenaean
rhyta come from funerary contexts.  Nonetheless, it is clear that rhyta
occur most frequently with drinking vessels (cups, kylikes, goblets),
vessels in which liquids were stored (bridge-spouted jars, stirrup
jars) or pouring vessels (small jugs and, especially, beak-spouted
jugs: Koehl suggests that rhyta + beak-spouted jugs constitute the
Aegean 'libation set').  (277-79)

Despite their divergent uses, it comes across strongly that the
different forms of rhyta were thought of as the same category of
vessels--as may be inferred from  different types and classes being
stored together in various cult repositories, at times to the exclusion
of other vessels.

A series of short essays now examines the many locations of rhyton use:
Rhyta in Tholos Tombs (327-29); in Peak Sanctuaries (329-30); in
Processions (330-32); in Foundation Deposits (332-333); and in Ritual
and Industry (333-335).  Considering the rhyton's ritual associations,
Koehl notes that the earliest (MM IIB Malia) Type IV rhyton (wide
opening, footed) is shaped like a pithos.  He suggests that libations
would have been poured from a vessel that metaphorically stands for the
event being celebrated--in this case, an occasion related to
viticulture, such as the harvest and pressing of grapes or opening
pithoi to taste the new wine (282, 333).

Another essay certain to provoke discussion is 'Rhyton Use and Gender'
(335-337).  A gender contradiction arises: on the one hand, all but one
rhyton in human form are of females (such female figural rhyta, Koehl
thinks, were perhaps also used by women); yet, on the other hand, all
the images that depict rhyta together with human figures associate the
vessel exclusively with males.  Women are never shown either carrying
or standing with rhyta.  Though numbers are small (and the timescale
long), Koehl identifies the specific group of males who handled rhyta
as priests ('Rhyta and Priests', 337-342).  Furthermore, based on the
vessel's distribution in LH I-IIIB:1 and LM II-IIIB burials, Koehl
suggests that one or two members of each LBA Aegean community
officially served as priests at any one time.  It is a pity we cannot
know if this possible custom of burying priests with their libation
sets started in the Minoan era: although rhyta are found in Prepalatial
and Protopalatial Minoan burials, the contexts are too disturbed for
any conclusions to be drawn.

Chapter 4 concludes with 'Aegean Rhyta in Extra-Aegean Contexts'
(342-350).  Significantly, they were the only Aegean vessels that were
adopted for ritual use in Egypt, Cyprus and the Levant. The Egyptian
evidence is especially compelling. The only Aegean vessel imitated in
Egypt in the early 18th Dynasty is the Type III conical rhyton. At Tel
el-Dab'a, two miniature conical rhyta were discovered along with many
small handleless cups in an outdoor cult spot, indicating that it was
the site of some ritual that involved drinking or toasting.  Strainers
made as matching sets were found nearby which suggests that, as in the
Aegean, the rhyta were used to strain a mixed beverage. All four rhyta
from Tel el-Dab'a are clearly based on LM IA (or LC I) prototypes.  As
such, they provide another synchronism between LM IA and the beginning
of the 18th Dynasty, supporting the traditional, or "low chronology"
(343).

Egyptian imitations of Aegean rhyta found in graves during the mid 18th
Dynasty are similar in profiles and decorations to LM IB rhyta, a
circumstance which implies that Aegean imports continued to arrive in
Egypt even though no such specimens are known.  Quite possibly,
imported rhyta were made of precious metals--like those depicted on
tomb walls in the Valley of the Nobles at Thebes--and, hence, did not
survive.  As it happens, one of the latest painted representations (in
the tomb of Horemheb at Saqqara [temp. Thutmosis IV-Amenophis III])
shows a rhyton being used within an Egyptian context: a servant holds
up a conical rhyton before one of four seated guests, one hand held
under the tip.  A dark spot painted on the servant's hand may represent
a spot of liquid, perhaps, as Koehl suggests, perfumed oil dripping
from the tip to be daubed on the guests. (345)

By an extraordinary chance, a recently-found painting on a MC III jug
from Akroteri, Thera, shows for the first time a rhyton being used in
the Aegean itself (add to the catalogue [as P2]: Chr. Doumas in [P.
Valavanis ed.] Great Moments in Greek Archaeology, 247,  fig.24, Athens
2007. Kapon Editions).  It pictures two facing wasp-waisted youths
dressed in kilts standing on either side of a large, sinuous, leafy
plant.  The youth on the left pours a liquid from a narrow-necked
libation jar into a Type IV cup rhyton held by the youth on the right.
Liquid drips from the bottom of the rhyton onto the plant (very much in
line with Koehl's reconstruction of ritual libations, p. 352.  The
closest comparanda for this cup-rhyton are Phylakopi #1329, 1330 [but
why does Koehl call them 'bowls'?])

The Summary and Conclusions (Chapter 5) reviews the chronological and
regional variations in the use of rhyta throughout the Aegean.  It
describes (with diachronic details given on Tables 27-29) the
developments in the morphology, mechanical workings, uses (Types 1, II,
IV for libations, Type III for flavouring and straining), and evolving
meanings of rhyta over time.

Koehl's great accomplishment lies exactly in what he set out to do: to
explain the 'how, why, when and where' of rhyta.  When I put down ABAR,
I had the strong feeling that, now at last, we have a good chance of
understanding the role these fascinating vessels played in Aegean life.