Middle and Late Bronze Age Metal Tools from the Aegean, Eastern ...

few select palaces (e.g. Mycenae, Athens, Orchomenos, and Thebes). Double axes are far
less frequent at lower-level Mycenaean sites; when they appear outside the palace, they
occur in hoards. Minoan specimens, on the other hand, are ubiquitous throughout the
island (68 sites), both in the “rural village and urban/palatial centre alike.” 336
Therefore,
the availability of the double ax was more restricted on the mainland, while the tool was
employed by a wider range of users on Crete.
One might assume that the Mycenaean double ax developed organically from
Minoan types, and this supposition seems to be supported by the sheer volume of tools in
both regions. Yet important differences between the Cretan and mainland double axes
include their period of use and their basic shape (Plates 4.4-9). A distinct chronological
gap exists between the use of the tool on Crete (primarily in the Neopalatial period) and
the inception of the tool on the mainland during the LH III period. Given the popularity
and broad scattering of the Cretan double ax during the Neopalatial period as well as the
numerous Minoan items in the Shaft Graves at Mycenae, it is inexplicable why double
axes were not found in any early Mycenaean context. When the tool appears on the
mainland in the LH III period, the Mycenaeans had made a few modifications to the
Cretan form. Specifically the mainland versions utilized oval shaft holes rather than
round ones; the overall tool was slightly elongated; and the object’s middle width (from
top of the shaft hole to the bottom) was narrowed (Fig. 4.2; Plates 4.7-9). These
observations imply that the Mycenaean craftspersons did not wholeheartedly adopt the
traditional form of the Minoan craft implement. There are two MH double axes from
Sesklo, but they resemble Cretan versions with their thick waists and circular shaft holes,
and so are unrelated to the LH III examples.
336 Evely 1993, 54.
142