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

the hypothesis that the Mycenaean double ax did not stem directly from Minoan types
(see sections C and D1). If the Mycenaeans had been entirely influenced by Neopalatial
tools, it is reasonable to suppose that Minoan double axes and other shafted tool types
would have arrived on the mainland as a collective tool package. Yet such a hypothesis is
not supported by the infrequency of double adzes, ax-adzes, ax-hammers, adze-hammers
and pick-adzes on the mainland.
Regional total MBA LBA General 2 nd millennium
Crete 51 4 33 14
Mainland 9 - 5 4
Islands - - - -
Cyprus 28 1 27 -
Anatolia 4 - 3 1
Syria-Palestine 3 - 3 -
Shipwrecks 4 - 4 -
Total 99 5 75 19
Table 4.11: Shafted, combination and double ended tool distribution (excludes double axes) 391
F1: Double adzes (Plates 4.31-4.34)
The double adze is a shafted tool with a single-bevel cutting edge on either side;
Catling describes the tool as “consisting of two equally balanced cutting blades on either
side of a round socket.” 392 All known examples of the double adze (29 total) have
circular shaft holes (Plates 4.31-4). The tasks that the tool performed are debatable;
Deshayes believed the double adze was best for agriculture, operating like the modern
mattock for digging purposes. 393 Catling pointed to the “very small and light” nature of
the Cypriot examples as an indication that the tools were used by carpenters rather than
masons (for instance, see Plates 4.33-4 rather than 4.31-2). 394
Evely also implied that
they were for woodworking, though he noted that many of the Minoan double adzes were
391
NB: The numbers in Table 4.11 exclude all implements that have been classified as double axes
elsewhere. Included are implements that were converted into ax-adzes or the like from double axes.
392
Catling 1964, 89.
393
Deshayes 1960, 262.
394
Catling 1964, 89.
167