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

tool distribution patterns in hoards and shipwrecks demonstrate a correspondence
between Aegean tool kits and the accumulated Uluburun and Gelidonya metals.
The accumulation of metal objects at either shipwreck was not concentrated in
one spot, thereby casting doubt on whether the tools were conceptualized as a collective
group. Bass notes that many complete Gelidonya bronzes came from the cabin space of
Area G and M, perhaps indicating a difference between personal crew possessions and
cargo. 705 The Uluburun tools were “found on various parts of the wreck” with the highest
concentration of objects from L-11, M-11, N-11 and K-14. 706 Pulak notes that the
majority of the wood- and stone-working tools came from the same general area in “what
is believed to have been the after section of the ship,” but that they were not all found
together as in a hoard. 707
The dispersed tools from the wrecks could have been a distinct
grouping before they were separated underwater during the sinking of the ship.
Rarely interpreted as commodities for exchange, shipwreck tools are traditionally
considered as either belonging to the ship’s owner for maintenance or as the personal
possessions of the crew. The array of craft implements from Uluburun and Gelidonya
indicates that they constituted a typical kit of a craftsperson. It is not beyond the realm of
possibility that itinerant craftspersons traveled with personal tools on the ship, while
incorporating foreign implements into their repertoire. This possibility is substantiated by
Bass’ basic interpretation of the Gelidonya metals: “All of the elements necessary for
bronze-making were on board – pure copper, pure tin, and bronze scraps and ingots for
being recast…All that was missing from a traveling smith’s complement of material were
705 Bass 1967, 117.
706 Pulak 1998, 208; Pulak 1988.
707 Pulak 1998, 208.
302