ORIENTALIA LOVANIENSIA

ANALECTA
202

INTERCULTURAL CONTACTS IN
THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN
Proceedings of the International Conference at the
Netherlands-Flemish Institute in Cairo,
25th to 29th October 2008

edited by

KIM DUISTERMAAT and ILONA REGULSKI

with the collaboration of
GWEN JENNES and LARA WEISS

UITGEVERIJ PEETERS en DEPARTEMENT OOSTERSE STUDIES

LEUVEN PARIS WALPOLE, MA
2011

TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS .

CONTRIBUTORS .

IX

PROGRAMME OF THE CONFERENCE .

XIII

M. BIETAK
Preface .

XIX

XXI

S. SHERRATT
Between Theory, Texts and Archaeology: Working with the
Shadows . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

D. PANAGIOTOPOULOS
The Stirring Sea. Conceptualising Transculturality in the Late
Bronze Age Eastern Mediterranean . . . . . . . . .

31

E. ASOUTI
Community Identities, Interactions and Cultures in the
Pre-Pottery Neolithic of Western Asia: A Commentary on the
Production of Historical Knowledge . . . . . . . . .

53

N. MAC SWEENEY
Strange and Estranged: Perceiving Cultural Contacts in Late
Bronze Age-Early Iron Age Anatolia . . . . . . . .

67

A. SIMANDIRAKI-GRIMSHAW
Religious Exchanges Between Minoan Crete and its Neighbours:
Methodological Considerations . . . . . . . . . .

79

S. CAPPEL
Considerations on Sealing Practice and Agency in Minoan Crete
and the Eastern Mediterranean in the 2nd Millennium BC . .

89

K. DUISTERMAAT
Introduction and acknowledgements

THEORY AND METHODOLOGY

IDENTIFYING FOREIGNERS AND IMMIGRANTS

L. HULIN
Pragmatic Technology: Issues in the Interpretation of Libyan
Material Culture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101

VI

TABLE OF CONTENTS

M. WASMUTH
Tracing Egyptians outside Egypt: Assessing the Sources .

. 115

A. HASSLER
Mycenaeans at Tell Abu Gurob? .

. 125

B. BADER
Traces of Foreign Settlers in the Archaeological Record of Tell
el-Dab{a . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137
P. WILSON
Pots, People and the Plural Community: A Case Study of the
Greeks in Egypt at Sais . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159
P. PERKINS
The Etruscans, their DNA and the Orient .

. 171

MATERIAL EVIDENCE FOR CONTACT:

CERAMICS, IMPORTS AND IMITATIONS

J. BRETSCHNEIDER and K. VAN LERBERGHE

The Jebleh Plain through History: Tell Tweini and its Intercultural Contacts in the Bronze and Early Iron Age . . . . . 183
L. BADRE
Cultural Interconnections in the Eastern Mediterranean: Evidence
from Tell Kazel in the Late Bronze Age . . . . . . . 205
G.J. VAN WIJNGAARDEN
Tokens of a Special Relationship? Mycenaeans and Egyptians 225
B. BURNS
Context and Distance: Associations of Egyptian Objects and
Style at Mycenae . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 253
M. OWNBY and L.M.V. SMITH
The Impact of Changing Political Situations on Trade between
Egypt and the Near East: A Provenance Study of Canaanite Jars
from Memphis, Egypt . . . . . . . . . . . . . 267
A. AHRENS
Strangers in a Strange Land? The Function and Social Significance of Egyptian Imports in the Northern Levant during
the 2nd Millennium BC . . . . . . . . . . . . . 285

VII

TABLE OF CONTENTS

G. GRAZIADIO and G. GUGLIELMINO

The Aegean and Cypriot Imports to Italy as Evidence for Direct
and Indirect Trade in the 14th and 13th Centuries BC . . . 309
G. GERNEZ
The Exchange of Products and Concepts between the Near
East and the Mediterranean: The Example of Weapons during
the Early and Middle Bronze Ages . . . . . . . . . 327
F. HFLMAYER
Egyptian Imitations of Cypriote Base Ring Ware in the Eastern
Mediterranean . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 343
R.G. GRTEKIN-DEMIR
An Eastern Mediterranean Painting Convention in Western
Anatolia: Lydian Black-on-Red . . . . . . . . . . 359

MARITIME TRADE AND SEA PORTS

M.-H. GATES
Maritime Business in the Bronze Age Eastern Mediterranean:
the View from its Ports . . . . . . . . . . . . 381
M. SAMAES and J. COENAERTS
Exchange Between Southeastern Cyprus and the Surrounding
Regions in the Eastern Mediterranean During the Late Bronze
Age . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 395
A. VIANELLO
One Sea for All: Intercultural, Social and Economic Contacts
in the Bronze Age Mediterranean . . . . . . . . . 411
C. SAUVAGE
Evidence from Old Texts: Aspects of Late Bronze Age International Maritime Travel and Trade Regulations in the Eastern
Mediterranean? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 427

INFLUENCES IN ICONOGRAPHY, IDEOLOGY AND RELIGION

K. IREN
The First North Ionian Despotes Theron .

. 441

VIII

TABLE OF CONTENTS

E. PAPPA
From Seafaring Men to Travelling Images: The Phoenician
Commercial Expansion in Southeastern Spain as a Stimulus
for Artistic Interactions in Iberia . . . . . . . . . . 461
A. POGGIO
Incidents in Dynastic Hunts in Lycia and Phoenicia .

. 479

I. FAPPAS
Exchange of Ideas in the Eastern Mediterranean during the
14th and 13th centuries BC: The Case of Perfumed Oil Use and
Ideology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 495
S. ERDIL-KOCAMAN and B. GT
From Teshub to Jupiter Dolichenus The Iconographical
Development of the Storm God in Southeastern Turkey and
Northern Syria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 511
S. YALCIN
A Study of Cultural Interaction in the Eastern Mediterranean
during the Late Bronze Age: Adaptation of the Winged Sun
Disc by the Hittites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 521

ADMINISTRATION AND ECONOMY

L. JIRSKOV
Relations between Egypt and Syria-Palestine in the Latter Part
of the Old Kingdom . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 539
A. MUROCK HUSSEIN
Minoan Goat Hunting: Social Status and the Economics of War 569
R. MLLER-WOLLERMANN
The Impact of the Greco-Persian Conflict on the Egyptian
Economy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 589

THE EXCHANGE OF PRODUCTS AND CONCEPTS BETWEEN

THE NEAR EAST AND THE MEDITERRANEAN:
THE EXAMPLE OF WEAPONS DURING THE EARLY
AND MIDDLE BRONZE AGES
Guillaume GERNEZ

Metal weapons represent a valuable source of information in the study of

craft production and material culture, because their form is not only
related to their function, but is also the result of technical, strategic and
aesthetic choices and designs.
These specifics allow us to study the different levels of influence,
exchange and contact between various regions. The most difficult point
is to understand the nature of these influences, and if they are the result
of the movement of objects, people and/or ideas. There is generally no
linear or simple way, and we have to use specific examples before trying
to obtain a general view.
Mainly from the examples of spearheads, daggers and axes of different
forms and types, we will try to observe the evolution of the interactions
between the Near East and the Mediterranean region through time,
from the end of the 4th millennium BC to the beginning of the 2nd millennium BC.
The first question that concerns the weaponry of the Near East is the
relevance of the concept itself. Even if there are several homogeneous
ways of development and use in the whole area, it is in fact possible to
perceive several traditions partly separated and partly linked. These main
ensembles are Mesopotamia-Western Iran, Anatolia-Transcaucasia and
the Levant. Anatolia plays an important role in several cases, but the
Levant seems to be more closely linked to other cultural areas in the
Mediterranean. Consequently, the main focus of this short study will be
the Levantine weaponry, which results both from local development and
from the influence of the other important and innovative areas. During
the Early and Middle Bronze Ages (c. 3300-1550 BC), the more significant forms are short riveted daggers, crescentic axes, bipartite and tripartite spearheads, bipartite poker-like javelins, slotted spearheads (in the
Early Bronze Age (EB)), and fenestrated and duckbill axes, socketed
javelins and spearheads, ribbed daggers, narrow-bladed shaft-hole axes

328

G. GERNEZ

Fig. 1: Main forms and types of weapons in the Levant.

1: Crescentic axe. 2: 3-rivets dagger. 3: Slotted spearheads. 4: Tripartite
spearhead (northern Levant). 5: Bipartite poker-like javelin (northern Levant).
6: Long dagger. 7: Tripartite spearhead (southern Levant). 8: Bipartite
poker-like javelin (southern Levant). 9: Fenestrated axe. 10: 2-ribs dagger.
11: Socketted spearhead. 12: Duckbill axe. 13: 5-lined dagger.
14-15: Narrow-bladed shaft-hole axes. 16: Flat-rib dagger. 17: Curved sword.

and curved swords (in the Middle Bronze Age (MB))1 (Fig. 1). From
several examples of weapons, our aim is to understand some of the manifold kinds of technical, typological, conceptual and/or symbolic patterns
of exchange, transfer and relations between the Near East and Egypt,
Cyprus, the Aegean and the Western Mediterranean.
Egypt and the Near East
Because of their proximity, Egypt and the Levant had close and constantly
changing links throughout their history. The influences are various: trade,
1

For a complete synthesis, see Philip 1989.

THE EXCHANGE OF PRODUCTS AND CONCEPTS

329

technical transfer, conceptual and symbolic transfer and also people moving
with their own weapons and knowledge.
During the 4th millennium BC, one can note similarities between the
Egyptian simple riveted daggers found at el-Amrah (Randall-MacIver
and Mace 1902: 40) and Naqada (Crowfoot Payne 2000: 146) and several daggers from the Levant, especially at Byblos and Kfar Monash.
From the beginning of the Old Kingdom, documents remain rare. However, three semi-circular flat Egyptian axes have been discovered at
Byblos (Dunand 1937: pl. 95), and are likely to be imports rather than
imitations (Fig. 2). This type did not have any diffusion in the Levant, but
its form could have contributed to the specific design of the fenestrated
axes.
However, in most cases, the influence comes from the Near East.
Many weapons were created there and then adopted in Egypt. The first
and the most ancient example is the crescentic axe, which has a
long, flat, curved blade. The oldest were made in Mesopotamia and
northern Syria c. 2900/2700 BC, and from 2600/2400 BC they spread

Fig. 2: Egyptian flat semi-circular axes (1-4) and three axes found at Byblos
(5-7).

330

G. GERNEZ

widely in the Levant and later in Anatolia and Iran. In Mesopotamia, it

is one of the typical Akkadian axes. This form was perhaps known in
Egypt from the 5th dynasty2, but the first metal ones were not found in
Egypt before the 1st Intermediate Period. It is highly probable that the
Egyptian craftsmen and soldiers adopted this type through their contact
both peaceful and hostile with the Levantine area.
The second example is later, but follows the same itinerary: the curved
sword (or Harp / Khopesh), which is an improvement of the crescentic
axe (Gernez 2007: 423-432), appears in southern Mesopotamia at the
very end of the 3rd millennium BC (Tello and Susa). The specific form
and design diffused in a short time through Iran, the Levant and Egypt.
This adoption was due to the choice of the elite. Curved swords are
often found in prestigious contexts, for example the Royal Graves of
Byblos (Montet 1928: 176-180), and they later achieve a similar status
in Egypt.
The first half of the 2nd millennium BC sees the Levantine population
arriving in the Nile Delta. At Km el-Hisn during the 11th dynasty, a
large part of the weaponry is of Levantine type (ribbed daggers, socketed
spearhead, fenestrated axe) but there are also Egyptian flat axes (Hamada
and El-Amir 1947: pl. 31; Hamada and Farid 1948: pl. 7). The situation
differs during the Middle Kingdom and the 2nd Intermediate Period:
nearly all weapons from the graves discovered at Tell el-Daba are of
Levantine origin. Duckbill axes, curved swords, socketed spearheads,
ribbed daggers, knives and narrow-bladed shaft-hole axes are present.
At least a part of them were manufactured on site, as shown by the
numerous stone moulds discovered (Philip 2006: 172-200). However, the
Levantine weaponry is limited to the Delta area, and Egyptians borrowed
only the design of the daggers, especially the form of the guard and the
pommel.
Despite these important examples, it is notable that the connections
between Egypt and the Near East as far as metal weaponry is concerned
were not highly developed. In fact, there was a complete lack of transfer
of the main Near Eastern techniques and types during the EB and MB:
leaving aside the epsilon axes and Levantine weapons brought by the
Hykss and their predecessors, all the oriental weapons are absent. There
is no shaft-hole axe, bipartite poker-like javelin, tripartite spearhead,
sword, and the bent tang so frequent in the Levant and Cyprus was
never used in Egypt.
2

See the grave of Inti at Deshasheh (Shaw 1991: 38).

THE EXCHANGE OF PRODUCTS AND CONCEPTS

331

Cyprus and the Near East

Interrelations with Cyprus vary depending on the period, but the insulation is often strong. Most data about weaponry come from the large
graveyards of Vounous and Lapithos, and also smaller ones.3 The first
metal weapons appear in the middle of the 3rd millennium BC, during the
intermediate phase between the Chalcolithic and the EB, called Philia
Culture. It was of partly foreign origin probably Anatolian. Both
locals and newcomers acculturated, and formed the Bronze Age culture
in Cyprus (Webb and Frankel 1999). This hypothesis is confirmed by the
specifics of metal weapons, but one can also notice some influence from
the Levant during the end of the EB.
In Cyprus, from c. 2500/2400 BC, two main types of weaponry are
known: the short simple daggers with a riveted tang (one rivet) and the
long bipartite spearhead with a bent tang (sometimes wrongly called the
Cypriot sword4). These two types originated in Anatolia: the daggers
can be found throughout the peninsula, and the bipartite spearheads are
known in the north, in Ikiztepe (Bilgi 1984: 86; 1990: 202-204) as early
as 2700/2500 BC. There are several differences which may be due to a
Levantine elaboration: in bipartite Cypriot spearheads, the bending system of the tang resembles the Levantine one. The square section, the
enlargement and the angle of the butt appears on the EB IV poker-like
javelins from the middle Euphrates at Tell Halawa (Orthmann 1981: pl. 69),
Selenkahiye (Van Loon and Meijer 2001: fig. 4) and Til Barsip (ThureauDangin and Dunand 1936: pl. 31) as well as on the EB IV B / MB I
tripartite spearheads from the northern Levant at Tarsus (Goldman 1956:
fig. 427), Ras Shamra (Shaeffer 1949: 50), Byblos (Dunand 1950: pl. 75)
and Tell Munbaqa (Werner 1998: 110). Consequently, the form of the
spearhead has its origin in Anatolia, but the hafting mode is of Levantine
conception (Fig. 3).
Most daggers derive directly from the Anatolian weaponry as shown
by their dimensions, ratios, morphology and hafting mode (a rectangular
tang containing one rivet hole). However, other daggers, fewer in number,
are of Levantine design (their tang is rounded or triangular, and there are
two more rivets, placed on the shoulders). These daggers are typical of
the EB northern Levant. Consequently, weaponry in Cyprus originated
3
For a complete review of the weapons and other copper and bronze objects in Cyprus,
see Weinstein Balthazar 1990.
4
G. Philip finds five good arguments to suggest that these weapons had been used as
spears rather than as swords (Philip 1991: 67-68).

332

G. GERNEZ

Fig. 3: Distribution and diffusion of the bent/hooked tang technique

(spearheads).

both in Anatolia and the Levant, and developed during the last centuries
of the 3rd millennium BC.
From the beginning of the 2nd millennium BC the situation changes:
Cypriot weapons develop locally. The main types are the same as before,
with several minor enhancements (lobed shoulders, thinner rat tail
tang). This continuity is totally different from what can be observed in
Anatolia, Mesopotamia and the Levant, where most types are of a new
design and also often have new technical aspects fenestrated / duckbill
axes, socketed spearheads, ribbed daggers, narrow-bladed shaft-hole axes
appear during this period.5 There are very few weapons from the Near
5
Most of these weapons first appear at the end of the 3rd millennium BC but develop
and diffuse quickly from the beginning of the 2nd millennium BC.

THE EXCHANGE OF PRODUCTS AND CONCEPTS

333

East in Cyprus during the first centuries of the 2nd millennium BC.
Several comparisons have been made (Branigan 1966), but they are very
rare and are similarities or imitations rather than imports. For example,
a dagger found in Vounous (Catling and Karageorghis 1960: 110) has a
Minoan form but also a multiple-lined decor similar to several Byblos
daggers (Dunand 1950: pl. 66.5433). In any case, insularity seems strong
during this period, and the weaponry of Cyprus shows a local development, far from the rapid and widespread evolution in the whole Near
East. About 1650/1600 BC, one can note a new period of Levantine
influence: the narrow-bladed shaft-hole axes and the metal belts can be
found on the island at Dhalli Kafkallia (Keswani 2005: 381). Other axes
of this type are known at Tamassos-Chomazouda, Tamassos-Pera, Hagia
Paraskevi, Alambra and Idalion-Kafkallia (Buchholz 1979). During the
Late Bronze Age (LB), socketed spearheads were at last adopted, but
remained rare.
In summary, relations with regard to weaponry between the Near East
and Cyprus seem to be unilateral and limited in time, and appear to have
largely broken off during the MB I.
The Aegean and the Near East
Two aspects of the interrelations between the Near East and the Aegean
can be considered here. The first concerns relations between Crete and
the Levant, while the second involves Anatolian-Aegean contacts.
The first question was studied in the 1960s by K. Branigan (1966; 1967)
based on the exotic daggers found in the Aegean, and by N.K. Sandars
(1961) concerning the development and origin of Aegean swords. In the
light of new research, it is now difficult to suppose a direct link between
the Levant and the Aegean during the EB or the MB. The intrusive daggers found in the assemblage of Platanos, Trapeza and Psychro (Branigan
1966: 124; 1967: 118) do not seem to be of Levantine manufacture, but
may be imitations of such types, transferred through Cyprus or Anatolia.
With regard to swords, which appear in the Aegean during the Middle
Minoan period, it is possible to assume that the concept of this long
weapon was transferred after a long tradition in Anatolia (Arslantepe,
Tlintepe, Alaca Hyk, Sakegz, Diyarbekir), then the Levant (Byblos), Transcaucasia (Saduga, Mravaltskali, Samtavro) and Crete (Malia)
(Mller-Karpe 1994a; Gernez 2007: 433-443). However, typology
shows that in each area, the rare swords are in fact longer versions of the
local daggers (Abramisvili 2001; Schulz 2006; Gernez 2007: 433-443).

334

G. GERNEZ

Moreover, the rarity of swords and their contexts could mean that this
weapon was designed for the elite and was not yet used in warfare.
The transfer of this concept seems more linked to its symbolic impact
and the high level of technical knowledge required than to modes of
combat or exchange of products. The role of the Levant is probably
minor in this transfer, whereas Anatolia was both the place of invention
and the centre of diffusion to the east and west.
The second main point concerns direct relations between the Aegean
and Anatolia, and the main form of weapon is the slotted spearhead
(Fig. 4). Among common Anatolian weaponry of the EB and MB (shafthole axe, epsilon axe, socketed poker-like javelin, mace-head, bipartite
spearhead), it is the only form which was adopted in the Aegean. These
bipartite spearheads often have a long narrow tang, sometimes hooked,
and a triangular or foliated blade with symmetric slots on its base. At least
eight types can be identified, and the variety is large compared to the
limited number of artefacts. The slots are made with the aim of reinforcing the hafting (Yadin 1963: 45), but could in some cases be residual and
decorative only. The origins and development of this specific weapon are
still difficult to understand because the precise chronology of the first
artefacts is unclear. This model could have been created in two places:
West Anatolia / Cycladic islands c. 2500/2400 BC (Troy, Thermi, Dokathismata and Stavros (Amorgos)) or Central Anatolia (Alaca Hyk and
Yeni Hayat Ky) (Branigan 1974: pl. 10 and 27; Arik 1937: pl. 174;
Mller-Karpe 1994b: pl. 92). In the Aegean, several types coexisted from
this period on, and differ from the Anatolian ones.6 It can be assumed
that the development of such weapons follows an ancient evolution of
bipartite spearheads, which is known in Anatolia and not in the Aegean.
So it is possible that craftsmen from the Cycladic islands or Troy improved
on an Anatolian weapon. From this (or these) homeland(s), slotted spearheads reached Northern Anatolia (Horoztepe, Ikiztepe), the Caucasus
(Elista), Cilicia (Tarsus, Ordu) and Northern Syria (Til Barsip, Halawa,
Umm el-Marra, Tell Brak, Judaidah, Ugarit) during the EB IV (2400-2000
BC), then Palestine later (c. 1800 at Megiddo)7 (Gernez 2007: 340-347).
During the MB I-II, these weapons were mainly known in Anatolia and
the Aegean. They then declined, and disappeared c. 1700 BC.
6
It is not yet possible to ascertain if development began in one area or the other, even
though Cycladic precedence has been assumed by A. de Maigret (De Maigret 1976: 77).
7
This spearhead, dated to the MB, is the only one known in the southern Levant, and
belongs to an EB Syrian type.

THE EXCHANGE OF PRODUCTS AND CONCEPTS

335

Fig. 4: Distribution of slotted spearheads.

The specificities of these slotted spearheads (origins, variety, and

distribution) could reflect mutual Anatolian-Aegean contributions and/or
competition for the development of a technique.
The Levant and the Western Mediterranean: the problem of La Pastora dolmen (Spain).
A very well known group of 30 tripartite spearheads was discovered in
1860 in the tumulus covering the dolmen of La Pastora, near Seville,
Spain (Guilaine 1994: 90; Montero Ruiz and Teneishvili 1996: 76).
This quite poor context does not allow precise dating,8 but the most
important fact is that this ensemble is the largest one known for this type
8
Dolmens of the same type have been dated to the local Chalcolithic period, between
the last centuries of the 3rd millennium BC and the first centuries of the 2nd millennium BC
(Montero Ruiz and Teneishvili 1996: 75). However, the group was found under a stone
in the slope of the tumulus, and should be linked to a later use.

336

G. GERNEZ

Fig. 5: Comparison between tripartite spearheads from

the southern Levant and from La Pastora.

of weapon and, secondly, that it is the only place outside the Near East
where such weapons have been found.
The tripartite concept, as well as the form, dimensions (between 17.3 cm
and 30.3 cm) and ratios are very similar to the southern Levantine type
(Fig. 5). Two differences can be observed: the thinness of the stem, and
most of all the end of the tang, which is not bent. Even if the tripartite
model was very common in a large part of the Ancient Near East from
the end of the 4th millennium BC to the middle of the 2nd millennium BC,
the only good parallels date to a short period (2300-2000 BC) and were
found in a small area: examples were discovered in shaft graves at Tell
el-Ajjul (Petrie 1931: pl. 19), Lachish (Tufnell 1958: pl. 22), Djebel
Qaaqir (Dever 1995: pl. 3), and Barqai (Gophna 1992: pl. 23).

THE EXCHANGE OF PRODUCTS AND CONCEPTS

337

In order to ascertain if the group found in La Pastora has an oriental

origin, chemical analyses were made. The results indicate a homogenous
and local production, so the researchers suppose a local invention which
had not known any success in this area (Montero Ruiz and Teneishvili
1996: 88). However, there are other possibilities which could allow us
to better explain the presence and the importance of this group of spearheads in Spain. With similarities in design despite differences in form,
it could be an imitation. So several solutions can be assumed:
Either travellers/craftsmen saw such tripartite weapons in the Levant
during their period of use, or several rare objects were in circulation and
a few of them reached Spain, where local craftsmen tried to imitate the
model. This could mean that some connections, even if infrequent and
maybe indirect, existed between each side of the Mediterranean as early
as the end of the 3rd millennium BC.
Some of these spearheads could have been discovered later in the
Levant, for example due to the reuse of a grave in the MB/LB, when the
circulation of peoples and ideas in the Mediterranean is well attested, and
could have reached the Iberian Peninsula at this time.
In any case, the foreign aspect of these Levantine weapons can explain
the two singularities of the La Pastora group: the quantity of spearheads (symbolic and/or artistic interest for such exotic products) and
the unique presence of these weapons outside the Near East (local inhabitants and warriors refused the adoption of a foreign and/or archaic type
of weapon).
Conclusion
These different examples reveal the diversity and complexity of the interrelations between the Near East and the Mediterranean. In general, the
diffusion of weapons occurred mostly but not entirely in an eastto-west direction, from Anatolia and the Levant to Cyprus, the Aegean
area and Egypt.9 In summary, several interconnecting factors played a
part in this diffusion:
Function: the adoption of a weapon was linked to the development of
warfare.
Technique: knowledge could be transferred, or not, between peoples.
9
It is, however, important to keep in mind that the first phase of a great development
occurred in the Balkanic area during the Chalcolithic period.

338

G. GERNEZ

Concept: a form/type of weapon could be imitated.

Symbol: the status of a weapon increased (prestige) or limited (cultural
identity) its diffusion.
Trade: circulation of objects eased the transfer of models and types.
Migrations: people brought their techniques, knowledge and weapons
with them when they moved.
Throughout the Levant and Anatolia, a small but effective part of the
Near Eastern weaponry was diffused in the Eastern Mediterranean region,
mainly from the end of the EB onwards.
Bibliography
ABRAMISVILI, M.
2001
Transcaucasian Rapiers and the Problem of their Origin, in
R.M. Boehmer and J. Maran (eds.), Lux Orientis. Archologie
zwischen Asien und Europa. Festschrift fr Harald Hauptmann
zum 65. Geburstag (Internationale Archologie 12), Rahden.
ARIK, R.O.
1937
Les fouilles dAlaca Hyk entreprises par la socit dHistoire
turque. Rapport prliminaire sur les travaux en 1935 (Trk Tarih
Kurumu yaynlarndan V-1), Ankara.
BILGI, .
1984
Metal Objects from Ikiztepe-Turkey, Beitrge zur Allgemeinen
und Vergleichenden Archologie 6, 31-96.
1990
Metal Objects from Ikiztepe-Turkey, Beitrge zur Allgemeinen und
Vergleichenden Archologie 9-10, 119-219.
BRANIGAN, K.
1966
Byblite Daggers in Cyprus and Crete, American Journal of Archaeology 70 (2), 123-6.
1967
Further Light on Prehistoric Relations Between Crete and Byblos,
American Journal of Archaeology 71 (2), 117-21.
1974
Aegean Metalwork of the Early and Middle Bronze Age (Oxford
monographs on classical archaeology), Oxford.
BUCHHOLZ, H.-G.
1979
Bronzene Schaftrohxte aus Tamassos und Umgebung, Studies
Presented to Porphyros Dikaios, Nicosia, 76-88.
CATLING, H.W. and KARAGHEORGIS, V.
1960
Minoika in Cyprus, The Annual of the British School at Athens 55,
109-27.
CROWFOOT PAYNE, J.
2000
Catalogue of the Predynastic Egyptian Collection in the Ashmolean
Museum (2nd ed.), Oxford.
DE MAIGRET, A.
1976
Le lance nellAsia anterior nellEt del Bronzo. Studio Tipologico
(Studi Semitici 47), Universit di Roma, Roma.

THE EXCHANGE OF PRODUCTS AND CONCEPTS

339

DEVER, W.G.
1995
Social Structures in the Early Bronze IV Period in Palestine, in:
T.E. Levy (ed.), The Archaeology of Society in the Holy Land, New
York.
DUNAND, M.
1937
Fouilles de Byblos. Tome I: 1926-1932, Atlas (Bibliothque archologique et historique 24), Paris.
1950
Fouilles de Byblos. Tome II: 1933-1938, Atlas (Etudes et documents
darchologie 3), Paris.
GERNEZ, G.
2007
Larmement en mtal au Proche et Moyen-Orient, Thse de doctorat de lUniversit Paris 1 Panthon-Sorbonne, Paris. http://tel.
archives-ouvertes.fr/tel-00339404/fr/
GOLDMAN, H.
1956
Excavations at Gzl Kule, Tarsus. Volume II: From the Neolithic
through the Bronze Age, Princeton.
GOPHNA, R.
1992
The Intermediate Bronze Age, in: A. Ben-Tor (ed.), The Archaeology of Ancient Israel (rev. transl. from Hebrew by R. Greenberg),
Cumberland.
GUILAINE, J.
1994
La mer partage La Mditerrane avant lcriture, 7000-2000
avant Jsus-Christ, Paris.
HAMADA, A. and EL-AMIR, M.
1947
Excavations at Km el-Hisn. Season 1943, Annales du Service des
Antiquits de lEgypte 46, 101-11.
HAMADA, A. and FARID, S.
1948
Excavations at Km el-Hisn. Third season 1946, Annales du Service
des Antiquits de lEgypte 48 (2), 299-308.
KESWANI, P.S.
2005
Death, Prestige, and Copper in Bronze Age Cyprus, American
Journal of Archaeology 109 (3), 341-401.
MONTET, P.
Byblos et lEgypte. Quatre campagnes de fouilles Gebeil, 19211928
1922-1923-1924, Texte (Bibliothque archologique et historique 11),
Paris.
MONTERO RUIZ, I. and TENEISHVILI, T.O.
1996
Estudio actualizado de las puntas de jabalina del Dolmen de la
Pastora (Valenciana de la Concepcion, Sevilla), Trabajos de prehistoria 53 (1), 73-90.
MLLER-KARPE, A.
1994a
Anatolisches Bronzeschwerter und Sdosteuropa, in: C. Dobiat
(ed.), Festschrift fr Otto-Herman Frey zum 65. Geburstag
(Marburger Studien zur Vor- und Frhgeschichte 16), Marburg,
431-44.
1994b
Altanatolisches Metallhandwerk (Untersuchungen aus dem Institut
fr Ur- und Frhgeschichte der Universitt Kiel und dem Archologischen Landesmuseum der Christian-Albrechts-Universitt,

340

G. GERNEZ

Schleswig sowie dem Landesamt fr Vor- und Frhgeschichte von

Schleswig-Holstein 75), Neumnster.
ORTHMANN, W.
1981
Halawa 1977 bis 1979 Vorlafiger Bericht ber die 1. bis. 3 Grabungskampagne (Saarbrcker Beitrge zur Altertumskunde 31),
Bonn.
PETRIE, W.M.F.
1931
Ancient Gaza I. Tell el Ajjul, London.
PHILIP, G.
1989
Metal Weapons of the Early and Middle Bronze Ages in SyriaPalestine (British Archaeological Reports 526), Oxford.
1991
Cypriot Bronzework in the Levantine World: Conservatism, Innovation and Social Change, Journal of Mediterranean Archaeology
4 (1), 59-108.
2006
Tell el-Daba XV. Metalwork and Metalworking Evidence of the
Late Middle Kingdom and the Second Intermediate Period (Denkschriften der Gesamtakademie 36) (Untersuchungen der Zweigstelle
Kairo des sterreichischen archologischen Instituts 26), Vienna.
RANDALL-MACIVER, D. and MACE, A.C.
1902
El Amrah and Abydos 1899-1901 (Memoirs of the Egypt Exploration Fund 23), London.
SANDARS, N.K.
1961
The First Aegean Swords and Their Ancestry, American Journal
of Archaeology 65 (1), 17-29.
SCHAEFFER, C.F.A.
1949
Ugaritica II (Bibliothque archologique et historique 47), Paris.
SCHULZ, C.E.
Zum Aufkommen des Schwertes, Anodos 4-5 (2004-2005), 215-29.
2006
SHAW, I.
1991
Egyptian Warfare and Weapons (Shire Egyptology 16), Buckingamshire.
THUREAU-DANGIN, F. and DUNAND, M.
1936
Til Barsib (2 Vols.) (Bibliothque archologique et historique 23),
Paris.
TUFNELL, O.
1958
Lachish IV (Tell ed-Duweir). The Bronze Age (The Wellcome
archaeological research expedition to the Near East publications 4),
London.
VAN LOON, M.N. and MEIJER, D.J.W.
2001
Graves and their contents, in: M.N. van Loon (ed.), Selenkahiye.
Final Report on the University of Chicago and University of
Amsterdam Excavations in the Tabqa Reservoir, Northern Syria,
1967-1975 (Uitgaven van het Nederlands Historisch-Archaeologisch
Instituut te Istanbul 91), Leiden.
WEBB, J.M. and FRANKEL, D.
1999
Characterizing the Philia Facies: Material Culture, Chronology,
and the Origin of the Bronze Age in Cyprus, American Journal of
Archaeology 103 (1), 3-43.

THE EXCHANGE OF PRODUCTS AND CONCEPTS

341

WEINSTEIN BALTHAZAR, J.
1990
Copper and Bronze Working in Early through Middle Bronze Age
Cyprus (Studies in Mediterranean archaeology and literature.
Pocket-books 84), Jonsered.
WERNER, P.
1998
Lanzen- und Speerspitzen, in: R.M. Czichon and P. Werner (eds.),
Die Bronzezeitlichen Kleinfunde (Ausgrabungen in Tall Munbaqa
Ekalte 1) (Wissenschaftliche Verffentlichungen der Deutschen
Orient-Gesellschaft 97), Saarbrcken, 110-11.
YADIN, Y.
1963
The Art of Warfare in Biblical Lands in the Light of Archaeological
Discovery, London.