Bronze Age and the Aegean - Essay Example

Bronze Age and the Aegean Name of the Student: Name of the Instructor: Name of the course: Code of the course: Submission date: Bronze Age and the Aegean Extensive Was The Overseas Mycenaean Trading Network? How Was Bronze Age Trade Organized And Conducted? The Mycenaean age is a cultural period in ancient Greece which is estimated to have occurred in between the years 1900 BC to 1000 BC. The Mycenaean age occurred during the Bronze Age. The Bronze Age is an ancient Greek age which is characterized by a high regard for the Bronze metal. At this time Bronze was actively used for trading purposes (Oliver, 2012). In addition to it being a means of exchange, it was used in the Greek industries to make tools and weapons which the Greeks used as trading items. One of the highly regarded economic activities in the Mycenaean age of Bronze Age was trade. Just as trade is important to modern economies, it has the same importance to the ancient societies, with Greece being actively involved with it. Ideally, the Mycenaean trading network was extensive; meaning that the people living in the Mycenaean age engaged in trading activities with states and kingdoms outside Greece. One of the most interesting things about the Bronze Age trade was organized and conducted. The trading commodities of the Mycenaean people, their trading partners and the ways in which trading activities were governed are some of the interesting elements of the Bronze Age trade. The following essay will take a deep insight into the Mycenaean trading network. It will analyze how the Bronze Age trade was organized and conducted. As indicated in the introduction, the Mycenaean trading network in the Bronze Age is something to marvel about. The Mycenaean’s traded amongst themselves, trading off what they had in plenty in place of what they did not have. However, one remarkable thing about the Mycenaean trade is the overseas trading network. There were various Mycenaean trading centers. Some of the evidence supporting this is archeological data which has been collected over time. The Mycenaean civilization was one which was characterized by documentation. Although no documentation of the age is available, the discovery of the Linear B tablets shone light into the analysis of the Mycenaean history (Palaima, n.d). It gave some reference some trading activities which existed at that age. The evacuation of graves other archeological sites also provides some evidence that trade existed in the Bronze Age. On this point, it is important to note that the discovery of a nestle body cloth which had been used to bury a man near the present Austria is an evidence of trade since nestle textiles was one of the precious trading commodities of the ancient Greece (Popular Archaeology, 2012). Moreover, archeological data illustrating the existence of specialized professions such as bakeries, blacksmith and carpenters is a evidence of a trading activity which existed during the Bronze Age. The tom of Rekmire (Vizier of Tuthmosis 3) also provides some evidence about the existence of trade in the Mycenaean period. The artwork on the tomb’s walls illustrates the trading items and activities which the Mycenaean people traded with. The archeological remains of Mycenaean poetry in Amarna Egypt are another indicator of the trading activities in the Mycenaean period. One fascinating thing of the trade in Mycenaean period in the Bronze Age was the trading network. It is interesting to understand the large trading network owing to the various odds which countered long distance trade (Oliver, 2012). One of the important trading partners of the Mycenaean people was the Egyptians. The Mycenaean people traded actively with the Egyptians, thus the findings of several Mycenaean items of trade which includes poetry, gold and bronze in various archeological sites for instance the tomb of Senmut who was a favorite minister for Hatsheput. Generally, Egypt served as the link to African countries for instance Punt which is the region found south of Ethiopia, Libya and some parts of Asia and the Middle East. Some of the other important trading partners in the Mycenaean trading network included Italy, Lipari, Syria, Canaan, Troy and Palestine. Over the Mycenaean’s trading activities, they came across several civilisations. Some of them included the Egyptian civilization which is a major civilization in history owing to the great management and organization of the political system in addition to the technological and economic prowess of the Egyptians. Other civilisations which Mycenaean people interacted with includes the Hittite civilization and Troy civilization which would later turn out to be threats to the Mycenaean civilization, thus leading to its downfall (Cline, 1991). The cultural interaction between the Mycenaean people and other peoples during trading resulted into the mixing of cultures between the Mycenaean and their trading partners. One of the cultural interactions was via intermarriages between the Mycenaean peoples and the people from their trading partners. There were also political interactions between the trading states which led to them having a substantial effect on the Mycenaean administration. It is believed that the centralised administration of the Mycenaean people was as a result of their interaction with Egypt whose pharaoh administration depicted such form of centralised governance. Lastly, the cultural interactions of the Mycenaean people with their trading partners led to the establishment of social classes. The trading of luxurious commodities such as Gold and luxurious pottery led to the upholding of several items which were not previously regarded highly by the Greeks (Hruby, 2010). Therefore, the cultural interactions led to the symbolization of possession of such items as an indication of wealth. Ideally, Bronze was regarded highly in ancient Greece by the Mycenaean. However, with the introduction of the other items via trading activities, the Mycenaean culture was compelled to uphold the luxurious items as a sign of wealth. The discovery of the Linear B tablets by archeologists marked a landmark discovery in the unveiling of the ancient Greek life (Vianello, 2000). This is due to the fact that the tablets provided a documented evidence on the state of the Mycenaean people, which was far much credible than the deductions from history which were previously done by archeologists. However, the Linear B tablets were not initially meant to provide documentation for history but rather, they were some of book keeping materials by a bookkeeper, which illustrates the hardness of deciphering the information in the tablets (Haskel, 2004). Therefore no direct inferences about trade or any other Mycenaean activity can be made from the Linear B tablets owing to the coded language used in them (Palaimas,Pope & Reilly 2000). However, several deductions about the Mycenaean trade can be deduced from the tablets. One of them is that indeed trading activities existed in the Bronze Age. One of the inferences which can be made from the tablets is about the existence of textiles trading in the Bronze Age. This is deciphered from the code MY Z 508, which infers to the movement of cloth to Thebes (Haskel, 2004). Generally, textiles were a major trading commodity in ancient Greece. Professional clothes makers were an elite group in the society (Palaima, n.d). One of the most revered clothes in the Mycenaean period was nestle. This is the reason as to why the body cloth wrapping which had been used for burial was discovered, several inferences were made about the Mycenaean trade. Another inference about Mycenaean trade which can be made from the Linear B tablets is the movement of Zakanthian chariot wheels as Pylos. Therefore, it can be learnt from the linear B tablets that textile materials and iron works such as the chariot wheels were some of the trading commodities of the Mycenaean people. Trading in the Mycenaean period was organised by palatial administrations and a possible centralised administration from Mycenae, the capital (Earle, 2011). However, free enterprise trade also existed in the Bronze Age trade. The nature of the trading commodities, the need for military security and the need to manage the Greek wealth and resources for the development of the country saw the need for the palatial administration of the Mycenaean trading activities. One of the most important aspects of palatial administration in the Mycenaean period was Wanax. Generally, Wanax had a substantial power over the political, social and religious activities in the Mycenaean period (Haskell, 2004). Therefore, it is believed that palatial administration had a Great role to play in the management of the trading activities in the Bronze Age. Ideally, some documented evidence about the involvement of Wanax in the administration of trading activities can be found in the stirrup jars which were used to put oil. The inscriptions on the oil jars pointed out that Wanax received some revenue from the sale of oil. Generally, it must be acknowledged that oil was an important trading commodity for the Mycenaean people. Due to the fact that the special scents which were associated with the Greek oils could not be gotten from the local raw materials, their importation from the overseas trading partners necessitated the intervention of an administrative body. This is the same case with the large scale bronze and metal working industry of the Mycenaean period; the raw materials had to be imported, thus necessitating the intervention of the Mycenaean administrative body. Wanax also does have a special influence over the textile industry as it does on the oil industry and there is also some documented evidence alluding to this (Nosch,2011). Moreover, the capital of the Mycenaean empire, Mycenae, had a substantial influence on the trading activities of the Mycenaean trade. The Mycenaean empire comprises of four states, and Mycenae was one of them and its capital. In trading activities which necessitated the intervention of the capital such as oversea agreements and trading voyages, the central palatial administration at Mycenae came in. As indicated earlier, the Mycenaean trade was characterized by extensive overseas trade, with Mycenaean people making various trade voyages to Egypt, Syria, Palestine, Canaan and Italy among other trade destinations. There is wide evidence alluding to this. First is the fact that the large scale bronze and metal working in Mycenaean empire needed raw materials, bronze and metals which were not locally available in Greece, thereby meaning that they had to be imported from somewhere else. This is an indicator that trade was necessary to ensure that the Mycenaean industries got their raw materials (Gale, 1991). In addition to this, the presence of Mycenaean influences and trading items such as pots in their trading partner’s territories is an indicator of the overseas trading activities of the Mycenaean people. On this point, it is important to note of the Mycenaean pots which were found in Egypt. On the other hand, there are several foreign items which have been found in what is believed to have been the Mycenaean Empire (Oliver, 2012). Such includes gold and silver, which have found in several tombs and archeological sites. The source of the gold and silver is believed to have been Egypt, thus illustrating trading activities between Egypt and Mycenaean people. In addition to this, several paintings which allude to the trading activities between the two countries have been found in both Egypt and Mycenaean empire. Another piece of evidence which shows that the Mycenaean trade was characterized by an extensive overseas network is the shipwrecks which have been discovered. It is believed that these ships were carrying goods from the Mycenaean empire to the overseas trading destinations or vice versa. The excavation of a Bronze Age ship at Ulu Burun is one of the ship wreckages which have provided a lot of evidence to the existence of overseas trade in the Bronze Age. The type of goods and materials which the ship carried in addition to the architecture of the ships is a proof of their link to the Mycenaean trade (Bass, 1986). The main trading commodities of the Mycenaean Greece were oils, textile, pottery bronze tools and weapons. The Mycenaean oil industry was flourishing (Watson, 2001). It made sweet scented oils from local and imported raw materials. The textile industry was also flourishing, highly valued textiles made their way out of the Mycenaean empire to the overseas markets. The large scale bronze and metal working industry was great; hence Mycenaeans were able to make high technologies of weaponry such as daggers, swords and spears which were major exports for the Mycenaean people (Gale, 1991). The raw materials which were deficient in the Mycenaean empire included specific materials for scenting oils which had to be imported from Canaan and bronze and other metals which had to be imported from Egypt and other kingdoms. This fostered the overseas trade links in the Mycenaean age. Among the trading commodities in the Mycenaean trade were the luxurious commodities. They did not have a high economic value to states oblivious of their high monetary value. Some of the luxury commodities in the Eastern Mediterranean before 200 B.C. includes Mycenaean luxurious pottery, gold and gold items, silver and silver items, Bronze and bronze items, oils and textiles (Rutter,n.d). Among these, the Mycenaean communities had a high regard for oils, bronze and textiles and they were the most prized items. This is due to the fact that the items were locally produced in the country. Owing to the unavailability of raw materials to make them, they had to import them. In addition to this, they had a special bearing on Mycenaean culture, which explains their high pricing. Water transport has been a very important transport system for large bulks both in ancient societies and in the modern ones. Therefore, it is important to note that water transport played a big role in the transportation of goods from Mycenaean empire to its overseas trading partners and vice versa (Bass ed., 1972). The numerous ship wreckages which have been discovered by archeologists are an evidence of this. Therefore, water transport provided the much needed link to the overseas trading destinations. Other forms of haulage were land transportation systems which included the haulage of goods in chariots by animals (horses and mules). Manual haulage by humans was also used to transport goods. In conclusion, it can be seen from this essay that the Mycenaean trade had an extensive trading network. From the essay, it can be seen that the Mycenaean people were actively involved in trade, the artistic paintings on tombs, the Linear B tablet, the shipwrecks and vast archeological data are just but some of the evidence which depict that Mycenaean were actively involved in trade. The organization and coordination of the Mycenaean trade was great; which illustrates the reason as to why the Mycenaean Empire accumulated vast wealth to become an economic and military power house of the Bronze Age. The Mycenaean trade was basically administered via a palatial authority. The essay has discussed on how Winax, a Greek palatial authority oversaw the management of the trading activities in the empire. A documented evidence of the administration of Winax in the oil industry is available via some inscriptions on oil jars. The essay has also discussed about the various trading commodities in the Mycenaean trade. On this point, the essay has gone further to discuss about some of the precious trading items which were more of luxurious value than of economic. The essay has also discussed about the sea and its importance to the Mycenaean trade. It has been acknowledged that the sea was the main transportation system of the times, and it brought about place and time utility in the Mycenaean trade. Generally this essay has given a deep insight into the Mycenaean trade in the Bronze Age. From, it is appropriate to state that indeed the Mycenaean trade had an extensive trading network, with various overseas trading destinations. The great coordination and organization of the Mycenaean empire is the reason behind the success if the highly regarded historical trade. References Bass, G. ed. 1972. The Earliest Seafarers In A History of Seafaring Based on Underwater Archaeology, Thames and Hudson,London.11-36. Bass, G., 1986. A Bronze Age Shipwreck at Ulu Burun (Kas): The 1984 Campaign American Journal of Archaeology, 90 (1); 269-296 Cline, E. 1991. A Possible Hittite Embargo against the Mycenaeans, Historia. 40 (1);1-9 Earle, T., 2011. Redistribution in Aegean Palatial Societies. Redistribution and the Political Economy: The Evolution of an Idea, American Journal of Archaeology, 115 (1); 237-244 Gale, N., 1991.Bronze Age Trade in the Mediterranean, Studies in Mediterranean Archaeology, xc (i); 121- 387 Haskell, H., 2004. Wanax to Wanax: Regional Trade Patterns in Mycenaean Crete, Hesperia Supplements, Vol. 33, Essays in Honor of Sara A. Immerwahr.151-160 Hruby,J., 2010. Mycenaean Pottery from Pylos: An Indigenous Typology, American Journal of Archaeology, 114 (2); 195-216 Nosch,M., 2011. The Mycenaean Administration of Textile Production in the Palace of Knossos: Observations on the Lc(1) Textile Targets, American Journal of Archaeology, 115 (4); 495-505 Oliver, D., 2012. Ch. 7.Trade, Exchange and Foreign Contacts, The Aegean From Bronze Age to Iron Age, Continuity and Change Between the twelfth , Routledge, Hoboken.196-218 Rutter,n.d. Lesson 22: Narrative, Aspects of Mycenaean Trade, 1-9 Palaima, n.d. Maritime Matters in the Linear B Tablets, 273-312 Palaimas, T., Pope, E., & Reilly, K., 2000. Unlocking the Secrets of Ancient Writing, Aegean Scripts and Prehistory, 1-33 Popular Archaeology, 2012. Ancient Nettle Cloth Reveals Bronze Age Trade Networks, Popular Archaeology, Vol. 8, Viewed on 7th Jan 2012 from < http://popular-archaeology.com/issue/september-2012/article/ancient-nettle-cloth-reveals-bronze-age-trade-networks > Vianello, A., 2000. What Light Do Linear B Texts Shed On The Production And Consumption Of Craft Goods In Mycenaean Greece? Viewed on 7th Jan 2012 from http://www.bronzeage.org.uk/8.aspx Watson,I 2001. The History of Greek Vases, Reference Reviews,15 (8);40 - 4 Read More