|Linear B ka-ra-re-we, probably krairēwes from κραῖρα, "head, extremity, protrusion."|
A Mycenaean stirrup jar in the collection of the Louvre, c. 1350 BC. Below is a Minoan stirrup jar.
|Writing||About 10 instances of the LH/LM IIIB transport type have Linear B inscriptions.|
|Created||Late Bronze Age, with an origin in the late Middle Bronze Age|
|Discovered||Eastern Mediterranean, especially Crete and mainland Greece|
|Discovered by||The first known were discovered by Schliemann.|
|Present location||Various museums|
|Culture||Mycenaean Greek, except for the Middle Minoan prototypes, of which the manufacturers probably spoke the now unknown language of Linear A.|
A stirrup jar (abbreviation SJ) is a style of pottery vessel, which flourished during the Late Bronze Age after a probable origin at the end of the Middle Bronze Age, probably on Crete. H.W. Haskell, a theorist of the later 20th century, proposed that it began as a one-time invention on Crete (not having any precedents), to accomplish more efficient, less wasteful pouring of expensive fluids, to take the place of various amphorae used for the purposes. From there it passed to the Cyclades.
The mainland Greeks were slow to adopt it, but when they did (LH II A), they did so as a standard type (Furumark's FS 169). In the Cyclades and under Aegean Crete, no standard type was used, but the features varied a great deal.
Its range was the Eastern Mediterranean region, comprising mainland Greece, the Cyclades, Crete, Cyprus, Rhodes, and export regions on the coasts of Western Asia and Africa, especially Ancient Egypt. In short, the type is primarily associated with, and is a diagnostic of Mycenaean Greece. It is known from the entire Mycenaean Period from Early Mycenaean (Late Helladic and Cycladic I and II) through all phases of the Late Mycenaean (Late Helladic, Cycladic, and Minoan III).
LH and LC I are dated to 1550 - 1500 BC; LH/LC II to 1500 -1410. LM I was originally seen as contemporaneous with LH/LC I, but according to recent thinking, LH/LC I culture was the result of Minoan influence, as Minoan civilization was imperial or quasi-imperial. LM I therefore precedes LH/LC I. Both the I and the II have A and B phases. The synchronization is, LM I B and LH II A (1500 - 1450) were contemporaneous.
At about 1400, Crete is invaded by Mycenaean Greeks, who take over the capital at Knossos. The rule of the non-Mycenaean Minoans is overthrown. Their language begins to fall into disuse. Their commercial enterprises are appropriated by the Mycenaeans, who bring their native fabrics, such as their own styles of stirrup-jars, their own writing system (Linear B), and their own weights and measures to the commercial scene. LM II and LH II B (1450 - 1410) are contemporary. LH/LC/LM III A (1410 - 1280), B (1280 - 1200), and C (1200 -1050) are contemporary across the board.
The word, "stirrup-jar," is a translation of German Bügelkanne, which is what Schliemann called the first known instances just after he had uncovered them from the Troy VI layer at Troy (destroyed 1250 BC). The handles look like stirrups. The neck between the stirrups is a false one, leading to the synonym "false-necked jar." The real spout projects from the upper flank. There is a mechanical advantage to holding the stirrups and tilting the jar up from the bottom to pour from the side, over turning the flasks with similar stirrups but a real neck nearly upside down to pour.
- 1 Science and the stirrup-jar
- 2 Art and the stirrup jar
- 3 Contexts of the stirrup-jar
- 4 Issues of the stirrup jar
- 5 List of stirrup-jar sites
- 6 Gallery
- 7 See also
- 8 References
- 9 Sources
- 10 External links
Science and the stirrup-jar
Stirrup jars are made of clay, which in unworked form occurs in beds of particles of a certain size formed from the weathering of rock. As different rocks are composed of different minerals, clay has also a certain range of compositions, all of which contain clay minerals and sand, which is weathered quartz. Mixed with water the particles of clay cohere in a plastic mass of loosely bonded grains. When fired, or baked in an oven, the grains indurate, or form chemical bonds between them, so that they can no longer slide over each other. Pottery is therefore constructed and shaped in the plastic phase and then placed in an oven of predetermined temperatures to cook for predetermined lengths of time. The ancients were aware of these factors and did vary temperature and time although not with today's precision. In the vocabulary of pottery, clay pots are considered earthenware ceramics and are typically labelled terracotta, etymologically "baked earth."
In the last few decades of the 20th century a number of questions became current about the provenance of Mycenaean pottery excavated by the British Museum from Tell es-Sa'idiyeh in the Jordan Valley. The pottery was Mycenaean, but was it imported or local? As a result, the British Museum's Department of Scientific Research (now Conservation and Research) decided to run a series of scientific tests on stirrup jars as representative pottery to see what determinations might be made, such as the provenance of the clay from which they were manufactured. They would perform the same tests on a "control group" of pots of known provenance in the British Museum.
The preliminary tests determined the construction of the stirrup jars by xeroradiography, which had been adapted to archaeological images from medical technology. It produced x-ray images on paper rather than film. Like x-rays of metal castings, these images were of the masses within the border surfaces, showing cracks and inclusions. All the pots turned out to be constructed in the same way, without consideration of time or place.
First the body of the pot is constructed by one of a few methods: coils, slabs or the potter's wheel. Immediately after construction, the pot contains too much moisture to be fired, as its sudden loss would cause the pot to contract and crack. It is allowed to dry until shrinkage is complete and it reaches a state called in the trade leather-hard, a descriptive term. Subsequently, the body is pierced and the preformed spouts are luted (glued) in place. Etymologically the word means "mud." Lute is a slurry of clay and other substances the potter feels would enhance the binding. The false spout may be hollow, partly hollow, or solid. If hollow, it is blocked with ceramic. Finally, the stirrup handles are luted on.
Radiographic analysis revealed minor differences in construction: size and shape of the base, method of obtaining a base pot, size, shape and placement of the spouts and handles, etc. What the investigators wanted to know is whether any of these were statistically significant; i.e., were not the result of random variation, and therefore were the signature of some potter or school of potters. They decided to perform a quantitative analysis of each pot's elemental composition; that is, a list of elements with the percentage present. They would assume a presence of 23 elements and detect the amounts present, obtaining a profile for each pot. Software to perform an analysis of variance of the profiles of all the samples for various factors would then detect if any factor caused a non-random difference.
Neutron activation analysis
The tedious methods of qualitative analysis by chemical isolation of the components went out of general use with the invention of mass spectrometry in the early 20th century. Most generally, mass spectrometers turn the sample into a gas (destroying it) and by bombarding it with a stream of electrons create a plasma, or supercharged cloud of ions, which loses the energy imparted to it by radiating wavelengths characteristic of the elemental atoms at an intensity that depends on the concentration of the element. A detector sorts the radiation by wavelength and reads the atomic spectra. Software turns the raw spectra and concentrations into a report of element and concentration present in the sample. This method was less attractive to the investigators because of sample destruction.
A subsequent method activates only the nucleus rather than the whole atom. At the British Museum, a sample powder was obtained from each jar by drilling a 2 mm diameter hole in the footing with a tungsten carbide drill. The sample was sealed in a silica tube and sent off to a laboratory. There each sample was irradiated with a stream of neutrons. The nuclei acquired more neutrons than nature ordinarily permits, creating short-lived isotopes, which decayed emitting a radiation characteristic of the elemental atoms, etc. The sample is not destroyed, but can be used again.
Analysis of variance on the profiles of the sample jars found that minor variation of constructional features was random. On the other hand, there existed regional non-random profiles, which indicate regions of a single clay composition.. The pots must have been manufactured there from them. A method had been found to identify at least by region the geological beds from which the clay had been retrieved.
Regions of stirrup-jar manufacture
The control sample regions were as follows.
- East Peloponnesus, represented by 5 jars from Mycenae and Berbati in the Argolid, LH III A2 and LH III B.
- Attica, represented by 4 jars, LH III C.
- Aegina, represented by one jar, LH III C.
- Rhodes, represented by 3 imports from East Peloponnesus, LH III A2 and LH III B, one from Attica, LH III B - C1, and 4 native to Ialysos, Rhodes, LH III C1.
- Crete, represented by 2 jars from Knossos, LM III B.
- Cyprus, represented by 4 imports from East Peloponnesus, LH III A2, LH III B, and 2 native Cypriote, 12th century BC.
- Caria, represented by 1 jar from Assarlik, LH III C.
- Egypt. None were manufactured, but there were 3 East Peloponnesian imports, LH III B.
In the test sample, there were
- 3 jars from Tell es-Sa'idiyes, 12th century BC, and 1 13th century jar from East Peloponnesus.
This is the first scientific data illuminating the difficult questions of who used the stirrup jars, when, who manufactured the stirrup jars, where, how they got from one place to another, and what conclusions might be drawn from their presence. Because the Jordanian stirrup jars were so late, the project confined itself to the relative time period, LH/LM III, long after the invention on Crete and introduction of the type to Greece. LH III included, however, the floruit of Mycenaean culture. Some hypotheses are evidently inconsistent, such as, stirrup jars were the monopoly of Crete and only arrived in Greece by importation from there, or that stirrup jars were moved from one area to another when they were carried there by Mycenaean Greeks.
Instead, several regions of competition are defined, not necessarily as a political bloc, but as regions where the jars were manufactured locally from local clays and sold with their contents on the open market both locally and for export. There are no political implications either imperial or any other, and no ethnic implications about the exporters or importers. Anyone in the region could make and ship the pottery freely. If it was made by a royal administration in a palace, it was nevertheless sold on the free market. The manufacturers, however, as indicated by the historical documents of Linear B, might not have been free men according to today's understanding, and might not have reaped the profits.
The authors do present some tentative further conclusions, dividing III into an earlier (A and B) and a later (C). In the earlier period, East Peloponnesian stirrup jars were exported to Egypt, Palestine, Rhodes, and Cyprus. In later III, Cyprus and Rhodes made their own jars, while East Peloponnesus contributed none, presumably because they did not make them any longer. The authors attribute this deficit to the destruction of the mainland palaces and the fall of Mycenaean culture there, to be replaced by Dorian. By then Jordan also was making its own Mycenaean pottery from local clays. The presence of Mycenaean pottery there is therefore not an indication that they were Mycenaean Greeks. The former Mycenaean Greeks were, so to speak, either on the defensive or on the run, faced with invasions from the Balkans.
Art and the stirrup jar
All stirrup jars display on their surfaces various designs in various colors, which is termed "vase painting," and the stirrup jars "painted vases." As far as ancient terra cotta is concerned, no paint is applied to the surface of the finished vase. Rather, the paint is put on during the leather-hard phase or also after partial firing, and becomes an integral part of the indurated surface.
Between the leather-hard pot and the fired pot is one more phase: the application of the slip or glaze. Even when the pots are leather-hard, there is a danger of their cracking during firing due to rapid loss of water and shrinking. All pottery to be fired is coated with a layer of slurry that impedes water loss. The quality and color of the baked surface depends on the substance applied. There are many traditional substances used for the purpose. If the result is a surface of glossy texture the substance used is called a slip. If the substance is such that it causes a glassy surface, it is called a glaze.
Stirrup-jars are wholly or mainly slipped/glazed; for example, the undersides of the handles might not be slipped. The composition of the slip is changed to produce different colors. The jar can be painted in coats. For that purpose it was sometimes fired in stages, the last firing occurring after the last application of paint. Typically the first coat is a monochrome covering the entire jar, with designs placed subsequently. If no further painting occurs, the pot is termed "unpainted" although in fact the viewer sees the first coat. It is not the color unpainted fired terra cotta would have; that would be variegated most likely ranging from red to black depending on the firing parameters and content of the clay. For example, Black Glazed Ware features a single coat of black glaze. Red-figure vases are washed with a black slip on which red figures are painted; black-figure vases, a red wash with black figures. Stirrup jars do not bear human figures; nevertheless, some are quite ornamental, with most of the painting surfaces filled with motifs.
The stirrup jar offers two basic zones for decoration, the body and the shoulder. These are defined by concentric bands of color around the bottom and the top of the vase. The bands are present on nearly every stirrup jar, whether the canvases are painted or not. Sometimes the bands cover the entire body, and are the only decoration. The colors, generally red or brown on a cream or buff slip, are produced by hematitic inclusions in the paint.
Contexts of the stirrup-jar
Evidence of the Linear B documents indicates that Stirrup jars were used as containers for olive oil. Speculations as to other content have been made, but are generally unsupported. The most common, wine, had its own battery of containers from serving and drinking ware (cups, mixers, bowls, etc.) to transport vessels, the amphorae, which are generally larger and more plentiful than stirrup-jars. Wine was apparently more plentiful. Oil requires a significant investment in olive trees, which cannot be harvested for several years after planting. A third suggestion, perfume, is not compatible with the small quantities placed in perfume jars, which are always very small. The relatively large stirrup jars would represent unrealistically huge amounts of perfume.
Noting that the stirrup jars of which he knew from the excavated houses of Mycenae and elsewhere had a capacity of 12 – 14 l, Ventris, decipherer of Linear B, hypothesized that one stirrup jar was designed to hold one liquid unit, which he took to be “the convenient figure” of 12 litres (3.2 US gal). Using a density of olive oil of 0.917 kg/l obtains a weight of about 11 kilograms (24 lb) for a full jar, to which must be added the weight of the jar. As this is not a convenient weight for decanting or table use, the jars that came to Ventris’ attention were probably of the transport type; that is, intended for export. Furumark's FS 164 is between 40 centimetres (16 in) and 50 centimetres (20 in) high and between 27.5 centimetres (10.8 in) and 35 centimetres (14 in) maximum diameter. A full jar was probably not lifted by the stirrups alone, as this practice would risk a disaster. As for amphorae, one might suppose wooden racks and loading nets lifted by cranes.
Fine ware stirrup jars
The early stirrup-jars were not distinguished by special type; i.e., the sizes and shapes varied within a maximum height of 45 centimetres (18 in). They were all from "domestic deposits," yet some had features suggesting export: instead of the two stirrup handles, a disk supported by three handles, and a true spout with two or three horns (we should say lugs) on its sides. The lugs could be for lashing down a cloth (Homeric kredemnon) over a stopper (no stoppers have been found). The disk had one or two holes on the edge, possibly for ties holding a stopper or a shipping tag. Haskell suggests an identity tag marking the owner.
By LM I B, the smaller Cretan jars had developed into one of the two subsequent major types, the "fine ware," which Haskell proposes spread to the rest of the eastern Mediterranean: LH I B, LC I A, etc., and the equivalent periods on Cyprus and Rhodes. Those cultures were predominantly Mycenaean. Before then, while Knossos was still under the Linear A administration, the stirrup jar moves into the Cyclades and is found at Akrotiri before the volcanic eruption. The smaller and finer instances were found in the living spaces. The storerooms contained larger and coarser stirrup jars. Haskell hypothesizes that the smaller were used for decanting from pithoi and for temporary storage.
What makes a stirrup jar "fine" is the grain size of the clay. Powdered clay results in a smooth surface. "Coarse ware," or coarse texture, means a surface similar to that of oatmeal, composed of larger grains, formed by admixture with quartz (sand) and particles of other minerals.
Transport stirrup jars
Haskell developed his idea of the larger, coarser type of stirrup jar found in storerooms at Akrotiri into the "transport stirrup jar," a vessel serving as a standard container for the export of olive oil, and perhaps other valuable fluids as well. The neutron activation analysis performed by the British Museum sparked a field-wide interest in the topic and the method. A number of research groups were to assume the challenge of refining the technique and applying it to other caches of stirrup jars to more fully ascertain its provenance and uses in trade. A challenge had been thrown down earlier questioning the validity of some of Evans' excavation at Knossos and his date for the invasion of Knossos by Mycenaeans, based on a supposed late date of the stirrup jar (see below under issues).
The Kommos sherds
Contemporaneously with Haskell's theoretical work and the British Museum's neutron activation studies, excavations were being conducted at Kommos on the southern coast of Crete by the University of Toronto, 15 years of excavation in all, ending in 1995, which turned up thousands pieces of what looked like export and import pottery. The excavators and theorists of this effort adopted Haskell's term of “transport jars.” Kommos was an LBA port networking extensively with Egypt and the Levant.
Following the lead of the British Museum, the project archaeologists decided it would be illuminating to the subject of trade contacts and relationships to conduct neutron activation studies of the origin of this pottery. Accordingly, they prepared powdered samples of 18 stirrup jars, 13 short-necked amphorae, 34 Canaanite jars, 19 Egyptian jars, and 4 others subsequently reclassified, 88 in all, covering the span LM I B through LM III B. The stirrup jars covered LM II through LM III B. The goal was to test non-random geographical hypotheses about the compositional profiles of the samples; that is, the provenances, as had the British Museum.
The actual grouping by composition was done in advance by thin-section petrography, in which microscopically thin sections of the sample are mounted on a slide for visual inspection under a microscope. The grains of the fabric can then be identified mineralogically and the sample classified according to the types of minerals found. The study found 26 fabrics concerning which hypotheses could be tested by neutron activation and analysis of variance; that is, for each group, were the samples in it randomly or not? The cross-identification between fabric type and geologic region was assigned by inspection. The cross-identification between region and elemental profile was an outcome of the methods chosen for statistical manipulation of the profiles. These are beyond the scope of this article, but the theory is as follows.
Imagine an ideal clay bed in which the same elements are found at the same concentrations in every sample at random. In a sufficient number of samples, the measured concentrations are expected to vary at random (defined mathematically) around a mean. If any do not, then the sample comes from a bed containing higher amounts. By comparing every element to a control element, presumed ideal; that is, at measured concentrations varying only at random, the investigators developed one or more profiles that were non-random.
The first problem was to find a control element that was always present in the same concentration, varying only randomly. The investigators selected 27 elements for study, which might be presumed to be in every clay bed. Only 16 of these were chosen for statistical analysis, as the most reliable and representative. As a control, or ideal, element, the investigators chose Scandium, a low-presence element that had the second-lowest variability. The variation of each element in all the samples was calculated and compared to that of Scandium. If it exceeded that of Scandium by a specific threshold, then the element was judged present in some sample in a non-random amount. Further analysis pin-pointed which samples. The end result was a series of nine elemental profiles, each representing a bed of unique chemical composition. They were termed “Cretan chemical groups” I through IX.
There was obviously not a one-to-one match with the 26 fabrics. The investigators chose the multi-fabric solution: more than one fabric might belong to the same chemical group. The fabrics could then be grouped by chemical similarity in a dendrogram (which had no implications of descent). Some of the conclusions they drew are:
- The 9 types are divided into Cretan (I-III) and import (IV-IX). All the Egyptian and Canaanite jars except two are from beds along the Nile or on the coastal plains of Lebanon, Syria, and Israel. The two are apparently imitations of Canaanite jars in Cretan clay. None of the stirrup jars or short-necked amphorae are imports.
- Native Cretan types I-III are all in or adjacent to the Messara Plain in south central Crete. They are of different clay than that around Kommos; i.e., the clay (or possibly the pots) was brought to Kommos, probably from select beds. It was fired in the kiln at Kommos. Type I consists of marine sediments. Type II with a higher concentration of Chromium reflects outcroppings of high-Chromium rock in the plain. Type III comes from volcanic rock in the foothills of the Asterousia Mountains of south coastal Crete. I contains mainly Fabric A ("main south-central Cretan"), with smaller amounts of D, E, G, and J; II is A also, and III is B.
- Of the stirrup jars, 10 are A and I, ranging in date from LM II to LM III B. The locality cannot be determined any more precisely than western Messara Plain. Since the kiln at Kommos included bins for storage of unworked clay, pottery fired there was probably worked at that location also. The ruins of the fine palace would now have taken on a messy industrial appearance, with thousands of pots in every stage of development.
These conclusions about the stirrup jars at Kommos follow the same direction as the earlier British Museum studies. Throughout the 14th/13th centuries BC the jars were made from local clays. If there was any connection to Knossos and north Crete there is little hint of it here. There is nothing to suggest that the pot-making was an aspect of an overall palace economy (the deficit does not imply there was none). Kommos was a terminal point for imports from Egypt and the Levant. There was possibly a local balance of trade against exports from Kommos, as the transport jars, not being imports, can only have been intended for export.
Issues of the stirrup jar
The stirrup jar has been a key topic in the scholarship of the LBA, perhaps because of its specialized nature. Beginning before the LBA, and ending after, it has endured through some major changes in civilization. Change of language is generally considered to be a major cultural change. When the stirrup jar began on Crete, its administrative citizens used a syllabary termed by Evans Linear A, reflecting a yet unknown language, probably not Indo-European, sometimes called "Aegean." At some point in the LBA Linear A was replaced by Linear B, another syllabary representing east Greek. One of the major issues regarding this change is when it occurred, a second being how.
At some point later, east Greek stopped being spoken in the Peloponnesus and on Crete, while writing disappeared in Greece. When history began to be written in a new alphabet centuries later, verbal tradition covering the gap was telling of an invasion of illiterate west Greek speakers from central Greece, a destruction of Mycenaean civilization, and a replacement or subjugation of the East Greeks in the Peloponnesus. A new population on the coast of Anatolia told of being driven across the Aegean by invaders. Issues of this second cultural change are when and how this replacement occurred.
To some the dark age seemed to wipe the slate of Greek culture clean. All the old ways and artifacts seemed to have disappeared, or to have been highly modified. The stories of political events during those times were discounted as unreliably legendary, having no primary record. The art seemed to have begun anew. The change seems somewhat unusual, as large populations of east Greeks, such as the city of Athens, were little touched by the change and should have left some continuous record. The darkness and discontinuity of the dark age began to be questioned, which is a third type of issue.
List of stirrup-jar sites
- A number of inscribed Kydonian stirrup jars have been recovered from several archaeological sites on Crete.
- Early examples of the stirrup jar have been recovered from Rhodes dating to c. 1200 BC.
- From the Panagia Houses I and II, twelve LH III B globular, decorated stirrup jars of two sizes, a smaller, fine-ware, and an intermediate-size of variable grain texture.
- Chadwick 1974, p. 328
- Haskell 1985, pp. 221–223. Haskell's view was based on undisputedly MM III jars found at Kommos (Crete) and Kea (island).
- Haskell 1985, p. 224
- Haskell 1985, p. 225
- They are all Furumark Form 46, whuch he reserved for the stirrup-jar, but he further distinguished 22 types, FS 164-185. Leonard, Hughes & Middleton 1993, p. 105
- Leonard, Hughes & Middleton 1993, p. 106 "In addition to its appeal at home, the stirrup jar (with its valuable contents) was traded widely beyond the shores of the Aegean sea, having been found at sites from Sardinia to Syria and from Anatolia to Nubia."
- "Mycenaean" is not an archaeologically defined period name. The civilization was named by Schliemann in the early days of Greek archaeology, who excavated even before Evans. The first credible archaeological periodization was Evans', who devised Minoan I, II, III, etc. It was extended by Blegen, as a result of the excavation of Pylos, to Helladic and Cycladic, so that all the I's II's, III's, etc., were roughly synchronous. This periodization still applies. "Mycenaean" came in after the Greek imperial character of the sites was known. It saved having to refer to the single culture with a multiple name: LH, LC, LM, etc. For example, "Mycenaean III" means LH, LC, and LM III. For an example of the effective use of "Mycenaean," read Stubbins, Frank H. (1973). "Chapter XIV: The Rise of Mycenaean Civilization". The Middle East and the Aegean Region c. 1800 - 1380 BC. The Cambridge Ancient History. II Part I (3rd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 627–654.
- Single-letter abbreviations: L=Late, H=Helladic, C=Cycladic, M=Minoan.
- Symeonoglu, Sarantis (1970). "A Chart of Mycenaean and Late Minoan Pottery". American Journal of Archaeology. 74 (3): 285–288.
- Schliemann, Heinrich (1892). Schliemann, Sophie (ed.). Heinrich Schliemann's Selbstautobiographie (in German). Leipzig: F.A. Brockhaus. p. 97.
- The tendency of some art historians to consider only figurines to be terracottas is not generally accepted.
- Leonard, Hughes & Middleton 1993, pp. 107–109
- Leonard, Hughes & Middleton 1993, pp. 116–117
- Leonard, Hughes & Middleton 1993, pp. 112–113
- Leonard, Hughes & Middleton 1993, pp. 110–111
- One result of this and other studies demonstrating the distributed provenances of Mycenaean and Minoan cultural features is the ad hoc use of the term "Aegean" to mean these elements. Thus the "Aegean" culture may be found far from the real Aegean Sea. For example: Cline, Eric H. (2012). "Preface". The Oxford Handbook of the Bronze Age Aegean. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
The geographical area of the Aegean ... comprises primarily mainland Greece, Crete, and the Cyclades Islands, but extends to Rhodes, the Dodecanese Islands, the western coast of Anatolia ... the eastern Mediterranean ... and the western Mediterranean ....The associative names exist on three levels, which often tend to be confusing. At the archaeological, the stirrup jar is Helladic, Cycladic, Minoan, Rhodian, Cypriote and possibly some others. In the history of civilization, stirrup jars are Mycenaean, Minoan, and Greek. In art history they are now often "Aegean," as opposed to "Greek." The fact that some of them are submycenaean and geometric (archaeological terms) causes additional issues for the art historian (see under Issues.)
- Leonard, Hughes & Middleton 1993, pp. 120–121
- Leonard, Hughes & Middleton 1993, p. 116
- Pratt 2014, p. 54
- Haskell 1985, pp. 222–223
- Haskell 1985, pp. 224–225
- Day et al. 2011, p. 511
- Day et al. 2011, pp. 513–515
- Day et al. 2011, pp. 521–522
- Day et al. 2011, pp. 522–534
- Interested persons of some statistical knowledge may find more detail in Day et al. 2011, pp. 534–536
- Day et al. 2011, pp. 539–542
- Day et al. 2011, pp. 536–539
- Day et al. 2011, pp. 514, 522, 536
- "Cydonia". The Modern Antiquarian. Retrieved 15 October 2013.
- Shear, Ione Mylonas (1987). The Panagia Houses at Mycenae. University Museum Monograph 68. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology. pp. 112–113.
- Chadwick, John (1974). Documents in Mycenaean Greek (Second ed.). Cambridge: University Press.
- Day, Peter M.; Quinn, Patrick S.; Rutter, Jeremy B.; Kilikoglou, Vassilis (2011). "A World of Goods: Transport Jars and Commodity Exchange at the Late Bronze Age Harbor of Kommos, Crete" (PDF). Hesperia. 80: 511–558.
- Haskell, Halford W. (1985). "The Origin of the Aegean Stirrup Jar and Its Earliest Evolution and Distribution (MB III-LBI)". American Journal of Archaeology. 89 (2): 221–229. doi:10.2307/504326. JSTOR 504326.
- Leonard, A.; Hughes, M.; Middleton, A. (1993). "The Making of Aegean Stirrup Jars: Technique, Tradition, and Trade" (PDF). The Annual of the British School at Athens. 88: 105–123.
- Pratt, Catherine Elizabeth (2014). Critical Commodities: Tracing Greek Trade in Oil and Wine from the Late Bronze Age to the Archaic Period (PDF) (PhD). Los Angeles: UCLA.