Swallows and Dolphins at Akrotiri: Some Thoughts on the Relationships of Vase-Painting to Wall-Painting

It is concluded that the swallow is an indigenous Theran motif that begins in Middle Cycladic, and in turn influenced the wall-paintings of Late Cycladic I, particularily the Spring Fresco from Delta 2. This fresco, in turn, may have suggested the combination of floral forms and swallows that we find on the later polychrome vases of the volcanic destruction level. The dolphin, on the other hand, seems to have been a later introduction under strong Minoan influence. Although no fresco is preserved with dolphins in a marine seascape, it is suggested that the marine table of offerings from the West House gives us an idea of such a painting, which may yet be discovered at Akrotiri.

INTRODUCTION

The relationship between painting on pottery and wall-painting is a fascinating subject that has been explored in other periods, for example in Classical Greece, where vases provide the best evidence for lost paintings of major artists. In the Aegean, however, we are more fortunate in the preservation of wall-paintings as well as pottery with pictorial representations, and Akrotiri provides the best site to make such comparisons because of the abundant material of both classes. Furthermore, we are dealing with a limited time span for paintings and pottery coming from the volcanic destruction level (VDL), so most examples should be contemporary.

M. Marthari is making an exemplary study of the pottery from the VDL, and in an interesting article (Marthari 1987, 359-379) discusses the derivation of her six classes of local painted pottery, two of which derive from earlier Middle Cycladic pottery, two from imported Minoan pottery, while two are specific Late Cycladic I creations. One of these, the Theran Polychrome, she believes was strongly influenced by the wall-paintings, and it is this aspect that I would like to consider with a view to determining how much the artists interacted upon each other.

Most scholars, including Marthari, would agree that we are dealing with different groups of painters, who were not transferrable from one medium to another, but who doubtless saw each other's work. The wall-paintings, on a larger scale and a flat surface, done in a fresco or mixed fresco technique in a full range of colours, provided greater opportunities than the smaller scale and curving surfaces of the pottery where the colours were restricted to the earth tones of clay slips and paints put on before firing. It is no wonder that we have only one attempt to render a human figure in the Polychrome pottery (S. Marinatos 1971, Pl. Ga), a male head to right that cannot have been more satisfactory than the fishermen on the stand from Phylakopi (Atkinson et al. 1904, Pl. XXII), in a related Milian fabric. Theran artists confined themselves mainly to three subjects, the swallow, dolphin, and goat, but there are isolated occurrences of other motifs, for example the bull and the duck. In addition to differences in technique, we must assume also different traditions for these artists - the fresco-painters Minoans, or Therans trained by Minoans, the pot-painters local craftsmen. To explore this interrelation, I shall examine the two most popular motifs in the polychrome ware, the swallow and the dolphin.

SWALLOWS

Curiously there are no swallow paintings in Aegean frescoes except at Akrotiri where they form the leitmotif in the famous Spring Fresco from Delta 2, and possibly at Phylakopi, where a small fresco fragment showing the head of a bird with chestnut back and white underpart could be construed as part of a swallow (Atkinson et al. 1904, 77, Fig 65). However the so-called 'swallows' on the embroidered skirt of the seated woman, or goddess, from the room with the Flying Fish fresco (Atkinson et al. 1904, 73, Fig. 61) are more likely doves, or possibly griffins (Cameron 1975). But also from Phylakopi a fragment of a bird vase with a flying swallow (Atkinson et al. 1904, 120, Fig. 92) was recognized by Marinatos as the work of his 'Swallow Painter' from Akrotiri (S. Marinatos 1969a, 65-69), suggesting the close connection between the two islands.

Elsewhere in the Aegean, and even in Crete where most likely the art of wall-painting originated, it is the rock dove, the so-called bluebird, that dominates - in the House of the Frescoes at Knossos (Cameron 1968, 1-31), and in the Bluebird friezes from Ayia Irini on Kea (Coleman 1973, 286-293) and Pylos (Lang 1969, 151-152). On other species represented are the partridges and hoopoes from the Caravanserai frieze (Evans 1928, 109-116), the pheasant from Room 14 at Ayia Triada (Smith 1965, Fig. 110), the miniature flying birds (hoopoes?) from Katsamba (Shaw 1978, 27-34), ducks too numerous to cite but usually in a 'Nilotic' setting (see Morgan 1988, 63-66), as well as certain fanciful creations like the bird in the Lyre-Player composition from the Throne Room at Pylos (Lang 1969, 79-81) or the crested bird from Tiryns (Rodenwaldt 1912, Pl. XVI, I).

At Akrotiri the swallow is supreme both in wall-painting and in pictorial pottery, a curious phenomenon considering its scarcity on the island today (S. Marinatos 1971, 51-52). There are the seven remarkable swallows (S. Marinatos 1971, Pl. 121-124; here Fig. 1b, nos. 1-5) in the Spring Fresco from Delta 2, which have recently been studies by M.B. Hollinshead (1989). Each differs in position and reveals an artist who was gifted in showing momentary poses and suggesting the swift darting movements of the hirunda rustica with its elongated forked tail. There are also single swallows from Section A (S. Marinatos 1969b, Pl. B, 2) and Beta 6 (S. Marinatos 1970, Pl. B, 1; here Fig. 1a), and another has been published from Xeste 3 (N. Marinatos 1984, Fig. 47; here Fig. 1c), undoubtedly part of a bigger composition showing swallows feeding their young in nests amid rocks and crocuses. Hollinshead (1989, 346) rightly sees this swallow flying upward in a foreshortened position as the work of the same artist who painted the swallows of the Spring Fresco. It is worth noting that in both cases the swallows are part of an entire scene of nature, showing the artist's observation of the habits of the swallows.

The other two preserved fresco representations are much more conventional with a single swallow flying to the right in profile with outstretched wings and forked tail, and they are much closer to swallows on the vases.

From the published examples of the Polychrome ware from Akrotiri, I have counted seven more or less complete vases with swallows, but there are doubtless others that once existed. Two are nippled ewers, on of which comes form a cavity dug in bedrock under the West House (Ergon 1984, Fig. 116; here Fig. 2a). It has been dated to the pre-seismic phase of the settlement by Marthari (1987, 370) probably to late Middle Cycladic, since the severe earthquake that caused extensive rebuilding and levelling plus some alteration of the town plan has been shown to have occurred at the very beginning of Late Cycladic I (Marthari 1984, 119-133, and Palyvou 1984, 134-147). This context is important in suggesting that the Polychrome style on nippled ewers with the distinctive flying-swallow motif may antedate any occurrence of swallows on frescoes. I say this advisedly, since we know very little about the wall decoration of the pre-seismic buildings, which were certainly elegant structures; what evidence we have, however, for instance the reused plaster that was turned over or the Monkey Fresco from Beta 6 (S. Marinatos 1972, 37, Pl. 91), while of high quality, showed only painted bands. It would be interesting to know whether any scraps of wall plaster from the pre-seismic level have pictorial representations. In any event, this ewer from the West House cavity is so close in shape and style to the ewer from Beta 2 (Doumas 1983, Pl. 58; here Fig. 2b) that it strongly suggests the latter may have been a heirloom, coming perhaps from one of the repositories in the neighbouring room with the Antelopes and Boxing Boys, where it may have had a ritual function (see N. Marinatos 1984, 106). Both vases have strongly recurved necks, black nipples surrounded by dots, and apparently three swallows flying to the right with elongated forked tails and wings rendered in a rudimentary perspective, the farther one closer to the bird's body, which is shown in the light colour of the clay. I am not certain whether any applied white or red is used on these two ewers, although Marthari speaks of an early variant of the Theran Polychrome ware.

The next example is an eyed ewer from A 2, distinctive in its somewhat later shape and liberal use of polychromy both for the swallow and the surrounding bands (S. Marinatos 1969b, Pl. A; here Fig. 2c). The swallow, again flying to the right, has now become a formula with foreshortened farther wing and forked tail, but the painter has shown the ruddy throat of hirunda rustica and has added four white dots to the tail, a scheme which also seems to occur in the fresco example from Beta 6 (Fig. 1a), perhaps an attempt to show that there is some white on the tail feathers. On the vase the curving bands and groups of short strokes may represent a desire to introduce some naturalistic setting. Much the same surrounding atmosphere is found on the ewer from the pottery stores of the West House (S. Marinatos 1974, Pl. 74a; here Fig. 2d) where, although the shape is of the more advanced type, the swallow has the freshness of the earlier representations with apparently more foreshortening in the farther wing.

The next two vases are of the developed Polychrome style betraying the influence both of imported Minoan pottery and of frescoes. The strainer from Xeste 3 (a new shape under Minoan influence) combines the Polychrome style in the flying swallows of the shoulder zone with the Light-on-Dark Minoanizing technique in the lily frieze on the foot (S. Marinatos 1976, Pl. 47c; here Fig. 2e). The birds are, however, rather conventionalized like those ont he Polychrome ewer from A 2, but they fly over a field of large crocuses (tulips?), creating in an abriged form a sense of space on the kymbe from A 1 (S. Marinatos 1969b, Pl. 17; here Fig. 2f) are of similar type, but appear even more reduced to a formula, repeated four times one each side of the elongated dish, where they fly between scalloped borders suggestive of waves and rock-work (probably not clouds for the upper frame). With great economy of means the artist has suggested a whole scene of nature.

I am uncertain whether the final vase described as decorated with swallows should be so characterized. It is a pithoid jar from the West House (Ergon 1980, Fig. 83; here Fig. 2g), and the birds presumably occur three times in the panels between the horizontal handles and are framed by S-shaped spiraliform motifs of Ephyraean appearance (cf. Furumark 1941, FM 47, 1-2). The birds themselves are clumsy with massive breast with white spiral (?), and the forked swallowtail has been filled in with solid paint. Although the wings are large and swooping, the bird does not look as if it would be able to fly, and indeed little feet are suspended under the belly like landing gear, quite differently form the organically attached feet of the swallows in the Spring Fresco. Clearly these are not by the Swallow Master of the early ewers nor in any way indebted to the frescoes from Delta 2 or Xeste 3. They have more in common with the composite bird from the Throne Room at Pylos of much later date.

From the available evidence it would appear that the swallow is an inegenous Theran motif that began on pottery as part of the Cycladic predilection for beaked ewers with birds. A gifted pot-painter, Marinatos's Swallow Master, whose career spanned the transition from Middle Cycladic to Late Cycladic, may have been responsible for developing the type, with his ewers popular enough to have been exported to Phylakopi and even to Mycenae (Mylonas 1973, Grave Gamma, no. 27). Whether he personally painted the other vases with swallows, I am less certain, for they seem more conventionalized. If we could be sure that there were no swallows in pre-seismic frescoes, I would suggest that he may have been the original inspiration for the swallows in the wall-paintings of the volcanic destruction level (as in Fig. 1a). However, an even more gifted artist, a fresco painter, took up the idea of flitting swallows in foreshortened poses and developed it to its ultimate form in the Spring Fresco (Fig. 1b). These, in turn, may have influenced the pot-painters, partcularly the painter of the strainer with swallows and lilies (Fig. 2e). Interestingly enough, the pot-painters never attempted the complicated poses and groupings of the wall-painting. Their birds fly singly and always in profile to the right. As for the artist of the Spring Fresco, I would assume he was a Theran, since there is nothing comparable in the Minoan repertoire. He shows his full understanding of the habits of the swallows in the courting scenes of the Spring Fresco, and the feeding of young swallows in nests in the painting from Xeste 3 (Fig. 1c), which strongly suggests that swallows were well known in the ecology of the island before the great eruption.

DOLPHINS

A study of the dolphin motif on the Polychrome pottery from Akrotiri produces rather different results. Not only are there more examples (at least eleven in the published pottery) but it is more difficult to make comparisons with wall-painting, owing to the scarcity of examples with this motif at Akrotiri. They apparently all fall in the post-seismic period. There are no nippled ewers, but three eyed ewers show large dolphins on their shoulders (S. Marinatos 1971, Pl. 67b; 1972, Pl. 49; Praktika 1975, Pl. 210; here Fig. 3a and b from Delta 1 and 9). They have applied white, and leap always to the right amid wavy steamers and groups of parallel strokes that give an approximation of waves and seaweed. The other shapes are all of the Minoanizing phase of the volcanic destruction level: three kymbai, a teapot, double vase, shallow bowl, and two pithoi of different forms.

The three kymbai (S. Marinatos 1969b, Pl 11, 2; 1974, Pl. 80 and 81 from Beta 2, the House of the Ladies, and the West House; here Fig. 3c, d and e) were almost certainly painted by the same artist, although the first is smaller and simpler, with only dolphins and waves liberally emphasized with white. The two large ones each create a real marine scene with the introduction of seaweed springing from the rocks, whereas their reverses show running goats. The teapot (Marthari 1987, 377, Fig. 27) and double vase (Ergon 1977, 162, Fig. 104) are essentially abridgements of the same scheme, possibly by the same artist. However, the shallow bowl from the West House (Praktika 1979, Pl. 159c; here Fig. 3f) introduced a more sober, but ingenious, arrangement with the dolphins suspended in scalloped formation below the rim, echoing the dark wave pattern above. Is it fanciful to think that the dish, when filled with liquid, would provide the sea beneath them (as on later Attic vases)?

Perhaps the most successful seascape of all is found on the cylindrical pithos illustrated by Marthari (1987, 377, Fig. 28; here Fig. 3g). Its dark rocks at top and bottom frame a light field against which large dolphins swoop down in graceful curves, with seaweed sprouting from the rocks at top and bottom. This is certainly in the tradition of Minoan marine scenes going back even into an earlier period, for example on the stand from Phaistos decorated with plastic dolphins and shells (Levi 1976, Pl. LXXIX). The other pithos, of barrel-jar shape with plastic ridges on the shoulder, comes form the West House (Praktika 1980, Pl. 178b; here Fig. 3h). It is curiosity rather than a success, with a school of dolphins of assorted sizes on one side, and a bull (the only occurrence I know in the Polychrome pottery) in a flowery meadow on the other. Clearly this does not seem to be the work of the artist of the kymbai or the different artist of the cylindrical pithos.

The only wall-painting at Akrotiri showing dolphins is the famous Ship Fresco fom the West House where eleven or twelve dolphins accompany the fleet on the south wall (S. Marinatos 1974, Col. Pl. 9; here Fig. 4a). Although this marine scene has rocks and coastline, the dolphins are shown against a neutral background, and in a sense they create the sea for a narrative painting (Morgan 1988). There are no marine seascapes of the type of the Flying Fish form Phylakopi or the Dolphin Fresco from Knossos (Evans 1930, Fig. 251-252) among the preserved wall-paintings. The dolphin type in the Ship Fresco (Fig. 4a), with stripes of alternating colours, could have provided the model for individual dolphins on the Polychrome pottery, but hardly the full marine seascape. However, the stuccoed tables of offering, which, in their fresco technique, are closer to wall-painting, may have furnished the best models for marine painting on pottery. The one from Delta 8 (S. Marinatos 1971, Pl. 82; here Fig. 4b), with its paired dolphins on each foot, is hardly suggestive of a seascape, but the table of offering form the West House (S. Marinatos 1972, Pl. 102; here Fig. 4c) creates a real marine setting with rocks, coralline, seaweed, and sprays of bubbles. Was it painted by a Minoan artist who brought the scheme from Crete, or was it based on an as yet undiscovered Dolphin Fresco at Akrotiri? We may never know, but at any rate this was probably the latest work to be produced at Akrotiri before the great volcanic eruption (see S. Marinatos 1974, 27). However, in no way should it be used as an argument to lower the date of the catastrophe to LM IB, when the Marine style pottery decoration was flourishing in Crete. Despite the recent lowering of the date of the Dolphin Fresco from Knossos to LM II / IIIA (Koehl 1986), there must have been LM IA predecessors comparable to the Flying Fish from Phylakopi.

CONCLUSION

What, then, can be said about the interrelation of the pottery representations an the frescoes? While there is interaction between the two media in the case of each motif, the relationship seems different, the swallow being an indigenous Theran motif that began on pottery in the MC period as part of the Cycladic predilection for beaked ewers with bird motifs, whereas the dolphin seems to have come in with the Minoanizing artistic infusion of LC I. The pot-painters and the wall-painters were clearly different artists, the former local craftsmen, whereas some Minoan artists must have participated in decorating the houses, working with a local atelier composed of a number of gifted artists, among whom was the Swallow Painter of Delta 2 and Xeste 3. The exact relationship of Thera to Crete in Late Cycladic I is still uncertain, whether that of a colony or of a separate state under strong Minoan cultural influence. However, a study of the Polychrome pottery in comparison with the wall-paintings may help to elucidate the problem, and would seem to suggest a fair degree of autonomy.

------------------------------------------

-------------------------------------------