20

The administration of Mycenaean sheep rearing (flocks, shepherds, “collectors”)
*

by

Françoise Rougemont

Abstract: The Mycenaean Greek archives found both at Knossos in Crete and Pylos in Messenia give us detailed information about flocks of sheep, which are reared for their wool. The aim of this paper will be to provide the (non-specialist) reader with an overview of the extant documentation, and to study some problems and characteristics linked with the administration of sheep rearing (organization of the flocks, relationships between palatial administration, shepherds and “collectors”). Differences between these two archives are underlined (e.g. tablet format used by the scribes, presence / absence of “deficit” entries, presence / absence of flocks intended for reproduction, presence/absence of targets for wool production) and some possible explanations are suggested.

The Linear B clay tablets found at Knossos (Crete) and Pylos (Messenia) provide us with detailed information about the breeding of sheep, pigs, and goats at different stages of the Late Bronze Age. The Knossos texts register ca. 100000 sheep, the Pylos Cn tablets ca. 10000. The other LB archives (especially at Thebes1 and Mycenae) do not yet document sheep breeding (this lack of information is probably due to the lesser number of texts found), but wool and textiles are well attested, which means that the lack of tablets registering flocks depends only on the preservation of documents. Sheep are reared mostly for their wool. The majority of the flocks are made up of wethers, because they produce more wool, and of better quality.2 However some flocks also include ewes and lambs; they were probably intended for the reproduction and restocking of the wool flocks, though it can be demonstrated that the reproduction flocks as attested in the present state of the corpus would not suffice to replace the old animals of the wool flocks.3 The palatial administrations set uniform targets, which the shepherds were supposed to fullfill. The deficits were carefully recorded.4 We also have information about the fattening and, later, the consumption of different species of animals (sheep, goats, pigs, etc.) on the occasion of banquets, which probably took place after sacrifices.5 This paper will focus on the administration of sheep flocks, and especially on the relationship between flocks’ organisation, shepherds and ’collectors’: what are the differences between the Pylos and the Knossos

archives, and how are they to be analysed? What does it mean when a shepherd’s name appears many times in a documentation supposed to be from the same year? Are there some cases where two documents refer to the same flock, which means there may be a chronological difference, even small, between them? What can be said about the geographical organisation of sheep rearing? How are we to interpret the involvement of the so-called “collectors”? The aim of this paper is to present the extant data as clearly as possible for the non-specialists; to confront systematically — keeping in mind the different questions asked above — the Knossian and the Pylian documentations, which are in most cases studied appart;6 to give an idea of the problems and to suggest some elements for an answer, as well as to present some elements of my current research on those topics.

I. Description of the Mycenaean documentation about sheep
In a single deposit or bureau, all documents are from the same and short period of time (a few weeks or months). The sheep tablets are never dated.7 The information provided by the scribes are the following: place-name, shepherd’s name, ideogram (occasionaly some descriptive elements about the animals), numbers, and, in 30% of the texts, the collector’s name.8 The first personal name written by the scribe on a sheep register is interpreted with relative, but not absolute, certainty, as the shepherd’s name.9 In the only occurrence of the word po-me, ποιμήν, “shepherd”, on Dd 1376 there is no way to determine if it is a professional designation or a personal name.10 This is no surprise since, in epigraphical corpora where the shepherds are much better known than in our documentation, like the roughly contemporary Nuzi texts, the different professional designations for the shepherds are mostly known from contexts like legal or military texts, or documents where the profession of the individuals matters, but is not directly apparent through the context.11 In our texts we find no trace

PECUS. Man and animal in antiquity. Proceedings of the conference at the Swedish Institute in Rome, September 9-12, 2002. Ed. Barbro Santillo Frizell (The Swedish Institute in Rome. Projects and Seminars, 1), Rome 2004. www.svenska-institutet-rom.org/pecus

It has been suggested that they were temporarily missing. The animals are missing at the time when the tablets were written. [ Here. the shepherd’s name is su-ta-no. / ra-to .17 and would be replaced later on the shepherd’s private flocks. and we . and flocks for reproduction. pe-ri-qo-te-jo . the flock is made up of 200 wethers.15 indicated on the documents by an o-pe-ro entry KN De 1112 (117) . conventionaly called “collector” .B ki-ta-ne-to .series.16 The interpretation of these o-pe-ro entries is a disputed issue. / su-ri-mo The documents record only a few basic pieces of information: ki-ta-ne-to is the name of the shepherd. indicating ((-pe-ro that 20 wethers are still due by the shepherd to the palatial administration.B su-ta-no .20 made up of wethers. The abreviation o. Different objections can be made to this theory.A OVISµ 200 [ . with occasionaly some old animals. see for example the following document : Da 1321 + 5101 + 5773 (117) . the “collector’s” name pe-ri-qo-te-jo. th in the 5 edition of the corpus (below KT V) — and V the variety of sheep documents preserved is much more important than at Pylos.Françoise Rougemont Table 1 Tablets KN Dm 1174 KN Dm 1175 KN Dm 1176 KN Dm 1177 KN Dm 1178 KN Dm 1179 KN Dm 1180 KN Dm 1181 KN Dm 1182 KN Dm 1183 KN Dm 1184 KN Dm 5181 KN Dm 5226 KN Dm 5237 KN Dm 5323 Table 1. • The Knossian sheep tablets are leaf-shaped and each register one flock. and the scribe has added an o(-pe-ro) entry. KN Da 1108 (117) . which means that wool production was always one of the main scopes.13 1. 15.19 The Da-Dg series record wool flocks. At Knossos Both the number — 984 texts in the Knossian D. there is also an additional personal name. su-ri-mo is the place name .5% of the Knossian sheep tablets mention a “deficit”. The data in the Dm series. This is the standard type of sheep tablet at Knossos. which represents 70% of the sheep records.A OVISµ 200 . the place name ra-to. or the complete word o-pe-ro corresponds to the alphabetical greek / ophelos / and can be translated as”debt”. On 30% of the records.A OVISµ 57 OVISƒ 23 . 21 Place Name ri-jo-no ra-su-to ku-ta-to ru-ki-to ? ku-]ta-to pa-i-to do-ti-ja ø ku-ta-to pa-i[-]to *56-ko-we-i e-ko-so ra-to ? a3-mi-re-we 2 4 5 3 ? 5 4 ? ø ø? ? ø ø? ? ø 3 2 e-ka-ra-e-we 20 10 61[ 24 ? 67 20 ? 21 ? 15 ( (o-we-to o-pa) ) ? 10 24 15 of a hierarchy among the shepherds12 nor of any kind of contract between them and the palace. the flock is made up of both wethers and ewes. See for example Da 1108. the place name is ku-ta-to .14 • Ca. However. / ku-ta-to o OVISµ 20 The shepherd’s name is a-ko-mo-ni-jo. or some ewes. the reproduction flocks (with ewes and lambs) are also registered with wool quantities.18 • Two main sorts of flocks can be distinguished at Knossos : flocks for wool production.B a-ko-mo-ni-jo . thought of lesser importance.

there is no entry for animals kept in enclosures. with the commonly admitted restitution pe-ri-]qo-te-jo. if it was the case. first.26 The animals registered can be classified in different groups or categories: those with shepherd’s name (sometimes preceded by the preposition pa-ro). ( /palaios/ “old”. and those with qualifying adjectives (pa-ra-jo. There are also deficits proving that there were targets both for lambing and shearing. Since precisions are often added to the ideograms of the Linear B script (hereafter LB).A a3-mi-re-we OVISµ 2 . because of the lambing (and also of the milk production) . Compare for instance the two following documents: KN Dn 5318 + 8388 (117) . because much finer. At Pylos The Pylos sheep records as a whole are much more difficult to analyse than the Knossian ones. with a wool delivery of 33 units (99 kg) and a deficit of 17 units (51 kg). the flocks connected to the same place name: wa-no-jo wo-wo for the 4 first flocks. On Pylos Cn 40.B ti-mi-za / da-mi-ni-jo o LANA 17 In the above documents.23 • The Knossos archives also contain totalling records. OVISµ 143 OVISƒ 36 . those of different species (sheep.21 One of the questions which arises is to know if the lambs were also shorn (or better. and attached to the same place-name. a-ne-u-te on line 13. In the limited frame of this article my aim will be to provide the reader with a short description of the Pylian documentary evidence. in the Dn series. (117) ]qo-te-jo OVISµ 33…00[ Dn 5318 registers totals for the place names ru-ki-to. The two documents show another example of collaboration between scribes working in the same sphere of administrative and economic activity. 2 animals kept in an enclosure. • The Dm series records small numbers of sheep kept in enclosures (a3-mi-re-we). either per place name or per “collector’s” name. OVISµ 20 The document records.22 we could expect some kind of precision to be given and lambswool to be recorded separately.22 The administration of Mycenaean sheep rearing Dm 1174 : KN Dm 1174 + 5265 (117) . for example. being the best documented). for the locality of ri-jo-no. Dn 5668. The main data are summarised in table 1 (all Dm tablets are by hand 117. and 20 animals being fattened. Much has been written about the organization of sheep rearing in Mycenaean Crete. ten of which also have a “collector’s” name. then e-ko-me-no. with also wool quantities. recapitulating each ten or more leaf-shaped tablets which are not preserved.28 The total number of sheep registered on this tablet is of 1185. that all flocks are not of the same type: 11 are made up exclusively of whethers.B ti-mi-za / ku-ta-to . There seems to be some kind of classification or at least traces of a rearrangement of some kind in the flock composition. a-ne-u-te and ma-ro(-pi). the numbers of animals kept in enclosure are systematically smaller than those of animals being fattened . warmer and appreciated). The beginning of the tablet seems to show a tendency to register together. how much wool they were meant to produce. See for instance 2. plucked). On lines 11-14. it looks like the scribe added some more flocks. or one following the other. pigs) . It should be noted. since our texts do not provide us with any indication about lamb’s wool (a quality usually specified. by scribe 117) and is also registered on Dk (2) 1076 (scribe 119). but produced less wool. presumably for consumption. pe OVISµ 21 KN Dk(2) 1076 + 8052 (119) . • The Pylian documents about sheep are page-shaped tablets. with toponyms also registered in the first rubrics: ma-ro on line 12. These categories are of course not mutually exclusive. No definitive answer can be given. One could ask. /palaios/. and animals being fattened (e-ka-ra-e-we) for consumption. or to some kind of inventary of all the sheep belonging to the same type (by sex.27 those with a ”collector’s” name. Throughout the series. registers the total of sheep for the “collector” pe-ri-qo-te-jo. written by Hand 21 we have fourteen rubrics. it is made up of 143 wethers + 36 ewes + 21 sheep born last year = 200 animals (Df 1121.A X OVISµ 200 LANA 33 . goats. but they are quite few in comparison. or the lambs were also plucked (but we have no way to prove it. and 3 exclusively of ewes. if each rubric corresponds to a real flock. So two possibilities exist: the ewes were plucked. the flock is entrusted to the shepherd ti-mi-za. pu-so and a-ka. and. • Matches can be observed between Dk24 targets for wool production and Da-Dg flocks.B ri-jo-no / e-ka-ra-e-we . nor to give any quantitative evaluation : any suggestion on this subject remains a mere speculation). with the place name ku-ta-to and the collector’s name da-mi-ni-jo.2 pu-s…o… OVISµ 1034… a-ka O…V…IS…µ[ KN Dn 5668+ fr. .1 ru-ki-to OVISµ 4…08…0[ . but the extant bibliography on the same subject for the Pylian kingdom is less important. the main scribe who has recorded sheep flocks at Knossos). There are some studies which aim at a comparison of the two archives. each registering one flock. those recorded with a given place-name . 3 are made up of old animals. in a few cases. also have the corresponding Dk records with targets for wool production. when it is the case. The Dl and Do series record ewes and lambs. species and/or age) and placed under the responsability of the same shepherd. KN Df 1121 + 7689 (117) . It can be remarked that the target for wool production is a standard one: 200 (animals) : 4 = 50 units of wool (33+17). and to pinpoint some of the problems which arise from it.A da-mi-ni-jo .25 See for example Df 1121 and Dk (2) 1076.

4 ta-to . • There are no o-pe-ro (“deficit”) entries in the Pylian sheep records.3 .Françoise Rougemont PY Cn 40 (S4/H21) . wo-wo . as in the Pylos Cn tablets studied above. wo-wo . “stables”.8 wo-tu-wa-ne . pa-ro . or ta-to-mo. as one could expect if the men . pa-ro .30 /stathmos/. pa-ro .36 PY Cn 4 (S4/H21) The syllable TA. if it had emerged. e-wi-te-we .2 me-ta-pa . pa-ro .13 . in particular. a-ke-o…-jo OVISµ 80 re-pe-u-ri-jo .1 e-ra-te-re-wa-pi . a-ko-so-ta-o OVISµ 83 ma-ro-pi . with the recapitulative character of the Pylian tablets. e-ke-si-jo OVIS+TA 9 . supra) an abreviation for ta-to-mo. the animals concerned are bovids.1 wa-no-jo . “stable”.35 This is one of the elements. ka-ta-wa . zo-wi-jo . Finally on line 6. ma-u-ti-jo . infra).5 e-ri-no-wo-te . wo-wo . as the indication of a debt. tu-ri-ta . po-so-pe-re-i . The absence of deficit indications would induce us to think that the problem.6 . we-da-ne-wo OVISµ 85 ma-ro . ne-me-ta-wo OVIS+TA 10 . on line 2.5 ma-to-ro-pu-ro OVIS+TA 1 . a-ko-so-ta OVISƒ 80 a-te-re-wi-ja . After the introduction.10 si-jo-wo-te . added to the ideogram. a-ko-s…o…-ta-o OVISƒ 60 a-ne-u-te pa-ro . wo-ne-we OVISµ 75 wa-no-jo . pa-ro . a-we-ke-se-u VIR 1 OVIS+TA 5 . It is /stathmos/. pa-ra-jo OVISµ 80 e-ko-me-no . which brings to mind the idea that the Knossian and Pylian sheep tablets reflect two different (successive?) stages of the administrative livestock management. ku-ri-sa-to OVIS+TA 22 .5 . ke-ro-we OVIS+TA 7 .34 This would perhaps be an argument to say that the different groups of animals registered on different documents (or different lines on the same document) with the same shepherd’s name were to be added to form the total number of animals entrusted to the shepherd (and not that the different groups made up the flocks entrusted to the same man for different years or seasons). had been solved at a stage of the management prior to the redaction of the extant tablets.14 .3 ne-de-we-e OVIS+TA 9 . pa-ro . personal name (shepherd). is (cf. a-ko-so-ta-o OVISµ 70 wa-no-jo . but the addition of the animals attested with identical shepherd names often comes down to round numbers. /ophelos/. indicating a bull (but in this case we would expect a BOSµ ideogram. for 8 sheep.6 ]i-pi[ VIR ]1 OVIS+TA 5 . ka-da-ro . one man is registered with the 5 animals kept in a stable. pa-ro .2 .2 and .7 . it seems hardly plausible that the two men on line 4 were necessary to take care of only eight sheep. not simply BOS) . pa-ro . sa-n…i…-j…o… OVIS+TA 16 .3 qe-re-me-ti-re .31 And if we look at the number of sheep involved in two rubrics. the sheep numbers are less often round.9 ma-ta . each rubric is made up of the same elements: place name.29 Are these animals to be brought to stables belonging to the palace? Is there any link between the Knossian a3-mi-re-we or e-ka-ra-e-we sheep and the Pylian OVIS+TA? The nature of the documentation does not allow these questions to be answered with certainty. .15 wa-no-jo . t…u…-ni-jo OVIS+TA 7 .2 mu-ta-pi . o-pe-ro . pa-ro . especially if we take into account the possibility of a more or less important chronological difference between the two corpora. ti-ri-jo OVIS+TA 7 .32 In this case. e-zo-wo . there is also one man recorded besides the 5 animals. pa-ta . . a number of animals still due to the palatial administration. Tato-mo is usually interpreted as /stathmos/. a-ka-re-u-te . They could have been the individuals responsible for the transfer of the animals (to the stables). wo-wo . ta-to-mo . First it is necessary to propose some kind of explanation for the introduction of both tablets: ta-to-mo o-pe-ro. ta-to-mo . This man may be the person responsible for them. pa-ro .33 • At Pylos.7 e-ri-to-ti-no . nonetheless.7 ]-ko-[]O…V…I…S… [+TA] ™5[ were the individuals in charge of the animals/responsible of them towards the palatial administration. ro-ko . ma-ri-ti-wi-jo . pa-ro . there is also a VIR ideogram . stathmos/ o-pe-ro . we-da-ne-wo OVISµ 70 a-ne-u-te . pa-ra-jo OVISµ 150 ma-ro-pi .4 . o-pe-ro . there are two men.1 a-si-ja-ti-ja . two possibilities have been suggested : tauros. The problem is that these VIR entries are not systematic. a-ke-o-jo OVISƒ 70 vacat 23 • On Cn 4 and 595 the scribe records small groups of sheep (1 to 16) kept in stables (OVIS+TA).11 . p…a…-r…o… . e-ra-se OVIS+TA 10 PY Cn 595 (S4/H21) .10 . a-ka-re-u-te . a quantity /ophelos/ of goods. some rubrics on Cn 595 differ slightly from this pattern ( cf. combined with the other differences already described above.4. we-da-ne-wo OVISµ 60 e-ko-me-no . tu-ti-je-u OVIS+TA 4 .9 .6 ne-do-w…o…-te . ideogram and numbers. and /stathmos/.8 . On line 4. pa-ro . stathmos/ interesting to note that on Cn 595. [•]ma-te-we . ne-ti-ja -no-re . but in this case one would expect their proper names to be quoted (and again their number would seem strange). po-ru-qo-ta. There is also another document with a mention which could be analogous : C (1) 901. o-qe . a[-ko-so-]t…a…-o… OVISµ 82 ma-ro .4 u-de-wi-ne VIR 2 OVIS+TA 8 . pa-ra-jo OVISµ 140 . For the interpretation of ta on this tablet. The fact would fit nicely.12 .

Correspondences between Cn 131 et Cn 655+719.37 The absence of wool quantities clearly related to the flocks is probably to be put in relation with the very small quantities of textile tablets at Pylos.10 e-ti-ra-wo Cn 131.2 Animals OVISm 70 OVISm 60 pa-ra-jo OVISm 66 OVISm 96 pa-ra-jo OVISm 133[ OVISm 85 OVISm 69 OVISm 190 pa-ra-jo OVISm 70 pa-ra-jo OVISm 60 Place Name pi-*82 pi-*82 wi-ja-wera2 wi-ja-wera2 ma-ro-pi CN a-ke-o a-ke-o ø a-ko-so-ta ø a-ka-ma-wo OVISm 120 to-ro-wi OVISm 130 OVISm 130 OVISm 91 CAPf 55 Cn 131.43 The Pylian case is more complex.2 Cn 131.4 Cn 655. The meaning of these recurrences in relation with the administration of sheep flocks is problematic. Some oddities in the sheep tablets • At Knossos. this is one more argument to think that the Pylian documents do represent another stage or period of the recording/ managing process of the flocks (or that we have at Pylos a different part of the documentation). all three by scribe 117.10 a-ta-mane-u OVISm 100 OVISm 140 pi-*82 pi-*82 Cn 655. a few tablets do not register a toponym:39 Da 1445. as they are at Knossos. At Knossos.10 ma-ro-pi ma-ro-pi Cn 131.6 The administration of Mycenaean sheep rearing Shepherd’s Animals name o-ku-ka ku-pi-ri-jo ko-ru-no OVISm 13…0 OVISm 50 OVISm 100 Place Name pi-*82 pi-*82 pi-*82 pi-*82 pi-*82 Tablet Cn 719.40 • Some shepherd names are mentioned on more than one tablet.14 pu-wi-no Cn 131.7 Cn 131.8 a-ri-wo OVISm 100 OVISf 44 pi-82 pi-*82 Cn 655.19 OVISm ]4 OVISf 40 ma-ro-pi ma-ro-pi a-ke-o-jo a-ko-ra we-da-newo Cn 131.3 Cn 131.9 Cn 719.3 Cn 131.12 Cn 655. in comparison with what is preserved in the Knossian archives. sometimes with different ones. . Since they are also without deficit entry.44 The shepherds registered on Cn 655+ 719 II.4 Cn 131.38 they may be interpreted as records of flocks about to be trusted to the shepherd for the next season.5 ma-ro-pi ma-ro-pi ma-ro-pi ø ø a-pi-mede-o a-kora ø ø Cn 131. • Nothing like targets for wool production are attested. both at Pylos and Knossos. • We know nothing about flocks intented for reproduction at Pylos. Dc 1419 and Dd 1425. or as records of flocks given back by the shepherd to the palatial administration after one season. Since there is no reason why they would not be registered.24 Table 2 Tablet Cn 131.9 Cn 655.42 10 shepherds are mentionned both in at least one sheep register and one shearing record. we have 2 to 5 attestations at the most for the same shepherd’s name.3 Cn 655. and we have no mention at all of Pylos m ki OVIS (lambs).41 sometimes with the same place name.11 Cn 655.5 Cn 719. since the hypothesis of a double recording for some flocks has been formulated.7 ke-ro-wo ra-pa-sa-ko pi-*82 pi-*82 pi-*82 Cn 655.7 Cn 719.11 se-no Table 2. 11 shepherd names recurring on more than one tablet are associated with the same place name at least on two documents.

47 because of the Pylos Cn tablets.B ]d…a…-w…o… o OVISµ 12 De 1371 + 1480 + 7115 + 8741 (117) . The idea has been developped later by other scholars.A te-ra-po-si-jo .49 and it was suggested that even in cases where only the adjective. All the ‘collectors’ known in the Pylian archive do appear in the second set of documents. is to know if they are related to the same flock or not. but the shepherd’s dog as a guide. “collector’s” name. without “collector’s” name) and Cn 655. as guides. 25 III. with the “collector” a-pi-me-de). that cannot be answered with certainty. maybe some kind of collection of animals. a-pi-me-de on Cn 655. OVISµ 80 OVISƒ 8 . This maybe also the case of the two next documents. or perhaps a place were the plucking of the wool took place. and it seems not very plausible that the broken part on the right side of 1134 would make a difference. in my .5.12 (in this later document.50 To sum up : different kinds of problems arise from the Pylian sheep records tabulated above. a-ko-so-ta on Cn 719. a-ko-ra-jo/-ja.B o-to-ro-qa . with some additionnal information. would be also on another level. We also have very little information about the movements of the flocks (transhumance).19. if one considers the format of the document and the disposition of the information. Questions and problems • A few Knossian sheep tablets are looking almost identical: two tablets about one flock? This seems to be the case for Da 1134 and 1135. although they bear no chronological indication . is a very recent phenomenon in Europe. and some of the toponyms are also attested with craft activities. and the exact coincidence of the numbers in each sheep category registered is quite striking. by scribe 107). From this suggestion comes the widespread but.46 It has been suggested that the word ako-ra and the adjectives a-ko-ra-jo/-ja were linked with the individuals known as “collectors”. it seems to me that some doubts can be expressed about these correspondences. questionable. Both tablets are identical. especially in the case of Cn 131. if Mycenaean shepherds did use dogs. at ma-ro-pi. / *56-ko-we . The data are summarized in table 2. at pi-*82. etc. which were not very likely to be kept all the time at the same place. with two different flocks. and not only as a big animal supposed to protect the sheep from the predators.53 that the shepherds used. The first link was made by Ventris and Chadwick after the decipherment. and these animals would not necessarily be registered by the palace (belonging to the shepherds?). and documents relating to two different years. especially if the place in question was also a settlement area. / da-wo o OVISµ 12 The question. but that these individuals do appear six times in the right part (Cn 655+719) : a-ke-o on Cn 719.Françoise Rougemont would be the same as those registered on Cn 131.45 This would mean an identity of persons. but the documents reflect different stages both of animal management and administrative information processing.A u-ta-jo-jo OVISµ 100 . The idea of the place names representing administrative location or a shearing place seems more plausible.14 (55 she-goats. It should be remembered here that our ignorance of many practical details in the managing of Mycenaean flocks is great: we have no idea about the guiding system of the animals. both on the basis of ethnological comparisons52 and historical studies. and *we-da-ne-u on Cn 655. The question is how this can fit in the different theories elaborated to explain the presence of these individuals in the sheep records. and even that the a-ko-ra operation (some kind of “gathering” of animals) would be a definition of their activities.48 and gave their modern name of ”collectors” to these individuals. The broken shepherd’s name on De 1361 does not allow us to draw more conclusions.b ke-to . since the tablets bear no chronological indication. so that the situation is probably much more complicated that it seems at first sight. animals of the same species as those of the flocks (sheep or goats). idea of a special link between “collectors” and the western part of Crete. it is impossible to prove any kind of time difference between the records (difference which would be necessary if we suppose that the double recording corresponds to two successive series of operations on the flocks). or to a grazing place? The hypothesis of a grazing place does not seem very plausible for a number of toponyms. in my opinion.11. though it seems plausible. was mentioned by the scribes (in the Knossos Co series. 1° the para-jo or old sheep are a kind of mention that should be situated on a different administrative level as the OVIS without more precision. since they are probably to be taken from the flocks (or the groups of old sheep are recorded separately and intended for culling). As a consequence.5 (190 whethers. / *56-ko-we OVISµ100[ Da 1135 + 7182 (117) .5.51 • Does a place name correspond to an administrative centre managing the flock. but with animals corresponding to a new allocation for a new season. It is interesting to note that in the left part of the table (Cn 131) there are no “collector’s” names. the “collectors” were also involved. The identical toponym. as shown by the study of De Planhol 1969. also with the word a-ko-ra) . Cn 655. They may have used dogs.B ke-to . 2° the a-ko-ra management operation. De 1361 and 1371: De 1361 + 8240 (117) . Da 1134 (117) . The toponyms may indicate administrative connection. 3° This table shows that there are repetitions in the records (especially of shepherd’s names and toponyms). this was probably not as guides.A te-]ra-po-si-jo . OVISµ 80 OVISƒ 8 . since flocks are usually not kept in settlement areas. like pa-i-to (Phaistos) for example.a u-ta-jo [ . Moreover.

-L. On the sacrifices see also Isaakidou et alii 2002. General studies: Godart 1971.56 Conclusion Despite the number of documents in LB and of detailed studies devoted to the topic. there is a mention of a ”i-jere-u po-me”. Ea 350. Rougemont forthcoming. etc. The case is entirely different from the sheep register refering to the wool production or lambing targets. I thank her for reading a provisional draft of this paper and discussing in depth the topics dealt with here. 257-283. 7182. Halstead 1981. 6 On the Knossos texts: Killen 1964a and Killen 1964b . Nosch 2000 . PY Nn 831. Killen 1993. Nosch. 77-102 . Françoise Rougemont CNRS-UMR 7041 Protohistoire égéenne. is that of an organization of which only small parts emerge in our tablets. We have no such indication for whole flocks which would be moving towards summer pastures. SIPA. the palace did not register this. collectors — and animals. 5 Killen 1968. There are two other Mycenaean words in relation with the care given animals (this time. The only cases where we have an indication of movement for animals is on the nodules. who could be a ”Priest-Shepherd”. 1 .GU4 .PY An 830. Rougemont 2003. The existence of the two terms qo-u-ko-ro and qo-qo-ta-o brings questions about the precise meaning of both. 7 The Linear B tablets never bear the year’s indications. Ea 757. Godart 1992. Driessen 1992.10. PY An 852. never to prove or to ascertain a theory that would not be based on the Myceanean data. TH Uo 121 (-) . in our records. To build an interpretation of the fragmentary data still available to us.54 In each case it is a nodule and a single animal is concerned. 260. Mic. which does not help to solve our problem. we must try to find some help in ethnological studies. but focuses more on a different species (bovid). 117-125. βουβότας. interpreted as *γwουκόλος. Rougemont forthcoming. with the same kind of problems and the same characteristics). with toponyms in the allative form. I would of course be responsible for any remaining error or omission. ”shepherd”.a . in the same volume.a *153 1 VIN S 1[ . 12 Morrison 1981. 3 Detailed bibliographical references in Killen 1985. Carlier 1992.a) interpreted as *γwo(u)γwoταs. My thanks also go to M. 65-101 . ”chief shepherd”. for some reason. s. Godart 1972 . on Am 821. oxen) : qo-u-ko-ro (TI Ef 2. may be preserved in some cases. 241-305. but we know at least 7 month’s names. Killen 1996. • How can we interpret the recurrence of identical shepherd names? It seems plausible that we do have. 2. with a table of the different month’s names known in the LB documents. The Pylian and the Knossian data seem at first sight quite different. On the prosopographical issues concerning shepherds. a single text. Lú Lú 11 Morrison 1981. see also Landenius-Enegren (PhD). This short bibliography is of course not entirely exhaustive. shepherds. For detailed bibliography. and with a new allocation. Landenius Enegren. wine. like “shepherd” or “peasant”. 8 About the issue of the “collectors”. Bennet 1992. The picture of the relations between men — administrators. Uo 121. Halstead 1998-1999.a . 1-15. This fact could reflect different situations (not exclusive): shepherds taking in charge more than one flock. Halstead 1999. Killen 1995. this may be due to the fact that they represent different stages of the recording and managing process. There are some striking similarities (presence of “collector’s”. see Melena 1974. and Rougemont forthcoming 3. Rougemont 2001. Godart & alii (1975) suggest the possibility of opinion. Halstead 2001. and *190). Ea 802. LÚ ”oxherd”. but only that. 636-643. individual shepherds appearing many times.b OVIS 1 CAP 1 *190[ Among the recent changes in the sheep and wool tablets. shepherds registered with their flock for the past season. And qo-qo-ta-o (PY Ea 270 . and the link between qo-qo-ta-o and the land tenures suggests an interpretation as persons taking care of the oxen and their fodder. cf.13 . Godart 1992. 2. and the Pylian ones ca. SIPA. a priest called Shepherd or a shepherd called Priest. But the possibility of homonyms or homographs cannot be entirely ruled out. since they are only able to enlight some characteristics of our texts.5. 197-214 . These comparanda are to be taken into account with great care. see Dic. βουκόλος. we are far from understanding all the details of the administration and organization of sheep rearing in the Mycenaean period. Killen 1976.rougemont@mae. see Documents1. or the tablets registering first the allocation at the beginning of the season.26 The administration of Mycenaean sheep rearing * The paper by H. mainly from offering lists. qo-u-ko-ro and qo-qo-ta. Killen 1994. On the Pylos texts : Godart 1975.12. Killen 1993. kuzallu. 159-166 . 9 Olivier 1988. to take a “medium” chronology. 10 Somewhere else. PY An 18. in a list of commodities (*153. and then the state of the flock after the season. 1 In the new Thebes tablets. probably intented for consumption. Halstead 1994. deals with the same kind of subject. 21 allée de l’Université 92023 NANTERRE CEDEX francoise. 67-84. a goat. Meš š Lú Meš UDU .”. Nosch for reading and criticizing earlier drafts. Rougemont forthcoming. “herdsman”.9.fr . Halstead 1996. the high number of attestations brought to the idea of a more general meaning. This does not mean of course that there was no such organisation in the Mycenaean period. 1200). registers one sheep. but there are also significant discrepancies which could be due to the chronological difference between the two archives (if we date the bulk of the Knossian texts circa 1375. v. or the documents are lost to us. Del Freo and M. However qo-u-ko-ro is also attested in contexts related to land tenures. Olivier 1988 . 213-224 . 2 Killen 1964. ”shepherd for sheep” (?). Trümpy 1989. or in corpora from the — more or less — contemporary Near East. 4 Rougemont forthcoming 2 .u-paris10.-L. in this general framework. Halstead 19961997. see the new classification proposed by M. PY Ea 781). 129-138 .11. For this word.1. The existence of the two terms suggests some kind of specialisation and is not in itself surprising. 258 : SIPA. 200 ff . 191-234. boîte 16 MAE.

275. Nosch 2001. 45 See especially Killen 1964. like pa-ra-jo (old) for the sheep. that these individuals were collecting taxes in kind for the palatial administration. Nosch has suggested a new classification.-P. 54 For instance 1 ewe on TH Wu 65. see Nosch 2000.-L. 18 Rougemont forthcoming 2. /ophelos/. on PY Cn 41. see also Rougemont 2003. the indication te-qa-de. kami-ni-to. 24 The Dk tablets are now to be reconsidered with the addition of the new documents for which M. ka-da-no. Lejeune 1964.11. see also Landenius-Enegren in this volume. 1 47 Documents . because of the meaning of this word. 37 On wool and textile production in general. ate-i-ja-ta. the time factor could also be invoked as an explanation for some differences in the processing of the information. in J.a. ”KN : Da-Dg”. 43 a-ko-mo-ni-jo. forthcoming 2. by the palace). 15 Rougemont. see Killen 1984. 214-215. qa-si-da-ro. 55 On this subject. 1 and 2 with detailed references. Olivier & Th. with the toponyme te-qa-de on the second site. which is quite well documented both at Pylos and Knossos. or endograms like TELA+PU or TELA+PU m TELA+TE for the textiles.a. 11. see Rougemont forthcoming 1. see Rougemont forthcoming 1. 52 Ravis Giordani 1983. In the case of a higher or middle chronology. See Rougemont forthcoming. see the information provided in Rougemont forthcoming 2. with the hypothesis of a localisation at e-ko-so. the indication qe-te-a2. A . 28 Cf. ki OVIS for the lambs. 34 Killen 1993. 36 27 I will not discuss here the debated issue of the dating of the archives at Knossos. 40 One document should be added to this list. On this tablet. at least one herdsman contracted with another to pasture his livestock [HSS 9 31]”. see Palaima 1992. 27 On the page shaped tablets we often find sequences of flocks registered with the same place name. da-to-ro. ]za-ra-ro. 39 Rougemont 2000. ti-mi-za. see also LandeniusEnegren. ”stable”. inscribed as an ideogram on TH Wu 93. and on the third side of the sealing. also on a Thebes nodule.. see Rougemont 2003. ku-ta-si-jo. 16 Another technical term in the same field is qe-te-o. and wo-wo. 200. 20 See J. See also Cn 595. 42 a-ko-mo-ni-jo. ”to Thebes”.. for contextual reasons. 14 There is no room here for an exhaustive bibliography on the debated issue of the ”collector’s”. ka-ta-wo. / and o-pe-ro. 29 Lejeune 1964. 88 ff. and Vn 46. 1988. 47-49 for detailed arguments. twice the same place name). 411. Studies in Mycenaean Epigraphy and Economy offered to Emmett L. or by the means of words added before the ideograms. This list is not exhaustive. 53 De Planhol 1969. D’Hont 1994. Palaima (eds). For the lambing targets. Bennett. we have the formula a-si-ja-ti-ja ta-to-mo o-pe-ro.1. and again qe-te-a2 on the third.Françoise Rougemont a hierarchical difference between the two terms. 48 For detailed explanations. f SUS . where a-si-ja-ti-ja is a place name. 46 On this point. see esp. though it is not a systematic case. especially in the tables. da-to-ro. supra. 23 Lambs cannot be shorn at an early age. Jr. 21 It should be remembered here that ”shearing” is often used for the Mycenaean period but that the wool was in fact plucked. D 411 + 511 (-) f di-ko-to / e-ma-a2-o OVIS 60 WE 30 41 The most attested shepherd’s name is wi-na-jo. 51 For a detailed study of these two tablets. The quantities obtained. u-ra-jo (4 documents. do not vary much between shearing and plucking. i-ke-se-ra. Salamanca. ta-to-mo for /stathmos/. Suplementos a Minos 10. 19 Targets for wool production in flocks with ewes and lambs: LANA 1 : 10 animals. 49 See Godart 1992. 17 Halstead 1999. a-te-i-ja-ta. 1969 and 1993. The hypothesis has been abandonned since. But in the case of sheep rearing. pa-ja-so.b. Furthermore. 32 KN C(1)901 + 7661 + 8049 (107) e-wo-ta-de BOSƒ20 ta BOS 1 33 On this subject. we can be more confident and believe that the extant tablets are representative of what existed in the palace just before the destruction. see Rougemont 2000. 22 By the means of adjuncts. ”to gather”. Wu 96. Bennet 1992. It is clear that the differences stated above between the two ”sheep archives” become more striking if the low date is admitted for the Knossian corpus. wo-wo. see also Godart 1977 and 1992. with on the side b. 50 I have discussed this question in details in Rougemont (PhD). 26 The basic study on the formatting and organisation of these Pylos sheep tablets see also the article by Godart 1975. but the designation ”collector” is still used. esp. with detailed argumentation and tables. 77-109. . 275 ff. 219-267. 56 For the prosopographical issues. 38 On the textile production at Pylos. verbal adjective meaning ”to be paid” (in our texts. 470-471. 44 Killen 1964. 13 Morrison 1981. ]de-a-ta.-P. To be compared with the usual target for wool flocks: LANA 1 = 4 whethers. ”debt”. Or for a she-goat. because of the stress provoked by the cold. 30 The complete word is attested on KN Ws 1703 b. On these terms. with all the prosopographical comparisons. 260-261 : ”Consignment texts and muddû mudd documents indicate that the herdsmen contracted with livestock owners to care for the flocks and herds and to repay any deficits that occurred. see Lindgren 1973.a. Olivier.. according to the specialists. Killen 1993 . in relation with ảγείρω. and nothing on the third side of the nodule. 31 On the problem of the organization and hierarchy of responsabilities in the Mycenaean palatial economies. that can never be entirely ruled out. see Nosch & Rougemont forthcoming. For a review of other interpretations and recent discussions. with the indication a2-pa-a2-de on the side . KN D 411. 405415. G. in the same volume. ke-to. ku LANA TE (on the Theban Of tablets) . Landenius-Enegren (PhD) and Landenius-Enegren 1999. 35 The random preservation of the tablets in the destruction by fire of the palace being another hypothesis. They suggested. 25 Olivier 1969. no better word being generally accepted by the Linear B scholars. ka-da-no. See Killen 1964a. Killen 1969.

Halstead. Wien 2000.Bennet & J. 405-415. Salamanca.). ‘Nouveaux textes en linéaire B de Tirynthe’. ‘Valeur des idéogrammes OVIS . Godart 1972 L. ‘Les collecteurs sont-ils des fermiers ?’. T. in M. ‘Texts. 418-424. m f m f m f m f Godart 1971 L. 1972. Hodder. Godart 1977 Godart 1992 L. Halstead. Acta Mycenaea. Halstead 1996-1997 P. in U. ‘Linear B Evidence for the Management of Sheep Breeding at Knossos : Production Targets and Deficits in the KN Dl (1) and Do Sets’. ‘La rédaction des tablettes des moutons de Pylos’. SUS .). Denkschriften 1). D’Hont 1994 O. internationalen mykenolohischen Colloquiums in Salzburg vom 1. ‘Les tablettes de la série Co de Cnossos’. Colloque international sur les textes mycéniens et égéens organisé par le Centre de l’Antiquité Grecque é et Romaine de la Fondation Hellénique des Recherches Scientifiques et l’École française d’Athènes nique l’ (Athènes. tenu à Salamanque. Cambridge Philological Society. ‘Les ressources des palais mycéniens de Cnossos et Pylos’. World Archaeology 28/1. Godart. Damas 1994. Bennet. Godart. Mayence VIII 1975. Halstead. Dic. in S. 30 mars-3 avril 1970. Tiryns VIII. Voutsaki & J. Pattern of the Past: Studies in Honour of David Clarke. Isaac & N. développement et signification géographique d’une technique pastorale’. 1990-91 [1994]. 343-365. Hammond (éd.). Cambridge 1981. 197 214. Akten des X. CretChron 23. in J. Driessen (eds). Driessen. Cambridge 2001. Economy and Politics in Mycenaean Palace States. 307-339. . Carlier. (BCH suppl. Halstead 2001 P. Observations sur l’élite mycénienne de Cnossos’. P. Philosophisch-historische Klasse. 1999. Halstead. ‘Missing Sheep : On the Meaning and Wider Significance of o in the Knossos SHEEP Records’. Halstead 1994 P.Mic Driessen 1992 Fr. Deger-Jalkotzy. J. MYKENAÏKA. Paris 1992. Killen. 1996-1997. 65-101. Halstead 1981 P. De Planhol 1969 X. Actes du IXe Ï ÏKA. Halstead. 1969. in K. 1998-1999. 1996. de Planhol. L. II Salamanca. 145-166. Diccionario griego-micénico. Godart 1975 Godart & alii (1975) L. Zooarchaeology: New Approaches and Theory. CAP . Halstead. L. LEC 45. Godart & alii. 351-360. Bulletin de l’association des géographes français 370. BOS et BOS dans les tablettes de Cnossos et de Pylos’. Actes du cinquième Colloque international des études mycéniennes. 20-42.-P. Floreant Studia Mycenaea. Halstead 1996 P. Carlier. Carlier 1992 Carlier 2000 P. in Olivier 1992. G. Halstead 1999 P. Godart. Godart. A-NA-QO-TA. Panagl (eds). 149-189. 159-166.28 Bibliography The administration of Mycenaean sheep rearing Bennet 1992 J. in Olivier 1992. supplementary volume 27. flax and sheep: palatial intervention in farming and its implications for rural society’. ‘Les mentions de la parenté dans les textes mycéniens’. ‘Les collecteurs dans le monde égéen’. 185-193. in Olivier 1992. OVIS . S. 1971. II. Minos 25-26. Madrid 1985-1993. ‘ ‘Collectors’ or ‘owners’ ? An examination of their possible functions within the palatial economy of LM III Crete’. Jantzen (ed. Halstead 1998-1999 P. Killen (eds. Godart. Aura Jorro. 1975. 89-94. Bones and Herders : Approaches to Animal Husbandry in Late Bronze Age Greece’. 1977. 2-6 octobre 1990). ‘Lost Sheep? On the Linear B Evidence for Breeding Flocks at Knossos and Pylos’. Minos 31-32. BSA 94. 38-50. SUS . T. in J. Vie quotidienne des Agedat. RAL 30:7-12. Hiller & O. Mai 1995.). in I. Thomas (ed. ‘Counting Sheep in Neolithic and Bronze Age Greece’. 25). Ruipérez (éd. ‘Mycenaean wheat. 31-42. ‘Le chien de berger. CAP . in S.). ‘‘Collector’s Items’.-5. S.). 257-283. D’Hont. 187-200. Studies Presented to J. 37-51. Techniques et occupation de l’espace sur le Moyen Euphrate. Olivier (ed. Halstead. ‘Pastoralism or Household Herding ? Problems of Scale and Specialization in Early Greek Animal Husbandry’.

internationalen mykenolohischen Colloquiums in Salzburg vom 1. University of Heidelberg. J. 325-342. St. Morpurgo Davies & W. Lacheman on His Seventy-fifth Birthday. Killen. Panagl (eds.-5. P.).T. Hiller & O. ‘Thebes Sealings and Knossos Tablets’. Killen. Archäologisches Institut. vol. Bulletin of Sumerian Agriculture 7. ‘The Knossos o-pi Tablets’. Killen.’Some Further Thoughts on ‘Collectors’’. Niemeier (eds. in S. in E. 1964.). W. in C. Killen. Rougemont & J. 71-82.). 69-93.Françoise Rougemont Isaakidou et alii 2002 29 V. Landenius-Enegren (PhD) H. Landenius-Enegren. Landenius-Enegren 1999 H. 1999. L. ‘Burnt Animal Sacrifice at the Mycenaean ‘Palace of Nestor’.I. Owen (eds. Morrison. Killen.). Lejeune.). Morrison & D.L.T. G. Akten des X. Nosch.1996.T. Shelmerdine & T. BSA 59. Österreichische Forschungen zur ägäischen Bronzezeit 1998. Wien 2000. 209-218.). Mai 1998. Uppsala 1973. Killen. in M. ‘Some Adjuncts to the Sheep Ideogram on the Knossos Tablets’. Olivier (eds. Prosopographical Studies in the Knossos Linear B Archives. Davis & S. Laffineur & W. 77-102. Bennett (ed. in A. Morpurgo Davies & Y. Sacconi (eds. 27 August-1st September 1984). Annales d’archéologie égéenne de l’Université de Liège et UT-PASP 12). 23-38. POLITEIA. ‘The Textile Industries at Pylos and Knossos’.B. Blakolmer (ed. Killen. Pylos Comes Alive. 14-20 ottobre 1991 (Incunabula Graeca 98:1). Italic. 67-84. Louvain-la-Neuve 1985. 77-109.T. in C. Lindgren 1973 Melena 1974 M. f . ‘Reflexiones sobre los meses del calendario micenico de Cnoso y sobre la fecha de la caida del palacio’. é Lejeune 1964 M. I-II J. 636-643. Linear B: A 1984 Survey. 49-63. Godart & A. Winona Lake. (BCH 122). Killen 1964a Killen 1964b Killen 1968 J. Industry + Administration in a Mycenaean Palace. J. Society and State in the Aegean Bronze Age. Killen 1994 Killen 1995 J. ‘The Linear B Tablets and the Mycenaean Economy’. 418-421. ‘Thebes Sealings. Isaakidou.T.T. Recherches récentes en épigraphie créto-mycénienne.). 257-296. Atti e Memorie del Secondo Congresso Internazionale di Micenologia. II’. 2002. Killen. Killen.-3. Morrison 1981 M. T. IN 1981.A. Melena. in F.‘Some Problems of the Prosopography of Knossos’. The People of Pylos I-II. 1993. 117-125. Duhoux (eds. Offered to Leonard R.). 86-92. Palaima (eds. in A.). ‘Linear B a-ko-ra-ja/-jo’. 1969. ‘Evidence for Herdsmen and Animal Husbandry in the Nuzi Documents’. Killen 1993 J. Knossos Tablets and Mycenaean State Banquets’. BICS 40.-P.). PhD. J. ‘Schafherden unter dem Namenspatronat von Potnia und Hermes in Knossos’. in E. 1994. Meid (eds. Proceedings of the 5th International Aegean Conference / 5ème Rencontre égéenne internationale. Landenius-Enegren. Studies in Greek.T. 211-216. Roma-Napoli. Killen 1969 Killen 1976 J. New York 1984. Killen 1985 J. Stocker. Gallavotti (ed. Killen. Emerita 42. ‘Records of Sheep and Goats at Mycenaean Knossos and Pylos’. Rome 1968. Nosch 2000 M.T. 10-13 April é 1994 (Aegaeum. Killen 1996 J.A.-L. The People of Knossos. 213-224. University of Uppsala 1999. 1974.).T. Pylos’. in F. Killen. Akten der Tagung am Ö ä Institut für klassische Archäologie der Universität Wien. Wien 2000. 1964. Wingspread Colloquium. L. Madison 1964. Killen 2000 J. ‘Minoan Woolgathering: A Reply. Mai 1995. J. Kadmos 8. Innsbruck 1976. ‘Sur quelques termes du vocabulaire économique mycénien’. in R. Antiquity 79.-D. 1-15. Floreant Studia Mycenaea. and Indo-European Linguistics. Killen 1984 J. Atti e Memorie del 1° Congresso Internazionale di Micenologia (Roma 27 settembre-3 ottobre 1967). Eranos 61.T. Proceedings of the Mycenaean Colloquium of the VIIIth Congress of the International Federation of the Societies of Classical Studies (Dublin. (Incunabula Graeca 25:2). De Miro. ‘The Wool Industry in Crete in the Late Bronze Age’. Halstead.T. Palmer on the Occasion of His Seventieth Birthday (Innsbrucker Beiträge zur Sprachwissenschaft 16). Deger-Jalkotzy. ‘Mycenaean o-pa’. Liège & Austin 1995. 2. 2. Studies on the Civilization and Culture of Nuzi and the Hurrians in Honor of Ernest R. J. Rome. 241-305. Lindgren. Killen.

219-267. f Ö Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften. Trade and Production in Premonetary Greece.-L. The Scribes of Pylos.-L.30 Nosch 2001 The administration of Mycenaean sheep rearing M. St.). 1989. C. Olivier. Rougemont. Rougemont (forthcoming 3) Fr. Gillis. 177-189. 129-138. 2002. Palaima. Proceedings of the11th International Mycenological Colloquium held in Austin. Palaima & C. Texas. Bennett. Actes du é é colloque tenu à l’université de Rennes II les 16 et 17 novembre 2001. Brno 2000. Rougemont 2003 F. Nosch & Rougemont forthcoming M. Thèse soumise pour l’obtention du doctorat nouveau régime. Rougemont. Olivier (ed.-P. Actes du colloque organisé à Alexandrie par le Centre d’Etudes Internationales sur la Romanité. Palaima (eds. SMEA 27. Nosch & F. 1988. 8-12 May 2000. 1992. in J. in I. in I. Hiller.G. Voutsaki & J. Rougemont.-P. Pernot & Fr.G. in Responsabilité et Antiquité. MYKENAÏKA. Part I : General Background and Scribe 107’. Panagl (eds). Paris 37-53. Th. de laine et de tissus à Cnossos’. 269-275. Olivier 1992 J. Rome 1988. Trümpy.). Prost (eds). Bergers corses. Rougemont. Les agents du contrôle économique dans le monde mycénien. é organisé par le Centre de l’Antiquité Grecque et Romaine de la Fondation Hellénique des Recherches Scientifiques et l’École française d’Athènes (Athènes. in L. (Suplementos a Minos 10).). Killen (eds. Nommer les dieux. . é égime. forthcoming in Hesperia. Palaima. Rougemont. ‘The Textile Industry at Thebes in the Light of the Textile Industries at Pylos and Knossos’. Olivier 1988 J. ‘The Scribes from Thebes. l’ Olivier forthcoming J.T. ‘Quelques particularités dans les enregistrements de moutons de Cnossos’. Radova (ed. Crossing Borders.-P. ‘KN : Da-Dg’. Olivier & T. Les communautés villageoises du Niolu. Wien. Salamanca. Studia Minora Facultatis Philosophicae Universitatis Brunensis 6. ‘The -ΦΙ Case Form in Mycenaean and Homer’. ‘The Knossos Oxen Dossier : The Use of Oxen in Mycenaean Crete. Ravis Giordani 1983 Rougemont (PhD) G. 463-474. 5. ‘Quelques remarques sur les entrées o-pe-ro et les ‘collecteurs’ dans les enregistrements de moutons. Sjöberg (eds.). Théonymes. ‘La production et l’exploitation de la laine dans les économies palatiales mycéniennes’. ‘The Collectors as an International Elite in the Mycenaean World’. supplementary volume 27). (BCH suppl.. Radova (ed. Aix en Provence 1983.G.-P. PCPS 44. 2001. ‘Some thoughts on the identification of the ‘collectors’ in the Linear B tablets’. Actes du IXe Colloque international sur les textes mycéniens et égéens Ï ÏKA.G. 191-234. The Tables of their Signs with Comparisons with the Scribes from the Continent and Crete’. Festschrift in honour of A.W. Nosch. Bartonek (Studia Minora Facultatis Philosophica Universitatis Brunensis 6) 2001. Rougemont 2000 Fr. Thompson 1998 Trümpy 1989 R. 8. Rougemont. Festschrift Bartonek. Rougemont 2001 Fr. Dez.). Méditerranées M 34-35. Internationales Forschungskolloquium. Shelmerdine (eds). ‘Les noms des dieux dans les tablettes inscrites en linéaire B’. épithètes. in C. O.B. in Olivier 1992. Palaima 1988 Palaima 1992 Th. é és Fr. 25). C. in S. Rougemont. Jr. Jalkotzy. Thompson. Cambridge. Rougemont (forthcoming 2) F. hiéronymes dans le monde grec. 2-6 octobre 1990). Studies in Mycenaean Epigraphy and Economy offered to Emmett L. Olivier. université de Paris I Panthéon-Sorbonne. Rougemont (forthcoming 1) F. Paris. 219-250. 1999.-6. épiclèses. ‘La hiérarchie des responsabilités dans les économies palatiales mycéniennes : l’exemple de la gestion des troupeaux d’ovins et de l’industrie textile’. Die Zeitangaben innerhalb der Pylischen Ölrationenserie’. Risberg & B. ‘Nochmals zu den Mykenischen Fr-Taefelchen. Ravis-Giordani. Rougemont. in S.). Economy and Politics in Mycenaean Palace States (PCPS. in T. 2003. 1998. Die Linear B Texte aus Theben: Ihr Aufschlusswert für die mykenische Sprache und Kultur.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful