Tracing the Source of the Elephant And Hippopotamus Ivory from ...

workshop traditions, but such methods are fraught with difficulty due to the international
character of the LBA, as will be seen from an examination of “Egyptianizing” versus
local innovations in style.
The Signature of an Ivory Workshop in the Archaeological Record
All of this of course begs the question of how one recognizes a workshop in the
archaeological record, and Krzyszkowska (1993) addresses this question in her
investigation of LBA Aegean workshops. Workshop material includes every stage of the
manufacturing process: from raw material in the form of whole or partial tusks, to
prepared blocks and blanks, roughouts, waste pieces (such as large offcuts to chips and
trimmings), rejects, mistakes, salvaged material for secondary working, unfinished
pieces, as well as the finished pieces (1993: 25-27). Elephant tusks are the preferred
form of ivory as larger solid flat blanks may be cut from prepared blocks. These blocks
were cut lengthwise from the tusk, not transversely, whereupon the outer “bark”
(cementum and enamel) was removed. The final product to be carved from the blanks
may be deduced from the shape and size of the blanks, in addition to possible guidelines
on the blank. The proximal end with the tapering pulp and the distal tip were more
difficult to carve and were utilized for pyxis (squat container) manufacturing. Small
chips, such as those recovered from Knossos, are “good indicators of a working area
proper, as opposed to a storeroom for a workshop” (1993: 27). The shape of the waste
pieces may also intimate what sort of objects were carved in the workshop. Thin and
relatively regular trimmings would suggest the manufacture of inlays, whereas carving in
the round or high relief would leave irregular flakes or chips in the working area. Some
57