268 269 Christine Lilyquist Remarks on Internationalism: The Non-Textual Data The remarks presented here do not con- stitute a formal essay so much as a collec- tion of thoughts that coalesced during the symposium held in December 2008, fol- lowing the opening of “Beyond Babylon: Art, Trade, and Diplomacy in the Second Millennium b.c.” During that stimulating conference, I came to muse on the term “internationalism” both as a focus of con- siderable attention in the past fifty years, which have seen our own world become more interconnected, and as a concept that has been used to interpret many Late Bronze Age objects. My overriding sense from the symposium is that we are using texts disproportionately in our analysis of material culture — and that terms such as “diplomatic exchange,” “greeting gifts,” and “emulation” block a more detailed study of the extant objects and their con- texts. We scholars have been dazzled by the gift lists — just as the lists were meant to dazzle the ancients. In fact, a significant part of the production and circulation of luxury goods took place outside the royal sphere. I believe, for example, that some of the objects found in Egypt could have been made outside Egypt and come there as dip- lomatic gifts. One instance is an overlay for a chariot from Tutankhamun’s tomb (fig. 1); 1 it is quite different from the king’s dagger hilt, which, in my judgment, was made in an Egyptian royal workshop for use in Egypt.2 A wooden pyxis with female sphinxes and Hathor-like protomes might also have been imported.3 As seen in the style and details of sphinxes and plant motifs, it has a Levantine flavor at variance with the Egyptian canon. The vessel was reportedly found at Gurob with items nam- ing Amenhotep III and Tiye. There is no evidence of a palace there at that time, nor do I know of cosmetic containers being used in religious settings. The pyxis may have been a “diplomatic gift,” but there could be other stories behind its manufacture. First, we must remember that diplomatic relations existed at the very top of the social structure, among leaders. Second, we should note that we can rarely verify whether gifts listed reached their destinations. More than one intended recipient complains that he has not gotten what he expected, and very few objects can be matched with verbal descriptions in terms of either intrinsic fea- tures or context.4 For example, a travertine amphora with an inscription of Thutmose III found at Katsamba should be a royal gift in the tomb of an elite person on Crete (fig. 2).5 How- ever, if we compare it with an amphora from the tomb of Thutmose III’s wives at Thebes (fig. 3),6 we begin to question its origin. Note the perfect symmetry and crisp detail of the Theban vessel in contrast to the Katsamba amphora, which lists to the left, its right shoulder higher than its left. The side view here shows lumpiness and traces of a drill left under the handles, and its inscription has a very rare, unorthodox spelling.7 If the Katsamba vessel is a royal gift from Egypt, then Tuthmose III must have been sending third-rate items to Crete. Marian Feldman has proposed that the objects described in the texts as greeting gifts and dowry gifts — which would end up in the hands of the elite — were coded with designs that signified the political sta- tus of both donor and recipient.8 If we look carefully at three of her examples from the Tell Basta Treasure, however, we find that, despite their “international” traits, their Fig. 1. Gold foil chariot decoration. Tomb of Tutankhamun. Dynasty 18. Egyptian Museum, Cairo Carter no. 122qq–rr, Harry Burton TAA 931 Fig. 2. Travertine amphora. Katsamba. Late Minoan IB– II. Archaeological Museum, Heraklion 2409 Fig. 3. Travertine amphora. Thebes, Wady Qurud. Dynasty 18, reign of Thutmose III, ca. 1479– 1425 b.c. The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, Rogers Fund, 1918 18.8.19