ABSTRACT
The study of the implements of Greek agriculture presents a number of difficulties. No doubt this has contributed to a limited interest in this area. Most implements were manufactured wholly or partly from wood, for which reason few physical remains have been discovered. Whereas bronze is reasonably well preserved, iron is not very durable; for this reason there are cases where we know less about the implements of the historical period than of those that hail from the Bronze Age. In Greek art, pictures of agricultural work are often preserved, but it is obvious that, for example, the Attic vase painters did not see it as their purpose to deliver a workshop drawing of the implements but merely to suggest their presence. Their contemporaries knew of course what was involved. Certain implements that were part of a ritual ceremony are frequently depicted, but often in an emblematic context that does not make it possible for us to see their function. In the literary tradition the difficulty lies in determining precisely which implement is referred to. Frequently the same tool seems to have several names, in the same way that we also assign more than one name to tools for which the Greeks had only one name. It is, however, not very practical to use the same term for the sickle as well as for the assortment of curved knives used for grafting and pruning, and so on. Only the curvature of the blades is a common feature whereas the work carried out by means of these tools is very different. To the contemporary users it was a different matter because naturally they knew precisely which tool was to be used in every specific case.
