your use of the jstor archive indicates your acceptance of ... · oil mills made their first, ......

American Schools of Oriental Research is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Biblical Archaeologist.

http://www.jstor.org

The Olive Pit and Roman Oil Making Author(s): E. Loeta Tyree and Evangelia Stefanoudaki Source: The Biblical Archaeologist, Vol. 59, No. 3 (Sep., 1996), pp. 171-178Published by: American Schools of Oriental ResearchStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3210548Accessed: 14-12-2015 23:53 UTC

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/ info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

This content downloaded from 141.211.4.224 on Mon, 14 Dec 2015 23:53:30 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=asor

http://www.jstor.org/stable/3210548

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp



The DOive Fit and

Romnan O Making By E. Loeta Tyree and Evangelia Stefanoudaki

can be gauged from its extraordinary range of uses as a basic food source, principal lighting fuel, and main ingredient in body care products. Olive oil probably

provided one-third the caloric content of a peasant (largely cereal-based) diet in such areas as Italy and Greece, with a probable annual consumption of about fifty liters per per- son (Foxhall 1990:79-80). Olive oil has an advantage in that it is tastier than most seed oils since it requires less processing to extract. Even as a lighting fuel, olive oil offered advantages. It could be produced in larger quantities than seed oils (such as linseed, poppy seed, and sesame). It also burned without producing a bad odor as animal fat or cas- tor oil did. And olive did not compete with cereals for arable land as did flax, the source of linseed oil (Stager 1985:183 n. 6). As a body care product, olive oil formed an essential base for numerous medicinal ointments, soaps, bath oil, skin oil, perfume, and cosmetics. As one example, it was used in the gymnasium (especially the great Roman bath houses) for bathing by rubbing the oil into the skin and scraping off, with a strigil, the oil and dirt. Such was the importance of olive oil that it gave the generic name to all oil (derived from oleiiuim/elaion).

Olive Pitting and Olive Oil Production Several years ago, while investigating modern meth-

ods of olive oil production, I (ELT) critiqued several papers that referred to an ancient Roman practice of pitting olives during oil making. The notion that olives were pitted during oil production astonished me not only because pitting is impractical in terms of modern procedures, but also because it is extremely labor intensive. A review of the modern literature discussing ancient oil production revealed that Forbes initiated this misconception in the 1950s (1958:65), and it had remained, for the most part, unchallenged. Was there any data that would decide this question? I was fortunate to be able to collaborate with Evangelia Stefanoudaki at the Sub- tropical Plants and Olive Trees Institute of Chania, Crete. The results of our research add to our knowledge of ancient oil processing and should put to rest any imagination of an olive oil manufacturing scene alive with scores of ancient Roman olive pitters.

Various methods were used in antiquity for crushing olives, from the simple to the complex. All that is needed is a simple

.. ,..

Ii .

. ; ?.

:o O

. ~~ .

i.,=.

.,~~~t •' ',• .•"

": YP

Fresh oil flowing into a container at the Niteros family oil mill in Nemea, Greece. While in contemporary economy and culture oil has lost the preeminent place it held in antiquity, methods of oil

production (crushing and pressing) must still cope with the same characteristics of the fruit. Photo by the author.

pounder in a stone basin or a heavy stone roller (column drum) rolled on a large, flat stone. More complex were rotary mills which fall into two main types with many regional variations (see Frankel 1993 for a possible additional category). The sim- pler and less expensive type had one or two cylindrical millstones and the other, a specialized crusher called a

trapetuiin, had two convex millstones that were suspended (to avoid crushing the pit) and had various metal fittings. Rotary oil mills made their first, certain, appearance in the Mediter- ranean in the Hellenistic period (mid-fourth century BCE). All are believed to have a common origin, from somewhere in the western Mediterranean, possibly Italy (Moritz 1958:60; Needham 1965:174-204; Frankel 1993:480).

Biblical Archaeologist 59:3 (1996) 171



-r?._ -. ~~ ??:

i-~isBs~i~8~7~i? : :r~ "Jbl~F~I~k"C~i~~'-il~_~L~~\ ~: ? :i~i~?~Jqf~'lT~t;~i' '::

.3 ?:.;~

ZI: 'f

'

~l'~fS~hs?i"~ s

i~i~i :1 ~ ;~P~_~d~ZY

f~ ?.?r:?i?? ??S~ . ?~-I

i~~ :?2~.-i ~~" '":'; i -i

I ;? I:I: I: I :. ? ~1T~ :: :i i-r::; ii:i%???~ ?,?:-;: :I ti~-?? i-. .?..I ::: :: -:'`: ~6F j j ~? ?; ??.~: I..'"~"r~"'

1:: : ::; -: i?i?l~ :.i. --.i.~ ??i?:i

.?i?~ ?~-~

A few ripe olives (Olea europaea L.) hang from a branch. The indespensibility of the olive, and especially its oil, in the ancient circum-Mediterranean world appears obvious in a short list of its uses: lighting, cooking and diet, cosmetics and medicinal preparations as well as ceremonial roles. Photo from the Beegle Collection.

Rotary oil mills increased oil yield by more thoroughly mixing the crushed paste, and they saved time because they could be turned by two men or driven by an animal. They became most common during the Roman period, spread- ing throughout much of the Mediterranean by at least the first centuries BCE and CE. The trapetuim, with its convex millstones, was characteristic of Italy (especially the Bay of Naples) and the Aegean (Drachmann 1932:8-11; Foxhall 1993:191). A variant form, used in Israel, could handle larger capacities due to a ceiling support stabilizing the millstones (Kloner and Sagiv 1993:125). However, the trapetlun was a specialized crusher which was more expensive to purchase and to main- tain. It was probably for this reason that it appears not to have been universally adopted. Indeed, crushers with cylindrical millstones were common, for example, in northern Syria, Israel, Cyprus, and N. Africa (see Frankel 1993:478-80).

The oil market at Rome appears to have been dominated by, at first Spain (from the first century BCE) and then North Africa, from the first to third centuries CE (Mattingly 1988b:51; Hitchner 1993:500). Fragmentation of the Roman empire during the Late Roman period (third to seventh centuries CE) broke this monopoly and allowed regions like mainland Greece to compete in its own local (Aegean) market (van Andel and Runnels 1987:116-17). This may account for a large number of trapeta of Late Roman date known from Greece. After the seventh century cE, rotary olive mills seem to have gone out of fashion and out of use every- where in the Mediterranean until the last few centuries (Forbes and Foxhall 1978:41; Kardulias and Runnels 1995:110).

We surveyed the ancient literature as well as conducted experiments to determine what happens to the

olive pit during traditional oil making. In our experiments, we were unable to use a Roman model (although we used a traditional crusher in Eleusis), but we analyzed the design of the trapetumn. We did so since the misconception that Romans pitted the olives used in oil making arises from the misunderstanding of the Roman recommendation to use a trapetumn to avoid crushing the pits. Cato, among others, advocated not crush-

ing the pit because he believed that the crushed pit adversely affected oil flavor (Agr. 66.1). Even though it does not make any difference to our investigation whether Cato and his fellow Romans were right or wrong, we did examine the validity of this belief, and we will offer some suggestions as to its possible origin.

Over the years archaeological studies had concluded that the trapetuin probably removed the flesh from the olive pit: our research has borne this out (White 1975:225; Cotton and M6traux

1985:71). We do not agree, however, that pits were removed and discarded, or that Forbes was correct to state that Greeks and Romans pressed kernel-free, crushed olive fruits (Forbes 1958:65; similarly, Cotton 1979:63 and White 1984:71). Our reading of the ancient literature shows no evidence that the Romans suggested pitting olives for oil production. On the contrary, Roman advice to mill owners was "not to crush the pit." Our earliest such reference is Cato (Agr. 66.1), who, in the mid-second century BCE, recommended not crushing the pit to avoid imparting a bad flavor to the oil. This belief and approach to the problem continued until at least the time of Columella in the first century CE. Columella advocated using a crusher adjustable to fruit size to ensure not crushing the pits and spoiling the flavor of the oil (Rust. 12.52.6-7). The caveat of both authors was "to avoid crushing the pit." No mention was made of pitting the olives. Apparently, then, the Roman writers themselves assumed that the pits were not removed and discarded; otherwise they would not have warned against crushing pits during production. The Catonian Trapetum

Our first step was to determine if the trapetium with its raised (convex) millstones designed not to break the pit, would in fact leave most pits intact. Since reconstructed crushers, of which there exists only one, in Pompeii, are not available for use in experimentation, our approach necessarily had to be theoretical. To address this question, we examined Drach- mann's reconstructed design of a trapetum, based on literary evidence (Cato Agr. 20-22), and dimensions of extant remains. A trapetum was a two-stone rotary crusher with a deep stone bowl and cylindrical central post. The millstones were

172 Biblical Archaeologist 59:3 (1996)



supported by a horizontal axle protruding beyond the basin to provide handles for propulsion. The axle pivoted on an iron pin, allowing the millstones to revolve simultaneously around the basin and on the axle.

Drachmann recognized that the shape and placement of the millstones were critical to the crusher's intended function of not breaking the pits. The millstones were convex on the outer side, matching the inner curve of the basin. They were raised one Roman inch (1.84 cm) above the basin floor and were also one inch from the nearest point of the basin. The distance from the midpoint of each of the millstones to its outer edge increased gradually, making the millstones appear to flare away from the basin at their edges. This flare or curve

appears to have been intended to force olives into the nar- row path behind the convex side of the millstone in order to

strip the flesh from the fruits without breaking the pits. This combination of features-the curve of the millstones

and their precise distance from the basin as described in Roman texts-is clearly indicative of a design intended not to break the pit. Based on experiments, discussed below, with a crusher which did not break all the pits even though the millstones were in direct contact with the basin, it is theo-

retically plausible that the trapetum was successful and left most pits intact. This would be the result, of course, bar-

ring any complications such as large or firm fruits jamming the mechanism or throwing it out of alignment.

In fact, there was no means to compensate for a larger fruit size, since the distance between the millstones and basin of the trapetum was set at the time of construction and could not be adjusted. Columella realized this flaw, and the con-

sequences of trying to adjust the millstones were noted by both Drachmann and White (Rust. 12.52.6; Drachmann 1932:44- 45; White 1975:229). If the millstones were raised or lowered

they would either be too close to the basin and abrade or too distant to operate efficiently. It appears, then, that the trapetum was constructed for a particular fruit or pit size, and the use of larger fruits would be a critical factor in the number of pits left intact after crushing.

The crushing surface of the convex side of the mill-

1~41~

to lo.

,.. .

O

ob.

?. ? .

?

*

. .,...,,..

34

?. .....

.. . .

.

. . ..

stone was limited to the area below the

lip of the basin. To increase the crush-

ing surface, the height-to-width ratio of the millstones was increased and the basin was made deeper and narrower (conical shaped). The millstones were set more deeply into the basin, almost

up to the hole for the horizontal axle, which increased both efficiency and

capacity. Extant examples of this type are known from the Pompeii region, dating before 79 CE. In some models, the curve above the crushing level was cut back, perhaps to eliminate super- fluous stone and weight (Drachmann 1932:46).

(top) The Roman trapetum was a specialized olive mill consisting of two convex mill stones that rotated around a vertical post in a deep bowl as pressure was applied by means of a horizontal

axle. This drawing of the Catonian trapetum indicates the basin; central post; lip; millstone; horizontal axle; and iron pin. The points A and B demonstrate the millstone flare. After Drachmann 193:137, fig. 1.

(center) A horizontal section of basin, central post, and millstone at the height of the basin lip shows the center of basin (0); center of millstone (X); and the gap created between the two. A represents a gap of 1 Roman inch (1.8 cm) between the millstone and basin, while B indicates a wider gap. The curve of the millstones and their precise distance from the basin

suggest that Roman engineers designed the trapetum so as not to crush the pits with the

fleshy fruit of the olive. After Drachmann 1932:139, fig. 4.

(bottom) Trapetum millstones. Left: convex millstone of a Catonian trapetum. Center: millstone with the curve removed above the crushing line. Right: slender convex millstone

making use of the whole curve for the crushing surface. LIP marks the height of the basin lip (the crushing line). After Drachmann 1932:145, fig. 11.




5~s~- ~

,e

-c~ Y " L t

L 1 Il

S~111(??

.? (? . r .?

??? ~E;Y~- .?;

A Olive oil processors carried the crushed olive pulp to a variety of presses in the ancient world. Like this beam press, these installations

squeezed and compressed the olive paste, expressing the oil along with a much greater quantity of water. Workers then collected the oil using some constellation of separator vats. This drawing of a reconstructed Iron II beam and weight press from Israel shows the

leverage that the beam press wielded; nevertheless, olive pits that were part of the pulp were probably not crushed in the process. From Borowski 1987:122, fig. 20.

7 The motor-driven traditional oil mill owned by the Demetrios Dima family in Eleusis, Greece. Apart from the electric power, the mill was comparable to ancient crushers with cylindrical millstones

rotating directly on the olives. Since the Roman trapetum was not available for experimentation, this crusher provided a close

approximation in our test of whether Roman crushers smashed the

pits as they made pulp out of the olive's fleshy fruit. Photo by the author.

??r` "?" r~-;]r :-4

-77, W7

The Crushing Process and the Olive Pit On average, an olive fruit contains twenty-two percent

oil, most of which is located in the flesh (mesocarp; Kiritsakis 1990:13). There is some oil in the skin (epicarp) and about two to four percent in the pit, which includes the stone (the hard, woody covering or endocarp) and the soft seed within (endosperm and embryo; Kiritsakis 1990:12; Di Giovacchino 1991:14). Plant cells must be crushed to release

the oil, hence the necessity of crushing the fruits. Crushing requires applying force to the fruit. To accomplish this a wide range of equipment has been used since antiquity: mortars and pestles, various types of rotary mills with stone millstones, and, recently, hammer mills.

No matter the method, crushing cre- ates a paste. The paste needs to be mixed, and this is today done in a separate basin from the crusher using a rotating blade

(comparable to a "dough hook"). Mix- ing coalesces the oil into larger droplets

to promote flow during pressing. The paste is scooped into woven sacks or onto circular press mats which are then stacked into the press. Pressing squeezes and compresses the stack, releasing the oil from the paste. Except for the modern cen-

trifuge system, ancient and modern presses (including the beam press, screw press, and hydraulic press) are all loaded and operated in this manner. The oily liquid from the press must be collected and separated. Separation is required because, in addition to oil, pressing releases water from the fruit (fifty to seventy percent water) and fruit solids. The oil rises to the surface, enabling its collection.

Traditional and modern oil production methods crush the whole fruit, including the pit. Presumably, crushing the whole fruit increases oil yield. During crushing, the pit's broken edges pierce the flesh releasing oil. During pressing, crushed pits promote oil flow and provide solid, com-

pressible matter to help prevent the soft paste from running off the press mats or from being pushed aside in the sacks. The pit is important enough in modern production that research labs have established the pit sizes producing opti- mal flow without blocking the pores of the woven press mats (Di Giovacchino 1991:19).

In attempting to determine whether or not pits would have been crushed in Roman oil production, our second step was to use a modern, traditional-style rotary mill in Eleusis, Greece (courtesy of Demetrios Dima). The mill was com-

parable to an ancient crusher with cylindrical millstones

rotating directly on the basin floor. The two millstones and

crushing floor were granite and were set within a metal basin.

Samples of crushed paste were taken after crushing and mix-

ing and their content analyzed. The fruit flesh was reduced to a pulp, which is the whole object of crushing. The fruit skin, being tough, often maintained its integrity. The pits were stripped of their flesh but, surprisingly, not all the

pits were crushed. Most of those that broke were smashed into many tiny pieces, although a few broke only into large pieces (see table next page). Most seeds were crushed beyond recognition. Those that survived were either broken into

pieces, with their seed coats attached, or they appeared to be intact but were actually "empty" seed coats remaining after

expulsion of the seed itself. Pits that remained intact clearly had been pushed aside

by the revolving millstones. This type of crusher is designed




with the intention of crushing the entire fruit, including the pit. It was one hun- dred percent successful at crushing the fruit flesh which contains the bulk of the oil. And yet, only an estimated fifty to seventy-five percent of the pits were crushed. Thus, successful crushing of the fruit flesh does not necessarily involve crushing the pits.

Our third step was to determine if the pits which remained intact during the process of crushing the olive fruit would subsequently have risked being broken in pressing. If so, this would have increased the percentage of broken pits, and might suggest the need to remove intact pits in between the process of crushing and pressing. To test this, we sampled press cakes (residue produced by pressing) from a small laboratory press and a modem hydraulic press. In our testing with a laboratory press, batches of crushed paste (three of "Mastoidis" olives and one of "Koroneiki" olives) with all pits intact were pressed at 205 kg/cm2 (2,940 psi). Not a single pit was broken.'

A 0.5 liter sample taken from a hydraulic press, operated at its standard pressure of 300 kg/cm2 (4,300 psi), suggested that while small pits escaping the crush of the millstones additionally escaped compression, medium and large sized pits tended to be crushed. Visual inspection of large chunks of press cake confirmed these results, showing small, intact pits dotting the press cake like almonds in a chocolate bar, with the presence of considerably fewer larger pits. It should be stressed, however, that the pressure of modern presses is considerably higher than that of ancient beam presses, which reportedly operated at only 1-4 kg/cm2 (14- 57 psi; Mattingly 1988:182-84). With an ancient press, breakage rates during pressing were surely not higher-and presumably were much lower-than in our tests, and would not have prompted the removal of olive pits before pressing.

To summarize results thus far, our investigation has shown: 1) that there is no evidence in the ancient literature that Romans pitted olives for oil; 2) that Romans recommended using a specialized olive crusher to avoid crushing the pit; 3) that the trapetumt had design features suitable for its intended function and conceivably fulfilled its purpose; and 4) that an ancient press, operating at a low psi, probably would have left most pits intact.

Although we cannot prove that Romans did not pit their olives for oil production, we can conclude that it was unlikely that they did so. If they pitted the olives, they would not have needed, and recommended, specialized crushers to avoid crushing the pits. And, since any pits left intact after crushing most probably were not broken during pressing, it was unnecessary for Romans manually to remove and discard pits during any stage in oil production. Such a practice would,

Contents of a 0.5 liter sample of olive paste (Olea europaea L. cv. Megareitiki) after crushing and mixing with a traditional two-stone rotary mill (millstones 170 cm high, 85 cm wide, and 40 cm thick). Comparable results were obtained with smaller samples. Dima Mill, Eleusis, Greece.

Leaf Fruit Pits Stones Stones Seed Seed pieces skin intact large small pieces coats

pieces pieces

1 30 18 5 many 12 5

Contents of a 0.5 liter sample of olive press cake (Olea europaea L. cv. Megareitiki) after two-stone rotary crushing and pressing in a hydraulic press at 300 kg/cm2 (4,300 psi). Dima Mill, Eleusis, Greece.

Leaf Fruit Pits Stones Stones Seed Seed pieces skin intact large small pieces coats

pieces pieces

23 many 11 50 many 8 25

needless to say, have been prohibitively labor-intensive. It is one thing to pit olives with a modern pitting device, but it is quite another to pit manually all the olives in a grove.

Other rotary crushers Certain olive crushers which resemble a Catonian

trapetum, because of their convex millstones, are actually sig- nificantly dissimilar. Such is the case for Hellenistic crushers with a single convex millstone at Maresha, Israel (Kloner and

Sagiv 1993:123-25). Compared to the trapetum, the capacity of the crushing basin was greater, the millstone rested on the basin floor, and the gap between the single millstone and basin was larger, 8.0-9.0 cm. Such differences indicate that these crushers were meant to handle greater capacities without either the problem of large fruits jamming against the millstones or the concern about breaking the olive pit (since the millstones rested on the basin floor).

It does not make sense to lump together, in the category of trapetumt, all Hellenistic and Roman olive crushers with revolving millstones regardless whether the millstones were convex or cylindrical (e.g., as done by Frankel 1993:478). The Catonian trapetum and other crushers with convex (or modified convex) millstones, like those at Maresha and one at Olynthos, operated on a slightly different principle than crushers with cylindrical millstones and broad basins. (For the Olynthos crusher see Foxhall 1993:189, fig. 5). The basins of the former had confined, limited space which relied on the weight of the olives and confined space to keep the olives near the crushing stones. (For the distinction of the operating principles we are grateful to Harriet Blitzer.) This ("intensive") method would crush the flesh partially by pressure of the olives against the basin and millstones without, perhaps, crushing so many pits.

The broad, shallow basins for crushers with cylindrical millstones necessitated shoving the olives back into the path




A Olive crusher with a single, cylindrical millstone from Tirat- Yehuda, Israel, late second century BCE. An "extensive" crushing device: the olives had to be shoveled beneath the millstone as it turned. After Hestrin and Yeivin 1977:30, fig. 1. 7 This drawing of a late Hellenistic crusher with convex millstone from Maresha, Israel shows that it possessed a gap (X) of 8.0-9.0 cm between the millstone and basin lip. The Maresha crusher provides an example of an "intensive" crushing device: with confined, limited

space, it relied on the weight of the olives and the confined space to

keep the olives near the crushing stone. After Kloner and Sagiv 199:126, fig. 5.

of the millstones as the millstones revolved and pushed the fruits aside ("extensive" method). The fruits are crushed

only when they come under the millstone, breaking the pit in addition to crushing the flesh. The greater the diameter of the crushing stones, the greater the number of fruits crushed

per revolution. The Crushed Pit and Oil Flavor

Is there any validity to the Roman belief that the pit spoils flavor? Little testing has been done, and results have proved variable. A group of eighteenth-century French oil produc- ers conducted twenty tasting tests, detecting no difference in flavor in oils produced with and without the pits crushed (Amouretti 1986:155). But in the 1980s, when an Italian group

pitted fruits with a stoner and compared the oil from these

pitted fruits with oil from crushed whole fruits, ninety-five percent of these tasters preferred the oil from olives without the pit (Almirante et al. 1987:28-29).

In order to conduct tests which were assuredly blind, we made and evaluated oils from fruits with and without the

pits crushed. "Mastoidis" olives picked at their peak of matu-

rity in February 1993 provided the raw material for

laboratory-sized samples. We crushed one batch with a brass mortar and pestle to insure that all pits were broken. We

employed a Getriebebau Nord brass screw grinder, with a 0.90 m long screw, to crush only the flesh of the other batch. A laboratory press at 205 kg/cm2 (2,940 psi) pressed the samples, and the oils were centrifuged and filtered.

We conducted these organoleptic tests, which evaluate elements percieved by the sense organs, following taste and aromatic standards established by the International Olive Oil Council (1991). A panel of eight tasters, trained in olive oil testing, blind tested and scored each sample. The results showed an average score of 7.00 and 7.3 on a scale of 1 to 9 for the oil made with and without pits crushed respec- tively. A score of 7 and above indicates good quality oil with no perceivable defect in smell or taste. Although there was a preference for oil from olives without the pits crushed, there was no significant difference between the mean scores of the oils of either treatment.

Next, we investigated the possibility of using analytical methods as an additional means of assessing organoleptic qualities. Oils made from different olive varieties are believed to contain the same chemical constituents, varying only in the ratio of constituents, which additionally fluctuates accord-

ing to fruit maturity (Montedoro 1989:29). These subtleties and the great number of substances which constitute flavor have hindered development of chemical analyses indicative of organoleptic qualities (Cucurachi 1975:62). Recently, however, a few tests have been developed, including one for bitterness (Rosales et al. 1992).

We used the bitterness test to compare oil made with and without the pits crushed. We collected mature "Koroneiki" olives in February 1993 and prepared them in the same manner as the "Mastoidis" olives mentioned above. Samples were extracted with 6 ml octadecyl (C18) columns and their absorbance was read at 225 nm ( Rosales et al. 1992). The resulting inten-

sity of bitterness readings ranged from 2.2 to 4.3 for the samples made with uncrushed pits and 2.5 to 4.5 for the ones with the pits crushed. No significant difference was found between the two types of oils.

Pit oil comprises such a small percent (two to four percent) of the end product that today pit oil is considered inconsequential in comparison to other factors affecting taste. The most significant factors are fruit health, storage, and processing. The olive variety, soil conditions, and climate also have an influence on oil taste, and the taste preference of the consumer is another factor. Pit oil, then, is not the only factor, nor necessarily the most significant of many factors, which can affect the final product.




Perhaps the belief that crushed pits affect oil flavor is related to the opinion, both modern and ancient, that less mechanical pressure produces superior oil. The first oil (the first flow of oil from the olive fruit) is purer and more delicate in taste because it contains only oil droplets and not the other fruit substances released with added pressure. This oil is released during crushing, prior to pressing, and was considered by Pliny (HN 15.6.23) to be the "flower" of the oil. It pools in the center of the crusher or mixer and can be extruded from press mats under the weight of the stack without any added pressure.

Alternately the belief that crushed pits affect oil flavor may be related to the "flower's" limited supply, higher price, and consequent appeal to the rich. For example, Roman agri- cultural writers highly valued "green oil" made from immature, green fruits (Cato Agr. 65; Columella Rust. 52.1-2; Pliny HN 15.2.5; also see Foxhall 1993:184). Green olives have a lower oil content than mature fruits, and it was recognized that olives picked at the stage of turning black offered the best balance between oil quantity and flavor (Pliny HN 15.2.6; also see Foxhall 1990:327-29). "Green oil" was limited due to low yield from the fruit and a short season for suitable fruits. The "flower" of the oil was truly a minuscule fraction of any batch of oil. Similarly, oil made without crushed pits was probably limited because it required a specialized crusher, which we know from Cato (Agr. 20-22) was costly to con- struct and transport.

Conclusion The Romans believed that crushing the olive pit adversely

affects oil flavor. Although the Italian test showed a preference for oil made without the pits crushed, the French tests and our tests showed no significant difference. Olive oils are complex, making minor variations between oils difficult to detect with either organoleptic or analytical analyses. Sub- tle differences in taste preferences make this determination even more difficult. Pit oil comprises such a small percent of the end product that it is not the only factor, nor necessarily the most significant of many factors, which can affect taste.

Specialty olive oils were produced by at least the time of Cato in the second century BCE. Judging from Varro and Pliny the Elder in the first centuries BCE and CE, specialty products for the tables of the rich experienced considerable growth. These included a greater variety of olive oils. The desire for limited, quality oils at the expense of bulk oils is evidenced by practices and technological advances, such as the Roman trapetum, which would otherwise seem impractical. Remov- ing and discarding olive pits during oil making was probably not one of these procedures; and as we have demon- strated, it would have been unnecessary. Any concern for the olive pit spoiling oil flavor could be met, as the Romans themselves noted, by using a specialized crusher to ensure that pits were not broken.

Acknowledgments We wish to thank the following people for helpful sug-

L?L?.il jr?rcr?r r~er.~ :~ccr? ..~?. ?,

( ?C'~-1C.'`C 2'1 ~r~ccpr- .? ki ,;I ?

..

r ~ 1-

Black basalt olive mill photographed at Capernaum, Israel. This was the most common type of crusher in the Levant during the Hellenistic and Roman periods. An example of an "extensive"

crushing device with a raised lip on the lower stone to contain the olives while they were being crushed. Photograph courtesy of D.

Hopkins.

gestions: Harriet Blitzer, ethnologist; Marina Iatrithou, for- merly head of the Olive Oil Chemistry Laboratories of the Ministry of Commerce of Greece; and Aristidis Koutsaftakis of the Subtropical Plants and Olive Trees Institute, Chania, Crete. We also thank Bahri Ersoy of the Olive Research Insti- tute in Izmir, Turkey for his collaboration with us in an unreported taste test using "Gemlik" olives (the resulting oils were too bitter to evaluate probably due to the use of a centrifuge for the pressing step). Thanks also to Roxanna Doxsan for reproducing the illustration of the beam press. This work was partly funded by the Ethnobotany Fund of the Botany Department of the University of Vermont.

Notes

1 The results of this test are not presented in tabular form since the table would simply indicate that zero pits were broken.

Bibliography

Almirante, P., Baccioni, L., Bellomo, F., and Di Renzo, G. C. 1987 Installations for the Extraction of Olive Oil from Stoned Olive

Paste. Olivae 17:24-29.

Amouretti, M. -C. 1986 Le pain et I'huile danrs la Grece antique. De I'araire aui moulin.

Paris: Les Belles Lettres.

Borowski, O. 1987 Agriculture in Iron Age Israel. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns.

Cotton, M. A. 1979 The Late Republican Villa at Posto, Francolise. Papers of the British

School at Rome, Supplemental Volume. London: The British School at Rome.




Cotton, M. A. and Metraux, G. P. R. 1985 The San Rocco Villa at Francolise. The British School at Rome

and The Institute of Fine Arts, New York University.

Cucurachi, A. 1975 Final Operations. Pp. 60-76 in Manual of Olive-Oil Technology,

edited by J. M. M. Moreno. Rome: Food and Agriculture Orga- nization of the United Nations.

Di Giovacchino, L. 1991 Olive Oil Extraction by Pressing, Centrifugation and Percola-

tion: Effect of Extraction Methods on Oil Yields. Olivae 36:14-41.

Drachmann, A. G. 1932 Ancient Oil Mills and Presses. Copenhagen: Levin & Munksgaard.

Forbes, H. A. and Foxhall, L. 1978 The Queen of All Trees. Expedition 21/1:37-47.

Forbes, R. J. 1958 Man the Maker. A History Of Technology and Engineering. The Life

of Science Library. London:. Abelard-Schuman.

Foxhall, L. 1990 Olive Cultivation within Greek and Roman Agriculture: The

Ancient Economy Revisited. Ph.D. diss., University of Liver- pool.

1993 Oil Extraction and Processing Equipment in Classical Greece. Pp. 183-200 in La production du vin et de l'huile en Miditerrande, Bulletin de correspondance hellenique Supplement XXVI, edited by M. -C. Amouretti and J. -P. Brun. Paris: tcole Franqaise d'Ath'nes.

Frankel, R. 1993 The trapetum and the mola olearia. Pp. 477-81 in La production du

vin et de l'huile en Miditerrande, Bulletin de correspondance h1l- lenique Supplement XXVI, edited by M. -C. Amouretti and J. -P. Brun. Paris: tcole Franqaise d'Athene.

Hestrin, R. and Yeivin, Z. 1977 Oil from the Presses of Tirat-Yehuda. Biblical Archaeologist 40/1:29-

31.

Hitchner, R. B. 1993 Olive Production and The Roman Economy: The Case of

Intensive Growth in the Roman Empire. Pp. 499-508 in La production du vin et de l'huile en Miditerranke, Bulletin de correspondance hillenique Supplement XXVI, edited by M. -C. Amouretti and J. -P. Brun. Paris: tcole Franqaise d'Athenes.

International Olive Oil Council 1991 International Olive Oil Council Procedures for Organoleptic Assess-

ment of Virgin Olive Oil, Resolution COI/T.20/Doc. no. 3/Rev. 1, May 1991. Juan Bravo 10, 28006. Madrid, Spain.

Kardulias, P. N. and Runnels, C. 1995 The Lithic Artifacts: Flaked Stone And Other Nonflaked Lithics.

Pp. 74-139 in Artifact and Assemblage. the Finds from a Regional Survey of the Southern Argolid, Greece, edited by C. Runnels, D. J. Pullen and S. Langdon. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

Kiritsakis, A. K. 1990 Olive Oil. Champaign, IL: American Oil Chemists' Society.

Kloner, A. and Sagiv, N. 1993 The Olive Presses of Hellenistic Maresha, Israel. Pp. 119-36 in La

production du vin et de l'huile en Miditerrande, Bulletin de correspondance hillenique Supplement XXVI, edited by M. -C. Amouretti and J. -P. Brun. Paris: tcole Franqaise d'Ath'nes.

Mattingly, D. J. 1988a Megalithic Madness and Measurement. Or How Many Olives

Could an Olive Press Press? Oxford Journal of Archaeology 7/2:177- 95.

1988b Oil for Export? A Comparison of Libyan, Spanish and Tunisian Olive Oil Production in the Roman Empire. Journal of Roman Archaeology 1:33-56.

Montedoro, G. F. 1989 Oil: Variety and Technology: Two Factors Affecting Quality. Oli-

vae 29:28-30.

Moritz, L. A. 1958 Grain-Mills and Flour in Classical Antiquity. Oxford: Clarendon

Press.

Needham, J. and Ling, W. 1965 Science and Civilization in China. Vol. 4 Physics and Physical Tech-

nology; Part II Mechanical Engineering. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Rosales, F. G., Perdiguero, S., Gutierrez, R., and Olias, J. M. 1992 Evaluation of The Bitter Taste in Virgin Olive Oil. JAOCS 69/4:394-

95.

Stager, L. E. 1985 The Firstfruits of Civilization. Pp. 172-88 in Palestine in the Bronze

and Iron Ages: Papers in Honour of Olga Tufnell, edited by J. N. Tubb. London: Institute of Archaeology.

van Andel, T. H. and Runnels, C. 1987 Beyond the Acropolis: A Rural Greek Past. Stanford: Stanford

University Press.

White, K. D. 1975 Farm Equipment of the Roman World. Cambridge: Cambridge Uni-

versity Press. 1984 Greek and Roman Technology. Aspects of Greek and Roman Life.

Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

Dr. Loeta Tyree has training in both archaeology and the natural sciences. In 1974 she completed a dissertation on the sacred caves in Crete and received her Ph.D. in Art History and- Archaeology from the University of Missouri at Columbia.

Since 1991, Loeta has been associated with the American School of Classical Studies at Athens. Her professional research has focused on the olive fruit and includes phytolith analysis

and its application to ancient storage jar residues and an olive DNA study to determine when olives were first cultivated in Crete. Loeta is currently updating her dissertation for publication by J.C. Gieben.




your use of the jstor archive indicates your acceptance of ... · oil mills made their first, ......

Documents