Technical Observations: All of the strigils (1935.35.56, 1959.128.A, 1959.128.B, 1960.484, 1978.495.54, 1978.495.55, 1983.7, and 1983.8) have a green patina, but with variations. 1935.35.56 was sanded clean of burial accretions on the inside to a smooth turquoise color and has reddish and golden brown areas on outside. 1983.7 and 1960.484 have reddish and golden brown metal showing through in localized areas; 1960.484 is also black in smaller areas and has tan accretions. 1978.495.54 is dark reddish brown at the broken end, and 1978.495.55 has red and black areas. 1983.8 has black, white, and gray speckled accretions. The two strigil fragments, 1959.128.A and 1959.128.B, have a dark green patina that has popped off in localized areas, exposing brown metal.
Each of Harvard’s strigils was made from a single piece of metal that was hammered out into a cupped, curved scraper at one end and, in most cases, a handle at the other end that bends back on itself and terminates in a finial. The concave shapes of all of the scrapers were fashioned by hammering the metal over a hard mold. The overall thickness of all of the scraper blades is relatively consistent, ranging from 0.3 to 0.7 mm. Although no hammer marks have been found from visual examination of the surface, x-radiographs revealed mottled linear patterns that are the result of both hammering and burnishing. In the x-radiographs of 1935.35.56 and 1983.8, the mottled texture and distortion of the metal due to hammering are particularly clear, indicating that these were cut from a thin sheet of metal. The thickness of the scraper blades of these two strigils is surprisingly consistent (c. 0.3 to 0.4 mm); this thickness would have been difficult to achieve by casting. The cupped scraper was shaped over a form (whether convex or concave is not clear), and the excess metal was cut off and smoothed. A thin flap extends out to each side of the edges of these scrapers near the handle, where the excess metal was only partially trimmed. 1983.7 was probably made that way as well, as it is very flat overall. In 1983.7, 1978.495.54, and 1960.484, on the other hand, both the thickness of the handles as well as the presence of a small lip that offsets the handle from the cupped end of the scrapers suggest that the implements were cast as blanks. These simplified, flat forms would have been hammered and bent into shape, as was done with the other strigils that were cut from metal sheets. Fine, parallel abrasive marks made by the tools used to smooth or burnish are preserved on 1978.495.55 and on the back surface of 1960.484. On the latter, areas of the original metal surface are better preserved than most of the other strigils, as those areas lie under what may be the translucent darkened remains of organic material.
The handles of all of the Greek strigils were bent in a similar fashion, so that their finials would fit neatly against the back of the scraper. However, on all but one of the pieces, the finials are separate from the back of the scraper. It is not obvious how or whether they were attached. On 1983.7, the finial is riveted to the scraper with an iron pin that pierces through to the inner surface of the blade. The rust, which is embedded in the surrounding copper corrosion and burial accretions, indicates that this fastening dates prior to burial. Closer examination of the other strigils revealed traces of what may be solder on the back of the scraper in the area corresponding to the shape of the finial. The use of solder was confirmed by the denser patches in the x-radiographs of 1960.484, 1983.7, and faintly on 1983.8. Some translucent reddish-brown organic material remains on 1935.35.56, on the back of the scraper in the area corresponding to the finial, but this appears to be over the corroded metal and is, therefore, probably a more recent adhesive.
Two fragments of strigil scrapers, 1959.128.A and 1959.128.B, were found inside a Panathenaic amphora. These fragments have early repair remains consisting of strips of metal adhered with a translucent brown resinous material to the cracked and broken metal. There is no evidence of the method of manufacture, but they have the same thickness as the other strigils in the collection.
Francesca G. Bewer (submitted 2001)
