East Greek Pottery (Routledge Readings in Classical Archaeology Series)

EAST GREEK POTTERY R.M. Cook and Pierre Dupont

^ ^ London aNd New YoRk

EAST GREEK POTTERY

East Greek Pottery pRovides a comprehensive suRvey of tHE potteRy Made by the Greek settlers aloNg the western coast of TurKey. The various styles of decoralion descriHed cover the period from tHe eleventh ceNtury to tHe Beginning of the fifth century HC. SubsequeNt)y) competitiON from Athens pressed local potters into using very simple ornament. Chapters include analysis of Grey ware, relief ware and archaic East Greek containers (or trade) amphoras, a class of pottery which is now attracting attention for its contribution to the study ol ancient economic history. East Greek pottery is a field that has been neglected, and much remains uncertain. Conjecture and fact have been clearly distinguished in this volume, and detailed references allow the evidence to He viewed and judged by the reader. R.M. Cook is Emeritus Professor of Classical Archaeology, Cambridge University. Pierre Dupont is at CNRS, Lyons, Prance.

I'irst published 1998 by Routledge I i New Fetter Lane, London EC4P 4EE Simultaneously published in the USA and Canada by Routledge 29- West 35th Street, New York, NY 10001 0 1998 R.M. Cook and Pierre Dupont Typeset in Garamond by Florence-type Limited, Stoodleigh, Devon Printed and bound in Great Britain by Redwood Books, Trowbridge, Wiltshire All rights reserved. No part of tins book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented; including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers. Ihitish Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Library of Congress Cataloguing in Publication Data Cook, Robert Manuel. East Greek pottery/R.M. Cook and Pierre Dupont. Includes bibliographical references and index. 1. Pottery, Greek - Turkey - Aegean Sea Coast - Themes, motives. 2. Pottery, Ancient - Turkey - Aegean Sea Coast - Themes, motives. I. Dupont, Pierre. II. Title. NK3840.C67 1998 738'.0939'2-dc21 97-7494 ISBN 0^15-16601-2

To Catherine Dupont, who did most of the donkey work

CONTENTS

List of illustrations Preface Preliminary notes Glossary

x xxi xxii xxv

1 Introduction R.M. Cook

1

2 The evidence R.M. Cook

5

3 Chronology #./W. Coo*

8 '

4 Protogeornetric R.M. Cook

11

5 Geometric R.M. Cook Middle Geometric Z-cttc Geometric

15 15 17

6 Bird Howls And Rosette Howls fl.Af. Cook

26

7 Early Orientalising R.M. Cook

29

8 The Wild Goat style /J.A/. Coo£ South Ionia

32

C/)WJ

A/ortA /oni(! Aeolis Dorian region Caria Lydia Colonial imitations Thasos

33 46 51 56 61 63 66 66 67

— Contents

—

Etruria (the Swallow Painter) 'Melian'

68 70

9 Chian: Grand and Black-figure styles R.M. Cook The Grand style Black-figure groups

71 71 73

10 Fikellura R.M. Cook Metropolitan school Colonial imitations Caria (and some oddments)

77

11 Ionian Little Masters R.M. Cook

92

12 Cla/.omeniart Black-figure R.M. Cook

95

77 89 90

13 Northampton and Campana groups R.M. Cook Northampton and Campana groups Caeretan hydrias 14 Vroulian R.M. Cook

108 108 111 114 '

j

^15 Situlas R.M. Cook 5 16 Late Black-figure R.M. Cook

116 119

17 Clazomenian sarcophagi R.M. Cook

121

18 Ionian cups R.M. Cook

129

\ 19 Banded and Plain wares R.M. Cook

132

20 Grey ware and Bucchcro R.M. Cook Aeolian Grey ware 'Rhodian' Bucchcro

135 135 136

21 Relief ware R.M. Cook

138

viii

— Contents

—

22 Faience R.M. Cook

140

23 Archaic East Greek trade amphoras Pierre Ditpont Introduction Chian amphoras Clazomenian amphoras Lesbian amphoras Samian amphoras Milesian amphoras Zeest's 'Samian' and 'Protothasian' amphoras Zeest's 'Thasian circle'

142 142 146 151 156 164 170 178 186

Notes /«(/ex

192 223

ILLUSTRATIONS

\ 5 i '!

v1 I || , ;! :v. * . *•-*$ 1 E•\>':'

. i: -.

-•'.'' ' • I* : , & ;'•' t': 'i i.'. :: f'

• '

-

1.1 Map of the Aegean and East GreeK region. 4.1 Coan Late Prologometnc oinochoe: Cos 440. Ht 22.7 cm. 950-900. (After ASA 56 (1978), fig. 48.) 4.2 Coan Late Proiogeometric skyphos: Cos 495. Ht 7.9 cm. 950-900. (After ASA 56 (1978), fig. 92). 4.3 Late Protogeometric amphora horn Dirmil, Caria. Bodrum. Ht 45.8 cm. c. 900. (AJA 67 (1963), pi. 83.16.) 5.1 Coan Middle Geometric lekytlios: Cambridge, Museum of Classical Archaeology 461. Ht 22 cm. 800-750. (Museum photo.) 5.2 Rhodian Late Geometric krater: Berlin Inv. 2941. Ik 34.5cm. 750-700. (Jdl 1 11886], 135.) 5.3 Rhodian Late Geometric oinochoe: Berlin Inv. 2940. lit 48cm. Bird and Zigzag painter: 725-700. (JJI 1 11886|, 135.) 5.4 Rhodian Late Geometric oinochoe: Munich 455. Hi 22 cm. Bird kotyle workshop: 700-675. (Museum photo.) 5.5 Rhodian Subgeometric skyphos: Birmingham University. Ht 12.8 cm. c. 650. (Photo R.A. Tomlinson.) 5.6 Carian Late Cjeometnc kotyle: Cambridge, Museum ol Classical Archaeology 463A. lit 9.3cm. Related to Bird koiyle workshop: 700-650. (Museum photo.) 5.7 ,Rhodian Subgeometric aryballos: Lund 61. Ht c. 9 cm. Spaghetti group (Kreis-und-Wellenband style). 700-650. (Lindos t, 304 fig. 30.) 5.8 Chian Late Geometric krater (restored): Chios, from Emporio. 1 It 34 cm. c. 700. (Eniporio, fig. 62.) 5.9 North Ionian Late Geometric krater, fragment: Izmir, from Smyrna. Width ol fragment C. 35 cm. 725-700. (Photo J.M. Cook.) 6.1 Bird bowl: Copenhagen ABc 899. Ill 5.5cm. Mid 7th century. {Vroulia, fig. 44.) .

3 13 13 14 16 17 18 19 20

20 21 23 24 27

— 1 lliisirtit torn —

6.2

Rosette bowl: lost (from Vroulia). 1 It 9 cm. Early 6th century. (Vroulia, pi. 43.25—la.) 7.1 a Rhodian Early Orientalising onioclioe. fragment of shoulder: British Museum 61.4—25.48. Scale c. 2:3. Second quarter or middle of 7th century. (Kardara, fig. 2.) b Rhodian Early Orientalising fragment, perhaps from neck of very big amphora: British Museum 64.10-7.1237. Scale c. 2:7. Second quarter or middle of 7th century. (Kardara, fig. 3.) 7.2 Milesian Early Orientalising amphora, fragment of neck: Balat (Miletus), l i t of neck c. 10 cm. Second quarter or middle of 7tli century. (Excavation photo.) 7.3 North Ionian Early Orientalising fragments: Izmir (from Smyrna). Third quarter of 7th century. (Photo J.M. Cook.) 8.1 Syrian or Phoenician iridachn.i shell: private collection. Width 12.7 cm. 7th century. 8.2 South Ionian Early Wild C*>at style oinochoe, detail of shoulder: Brussels A1960. Scale c, 3:5. Mid 7th century. 8.3 South Ionian Early Wild Goat style oinochoe: Bocluun S985. l i t 23.2cm. c. 650-640. (Museum photo.) 8.4 South Ionian Early Wild Goal style oinochoe, detail of belly: l.aon 37.786. Scale c 1:3. c. 650-640. 8.5 South Ionian Middle I Wild Goat style oinochoe: St Petersburg T G I 2 . l i t 27cm. 640-630. (Museum photo.) 8.6 South Ionian Middle I Wild Goat style oinochoe: Richmond (Va) 82.203. I It 32.3 cm. c. 630. (Museum photo.) 8.7 South Ionian Middle II Wild Goat style oinochoe: Louvre A312. H i 30.5 cm. c. 625-615. (Kardara, fig. 59.) 8.8 South Ionian Middle 11 Wild Goat style oinochoe: Karlsruhe 72.133. l i t 35cm. c. 615-600. (Museum photo.) 8.9 South Ionian Middle 11 Wild Goat style oinochoe: Louvre A32O. I l l 33cm. c. 615-600. (Vrutilui, fig. 13.) 8.10 South Ionian Middle II Wild Goat style oinochoe: lost (from Vrouli.i). I It 27.5 cm. c. 600. (Vroulia, pi. 24.5.)

28

30

30

30

31 33

34

35 35

36

37 39

40

41

42

— 1/lustrations

—

8.11 South Ionian Middle 11 Wild Goat style stemmed dish: lost (from Vroulia). Diam. c. 34 cm. c. 625-600. {Vroulia, pi. 17.3a.) 8.12 South Ionian Middle III Wild Goat style oinochoe, fragment of shoulder: ISalat (Miletus) K89.506.1. Width of fragment 9.5 cm. First quarter of 6th century. (Excavation photo.) 8.13 Lotus flowers and buds. a Middle I and II Wild Goat style, c. 630-600. I • b Middle II Wild Goat style, c. 615-600. Cpd Late Wild Goat style, earlier 6th century. e I'ikellura, mid and later 6th century. 8.14 Middle Wild Goat style stemmed dish, fragment (probably Ephesian): British Museum 1907.12-1.679. ' Width of fragment 11.5 cm. Perhaps c. 625. r (D.G. Hogarth, Excavations at Ephesus, pi. 49.1a.) 8.15 Chian Middle II Wild Goat style chalice: Wiirzburg 1.128. lit 15.4 cm. End of 7th century. (Museum photo.) 8.16 Chian Chalice style chalice: Louvre A330.1. Ht 15 cm. lirst quarter ol 6th century or a little later. (S. Zervos, | Rhodes, Capitate du Dodecanese, fig. 38.) J" 8.17 North Ionian Late Wild Goat style krater, fragment: |j " Izmir (from Smyrna), c. 610-600. (Photo J.M. Cook.) 8.18 North Ionian Late Wild Goat style tlish: Tocra 636. n | Diam. 21.5 cm. c. 575. (After Tocra 1, pi. 35 and fig. 26.) 8.19 North Ionian Late Wild Goat style krater (the handles are ornamental): lost (from Vroulia). Ht 31 cm. I c. 600-575. (Vroulia, pi. 15.) 8.20 North Ionian Late Wild Goat style oinochoe: i Copcnhagen..5607. l i t 35.8cm. (The animals ON the shoulder are black-figured.) First third of 6th century. \0 '• , (Kardara, fig. 179.) 8.21 Aeolian Middle Wild Goat style oinochoe from 'Larisa', • .i -' • fragment: Gottingen. Ht of fragment c. 30 cm. End of | !;.' 7th or early 6th century. (Photo J. Boehlau.) 8.22 Aeolian Middle Wild Goat style amphora from Pitane: .Izmir 5625. Perhaps first quarter of 6th century. f (Photo J.S. Cole.) 8.23 Aeolian Middle Wild Goat style dinos: Izmir 5018. London Dinos group. First quarter of 6th century. (Photo J.S. Cole.) I 8.24 Dorian Wild Goat style plate: British Museum 60.4-4.1. Diam. 25 cm. First third of 6th century. (Kardara, fig. 284.)

43

45 46

47 48

50 52 53

54

55

58

59

60

62

— Illustrations — 8.25 Dorian Wild Goat style plate: Berlin 1-3917. Diam. 27.5 cm. (The details on the figures are incised.) Perhaps c. 575. 8.26 Carian Middle Wild Goat style oinochoe: Bochum S')H7. l i t 30.3cm. End of 7th century or early 6th. (Museum photo.) 8.27 Carian mixed Wild Goat and Fikellura style olpe: Tampa 97.1. I It 27 cm. Mid 6th century. (Photo J. Gaunt.) 8.28 I.ydian Middle Wild Goat style dinos, fragment: Manisa 5494 (from Sardis, P63.332.3732). Ht of fragment 24 cm. Decoration in matt black and shiny red paint: red for parts of lions, spots on deer, filling ornaments and dividing Hands. First Half of 6th century. (Excavation photo, retouched.) 8.29 Middle Wild Goat style olpe by the Swallow painter: Bochum. l i t 25.3 cm. End of 7th century. (Museum photo.) 9.1 Chian Grand style, fragmeNts of chalices: British Museum

9.2

9.3

10.1

63

64

65

67

69 72

a 88.6-1.788 + 507 b 88.6-1.515 + 516 c 88.6-1.504 d 88.6-1.510 e 88.6-1.480/;. Scale c. 3:4. Light brown for male flesh, except on e; on c purple on parts of dress that show white in the illustration. Second quarter of 6th century. (A.A. I.emos, Archaic Pottery of Chios 1, from figs 56, 57 and 59.) Chian Black-figure style, fragment of lid: Izmir 930 (from Erythrae). Width of fragment 14 cm. Sphinx and Lion group: first quarter of 6th century. (Lemos, fig. 81.) Chian Black-figure style, fragments of chalices. a Chios (from Emporio). b Chios (from Rizari). c British Museum 88.6-1.1072 d Reggio di Cal. 19148. Scale c. 1:1. Comast group: second quarter of 6th century. (Lemos, from fig. 96.) Fikellura amphora: British Museum 88.2-8.54. Scale rather under 1:3. Altenhurg painter: c. 560. (Museum photo.)

xiii

74 76

79

— Illustrations

—

10.2 I'ikellura amphora, fragments of shoulder: Nicosia I960/X-29/2. Scale rather under 1:3. Altenburg painter: c. 550-540. (Museum photo.) 10.3 Eikellura ampliora: Altenburg 191. Ht 31 cm. Altenburg painter: c. 550-540. (J. Boehlau, Aus ionischen and italiscben Nekropolen, fig. 26.) 10.4 I'ikellura oinochoe: Louvre A321. Ht 29 cm. Group S: mid 6th century. (Photo E.A. Lane.) 10.5 Eikellura oinochoe: Birmingham University. Ht 29.5 cm. Group R: second quarter of 6th century. (Photo R.A. Tomlinsoi),) 10.6 Eikellura amphora: British Museum 64.10-7.156. I k 34 cm. Running Man painter: c. 530. (Museum photo.) 10.7 I'ikellura amphora, detail from belly: British Museum 67.5-8.859. Scale c. 1:3. Running Man painter: c. 530. 10.8 Eikellura amphoras. a Basle 1906.252. Ht 31 cm. Group P: second half of 6th century, b Louvre A327. Ht 43 cm. Group O: later 6th century. 10.9 I'ikellura amphoriskoi: British Museum. a 60.4-4.39. 1 It 26 cm. Second half of 6th century. b 64.10-7.1350. I It 28 cm. Late 6th century. (Museum photos.) 10.10 I'ikellura amphoriskos, detail from belly: Rhodes 12396. Scale c. 2:3. Painter of the Running Satyrs: c. 520. (Tracing corrected by G.P. Sehaus.) 10.11 Ftkellura aryballos: Bochum S1030. Ht 7.3 cm. Mid 6th century. (Museum photo.) 11.1 Ionian Little Master cups, fragments: Samos and Athens (but lion sherd is lost). Scale c. 2:3. Mid 6ih ' century. (Photo Deutsches Archaologisehes Institut, Athens - Samos 1942.) 11.2 Ionian Little Master cup: Louvre E68. Diam. of bowl ' 23 cm. Mid 6th century. (Photo E.A. Lane.) 12.1 a North Ionian dish, fragment: Izmir (from Smyrna). Original diameter c. 42 cm. Whitish slip: purple and white retouches. Precursor of Clazomenian Black-figure: c. 560. (Photo J.M. Cook.) b North Ionian krater, fragment of neck: British Museum 88.6-1.520. Ht of figures c. 6.3 cm. Washy slip: purple on hair (or cap), white spots on dress. Precursor of Clazomenian Black-figure: c, 560. xiv

80 80 82 83 84 84 85

86

87 88

93 94

96

96

— /1In strut ions — 12.2

12.3

12.4

12.5

12.6 12.7 12.8 13.1

13.2 13.3 14.1 15.1

16.1

17.1

Clazomenian Black-figure amphora: Berlin INV. 4530. I It (as restored) 54 cm. Purple and white retouches. Tiihingen group: c. 550-540. (Antike Denkmdler 2, pi. 54.) Clazomenian Black-figure slim amphoras: British Museum a 88.2-8.7 la. Hi 46 cm. b 88.2-8.74. I It of fragment 28 cm. Petrie painter: 540-525. (Museum photos.) Clazomenian Black-figure aniphoras, fragments: British Museum. a neck: 88.2-8.82. Diam. at lip 17 cm. b upper part of body: 88.2-8.110. lit (as made up) 19.6 cm. Urla group: 540-525. (Museum photos.) Clazomenian (?) Black-figure amphora: Athens 12713. lit 26.5cm. Knipovilch group: 540-520. (Museum photo.) Clazomenian (?) Black-figure askos: Kiev. lit 15.4cm. Enmann class: 540-520. Clazomenian (?) amphora, from Rhodes: British Museum 63,3-30.4. l i t 44cm. 530-500. (Museum photo.) Clazomenian Black-figure hydria, fragment: Athens 5610. Width of fragment c. 9.5 cm. c. 540. Northampton group amphora (the 'Northampton amphora'): private collection (formerly Castle Ashby). lit 32.4 cm. 540-530. (Photo J. Boardman.) Campana dinos: Wurzburg 115352. Hi 20.8 cm. Painter of Louvre E676: 540-520. (Museum photo.) Caeretan hydria: Zurich, private collection. 1 It 42 cm. c. 515. (Photo 11.P. Isler.) Vroulian cup: Berlin Inv. 2960. Ill 15.5cm. Mid 6th century. (Jell 1 (1886], 143.) Situlas: British Museum. a 88.2-8.11. Ht 46 cm. (Jdl 10 [1895], 37 fig. 1) b 88.2-8.7 + 22. Scale c. 1:2. Late in third quarter of 6th century. c 88.2-8.13 +30 + 41. Scale c. 1:2. Third quarter of 6th century. Late East Greek Black-figure oinoclioe: Chersoii (?) (from Berezan). Last quarter of 6th century. (Photo Inst. Hist. Mat. Culture, St Petersburg, 111 9187/5143.) . Clazomenian sarcophagi. Borelli painter: c. 540-530. a headpiece: Athens 13939. Width at top 77.5 cm.

97 99, 100

102

103 104 105 106

109 110 112 115 117

119 122

— Illustrations

—

H

17.2

17.3 18.1

19.1

23.1

23.2

fragment i>l Headpiece and Iclt upper corner strip: llrilish Museum R6.3-26.I. Ill of headpiece 33cm. (Museum photo.) Clazomcnian sarcophagus. Berlin Inv. 3145, Length 2.37 metres. Albertiiumi group: 500-480. {Antikc Denkmaler 1, pi. 44.) Cla/omenian sarcophagus, detail of figure 17.2. (Antike Denkmaler I, pi. 44.) Ionian cups. The types quoted are those of Vallet and Villard and of 1 Iayes (see chapter 18, n.l). Tocra. a 2267 ( A l / I l l ) . b 1197 (Hl/V). c 1218 (A2/1X). d 1204 (152/Vlll). e 1299 (A2/Samian). f 1288 (K3/X). (J. Boardman anil J. 1 Iayes, Excavations at Tocra 2, fig, 23; I, lig. 55-7.) Handed and Plain wares. a alabastron: from Santos. li I yd ion: Munich 532. C lekylhos: trom Samos. d amphora: Munich 463. e flask: from Samos. » Scale 1:3. Middle and second hall of 6th century. (a, c, and e alter J, Boehlau, Aits loniscben ttnd italischen Nekropolen, pi. 7.2, 7.3 and 7.5; b and d after CVA Mitnchen 6, pi. 303.1 and 303.3.) Chian white slipped nmphoras a Third quarter of the 7th century h Last quarter of the 7tli century c Second half of the 7th century il Lnd ol the 7lh-bcginning of the 6th century e lirst quarter of the 6th century f Second quarter of the 6th century g Third quarter of the 6th century Chian 'Lambrino A' anil 'swollen-necked' amphoras a 'I.aniHrino A 1'. c. 560-530 I) 'Lambrino A 1'. c. 530-500 c 'LamHrino A 2'. c. 510-490 d 'Swollen necked' with painted rim. c. 500-480 c 'Swollen-necked' with unpainted run. c. 490—470 I 'Swollen-necked' unpamled. Second quarter of the 5tli century

124 125 130

133

147

150

— Illustrations 23.3

23.4

23.5

23.6

23.7

—

Cl.i/omenian amplioras I Type A. End ol the 7th-fnsl quarter ol the 6th century b Typ* A. Second quarter ol the 6th century c Type A. Third quarter of the 6lh century d Type A. Last quarter of the 6th-Heginning of the 5tli century e Type B. c. 600 -525 f Type C. Last third of the 6th~beginning of the 5th century g Type D. c. 600-525 h Type E. Last quarter of the 7th—first quarter of the 6tli ceNtury (?) Lesbian grey amplioras a Second half of the 7th century h First half ol the 6tli century c Third quarter of the 6th century d c. 520-490 e c. 480-460 f 'Table-amphora*. Clinkenbeard's Shape A g 'Table-amphora'. Clinkenbeard's Shape 15. First half of the 6th century h-i 'Phi' type. Second half of the 6th century Zeest's 'tumbler-bottomed' amphoras . a End of the 7th-first half ol the 6th century b Third quarter of the 6th century c End of the 6tli-first quarter of the 5th century d Zeest's 'high swollen-necked' amphora. Second quarter of the 5th century Grace's Samian amplioras. Early types a Early type, massive echinus rim. Detail of upper part b Early type, massive echinus rim. End ol the 7thbeginning of the 6th century c Early type, massive echinus rim. Iirst quarter (or half?) of the 6th century d Early type, massive echinus rim. First and second thirds of the 6th century e Early type, pear-shaped. Detail of upper part f Early type, pear-shaped, gently slanting shoulder. End of the 7th—first half of the 6th century g Early type, pear-shaped, steep slanting shoulder. End of the 7th-first half of the 6th century Milesian amplioras a Ovoid belly. Early type. End o( the 7th-first quarter of the 6th century

153

157

163

166

171

— I lliistrtitions

—

h

23.8

; 23.9

23.10

23.11

•

Ovoid belly. Middle type. Second-third quarters of the 6th century c Broad Helly. Later type. Third quarter of the 6th century d Ogival belly. Later type. Second half of the 6th century e Ovoid belly. Later type. Second half of the 6th century I Conical belly. Later type. Second half of the 6th century g 'Table' amphora. Early type. First half of the 6th century h Table1 amphora. Later type. Second half of the 6th century Milesian amphoias. Details of shapes a Early type. End of the 7th century b Standard type. Second-third quarters of the 6th century c Standard type. c. 560-500 d Standard type. Last quarter of the 6th century e Standard type. First half of the 5th century f Variants of rims g Variant model. Second half of the 6th century h Variant with thickened rim. Last third of the 6th century i-m Foot profiles Sainian and Milesian amphoias. Later types a Samiaii. Third quarter ol the 6th century b Sainian. Last quarter of the 6th century C Sainian. First hall of the 5th century d Milesian (high lip). First half of the 5th century e Milesian (thickened rim). Mid 5lh century I Milesian (thickened rim). First half of the 5lh century g Milesian (thickened rim). Mid 5th century Zeest's 'Samian' amphoias a-d Standard types. Second half of the 6th century e Pithoid variant. Last quarter of the 6th century (?) f—g Intermediary types between Zeest's 'Sainian' and 'Protolhasian' Zeest's 'Protothasian' amphoias a Large model with ogival belly. End of the 6thfirst quarter of the 5th century b Large model with conical belly. Beginning of the 5th century i

xvin

172

173

179

180

— Must rations — c—g Standard models. End ol the 6th—lirst thud ol the 5th century 23.12 Zcest's 'Samian' and 'Protoihasian' aniphoras. Details of shapes a-d Zeest's 'Samian* models. Rim profiles: standard (d) and variants (a-c) e-j Zecst's 'Samian' models. Toot profiles: simple(e-g) and double-bevelled (h-j) k-m Zeest's 'Samian' models. Pithoid variant. Last quarter of the 6th century n-p Zeest's 'Samian'/'Prototliasian' models. Intermediary types q-t Zeest's 'Protothasian' models. First third ol the 5tii century 23.13 Zeest's 'Thasian circle' amphoras a Type A. Broad-bellied (= Agora P. 24892 type) b Type A. Ovoid-bellied (= Agora P. 24888 type) c Type A. 'Table' model (= Agora P. 24894 type) d Type A. 'Memkan' (?) (= Agor.i P. 24893 type) e Type B, l i n i n g ring-foot (= Agoi.i P. 248KV) f Type B. Broad flaring 'ring-foot (= Agora P. 24887) g Type C. (= Zeest's type I8l>) 23.14 Map of the Black Sea region

181

188

191

PREFACE

When the general editor of this series asked me to write this Hook, I accepted partly because of the flattering implication that I was not obsolete and also to give myself some respectable occupation. My knowledge of East Greek pottery is patchy. I Have worked in some detail on the main decorated wares of the mid and late sixth century and, il one counts the Clazoinenian sarcophagi, the early fifth. In the Wild Goat style I have kept up a general interest but, when in 1934 1 proposed to study it more closely, the then Director of the British School at Athens warned me that it was reserved eventually for another student and, being young and vulnerable, I submitted. With the other styles my acquaintance is mostly secondhand, though 1 Have had advice from more knowledgeable colleagues. Prof. J.N. Coldslream went through Chapters 3, 4 and 5; Prof. J.M. Cook was informative about finds in Turkey; Dr Pierrre Dupont made valuable comments, especially about the Ionian cups and material in Russian and Ukrainian collections and, still more helpfully, contributed a long chapter on trade amphoras; Mine C. Dupont translated her husband's French and drew the figures to illustrate his text; Prof. G.I'. Schauss read my text and commented perhaps too politely; Dr G.B. Shepherd gave me practical help; and Mi J. Donaldson saved me from disaster on the word processor. Among those who have answered questions, provided illustrations or permitted their use there are Prof. E. Akurgal, Prof. P. Amandry, Prof. G. Bakir, Prof. T. Bakir, Prof. G.F. Bass, Prof. Sir John Boardman, Prof. J. Boehlau, Prof. C. Boehringer, Dr D. Christou, Mr J.S. Cole, Mr B.I'. Cook, Prof. K.-V. von Eichstcdt, Mr J. Gaunt, Prof. W. von Graeve, Prof. C.I I. Grcenewalt, Dr J.W. Hayes, Prof. J.M. Hcmehijk, Prof. 1 I.P. Isler, Dr V. Karageorghis, Prof. Ch. Kardara, Dr N. Kunisch, Dr A.A. Lemos, Dr M. Maass, Dr M.E. Mayo, Prof. P. Pelagatti, Mr R. Sword, Prof. E. Simon, Dr P.V. Shuvalov, Prof. R.A. Tomlinson, Dr O. Tzakou-Alexandri, Dr K. Vierneisel, Dr D.J.R. Williams and Dr I. Wehgartner. To all these, to others I have missed, to the Managing Committee of the British School at Athens, and to the various authorities of the Museums, whose photos are used in this book - and, I add with pleasure, without any charge for reproduction - I am, properly, most grateful. R.M. Cook

XXI

PRELIMINARY NOTES

DATES .All three-figured dates in this book are BC and so that sign has been -omitted. Al) dates, obvious enough Irom the context, are all four-figured. SPECIAL ABBREVIATIONS t

•

IN addition to the standard abbreviations ol periodicals, shortened forms have been used lor a few books to which frequent reference is made. These are: Alt-Smyrna I: E. Akurgal, Alt-Smyrna 1 (Ankara, Turk Tarih Kurumu Basimevi, 1983). Bayrakli: E. Akurgal, Zcitscbrift der phiiosophischen Fakultat der Univenitat Ankara H.I (1950). .Clara jibodos: G. Jacopi, Clara Rhodos 3, 4, 6/7 (Rhodes, Istituio StoncoArcheologico, 1929, 1931, 1933); 1.. I aurenzi, Clara Rhodos 8 {ibid., 1936). Dupont: I\ Dupont, Dana 17 (1983), 19-43. •Emporio:]. llonrdman, Greek Emporiu (London,Thames and Hudson, 1967). Kardara: Ch. Kardara, Rodiaki Angehgraphia (Athens, listia, 1963). Sainos S: II. Walter, Samos 5 (Bonn, 1 labclt, 1968). Santos 6.1: E. Waltei-Kai ydi, Samos 6.1 (Bonn, I labclt, 1973). .yroulia: K.I'. Kinch, louilles de Vroulia (Berlin, Reinier, 1914).

\

.

N O N - S T A N D A R D ABBRliVIATIONS OF SLAVONIC A N D R O M A N I A N P E R I O D I C A L S (Chapter 23)

1JGA1MK.

l/vestiia Gosudarstvennoi Akademn Istoni Material'iioi Kul'tury (Moscow) 1VA1) Izvestiia na Varnenskoto Arkheologichesko Druzhestvo (Varna) KS1A Kiatkie Soobshclienija Institma Arheologii (Moscow) -MCA Materials si Cercetari Arheologice (Bucarest) Ross. Arkh. Rt>ssiiskaia Arklieologua (formerly Sovetskaia Arkheologiia) (Moscow) TG1M Trudy Gosudarstvennogo lstoricheskogo Muzeia (Moscow)

— Preliminary Nates — COLOUR OF CLAY AND PAINT Although it is becoming professional to relei to the Munsell Colour Charts to describe clays and paints, 1 did not have the opportunity to use them on most of the material mentioned in this book, nor do 1 think it would have been worth doing. The range of unintentional variation, even on the same pot, may be considerable, the result ol uneven Bring or, lor the paint, uneven density or application. Such variations I have ignored and my description of colours is conventional. 'Brown', of clay, covers a wide range, but is normally a medium tone, often with a reddish tinge. 'Black' or 'blackish' is used lor the dark paint which, when dilute, shades into brown or, if (as often) misfired, can be red. 'Purple' is an inaccurate description of the malt red paint used on many pots as a subsidiary colour; but 'ied' is wanted for the shiny and brighter red paint that on some Aeolian and other pots has an importance similar to that of the black paint. 'While' and 'whitish' includes cream and tends sometimes to yellowish. A look at a few specimens should make all this clear enough.

GLOSSARY

AI.ABASTRON A small, thin pot for toilet oil or scent with narrow aperture anil usually footless (Figure 19.1a). AMPI IORA A large, two-handled jar, usually with neck sharply set off from the body: proportions vary and the handles may He set vertically or horizontally (Figures 4.3, 8.22, 10.8, 12.2, 12.3a, 12.7, 13.1, 19.Id). AMPIIORISKOS

A small or miniature amphora (Figure 10.9).

ARYBALI.OS A small flask for toilet oil or the like, with narrow aperture, widish lip and round or pear-shaped body (Figure 5.7, 10.11). ASKOS A smallish, low closed pot, with a spoilt al one end ol the top and a handle behind it (Figure 12.6). BIRD VASE A sort of askos, shaped more or less like a bird: often called a 'duck vase'. BUTTERFLY MOTIVE

See 'Opposed Triangles'.

CABLE The true cable may He single (Figure 8.6), dmblc (Figure 10.1) or multiple (a triple form on Figure 10.3): later examples often have the outer angles filled (Figures 8.20, 8.26). The 'broken cable' is a simplification (Figure 5.8 on the lip, Figure 10.8). CHALICE The grandiose name given to a Cllian version of the cup (Figures 8.15, 8.16). CHORA

The territory of a city.

CHOUS

A type of small oinochoe (plural 'chocs').

CLOSED SI IAI'E A shape, such as thatol an amphora, the inside of which is not readily visible: krater and dinos are reckoned as closed shapes too. COLUMN KRATER A variety of krater with rectangular plaques joining the handles to the run. COM AST A drunken male reveller, sometimes with padded buttocks.

— Cl lossary — COMOS The revelry in which comasls cavort. CUP Usage varies: some extend the name to all drinking vessels, but in this book it is restricted - illogically - to post-Geometric ones with two horizontally set handles. CYLIX The word is still used by some students for cups of Little Master type (Figure 18.lt) and then successors. DIN OS A large bowl with incurving rim, for mixing wine in: it is distinguished from the krater by being footless and also may be without handles ((Figure 13.2).

D1P1NTO

Words etc., painted on a surface.

GLAZE A term often used - and not altogether wrongly - for the standard shiny black paint of much Greek pottery (and for the shiny red on some Aeolian and Lydian products). GLOSS A tentative substitute for 'glaze'. GRAFFITO In scholarly parlance this is used only of words etc. that are Scratched ('incised') on a surface; if painted, they are 'dipinti'. HEAD VASE A drinking vessel or oinochoe in the shape of a head, in fact a si

y', til .

ctric

Figure 5.1 Coan Middle Geometric lekytlios: Cambridge, Museum of Classical Archaeology 461. I k 22 cm. 800-750.

Atlic decoration. The graves on Rhodes are more generous with larger pots; the stemmed krater (Figure 5.2), which appears towards the end of Middle . Geometric, is notable. In Ionia Atticismg shapes are perhaps less rare. In the decoration of then pottery the Coans tended to pettiness and sometimes lack of comprehension, although the result can be modestly . . pleasing. The hatched meander, the characteristic ornament of the canonical i Geometric style, never became popular and its most regular use was on the new lekyllios, which being new had no traditional system of decoration; but since it was put on the shoulder, according to the local principles" of composition, and that was a field that narrowed greatly inwards, so big a rectangular motive >vas unhappy and the Coans soon reverted to bands of narrow ornament, substituting for the meander proper the lower battlement version or the zigzag, both hatched. There was also the attractive innovation of triangles filled with a lattice of hatched lozenges which, set out in a row, fitted neatly round a shoulder; 1 this motive was an East Greek speciality and presumably invention, whether by Coans or (more probably) others. The Middle Geometric of Rhodes is similar to that of Cos, but more robust and towards its end takes more note 16

(J

co tn ctn c —

Figure 5.2 Rhodian late Geometric kratcr: Berlin Inv. 2941. lit 34.5cm. 750-700. of Attic developments, although again without always understanding them. Whether Ionia did belter is not clear from the evidence yet available, but both in Ionia and on Rhodes Attic forms and syntax were not sacrosanct: for instance near the end of Middle Geometric the meander may be lined with solid hooks or be contorted into the meander fork. About the same time two more important ornaments appear — the cross-hatched triangle with hooks sprouting from its apex (the 'tree oi nament') and a lozenge, also crosshatched, with similar paired hooks at each coiner. In Late Geometric these inventions, wherever made, became characteristic of the East Greek region.

LATE GEOMETRIC The Late Geometric style is showier. At its beginning it picks up, directly or not, the Attic metope system, in which a long held is divided into squarish panels, separated by narrower strips, and there is also some limited borrowing from Corinthian - directly, since Corinthian pottery was imported. By now, if not before, distinct East Greek schools are discernible, although they share enough common peculiarities; even so, for want of available material, only those of Cos and Rhodes can be studied in any detail and Cos, where the finds stop before the end ol the style, was also backward. So generally Eest Greek Late Geometric is thought ot in Rhodian terms and perhaps the importance of Rhodes is exaggerated. To start with Rhodes, the more imposing shapes are the stemmed krater (Eigure 5.2) - the stem flaring - and various kinds ol oinochoe, of which '7

— Geometric

Figure 5.3

Rhodian Late Geometric oinochoe: Berlin Inv. 2940. lit 48 cm. Bird and Zigzag painter: 725-700.

the most typical has a plump body and a tall narrow neck with trefoil lip (Figure 5.3), although later a type with squat body and round mouth becomes fashionable (Figure 5.4). 1 he lekythos remains popular. So too does the kantharos, which is deeper than Before and sometimes has a high loot, and the skyphos (Figure 5.5), although both are soon outnumbered by (he koiyle (Figure 5.6). Decoration of closed shapes is more ample than before, although it is slill concentrated on the shoulder and does not often go below the middle of the pot, so that the lower part with its extensive area of paint still gives the effect of a dark-ground style. The metope system is soon modified by the narrowing or elimination of the strips between the panels, and often the central panel is divided horizontally into strips; the old practice of horizontal division without panels persists as well. Typical choices for panels are quatrefoils, usually not hatched, the tree ornament, the hooked lozenge (and more elaborate hooked confections) and, though rarely, a sort ol palm tree. In longer fields of some depth meanders are common, often cross-hatched, and there is a varied assortment ol meandioids, not always happily contrived. The familiar triangles and lozenges ol course continue to flourish, and there are still concentric circles, 18

— Geometric

Figure 5.4 Rhodian Late Geometric oinochoe: Munich 455. [It 22cm. Bird kotyle workshop: 700-675. sometimes stuffed with dots and sometimes linked. Occasionally the cable proper appears. The only creatures represented at all regularly are birds, drably Geometric but of no standard type. Rhodian Geometric is sophisticated enough to encourage the detection of differences between localities and workshops. There seeiri to be minor stylistic peculiarities in the products of the west and east coasts of the island, and the Bird-and-Zigzag painter (Figure 5.3) is a recognisahlc individual, neat though dull, who uses a small repertory of motives, tightly packed in numerous panels. A claim has been made also for a Bird kotyle workshop, which begins towards the end of Middle Geometric, but its formula, bolder if no more inspired, is found throughout the East Greek region and beyond (Figure 5.6), and it is not yet certain where it originated. Besides the property Geometric pottery there was also on Rhodes - and elsewhere on present evidence only in the Black-on-Red ware of Crete — a flourishing manufacture of imitations of Cypriot and Phoenician or Syrian closed pots, usually taken to be containers for unguents.10 There are three main varieties. The Red-.slip ware specialises in a sagging lekythos with a spreading lip; there is no" decoration. A second line has a lugger range of shapes, of which the comirs&ncst is an aryhallos, at first with ridged neck and handle attached to the ridge, but soon conforming to the Early 19

— G e o rn etnc

Figure 5.5 Rhodian Subgeometric skyphos: Birmingham University. I It 12.8 cm. c. 650.

Figure 5.6 Carian Late Geometric kotyle: Cambridge, Museum of Classical Archaeology 463A. Ht 9.3 cm. Related to Bird kotyle workshop: 700-650. 1

Protocol inthian model; characteristic ornaments are small concentric circles, groups of wavy lines and sets of spiral hooks, all done with a multiple brush (liguie 5.7); the clay tends to be yellowish with a highly burnished surface, and the paint is matt and friable. There are also imitations of bigger Cypriot Black-on-lied oinochoai, with globular body and narrow neck and decorated with large or small concentric circles, often intersecting. In general these wares had no influence on the local Geometric style 20

— Geometric —

l i g t i r e 5.7 R h o d i a n S u H g e o i n e l i ic a i y b a l l o s : 1 m i d 6 1 . I l l c. V e i n . S p a g h e t t i g r o u p ( K r c i s - u i i d - W f l U ' i i h a n d style). 700W>50. n o r it o n t h e m . They c o n t i n u e d III p r o d u c t i o n well d o w n t h e s e v e n t h century. On Cos the local Late Geometric can at present bo followed only .is far, to judge by Rhodian parallels, as about the middle ol the style. The shapes mainly represented are oinoehoc, squat Ickythos, skyphos with low conical loot and mug. On closed pots the decoration still emphasises the shoulder and rarely goes Helow the widest diameter ol the hody. I lie metope system is ignored and there is still a londness lor narrow hands ol ornament, and on the skyphos sets ol little concentric circles survive. Still, Cos was not entirely isolated; both the new cable and the palm tree make their apppearance. O n Samos the Geometric finds are from a major sanctuary, the I 1 era cum. They are fragmentary and the little stratification noted hardly helps, but much has been published, l o r the decorated pottery the regular shapes are stemmed kiater, kantharos (sometimes stemmed), koiyle and more frequently skyphos, and ol closed pots a round mouthed oinoehoe, the Hody ol which (as elsewhere in the region) in time becomes low and broad. The Altic metope system is used with comprehension, at least initially, and with it

— (icornel ru — several Attic motives, although not necessarily learnt at lust hand. Meanders, Liter sometimes dismembered, .11 e usually hatched, occasionally and again later cross-hatched; quatrefoils too are Hatched; and there are concentric circles (large and small), the tree ornament, hooks, chevrons and, especially on skyphoi, yig/ags. Birds arc frequent; horses, with the apparently Samian peculiarity of mane running Hallway along the back, are not rare; and there is a version of the prothesis. Towards the end the use of a whitish slip comes in. It is often difficult to distinguish Suhgeometric from Geometric unless it incorporates Orientalising motives, which occur here relatively early relatively that is to other known East Greek communities. Samian Geometric gives the impression (if a school less costive than that of Rhodes. For Chios there is material from three sanctuaries. The two at Emporio, which begin with Late Geometric, had some useful stratification and are published admirably; at the other, Phanai (Kato Phana), the finds begin rather earlier, but they are unstratided and publication is scrappy. Unfortunately, as so often in sanctuaries, there are very few complete pots and tlie range ol shapes is limited. Even so, it is clear that the Chiots, while genetically East Greek, were already going their own way. Many of the Late Geometric pots have a slip, even under the paint covering the inside ot open shapes, a procedure unknown in other Greek schools; during the seventh century this slip becomes finer and its colour progresses from cream to the pine while that makes Archaic Clnot ware so easy to recognise. The clay too is often distinctive with a pinkish tinge. Of the shapes the most important is the krater, stemmed and of more or less standard East Greek type. The skyphos is common, during the seventh century gradually evolving into the chalice. Mugs, mostly decorated with nothing more elaborate than simple bands, are of various forms; two are peculiarly Chian, one with a High splaying wall and a short foot, the other more normally proportioned but narrower at the lip than near the base. The most elaborate decoration is on kralers; Figure 5.8 is typical, with the central panel divided horizontally. Of the ornaments the broken cable (at the top in the illustration) is unusually common and the lozenge sprouting triangles (in the end panel) is at present hardly known outside Chios. Zigzags too, vertical as well as horizontal, are favourites, especially on kraters. Figures of men, animals and birds are perhaps more frequent than in other East Greek Geometric schools, but no more accomplished. There are also examples of the Bird kotyle type, presumably home-made. Chian Geometric (or more pedantically Subgeometrie) continued to flourish, while gradually relaxing its rules, until the third quarter of the seventh century: there does not seem to have been competition from any local Orientalising style. For Miletus the few dozen published sherds give no coherent idea of the local Late Geometric style. There are orthodox meanders, which continue to flourish in Subgeometrie, meandroids, both large and small concentric circles and, especially later, the row of panels each containing a

— G e o met r i C

I'igure 5.8 Cliian Late Geometric krater (restored): Chios, from Emporio. lit 34 cm. c. 700. diagonal cross. For narrow bands the ladder pattern - horizontal bars between uprights - seems to He a local speciality, the broken cahle becomes common and still more so the loop pattern, and there is the usual assortment of squiggly lines. There are also Bird kotylai, most probably local; these seem to be the only bearers of metopal decoration. A few fragments show figures, some human, Hut their cheerful, if clumsy, variety suggests that standard forms did not develop. Fiven less of the plentiful Geometric from Smyrna has seen publication." I lere Attic and Corinthian imports have been noted and these had some effect on the local style, hut without reforming its East Greek character. A couple of fragments of kraters offer a bewildering mosaic of Hands and panels (Figure 5.9); a Suhgeometric krater, more restrained in its composition, has the earliest depiction of a seven-stringed lyre; and there are the inevitable Bird kotylai. I low far the peculiarities of the pottery from Smyrna are original cannot be determined until we know more of its neighHour Clazomenae which, later at least, was an important producer. Further north, in Aeolis, there is so far no evidence for the making of Geometric painted pottery: at 'Larisa' (Buruncuk), some 16 miles (25 km) north of Old Smyrna, what little there is was imported, although the SuHgcometiic is said to He local. To come finally to Caria, what is available from lasos is unhelpful. Elsewhere Geometric pots are known from graves in the coastal parts near 23

— Cl eorni'lnt

—

Figure 5.9 North Ionian Late Geometric krater, fragment: Izmir, from Smyrna. Width ol fragment c. 35 cm. 725-700.

/

I lahcarnassus (Bodrum), a few sherds come from the sanctuary of Siliuri near Mylasa (Milas) and some complete pots, mostly broad trefoil oinochoai, have turned up in graves a little further east at Turgut (Lagina); and for Subgeomenic there are several broad oinochoai, both trefoil and round-mouthed, probably trom the cemetery near Milas'2 and also a couple of pieces from Stratonikeia (Eskihisar) further up-country. This Carian Geometric is Hast Greek in style, sometimes provincial but without noticeably extraneous features, although the composition lends to be erratic, especially in SuHgeometiic. Shapes recorded are amphora (of both neck and shoulder-handled varieties), krater, treloil oinochoe, skyphos, kotyle (liguie 5.6) and k.mlharos; in Subgeonietnc the broad oinochoe of both varieties is a lavounle. In decoration the mam peculiarity seems to be a reluctance to use the tree ornament, although a more tree-like ornament, with drooping tendrils or volutes attached to its apex, is rife in Subgeometric, which seems to continue well down the seventh century, perhaps till us end, but there is not enough lor dogmatism. Some East Greek Geometric went to Lydia, as excavation at Sardis has shown, and local imitation is reported." Overseas there was a trickle of exports to the Cyclades in the Middle period, but Late Geometric was more successiul, especially with its Bird kotylai. Examples have turned up not only in the Cyclades, but also across the Aegean, though only at Aegina and there not until the seventh century is the quantity at all significant;1'1 there is more Irom Al Mina near the mouth of the Orontes15 and a few *4

— Geometric — scraps from Tarsus in Cihcia;"' and Ul llie West .1 respectable amounl has turned up at Pithecusae (lschia), some at Cumae and ,u\ odd piece or two elsewhere. The Lydian finds one might expect to have come Irom northern Ionia, Hut the others are generally taken to he Rhodian or mostly so (although it does not necessarily follow that their carriers were Rhodians). The dating of East Greek Geometric in terms ol llie general system lor Greek pottery depends partly on stylistic comparisons with Altic and partly, especially later, on comparisons and contexts with Corinthian. On this evidence the division between the Proiogcomeiric and the Geometric of the region is, as has been said, about the lime ol the transition Irom Early to Middle Attic Geometric. Por Laic Geometiic the East Greek version is thought to begin a hllle later than tlie Attic and even the Corinthian: its end, that is when it is considered to pass into Subgeoinetric, conies after the beginning of Middle Proiocorinthian and before the end of Early Protoattic. For Subgeonietric, comparisons and, as it happens, contexts are less useful; Hut it is likely that the the style continued vigorously for at least a generation, since there seems little else to lill the gap until the Wild Goat style was established; and some particulai lines, such as Bird bowls and the little kotylai with cross-hatched triangles between the handles, 17 continue long enough to He found in graves alongside Early Corinthian. Translated according to the conventional system into calendar years (which are of course rather notional) the duration ol East Greek Middle Geometric is from 850 to 745 and ol Late Geometric bom 745 to 680; tor Cos the end of the cemetery is put at 715. It should, however, be remembered that this chronology is based on the material bom Rhodes and for other schools it is assumed thai the stylistic development was identical; the assumption may not He altogether sound. As for Subgeomen ie, it was still flourishing at Miletus and on Chios in the third tju.n tci ol the seventh century and in some places probably longer.'" Mention may as well be made of G 2 - G 3 ware,1'' notable mainly lor its name, which comes from the excavators' labelling ot sectors at Troy. This is a minor group, not particularly Hast Greek in character, but perhaps made in the far noiih ol the region. Clay is brownish and there is no slip. Shapes so far noted are a large open Howl (whether dinos or krater) amphora and cup. The modest decoration, which may be called Subgeonietric, relies on simple ornaments, notably the zigzag, the row of brackets (like rectangular Zs) and for variety the spiral hook, widely spaced on the upper part of the pot. Although the style is unambitious, execution is excellent. Its certain distribution is limited — at Troy, Antissa on Lesbos, l.emnos, Samothrace and Tlusos and along the I'll racial! coast; for lack ol exploration one cannot tell whether it had any currency in the Pioponiis. Presumably it was made somewhere in the north-east of the Aegean. The dale according to stratification at Samolhrace is the first half of the seventh century.

•*5

CHAPTER 6

~

BIRD BOWLS AND ROSETTE BOWLS

The Bird bowl1 - 'bowl' is an unhappy but now hallowed description - is the most elegant product of East Greek Subgeometric, using traditional Geometric motives in an increasingly mannered and eventually careless way (Figure 6.1). It evolved from the Bird kotyle (Figure 5.6) during the first quarter of the seventh century, simplifying the decoration and flattening the shape. A regular size is of 15 cm diameter at the rim. The earliest true Bird bowls Have a nicked rim, there is a band of dots under the decorated field, and below them the bowl is covered with dark paint. Next the nick and the dots are given up. In a third stage the lower part is reserved and ornamented with five or so outlined rays and in the main panel smaller rays often replace the cross-hatched triangles. Finally the boundary line below panels is eliminated and the drawing of the birds, wheh has steadily been getting slacker, is now distressing: sometimes too the ring foot is replaced by a disk with a small central cavity. There is also development in the composition, perhaps more positive, with the continual widening of the central panel. Except sometimes for a shiall reserved band or a tondo containing outlined rays or some other simple motive, the inside is covered with the dark paint, from the third stage onwards often embellished with a band of narrow white, purple and white stripes. The clay of standard Bird bowls is fine and usually of a lightish brown colour, occasionally there is a whitish slip, and the paint is blackish or intended to be so. From contexts with Protocorinthian and Corinthian pottery a fairly precise chronology has been obtained - 700-675 for the first stage, 675-640 for the second, 650-615 for the third and 615-600 for the fourth: the earlier dates may be a little too high, there may well be more overlapping, and the decadent fourth stage may have dribbled on a little longer. The Bird bowl, like the Bird kotyle, is generally thought to have been a Rhodian invention, but there was evidently manufacture in other parts of the East Greek region, and until more is known about them it is well to be cautious. Bird bowls were exported to much the same places and in the same relative frequency as the Bird kotylai and also to the new East Greek settlements overseas, although of course these do not have the earlier versions. Local imitations have turned up at Sparta. For the Rosette bowls (Figure 6.2), which replaced the Bird bowls, there is no detailed study. They began, it seems, in the last quarter of the seventh century and lasted well into the second half of the sixth. The shape is that 26

Bird bowls and Rosette bowls

Figure 6.1 Bird bowl: Copenhagen ABc 899. I It 5.5 cm. Mid 7th century. of the Bird Howl, usually with a ring loot; dimensions are often larger. The standard system of decoration is simple - in the field between the handles a blobby rosette of seven dots and at each end a group of strokes (or inverted rays), and below this field outlined rays or, regularly later, simple bands of dark paint: sometimes, presumably early, there are three rosettes, which may He enclosed in panels. The inside is covered with the dark paint, usually relieved Hy white or purple stripes and often a reserved circle at the centre. Clay tends to He coarser than that of the Hud Howls; and a whitish slip is less rare. Execution tends to He clumsier. Distribution is similar. According to clay analysis2 most of the Rosette Howls and the late Bird bowls exported overseas were made in North Ionia, at or near Clazomenae, as also were some of those found in other parts of the East Greek region. What have Heen called 'Lotus Howls' are a variant: on these instead of the central rosette a clumsy lotus flower of three petals hangs from the rim. Fragments from Smyrna show the use of a big meander as the principal 27

— Bird

bowls

and

Rosette

bowls

Figure 6.2 Rosette bowl: lost (from Vroulia). 1 It 9 cm. Early 6th century. decoration. There are also many bowls that do without rosettes or lotus (lowers: these are mostly latish. A larger version of the shape was a favourite , of the Late Wild Goat style. More enterprising are the Eye bowls,3 which usually have a pale slip. Here the handle field is filled with a pair of large eyes, complete with arching eyebrows and a short nose with nostrils twirling into spirals. Below there are bands, widely spaced. Some of these Eye bowls are stacked - that is constructed to look as if one bowl was stood inside another - usually two but sometimes three deep. According to clay analyses Eye bowls belong to the assemblage called South Ionian 3.4 They are not common, but were exported widely. Their floruit may be the early sixth century.

28

CM API III7

EARLY ORIENTALISING

It is usually assumed, though without direct evidence, that it was about 680 that pottery in a definitely Orientalising style began lo appear throughout the East Greek region. In practice there is not always a sharp distinction between SuHgeometric, which often admits Orientalising ornaments (such as the cable, true or broken), anil Early Orientalising, which still cherishes that most characteristic o( Geometric motives, the hatched meander. Here the qualification for Early Orientalising is the use ot burgeoning plant forms, especially volutes stuffed with dots, killer and more natural shapes of animal and human figures, or outline thawing (instead of silhouette) for heads and sometimes bodies. The number ol specimens is small and none has a useful context. A creaiuish slip is normal. A favourite shape on which^ Early Orientalising occurs is the round mouthed Oinochoe (of the type of Figure 5.4). I his, a creation ol East Greek Late Geometric, is frequent in SuHgcomctric too. From Rhodes there is also a slim amphora. The Rhodian pieces,' still unslipped, are decorated with figures - man, centaur, bearded siren, griffin - with outlined heads and drawn in a clumsy ami generally uniform style (Figure 7.1); all may well be products of the same workshop. I'rom Miletus fragments ol two pots are noteworthy. One lot shows parts ol an archer anil the horses ol a chariot, with reservation ol the head and arms of the man and heads and other parts of the horses;2 this is an ambitious subject and the style, unlike that of the Rhodian pieces, is sober and lor its time competent. As for the other pot, an amphora, the single sherd from its neck has a file ol grazing deer, unambitious but neat (Figure 7.2). There is more published from Samos.3 Nos 342-8 are examples of rank Orientalising vegetation; nos 363-6, 369 and 525 display clumsy lions and other animals, but there is more skill and spirit in those of 373 anil 377; anil 349 anil in a different way 334 are very near the Wild Goat style. Most, if not all, ot these pieces have a yellowish slip over the brownish clay. Smyrna has provided a more varied assortment/ There are several fragments with hophtes and others show a chariot, a rider and perhaps a siren. Remarkably on some of these pieces a white paint is used for flesh and to embellish ornaments (Figure 7.3) and one sherd, signed by Istrokles, looks as if decorated in white on a dark ground.5 The Orientalising bestiary is present too and even includes an owl. Some of the pieces from Caria too may be classified as Early Orientalising, though belated.* 29

-— Early

Orientalising

Figure 7.1 a Rhodian Early Orientalising oinochoe. fragment of shoulder: British Museum 61.4—25.48. Scale c. 2:3. Second quarter or middle of 7lh century. h Rhodian Early Orientalising fragment, perhaps from neck of very big amphora: British Museum 64.10-7.1237. Scale c. 2:7. Second quarter or middle of 7lh century.

|

•*

Figure 7.2 Milesian Early Orientalising amphora, fragment ol neck: lialat (Miletus). Ht of neck c. 10 cm. Second quarter or middle of 7th century. 3O

— Early Orientalising —

Figure 7.3 North Ionian Early Orientalising fragments Izmir (from Smyrna). Third quarter ol 7ih century.

On so little material it is risky to be dogmatic, lint provisionally it seems that, although the Geometric and even the Suhgeometric of the local East Greek schools had much in common, their Orientalising ventures did not. It is worth noting too that, although human figures were attempted and sometimes in complex scenes, they were discarded in the next stage of East Greek pottery, the Wild Goat style, which concentrated on decorative and not narrative effects. I'or close dating of Early Orientalising there are no useful contexts; the second quarter or mid seventh century is likely enough, hut it presumably went on a good while longer in places where the Wild Goat style was not adopted till in its Middle period. This, on the evidence at present available, seems likely for North Ionia and also for Caria. Chios apparently missed this stage.

3'

CHAPTER 8

THE WILD GOAT STYLE

'Wild Goat style' is the most innocuous name for the style which emerged from the Early Orientalising medley and dominated the decoration ol East Greek pottery for around a hundred years.1 The old name 'Rhodian', still used occasionally,2 is misleading; Rhodes was the place where it was first found in quantity and it was natural to assume that it was made there, but clay analyses argue that that island only imported the ware. Other names found in earlier publications are 'Camiran', 'Rhodian-Milesian' and 'Milesian', but these never caught on; and although (as it turns out) Miletus was an important producer, it was not the only one, nor was Wild Goat pottery its only product. And 'East Greek Orientalising", which some current studies use,1 is not by itself sufficiently specific. ; At present there arc two systems for classifying the Wild Goat style. One, which is used here, divides it into Early, Middle and Late, though the Middle style does not end when the Late begins. The other system, used mostly in Germany, has three (in the first version two) approximately contemporary groups - the Kamiros group, the Euphorbos group and the Vlastos group, corresponding more or less to Middle, the plates from the Dorian region and Late in the other system.4 The Wild Goat style is easy to recognise. Generally the clay is rather coarse, firing from a light brown to a reddish colour; local differences are not usually obvious to the naked eye. Normally the visible surface is covered with a cream to whitish slip, at first thick, but in the North Ionian Late style often no more than a thin wash, and towards the end even this may be omitted. The paint is blackish to darkish brown, sometimes misfired to red. Purple enhancements become regular during the Middle style, and in the Late there is also some white. In its decoration the Wild Goat style is an animal style, and human figures are very rare; but although not the only Greek school of the time that practised an animal style, its choice of fauna is distinctive and so too in continuous fields is the arrangement in file instead of small groups. It differs also in its types of floral ornaments and its preferences in abstract ones. That there were Oriental models for some of these features is likely, but what they were is still unknown. The heads of sphinxes, for instance, and the lotus flowers and buds have some resemblance to those on Syrian or Phoenician tridachna shells (Figure 8.1), which were imported into Greek lands, though the closest parallels are not before the Middle II style (Figures 8.8 and 8.13a); perhaps the East Greek potters used similar models and were now lapsing into 3^

The Wild Goal style —

Figure 8.1 Syrian or Phoenician tridachna shell: private collection. Width 12.7 cm. 7th century. a similar Negligence, but anyhow the jrid.ichn.i shells cannot account for the components ol the Wild Goat style.

SOUTH IONIA Early Wild Goat style In its Early stage the Wild Goat style was a small venture, finding a form without very adventurous experiment.'' Shapes were taken over from the cm rent Subgcomcli ic stock, notably the broad round-mouthed oinochoc and the krater. For the omochoe the tendency is to a lower body wnh a more symmetrical curvature and eventually, in imitation of metalwoik, the handle, now composed of three ribs instead ol the old Hal strip, is embellished with rotelles which, being only decorative, do not need to clip onto the neck. For the krater the surviving fragments are uninformative about any development. In the decoration the bolder experiments ol the Early Orientalising style are ignored. Of the fauna tiie goat becomes the most frequent species, but there are also dog, lion, sphinx, griffin, hare and more rarely boar, ram and fox. Though lions may threaten and dogs chase, they keep their distance and poses other than ol standing or i tinning, such as that ol the rearing goat on the Brussels oinochoe (Figure 8.2), are abnormal. Exceptionally there is a scene of human action on an oinochoe in Laon, a curious kind of hare hunt, tucked away among the running animals on the 33

— The Wild Co.it style

Pigure 8.2 South Ionian Eaily Wild Goat style oinochoe, detail of shoulder: Brussels A1960. Scale c. 3:5. Mid 7th century.

belly (Figure 8.4); but such excesses were contrary to the soberly decorative spirit of the new orthodoxy. In drawing animals outline soon comes to be the tegular technique for Heads, the edges of shoulder blades and finally a stripe along the belly; on heads this is at first hesitant and the contour is so thick as to give a piebald effect (Piguie $.2). To set off the animals neat and usually small filling ornaments are scattered thinly about the field, but do not yet adhere to the frame. For decoration outside the figure field or fields the illustrations show most of the regular ornaments. Florals, it seems, weie acceptable only as a centrepiece between animals in a shoulder field. Though some Early pieces - those from Rhodes and Caria - presumably come from graves, no useful contexts have been recorded. But since the total number of specimens is small - anyhow at present — and their style does not seem to require a long period of development, the Early style may not have taken more than ten or fifteen years. Further, the first stage of the Middle style, which also lacks useful contexts, may for similar reasons have lasted no more than fifteen or twenty years; but its end is fortunately fixed by graves on Rhodes to the time when Corinthian pottery was passing from its Transitional to its Early Corinthian stage, that is - according to the chronology used here — about 625. By this reckoning, which is of course speculative, the Early Wild Goat style should be put in the years around 650 or, perhaps better, in the 640s. This would, for instance, make the Bochum oinochoe (Figure 8.3) contemporary with Late Protocorinthian. To judge by places of finding - Rhodes, Samos, Miletus, probably Mylasa and perhaps Calymnos - the home of the Early Wild Goat style was in the southern pan of the East Greek region; and the uniformity of the 34

— Ib e Wild

Figure 8.3

C;,i< s t y l e —

South Ionian E.uly Wild Go.it style oiiuK'hiic: Boclnmi S985. I It 23 2 cm. t. 6S0-640.

LAOH 3178t

F i g u r e 8.4 S o u t h I o n i a n E a r l y W i l d G o a t style o i n o i h o c , detail o l b e l l y : I a o n 3 7 . 7 8 6 . Scale s I'his C hian silmol is the best undeistood of the East Greek schools of us nine its pioducts ,uc m gencial easy to recognise by the whiteness 46

—

F i g u r e 8.14

I be

Wild

dottt

iiylc

M i d d l e Wild G o a l style s t e m m e d dish,

fragment ( p i o b a h l v F p h e s i a n ) Bntish M u s e u m 1907 \2 I ii7V W i d t h of fragment I L S u n Pcili.ips t 625

of then slip ( w h i i h b e c o m e s still whitei in the sixth l e n t i n v ) , the use of this slip u n d e i the d a i k paint that coveis the sin lace inside open pots, and often the pinkish coloui of the clay 2(l The dating t o o is assured t o u g h l y by the stratified d e p o s i t s , p i o p e r l y published, ol I ' m p o n o o n ( liios' 7 and T o c r a m Libya,-" 1 s o m e c o n t e x t s at Smyrna-"' and a vciy few giavcs >0 In C h i o s , it is fairly cleat, S u b g e o m e t i ic flourished well ino the t h u d quartet ol the seventh c e n t m y anil there is no sign ol serious O t rentalising expetimcnl lie for c the Wild G o a t style was i n t r o d u c e d from South Ionia about the time of the transition from Mrddle 1 to Middle II " The bull's head o m o c h o e f i o m I' m p o n o ' J is a g o o d example, its (iguies aie elegantly c o n c t t — coirect, that ts, a c c o i d i n g to S o u t h Ionian o i l h o d o x y — and the roundels are still lelatrvely low. I he m u c h illustrated o m o c h o e Irom S m v m a " looks stylistically a little later. Soon a l t e r w a r d s , the m a t e n a l becomes m o r e plentiful, partly because of rich finds of s h e i d s at N a u c r a t i s in Lgypt and B e r e / a n - O l h r a in the U k i a m c ; b u t it seems also that only n o w , in the last quaitci of the seventh c e n t u i y (that is the per rod ol I ailv ( o i m t h i a n ) did a Cliian Wild G o a t school establish itsell l o i this Wild (Jo.it style a chalice m W u i / b i n g (I'lgure 8 15) is a g o o d example, a l t h o u g h m o i e .ulmiiaHle lot its state of picser vatron t h a n artistic quality The Cliian p o l t e i s , having noted the main features of the S o u t h Ionian Middle style, developed then o w n v e i s i o n C o m p a r e d with the S o u t h Ionian models the W i n / b i n g goats are c l u m s y , t h o u g h r o b u s t , the icsetvcd p a u h o n the b o d y of the bull on the other side is fanciful in shape; the Idling o r n a m e n t , winch includes the

47

n

— The Wild Coal ityle —

|

Figure 8.15 Chian Middle II Wild Goat style cluhce: Wiiizlnug I.12S. l i t 15.4cm. End of 7th century. 4«

mi

— The Wild (io.u style — now Horseshoe-shaped roundel, is Heavier ami less thoughtfully placed and above the bull clusters in a continuous fringe; and on goats and comparable creatures dotting of the belly stripe persists, though I>y now gcncially abandoned in South Ionia. Ol the (.uina goals are very numerous, but deer are rare; there are also dogs, lions, bulls, boars, geese ol course, and occasionally sphinx, griffin, ram, fox anil panther. Ol independent ornaments meanders and double cable are notable. The shapes show an insular independence. Much the commonest is the chalice, a sturdy vessel with lowish foot and well articulated bowl. Next come the dinos, the large bowl (often with straight, out-turned wall) and oinochoa\ ol various kinds, some with an animal's head instead ol a trefoil lip. There are also fragments ol dishes and plates, a few shallow cups and a votive shield; and laiger shapes sometimes sprout plastic female heads, especially near handles, a practice continued in the Black-figure style." Added purple is not used and there is as yet no decoration on the dark inside ot chalices. Around 600 - when Early Corinthian was ending - changes are visible. The chalice, still the favourite decorated shape, grows a higher lip, the transition from lip to bowl is slurred, and the loot becomes taller anil almost conical (as on ligvne 8.16). As for its decoration, the held ol the hp, except on some conservative pieces, is no longer divided into panels, but continues without interruption round the pot. The fauna too changes; goat, goose and dog become rare and are replaced by lion, sphinx, bull and boar, and occasionally a siren or griffin or even a human figure puts in an appearance. Increasingly now there are purple patches on bodies ol animals and some deliberate use of dilute paint tor details. The inside too ot open pots gels embellishment - lotus flowers and p.dmcites or rosettes and encircling stripes, painted in white anil purple over the dark paint. Other shapes decorated in the new manner are pluale, kanthaios, plate, dish, lid and omochoe or hydiia; but they are not common. This Animal Chalice style, as it has been called, flourished — to give a rough date - throughout the first quarter of the sixth century. Another development, which began r.uhci later, is the so-called Chalice style. I lere the use of filling ornaments is abandoned anil there is a comparable economy in the other decoration, l o r the mam held a single ligure, or less often a pair o( figures, is enough tor what is now the front (liguie 8.16) and on the Hack there is only a rosette or nothing. The repertory is small; lion and sphinx are commonest, but there are also human figures, whether preliminary to or derived from the Grand style; occasionally a male partner is in the black-figure technique. 3 ' On a tew sherds the principal field has a row of lotus flowers and buds, how continuous is uncertain. The other decoration too is simplified; rim patterns become leeble or disappear; in the handle field the saw pattern, an old Chian motive, becomes obligatory or almost so; and inner decoration becomes more perfunctory. The chalice, as time goes on Hecoming squatter, is much the commonest 4y

I be Wild Coat style —

Figure 8.16 Chian Chalice style chalice: Louvre A330.1. lit 15cm. First quarter of 6lh century or a little later. shape ol this style; there arc a few examples of the phiale and fewer of the kanih.uos. The date ol this gioup should be from some time in the first quarter lo the middle ol the sixth century or a little later. The Animal Chalice style very evidently and the Chalice style rather less so are continuations ol the Chian Wild Goat style of the last quarter of the seventh centuiy. II that is called Middle II, then these might be consideuil lo he Middle 111: there is no Chian Late Wild Goat style as the term 'Late' is used here. Chiaii pottery m these styles has a wide, though patchy, distribution. In the East Greek region it is frequent at Eiythrae on the mainland opposite Chios, and there are appreciable quantities from Pitane and perhaps Cla/omcnae and Smyrna; in the south it is very rare. On Thasos and along / the southern toast ol Thrace it is again frequent and so too on Aegina; in the other Aegean islands it seems to be rare and in mainland Greece almost unknown. Round the Ponius it is reported at Berezan and Olbia, and there is some Irom other sites. At Naucratis it was plentiful and there is a respcitahle amount Irom Tocra And Cyrene. In the West it is again rare, peihaps lather less so at Tar.inlo, Caiana, Sybaris and Marseilles. 50

— The Wild Coat style- — There was also some imitation. This is cei tilled hy analysis ol the clay for Eryllirae, where the local product is undistinguished,"' and Hy style lor I hasos (or perhaps some oilier place in that direction), where the imitations

NORTH IONIA liy 'North Ionia' is meant here the mainland east of the Mimas peninsula (which lies west of Clazomenae); ceramically Chios was going its own way, with Erythrae following, and so they are excluded. I'or the pottery of North Ionia in this limited sense analysis, particularly of sheids trom I lislria anil Smyrna, lias shown at both sites two rather different compositions, one matched at Clazomenae and the other not yet assigned to a source; their style, however, looks homogeneous. 1*' it tier then there should have been two major centres of production in close touch with each other Clazomenae and perhaps somewhere in the direction ol I eos - or else what is certifiahly Clazomcnian and the unlocated 'North Ionian 2' (as it has Heen named provisionally) were Hoth made at Cla/omenae, but using different -- and for North Ionian 2 still unidentified — sources of clay. Smyrna, though prolific ol finds, seems to have heen negligible as a pioducei.'" Systematic stylistic study lias not advanced lar. Hclore the I,ale style the material available is very scanty, and although then it becomes plenlilul — perhaps too much so to encourage research — there are other obstacles. Much has heen found at Smyrna and now more is turning up at Clazomenae; overseas there is a fair amount from N.uicratis, I listria ami Beiezan- Olbia, Tocra and Cyrcne and some lioin other sites. Hut only a few scraps I mm its homeland have been published and at the overseas sites, where publication has been generous, 1 '' the import ol North Ionian pottery did not begin till the Late stage and peihaps not at its very beginning. Dating too is difficult: very few grave contexts aie available,40 and little help comes I mm stratification — at Ilistna and Tocra the relevant stiata have ,m inconveniently long span, and at Smyrna what Has been reported is useful only for a few sherds Irom deposits sealed when Alyattes besieged and sacked the city.41 Lastly, complete pots are not common and the Latestyle relies on total effect rather than on detail. There is so far as I know no certain sign ol an Early stage ol the North Ionian Wild Goat style. A fragment ol a dinos from Smyrna 4 - looks like Middle I, but might perhaps He an impoil from South Ionia; and the use of a loop pattern on later pieces does not necessarily imply indebtedness to South Ionian Middle 1, but could well be a legacy Irom the local Subgeometric, which I .suppose lasted well into the second hall of the seventh century. The impression I have is that during most ol the currency 5'

— I he Wild Coat style —

Figure 8.17

North Ionian Late Wild Goat style luster, fragment: Izmir (horn Smyrna), c. 610-600.

of the South Ionian Middle style in its I and II phases the more adventurous of the Norlli Ionian potters, though aware ol it, were still experimenting.41 A more uniform and orthodox style seems at last to have been established not long before the end of South Ionian Middle 11, to judge by finds at Smyrna in the siege mound and destruction levels; the reserving goats of Figure 8.17 are not so far from their South Ionian counterparts. It is as well, however, to remember that this reconstruction, based on the little 1 have seen, is very speculative. The Late Wild Goat style may be defined as that branch of the Wild Goat style which makes regular use of the black-figure technique, though concurrently with the old one of reservation. It is peculiar to North Ionia that is Cla/omenae and its possible associate - and perhaps in some part to Aeolis: in other Wild Goal schools incision is exceptional and unsystematic. A few pieces are obviously early and some obviously late, but attempts to classify the material and trace a development have had only limited success:4'1 this is an open, but difficult held for some devoted student. The common shapes of the North Ionian Late style differ considerably from those of Middle South Ionian, but it is not clear how far they were

The Wild Gout style —

Figure 8.18 North Ionian Late Wild Goal style dish: Tocra 636. Di.im. 21.5 cm. c. 575.

new developments or continuations ol established kical lorms. Then: are oinochoai, .some more globular llian the South Ionian (Figure 8.20), some narrower with egg-shaped rather than pear-shaped bodies, and commonly 30 to 35 cm high. I he olpe too is known. Aniphoras are numerous, both of the necked and one-piece varieties; they too Have narrow egg-shaped bodies and the lip is simple; heights are generally 25 to 30 cm. The dinos survives, but gives way to the krater, both ol column type and ol a footless one with imitation ring handles (Figure 8.19), and these in turn are outnumbered by what is called a hemispherical Howl, though the segment is less than half a sphere. Many of these open pots had lids. There is also the stemmed dish and, especially in small unpretentious versions, the plate and the shallow bowl (Figure 8.18). In the reserving style much the most frequent animal is tile goat, more so relatively than in the South Ionian Middle style, since the shoulder held, where the mixed groups are usual, is often given over to the more modish black-figure confections. The old grazing posture - straight long back anil lowered head (Figure 8.19) - survives throughout, but is soon overtaken in popularity by a prettier model with head turned round, concave 53

_ •(!> H I P (Up^h W < < * ^ P e first venture was the Sphinx .uind Lion group (Figure 9.2).' It sets out to He different. In us repertory 'of shapes the chalice is very rare. Instead there are bowls, often with stemmed fool, lids, oniochoai, plates, dishes, as well as a few oddities. One fragment admits a goat in the reserving Wild Goat style and another keeps the corresponding Idling ornaments, but these are exceptional and probably eaily experiments. Tlie standard decoration is of a row of Hsmall animals ol die same species, in the same posture and facing the same way; they are surrounded by rosettes of Corinthian type and, attached to [the hordeis ol the held in the old Wild Goat way, half (or in coiners quarter) rosettes. Lions and sphinxes are the most popular species, the lions (usually with ham-hill collars) seated and facing right, the sphinxes also sitting but lacing leit; on larger pots they are often in alternate rows. There are also bulls, sirens and geese, again in homogeneous rows. Scenes of action are rare - lion facing bull, a rider, men in various postures (although because they appear on Iragments the action is obscure) and perhaps a centaur. On suitable shapes there is often a chain of lotus flowers and buds at the base: these are sometimes of the old Wild Goat type, but usually they .no of the new simplified version (as those of Figure 8.13e, but with two small extra petals). Puiple is used freely on figures ,\ni\ filling ornaments, Although the planning is careful, the quality of the figure drawing 74

^ ^

..(±I^A*I

,,

^M^^IJ

- (.'I'iiin:

^^^.->m.> ^^u-

-i^^^u

( 1 1 it n i l t i n (I l i l i n k

^^^JM>

^ ^ b — 'f+mmlLL

/I^IIIC » / y / o

is miserable, bin the well calculated balance ol dark and light is cllcctivc, il one docs not look loo closely. The polling, however, shows skill. A Sphinx and LION sherd was noticed in the siege mound at Smyrna, so that the group should have begun by about 600, ili.il is Uelore the end ol Early Corinthian. It is thought to continue till the 560s or a little later, though one would not expect so static a style to persist loi a good loity years. The distribution is unsurprising. Specimens turn up on Chios, there is much from Naucratis and also from Here/an and Olbia; some was found at Erytluae ami Pitane; a little went to other places in (he eastern ambit, and a couple of sherds are reported from ("orevia and Sybaris. Theic was too a I Hasian version, rather freer in its choice and use ol components; 10 it is less common than the Reserving I hasian one. The Comasl group," which is connected with the Sphinx and Lion group, sticks to chalices. I lere the external decoration is ol comasts, occasionally partnered by women. The comasts (Elgine lJ.3), in extended poses, usually wear a turban ('mitra'), but il is hard to make sense ol the fringed band across the chest and the cap coveimg the buttocks. The women are usually in hiack-ligurc technique like the men, but unlike them are hilly dressed and stand staidly, ollciing garlands. Tilling ornament, at first of Sphinx and Lion type, soon degenerates into loinul blobs with incised ring or rings inside. As a variant theme the Poultry group oilers cocks and hens. Rim ornaments are simple and the saw-tooth pattern is regular m the field between the handles. There is some use of pin pie retouches, but not — on the exterior - ol white. The general effect ol these chalices is lively, although except tor a lew, presumably early, lowls the drawing is slapdash. The inside, when the shape is an open one, usually has respectable lotus flowers and rosettes, done in purple ami while on the dark ground. I'or dating some stratification at Smyrna and Tocta and a couple ol giaves at I5oeolian Rhitsona and on Rhodes give lough guidance - the 570s to the 540s lor the Comast group, with the Poultiy gionp starling a little later, say in the 560s. Distribution, as recorded so lar, is similar to thai ol the Sphinx anil Lion group, though rather wider and thinner. As might be expected there is a little liner work.1-' Ibis includes Iragments of cups, indebted for shape and some details ol decoration to Laconian of around 570. Except for one sherd liom Here/an, the only place where this group has been found is, at present, Naucratis; and since also Laconian was lairly common at Naucratis, but has not, at present, been reported from Chios, once again manufacture by Chiots in Naucratis has been propounded. The argument seems to me unconvincing. Here/an is very remote from Naucratis and arguments I mm absence are not conclusive; though East Greek Bird bowls were imitated in Laconia, no imported examples are recorded.' 1 After the middle ol the sixth century Chian decorated pottery fades away. H Among vauous ploys the most notable is that ol a small black-figure 75

|UM,

— Qbiun: Grand and Black-figt$re

Figure 9.3

styU-i —

Chian Black-figure style, fragments of chalices.

a Chios (iron) Enipoilo). b Chios (from Rizari). c British Museum 88.6-1.1072 d Kcggto di Cal. 19148. Scale c. 1:1. Comast group: second quarter of 6th century. group, mainly of kanthnroi, where there is no slip and isolated figures provide the decoration, supplemented (if the field is not continuous) by small palmettos at the sides. Dispirited Arrangements of ivy leaves go on longer. The diversity of Chian styles in the earlier sixth century is remarkable. Still, if the products of other East Greek cities could be recognised as easily, this diversity might not be quite so abnormal.

76

C H A P II. R

10

FlKliLLURA

METROPOLITAN SCHOOL Iikellura 1 takes its name from a locality al ancient Canurus on Rhodes, where one ol the first linds ol this ware was made by Bdiotti ami Sal/mann. An alternative, Samian, had a long currency, especially in Germany, Hut is now obsolete. The style is easy to recognise, but less easily defined since, although it has distinctive shapes and ornaments, composition vanes remarkably and so loo docs the character ol (lie drawing. Its home, il is now clear, was Miletus; analysis indicates thai tlic clay is Milesian .\nd excavation is demonstrating its frequency and diversity there. There is no evidence, anyhow at present, lor manufacture in oilier I asl Greek cities. Clay, slip and paint are as in the Soil I h Ionian (Milesian) Wild Goat style. In the decoration details are ri'Sl'1'ved and incision is very rare, but in contrast to the reserving Wild Goal style heads ol figures are not drawn in outline. Purple enhancements appeal modestly at the beginning, but gradually are given up. While is used only lor eyes M\A rosettes on the lips ol oinochoai and occasionally lor dots on dresses or [lie body ol a snake. 1 He throwing ol pots was or soon became remarkably careless, so that lew I'ikellura amphoras even look symmetrical and often they are dented; tins is probably from sell confidence and not incompetence. The principal shape is the amphora, a broad poi with ll.itush shoulder and three-reeded handles (Figures 10.1, IO.C> and 10.8). lis height is usually 25—35 cm, although a few examples are bigger. An amphora ol this type appears once or twice in llie Middle II stage ill the South Ionian Wild Goat style,' although at present there is no sign ol a continuing tradition in painted pottery, 1 and the spreading body is paralleled in the Aeolian amphoras from Pitane (Figure 8.22); bin the North Ionian Late Wild Goat amphoras are very different.4 Second in popularity is the amphoiiskos, which sometimes and especially at the beginning is moderately stout, but later and much more often spindly (ligurc 10.9). Presumably it is derived from the amphora, and the better examples have well modelled lip and foot and reeded handles; most though are simpler, and eventually the lip is reduced to ,\ roll and the handles to Hal snips ol clay. In two or three instances one handle is omitted, bin there is mi need to call the result a 'lekythos'. Other shapes are much less common and mostly early. There are several oinochoai, ol two varieties. The more imposing, 9 which may be

up to 10 cm high, li.is sonic .illmity in shape to the standard Middle II type ol tin1 Sou ill Ionian Wild (io.it style, although the neck is stronger and ollrn more veitical; it has no lesemblance to the Noith Ionian Late type. Tlu- olhei I'ikclhna oinochoc is wide and low, like a cream jug;6 the norm is pel haps 13-14 cm to the top of the relatively high handle. Cups too have liitiK'd up, mostly in small Iragments. [he standard type lias a short oltset lip, a shallow howl and a ring loot; a diameter of 13-14 cm at the rim seems iioim.il. It is dccoiated hoth inside and outside. 7 1 here are rarities too. Vaiianls on the amphora are the hydiia, 8 differing only in its handles, and the stamnos,'' which has a curtailed neck as well. Besides the big oinochoe there is the so-called olpc, 10 a plump, round-mouthed jug unlike the olpai ol othci schools; a cup ol Little Master shape," a globular aryballos (Figuie 10.11),'- a m u g n and a plate with a handle 11 have turned up; and even a dinos has been claimed.1"' luilher excavation at Miletus may well add more. Dccoiation varies more in composition than components. The fauna is that ot the Wild Goat style with the addition of the partridge, popular too on the lei racotta revetments of South Ionia;16 but heads are no longer leseivcd. 1 luimn figures aie now frequent and active. The stock ornaments are lew and simply constructed. Necks usually have double cable, meander and squaii', oi meander cross. The cable, of the type of the Middle II Wild Goal style without the ring round the cenlial dot, is generally eaily; the mc.uidei .\ni\ squate, which continues throughout, is also traditional; the meandct cioss, a Flkclluta innovation, becomes common later. On the boilv the staples aie volutes, crescents and lotus. The volutes have their appropriate place on the belly in a broad field, whether or not enclosed, ami spring from the handles. Crescents occupy narrower bands on the bellv ami there may be more than one row of them, alternate rows facing < opposite ways; this oi nanient, which lor long had Been more or less icstricted to whiiligigs, appears about the same time in Clazomenian Blackfigure, though there moie highly coloured. The lotus flowers and buds are legularly of the type shown in Figure 8.13c; this occurs, though rarely, in ' the Middle 11 Wild Goat style (where the related form of Figure 8.13b is not uncommon). Simple diagonal arrangements of crosses, lozenges, blobs oi doited lines are liequcnt on amphoriskoi and occasionally used on other shapes. Of minor ornaments very simple tongues are often put at the top of the shoulder and sometimes, like rays, round the base; and ivy, usually in a single spray, had a vogue on shoulders. For dividing bands blobs or slum strokes are commonest. The pioneer ol the likellura style was the Altenburg painter. 17 The fiagmentary amphora illustrated here (Figure 10.1) is an early piece, if not quite tin1 earliest, and shows that the new style, though much indebted to the Milesian Middle II Wild Goat style (as is evident from a general consideration of his lepertory) has made radical innovations. One is in the drawing ol the animals. Instead of outlined heads and broad reserved details 7«

— / ik vll

ID

a

Figure 10.1 likellura amphora: ISiilish Museum 8S.2-K.54. Scale ratliei under 1:3. AhenHuig painter: c. Sf>0. on bodies and legs we have imitation of the black-figuie technii|uc, hut with meticulous iestivation instead ol incision. The l.uma and composition, though, are u.ulitional, as too is the emphasis given to the shouldci field: the belly Has a less caieful die o! iiinnmg dogs and Haies (oi, on olliei examples of this painter's work, goals). The filling ornaments too ai e inhei lied, though sparsei and smaller in conformity with the delicacy ol ilie drawing of the animals; compare the shoulder and belly lielils ol the amphoia illustrated. The other novelty is the Hand ol descents. Thcie is another band ol crescents below the chasing animals on the belly, and below thai tongues like those at the top of the shoulder. Very soon (if his stylistic development has been reconstiucted conectly) the AltenHuig paintei made another innovation, adding human hgures to his repertory; these appeal mostly m comos scenes, though fragments show that sometimes he was moie ambitious (I'igure 10.2). The next step was to shilt the dccoi.uive emphasis lo the belly, enlaiging the principal field theie and replacing the liguies on the shouldei with a hand or 79

It hell

II iti

—

Figure 10.2 Fikcllura amphora, fragments of shoulder: Nicosia 1960/X-29/2. Scale rather under 1:3. Altenburg painter: c. 550-540

Figure 10.3 lukeltura amphora: Ahenburg 191. lit 31 cm. Alteiiburg painter: c. 550-540.

— I'ikcll

itra

—

bands of simple ornaments (t'igurc 10.i). A fuuhef economy WAS to reduce

the number of figures in the belly lichl tti two or still better one, placed centrally between big volutes sprouting from the base ol the handles.18 The Allcnlnug painter Had at the outset shown notable care, especially ill the drawing of the figures of the shoulder field, ami though as tune went on Ins style became more cursory, He continued to decorate his pots compactly and the subsidiary decoration does not become slovenlyContemporaries of the Altenburg painter were inventive too. Broad fields, such as those on the belly of amphoi as and omochoai, might be Idled with two rows of lotus flowers and buds in mirror image'9 or ol enclosed palmettes similarly disposed20 or with scale pattern,-1 reticulation (standard on amphonskoi — Figure 10.9), rows ol short inverted rays'' or, more agreeably, star pattern (Figure 10.ll).2' There are also the omochoai of Group S (Figure 10.4), where the most plausible excuse for the decoration of the body is that it was meant to recall the plumage ol a bird. In all the groups so far considered the decoration normally remains compact and covers the visible surface ol the pot closely, but there was also another trend, which found empty space attractive and knew how to exploit it. Here there was a forerunner and perhaps .\n ancestor in the oinochoai of Group R (figure IO.f>), to which a krater from Tarsus may be added.24 None of these has a useful context, so that their dating depends on stylistic judgment. The well preserved oinochoe in the British Museum2* looks distinctly less advanced than the early work ol the Altenburg painter: the cable complex, which alternates with stalked rosettes on the shoulder, is loo elaborate and old-fashioned. liui the oinochoe illustrated here has a normal f ikellura lotus chain and a typical fikellura cable. The explanation may be that Group R is the creation ol another experimental painter who, however he started, found a home in the fikelhna school. Perhaps the delicately sparse decoration of a few cream jugs and cups is indebted to Ins example.2' It was, however, the Altenburg painter's prescription that was accepted and the tendency to less precise and exacting workmanship continued. In particular in the drawing ol animals, now mostly dogs and hares, the reservation of detail becomes no more delicate than in the Wild Goat style, though there is no return to the reserving ol heads. Generally too figures become rare. The Altenburg painter in his later work had been satisfied with a single comast between volutes for the decoration of the main field on the belly of his amphora*. It was an easy step, whether or not he look it himself, to dispense with the comast and extend the volutes. Group N' 7 still keeps the compact system of decoration and takes some care, but in the Volute Zone group (Group P: Figure 10.8a), which lasts till the end ol fikellura, such virtues are disregarded. It is templing to suppose that it was from Group R (figure 10.5) that some later Elkellura painters got the idea ol free held decoration, but the

-

/ the l/ii) ii —

I'igine 10.4 I dulluia oinochoe- Louvie AT21 1 h 29 cm Gioup S nud 6th centuiy.

intctval seems to he too long This kind of denotation now leappears in thice lot ins, ptih.ips At moie oi less the same time. The paintet of the aniphoi.is of (iiotip M was old-fashioned in his liking for animals on the shouldei - dogs chasing h.uc, goat or deer oi, less ambitiously, a file of nondesuipt hnds, but the mam field on the belly, which again in an old-fashioned way is nanow, is usually left empty 2 8 The drawing, though economical, is adequate and the effect stuking A couple of amphoras of tins gioup Have an cxtia low of crescents in the belly held, but this may be a failute ol neive t.itlict than an evolutionaly stage The experiment seems to have been shoil-hved «2

/ i k ell in a —

Figure 10.5 I'lkelhna OIIIOLHOC liunimgliani Umvcisily. lit 29 5 cm Group R second I)U.IIUM ol (>th iiiituiy

The Running Man pamtci (Gtoup I ) was less inhibited, rejecting comprehensively the oideilmess ol his I ikelhn.i .md othei coniempoianes. Ilis woi k lias an appeaiance of spontaneity, lo some (.xtml tontiivcd, on the pot illustrated (l'lguie 10 6) the mcgidai stiokes on the lip and the buckled fiamewoik of the cable aie not necessaiy conse(|iienies of i.ipid woik, Hut they do paitly disguise the use of conventional ornaments Similaily the upturn at one side of the lip suggests conscious (il not dehherate) negligence, since the generous volume of the body shows competence in potting In the use of empty space this pamtci is exemplaiy At the top ol the shoulder there is a light floral chain and on the belly a single figure (repealed on the other side) and a large but not heavy volute below each handle By contempoiaiy standards the anatomy of the i tinning men of his namepiece was not correct, but they give a icmai liable impiession of movement; even the volute complexes have a spi.uvlmg liveliness I he hate on anothei of this painter's amphoias (1'iguie 10 7) gives the same impiession «3

Figure 10.6 Fikellura amphora: British Museum 64.10-7.156. lit 34 cm. Running Man painter: c. 530.

Figure 10.7 l-'ikelhua amphora, detail from belly: British Museum 67.5-S.S5'>. Scale c. 1:3. Running Man painter: C. 530. 84

Ilk ell u ra

«rt\TllTT?Ji7J/>

a

1'igiire 10.8 I ikc.lhu.1 amphoras. Basle 1906.252. Ill 31 cm. Group 1': second hall ol 6th century b Louvre A327. l i t 4^cm. Group O: laicr th century.

ol speed but willi more grace, and there is a still more sinuous version ON an amphora in Rhodes. 2 ' Both the figures and ihe volute complexes look as if they had been dashed ofl and probably they had; often enough his figures — men, dogs, hares, goat, deer anil birds — do not come oil, and there is variety too in the rendering ol the volutes. A couple ol amphoias ol this group add a band of crescents ill the lower part ol the body, an unhappy compromise, since it cramps the volute complexes. Another and more modest use ol empty space appears on the amphoias of Group O (Figure 10.8b). 1 lere the main decoration is the girdle ot volutes of the Volute Zone group, but they are not confined and the pot is unpairued below them; the shoulder too is not decorated oppressively. The Running Man group and Group O are apparently connected, but there is not the evidence to say which began lust, though Group C) seems to have lasted to the end of I'ikellura. The Painter ol the Running Satyrs (Figure 10.10), another ol the second generation ol the I'ikellura school, had a character the opposite of that ol the Running Man painter, with whom he must have been in part at least contemporary. I le was a precise draughtsman and not only in the admirable detail of his figures (which in its elaboration is indebted to Attic Blackligure); his cables and lotus chains are neat and regular, and the two halves «5

/ ikelluia —

Figuie 10.9 I ikelluia amplionskoi* Bittisli Museum a 60 4-4 V) lit 26cm Second half of 6lh centuiy 1) 64 10 7 n">0 I It 28 em I ate 6th century of' Ins voltile complexes match 1 le had no set system of decoration On sever.d ol his pots he lias 7ones, sometimes with what looks like the piincipat held on the shouldei; on otlieis he prefeis a free field; and he may have painted omoehoai of Group S Like his eontempoiaiies elsewhere who woiked in the black-figure technique he prefened human to animal , figuies All in all, he was the most accomplished of Pikellura painters and, it seems, the last of any note It is a pity that only three of his pots, a stamnos anel two amplionskoi, can be said to be complete 1 he numei ous amplionskoi ai e mostly late. The shape has been desci ibeel already. 1 leights lange from 15 to 40 cm A few are decorated in nanowish /ones, a couple - by the Painter of the Running Satyrs - have a free field system, but most make do with some simple ornament, often ivy leaves, on the sliouldci and on the body a deep band of reticulation of one type oi aiuitliei and two uai rower bands of descents and tongues (l'igure 10 9a) 86

/ ikcllura —

Figure 10.10 l'ikelluia amplionskos, detail horn Belly Rhodes 12396 Scale t 2.3. Pamtei of the Running Satyrs c S20 On the neck the commonest decoiation is a snippet ot meandei u o s s I lieic aie also some amplioiiskoi with the usual di'coiation of neck and shoulder, but only sparse bands ol paint on the body (I'iguie 10 9b) A fuithei simplification dispense!) with the ornaments ol neck and shouldei too this class of amphonskoi - 'Sub l'lkellura' - is geneially moie carelessly shaped and often there is no slip Piesumably amphonskoi, except the few Hioad ones, were contameis loi toilet oil Unlike their Wild (.oat piedecessois likelhna pamteis made much use ol human hguies Most aie wildly dancing tomasls, but theie aie also banquets (one enlivened by wasps IIKI a mouse) nicl i lew mytliological sub|Lcts — cenlauis, satyis and maenads, pygmies and cianes, lleiacles ,\m\ IUISIIIS (to judge by the man with seipeiit he.ulgeai on a sherd in Oxloid) and a possible Potnia Iheion lheie aie dso winged figuies, male and female, a haie-headed man and a winged male with dog's head and diawing a swoid, these last two in isolation and vety possibly spoits ot then pamteis' imagination By the middle of the sixth centuiy Attic IJlack figuie had become the dominant style of painted Greek potteiy and connections with it might be expected in l'lkelhua There aic remaikahly few of them Piesumably the figuie style is indebted at the beginning lot the fineness of its linear detail, though reservation is lelamcd instead of incision and female flesh is dark like that of men, m this omblackmg Hliek figuie 1 atei the Painter ol the Running Satyis follows Attic ptecepts foi innei details, paitictilaily 87

— I'ikellura

-*-

ft

—

Figure 10.11 I ikcllura aryballos: Bochum S1030. Ht 7.3 cm. Mid 6th century.

'on legs. It has been claimed that the Altenburg painter's big handle volutes inspired the handle ornaments ol some mid-sixth century Attic amphoras and also [hat they were inspired by them,10 but at present it is not possible to decide which appeared fust: that they were connected is likely and, since related volutes had appeared in earlier East Greek pottery, my guess at present is that Attic was the borrower. A further claim that the shape of the likellura amphora served as a model lor some Attic potters seems unnecessary," nor is the shift of decorative emphasis from shoulder to belly surprising in the mid sixth century. With other schools too connections are tenuous. Crescents and scales appear in Clazomenian Black-figure, though then treatment is different and at present it is not possible to say which style used them first; and presumably the pomegranate chain, which sometimes substitutes for buds, was borrowed from Laconian, which in return took the band of crescents. But likellura was and remained a self-sutficient style. The distribution ol l'ikellura is much like that of South Ionian Middle 11, hardly surprising since both were Milesian. Very much has been found a.t Miletus, much on Samoa and Rhodes, and a fair number of pieces probably come from Damhbogaz near Milas m Cana: future discoveries are likely to show that it was popular generally throughout the southern part of the East Greek region. In the north, anyhow beyond Ephesus, it is rare. Some went to Delos and Aegina, but in mainland Greece it is almost unknown.'2 So too in Italy and Sicily. There is a little from Cyprus, much

— Ilk ell ii > ,1 - -

from N.iiuT.uis, relatively more from IVII DcfcniK'ti, SOUR- frtmi Cyicnc and a scattering of isolated (mils elsewhere in the I'last. Along the mirth coast of the Aegean it seems lo He ran-, the Piopontis is unknown. Hut in the Ponius, where excavation has Heen busy, I d u l l u i a is again plentiful. In general there was a decline in distant cxpoits in later yens, presumably because ol Attic competition. Graves on Rhodes give many contexts lot ihc last third ol the sixth century. The Running Man painter and the Painter ol the Running Satyrs are represented and so are Groups M, N, O and P \w\ reticulated amphoriskoi, But there is nothing useful for the Allcnhurg painter nor does the one context lor the mid sixth century give much help. I Us work, (hough, both early and late, is freijiient in a deposit at IVII Defenneh, probably closed in 525, where there are two examples ol Group N ,\nd one ol Group P, but none of the other painters ami groups. Admittedly the 'I'ell Deleiuieh deposit is a small one and odd in its constitution, and the supplying ol Greek pottery to the site, which was a frontier post, may have been infrequent and was certainly selective; but u is reasonable to conclude ihat the Aitenburg painter was still working in the laic 530s, iliough risky to go further and argue that the Running Man painter .\m\ others could not have begun much before the 520s. When ihc Allcnhurg painter began is disputed. A sherd from Sard is by or near bun was louiul in a stratum thai is reasonably thought to have been sealed by the Persian capture in 5-17 (give or take a couple ol years). There is also the comparison ol the Allcnburg painter's animals with those ol some Ionian Little M.tslci cups, but these cups are not precisely datable nor is it clear whetllei they or I ikelluia should have priority. So 560 still seems lo me a reasonable date lor the beginning ol likellura, ami for Us end I'M, when Miletus was destroyed by the Persians."

COLONIAL IMITATIONS Analysis ol the clay of pottery from 1 hsti la gave ,\n unexpected result, that of 62 J'ikelhua sherds 13 were ol a composition unknown at Miletus or elsewhere in the East Greek region, but fairly well matched in beds at I lisiria.14 Most ol these sherds were decorated only with abstract or floral ornament, which required no great skill, and stylistically arc indistinguishable from metropolitan work; but one more ambitious piece attempts comasts, awkward and underdeveloped figures, which show the painter's limitations. There is also a sherd from Olbia, which is similar in ilie composiiion ol us clay and is decorated with a respectably drawn goat ol likellura type, although unorihodoxly it is incised and there is a fringe ol dots along the borders of the field.55 Unfortunately the composition of the clay available at Olbia is not yet sufficiently known, but the geological context seems much

— File ellny/t

—

the same as that of I listna. If the clays too are similar, the imitations at I listna may after all lie imports, chough from Olbia. Olhia was a bigger place than Histiia, and some of the Clazomenian Black-figure that has been found there looks abnormal enough to be local, though of course not much is known about Cla/omenian norms. Still, imitation of imported wares need not have been confined to a single city.

CARIA (AND SOME ODDMENTS) Pots confidently said to come from Damlibogaz near ancient Mylasa show that the l'lkellura style was imitated in Caria in varying degrees of impulity."' (There may also be some true copies, but to detect them analysis of the clay would be needed.37) The first borrowings, it appears, are by the Boehum painter. His presumably earlier work had been wholly in a version of the Wild Goat style; but on an ovoid trefoil oinochoe in Tampa (Figure 8.27) - pei haps better described as an olpe - there are Wild Goat style goats (in the shoulder, but on the belly two rows of crescents and below them long tongues. On another oinochoe of his, in Bloomington, with dogs chasing goats and three tows of crescents, the dogs no longer have reserved heads, though the goats still do. Yet later the fragment of a bowl in Botlrum fiom Turgut (Lagina) shows a better assimilation of the Fikellura style and also intioduces the partridge. After this painter the Wild Goat style was forgotten and, though oinochoai continue, the amphora becomes more usual; it copies the I'ikellura shape with fair accuracy except that the foot is more spreading. As for the decoration, volutes tend to be spindly and crescents streaky, meanders may be heavy and old-fashioned, and the lower p'art of the body usually gets no more than one or two broad bands of paint. Occasionally a comast of I'ikellura type cavorts between volutes, and an amphoia in Berne Has a lion and a bull drawn in outline and of no known ancestry. So fai as I know, there are no amphoriskoi. To sum Up, the Bocluim painter with his strongly individual style used Fikellura innovations' disci iminalingly, but the later practitioners, though more whole-hogging, were ready to disregard the principles of their models. " Carian I'ikellura kept some independence. A lew sheids of similar character have turned up at the sanctuary of Sinuri and at Labraunda, both near Mylasa. No useful contexts are recorded, but by stylistic comparison the Boehum painter's pieces should be of the middle of the sixth centuiy and the rest of the later third and probably the fourth quarter. Two other pieces may as well be mentioned here since, although it is unlikely that they are Carian (if only because they were exported), they show a similar relationship to standard I'ikellura. One is a fragment probably ol an amphoia, lound at Tocra m Libya in a stratum closed about 90

— Vikclhtui — 520-10;"* the woikmansliip is competent, but the white enhancements, the rows of dots used for dividing bands and the - in the illustration unintelligible decoration at the bottom set it apart. Much more remote is a roughly decorated amphora from Tell Delenncli, with a cable on the shoulder and big scales on the belly.1'1

!M

C H A P I L K II

IONIAN

LITTLE MASTERS

Towards the middle of the sixth century some East Greek pocters began to take note ol the new types ol cup that were being produced at Athens and set out to emulate them. They procured a clay that in fineness and • colour was close to Attic, usually rather paler, but sometimes indistinguishable to the eye; so too with the black panit, though this (it is said) tends to have a greenish tinge. For decoration they were usually satisfied with simple bands ol paint, not always placed according to Attic precepts, and they made the distinctive innovation of multiple fine lines running round the lip or the Howl and especially lavoured on the inside. A rare variant embellishes the handle field with small plastic ornaments, such as knucklebones, bulls' heads and even human hands.1 There are tot) a few more ambitious cups and lo their painters the name ol 'Ionian Little Masters' Has been given ('Little Master' being a mistranslation, now hallowed, ol the German 'Klemmeister').2 These little Master cups are lew and probably always were so, since they .ne objects that excavators are likely to notice and publish. There is no sign of any coherent school, and it may well be that the painters were not only isolated from each other, but also did not paint such cups as a regular job. One ol the first ol these Little Masters used a purely I'lkellura style., evident on his lions (Figure 11.1) and dog, which are almost line for line identical with those ol the early Altenburg painter and similarly have reserved and not incised detail — finer admittedly, although this can be explained by the use of more refined clay and paint: only in rejecting even light filling ornament does the cup painter follow Attic rather than I'lkellura practice.1 It is hard to doubt that he and the Altenburg painter were close associates, il not in lact the same person. Another link with l'ikellura is "the man on the Vineyard cup (Figure 11.2), which looks a little later. This is one ol the very rare Archaic paintings that survive in which a natural selling gets more than perfunctory treatment, although it is still as much a decorative pattern as a study of nature, liven so, the claim sometimes made thai this sort ol subject is characteristically Ionian seems to me at least unproven. Except on the cups related to Eikelluia incision is normal. At first this may be meticulous and fine, even feathery, but later painters took less trouble over inner detail. In style the incised cups show no close connection with any other group of East Greek pots, nor much with each other: some-

Ionian

l.illlc

Aliiitcn

—

Figure 11.1 Ionian Little Mastei cups, fragments: Santos and Athens (luil lion sherd is losi). Sc.de c. 2:3. Mid 6lh century. tunes the most one can say is lh.it a figure or ornament has an last Greek look, sometimes only that ii is un-Attic, and towards the vnd, as quality fell, there are pieces of which it is haul to say whether ihey ace Atticising East Greek or deviant Attic. Rules of composition arc lax. There may be decoration on the outside or the inside ot the lip or on both, in the Handle field, or inside on the Howl - and here Idling the whole Howl with a single composition, or with a central tondo surrounded by another figured field, or with just a small tondo. The repertory includes human and subhuman figures in various kinds of activity, animals confronting or in file, geese processing, and dolphins swimming in line. Ivy anil myrtle leaves are the commonest ornaments: they are used sprouting on each side ol a stem, to decorate lips. A 93

,t,i

fV

0. Piobably they continued throughout the t h i i d i | t i a i l e i ol t h e s i x t h c e n t u i y .

94

.<JU •riur ^ • • t f / a a a ^ c; 11 A I* 11

CLAZOMENIAN

K

12

BLACK-FIGURE

D u r i n g the second quaiter of llie sixth century some painlcts ol the I Me W i l d Go.H stylo attempted t o enliven the we.tiv tradition liy studding animals w i t h white blobs oi rows of dols (I'iguie 12.la) oi liv replacing them w i t h himi.m liguies in an elemeniaiv hl.it k-ligmc III.IIIIKI ( l i g u i e 12.lb). 1'iom this initiative a more p i o p e i l y blaik-ligut e st\ le developed, which has l o i the last hiindied years been called Cla7omciiian and this tune lightly - at least l o r pait o l the matei ial - so clay analyses testily. A l l the same ,\t^ iinrcgcnerate W i l d Goat style persisted beside it l o i a time, il one can judge f i o m its protracted sin vivaf on the Cla/omciiian salt opfiagi.' Tin's Clazomeman Black-figure Has been studied only patchily' and the account which follows is laigely speculative. ('lay is h m w n i s h , in geneial rathei lighlei than is usual in Attic. A lew eaily pieces have a whitish slip, b i n noim.illy tbeie is none. The paint is mostly a goodish black, sometimes nnslned to led Puiple and white enhancements are frequent; and white, often put duectly on the clay, is used mote freely than in Attic; cianes, crescents anil tongues may be altogethei while, and sometimes male llesli too. Innei details and some outlines are usually incised o n dai k sui laces, but on white more olten painted. Unlike its W i l d Goat picdece.ssor thi.s is a deieimincdly bl.ickfiguie style. The earliest group o l what seems to he the main line o l development is the Tubingen group, a lather loose assemblage o l laige pots. Commonest is a bioad amphora w i t h shoulder handles (I'iguie 12.2), not unlike the Aeolian type, but more caiefully made and sometimes at least embellished with moulding ol the lip and handles anil w i t h a ndge high up on the neck; the m o i c complete specimens aie about 5 0 c m high. Tlieie aie also seveial examples - mostly small liagments - o l what is called a pyxis, a shallow ciiculai box w i t h lid, and again w i t h some mouldings; diameleis w o i k out at about 50 cm. The kiater too is k n o w n anil, since there seem l o have been some detached pedestals, the dmos is likely; again diameters aie as much as 50 cm. Some of these pots had plastic female heads attached to the sides of handles, a fancy presumably copieil l i o m Cluan. Decoration is claboiatc and covers the whole exposed suiface o f the pot, even the edge o l the lip and the foot. T h e main field most olten has a file ol high-waisted women, holding hands f o r a dance and w i t h o i without accompaniment l>y 3 musician, also female; hut a lew fiagment.s show moie ambitious- subjects 95

— C.la/.o»ictiia)i Black-figure

&

—

(a)

P

Figure 12.1 a North Ionian dish, fragment: Izmir (from Smyrna). Original diameter c. 42 cm. Whitish slip: purple and white retouches. Precursor of Clazomenian Black-figure: c. 560. b North Ionian krater, fragment of neck: British Museum 88.6-1.520. 1 ll of figures r. 6.3 cm. Washy slip: purple on hair (or cap), white spots on dress. Precursor ol Clazomcnian Black-figure: c. 560. 96

C.lazomouan Black-figl

i l l »-l-

Figure 12.2 Clazomeni.iN Black-figure amphora: Berlin Ihv. 4530. I It (.is restorcil) 54 cm. Purple anil white retouches. TUbingen group: r. 550-540.

_')Z_

' IBB

••§

••§

• 1 ' ••r —

*

.

'

'

' '

1 , *

C l —

C/ii/oiiivnuiti

Hltii k-jigtt) e

(a)

(b)

I'iguie 12.4 Cla?omenian BUck-figuie amphoias, ti.igments: British Museum. a neck 88 2-8 82. Diam at lip 17 cm H uppci pan ol b o d y 88 2-8 110 l i t (as made up) 19.6cm. Uila gioup: 540-525. IxJongs heie. Scales, usually with white centies, .lie the second choice Less commonly the painlei makes do with big ivy leaves Tlicie have been several finds at Cla/omenae and two oi tin cc have been published fiom Smyrna; OIK Lomes liom Rhodes, seveial fiom Rhencia and a couple horn Saniotluace, Nauciatis and Cyicne have been moie prolific and two examples turned up at Tell Defenneb, and I iistna and colonial sites on the north shoie ol tlit 15lnck Sea Have conttibutcd nioic l i o m its presence at Tell Dili muli it seems hkclv lli.it (lie Knipovitch gioup began in the 530s, one might guess that it lasted until the 510s This is a compact gioup, the

—

( ht/omoiiiin

llla'$ ast Ciie-ck, though on the Villa Giuli.i hydua the block of mcandei undernoath the side handles, the motley legs of the animals, and perhaps the head ot I lei icles seem to owe something to Etruscan and especially Politic fheie is no attempt licit to emulate Attic in coloui of clay or system of decoiation I'm the diniii uniloinnty ol style and deeoiative system suggest that the two painteis woi ked in the same woikshop I uitlicr the painter of I ouvie 1 676 appeals lo Have painted the one piece amphoia of the Northampton

-— Not tbampton

and

( antpana

gtottp*

—

g m t i p e o m p a i c in p,\i licul.ii the Iliads ol s i n i s and c u l l m i s ' ' ( N o i shotikl I he s u i p i i s c d if the othci d m o s p u n t e i t u r n e d out to have painted the icst of the N o r t h a m p t o n a m p h o i a s ) I \ i d c n t h llicn a p u n t u might d o wot k in a veiy wide lange ol quality, l i o m lapul l i . u k w o i k lo w l n t one may call conMileied m.isteipieces 7 the i m l v ol m i s t e i p i e e i s suggests ilut haekw o i k paid b e t t e r A numHei of pieces (not from d m o i ) tli.il lie of oi neai the I m m n n g i o u p have f i o m time to time Been attiibute'd to one oi othei ol these d m o s p i i n l e i s a l t h o u g h , since the eh a w i n g ol del id is t o o pi i luneloi v to He diagnostic, thei e is litlle a g i e e m e n l a b o u t p i i t i e u l a i alti ihutions s Some ol tin in m t v well be light 1 his alfects the p i o b l e m ol w h e i e the N o i l h a n i p t o n anil ( i i i i p t n i p a m l e i s w e i e w o i k m g So fai as is k n o w n , none ol then leeepted pioeluets Has been lounel o u t s i d e I t r u i i a , while the c o n t e n t i o u s uti ibutions c o m e m o s t l y fiom Egypt ot the* U k i a m e , w h c i e e x p o i t fiom I t i u t n is m i l i k i l y '' O p i n i o n s aie of c o u i s e divided Some maintain that the w o i k s h o p was and i c i n a m e d in Ionia, tisu illy the 1101 t h e i n p u t , the Hasie a i g u n u n t is that w o i k so p u i e l y f a s t G i e e k m u s t Have been made m an I ast G i c c k e n v u o n m e i H O t h e r s (of w h o m I am o n e ) think that the N o i t h i n i p t o n and ( a m p a n a p a m t e i s staiteel in Ionia - at oi neai ( l a / o m e n a e - bin emigiateel lo 1 liini.i, the m a m icason is that, since d e c o t a t e d 1 isl G i e t U p o l t e i y is so l a i c in [ ti in i.i, it is meieeliHIe that the d m o i in p m i e u l a i weie so sedulously i m p o i l e d It may also he noted that anal\ sis ol the e h y ol one ol the N o i t h a n i p t o n .iniphoi.ts sliowed a c o m p o s i t i o n that elilleied significantly I torn that ol a sample ol genuine I \ 1 ist G i c c k pi od nets l0 A l e l m e m e n t l i n t seems to me u n n e e e s s u v is t o extend tlusc emigi a n t s ' j o i n n e v b) a visit to 1 gypl Si 111, n o one has yet suggi steel an ulditional cxi ut sion to the noi lliei n s h o i e ol the lilack Sea, t h o u g h one ol the d m o i does l u \ i a i e h e i s in Scytln in dress and, to )uelge by its a b e i i a n l s t ) l c , s o m e p o l l c i y ol ( l a / o m e m i n type was m a d e thei e 'I he N o i t h a m p l o n g i o u p is u s u i l l v i h l e d i b o u l S JO, but p e i h i p s the 530s w o u l d He satei F oi t h e ( .impana g i o u p a i i a s o n i h l e guess is that p i o d i i c l i o n began at the same lime, that is in the S^Os, and lisleel till aBout 520 oi a little later

CAKRFTAN HYDRIAS T h e C a e t c t a n h y e h i a s " aie a g i o u p ol s o m e loitv p o t s , the w o i k - it appeals - e>f a pan of painters The clay is Hiownish with an oi ingy still ice, which has olten w o r n away I'm pie and white aie uscel vei v l i e e l ) , in ihotit ee]tial balance with black the effect is unusually coloiitfuf I he shape, w h i e h also ehffeis m a i k e d l y l i o m the h y d n i s of othei ( j i e e k schools, is H i o u l anil m o i e eomfoitahle than elegant, the height is usually Hetwien 40 and 45 i m I echmcally the pots aie not well made bodies sag oi aie d e n t e d , and olten l i i

— Northampton

,1 .

jsR ''Y

; J: , . >>V

and Campana groups

Figure 13.3 Caeretan hydria: Zurich, private collection. H t 42 cm. c. 515.

'the firing is poor. The system of decoration is shown on Figure 13.3. The •ornaments are bold and fat: it is said that some of them were done with a template, a practice otherwise not noticed in GreeK pottery. For figures there is a broad field on the front and narrower fields on each side of the back handle. Subjects are varied, taKen from mythology and human life: the best, which Wave more than a touch of burlesque, are unrivalled in Archaic Greek art. T o come to details, men may have black or white or even red flesh, nudes are rare, heads are of the fleshy type familiar in East Greek sculpture. In general the decorative effect is a little old-fashioned with its fondness for antithetical grouping. That the painters' style is basically East Greek is evident, but there is no close connection with any particular school. So far as is known, none of the hydrias has been found outside Etruria and there the principal finding place is Caere (Cerveteri). Their date, to judge by stylistic comparisons with Attic and some imprecise burial contexts, is the last thirty or so years of the sixth century. Where the painters worked is disputed. Some still think it must have been in a Greek city, preferably of the East Greek homeland; Phocaea, about whose art conveniently little is known, is of course a favourite. Others, more reasonably in my opinion, conclude that they painted in Etruria, but 112

— Northampton

and Campana groups —

without agreement on their antecedents: they m.iy have emigrated young, before they were hilly trained in the potter's craft, or they could be second generation immigrants. That they were Greek is, however, clear enough: apart from their familiarity with a wide range of Greek myths one of their hydiias with a representation of the embassy to Achilles gives the obscure herald his correct name of Odios, good evidence of the painter's access to the Iliad. The Caeretan masters tot) are sometimes credited with a visit to Egypt. It is commonly supposed that the Persian conquest caused many East Greek craftsmen to emigrate. This is not by any means certain. Among the potters the number of such emigrants so far inferred is not large, nor need their emigration have been the result of Persian rule.

"3

CM APT I. II 14

VROULIAN

* 1

* " * I ;

'Viotilian' is the name given to a small group, most notable for its cups (I'iguie 14.1),' Vrouli.i at the south end of the island of Rhodes being a site where several were found. To take the cups first, their clay is Hi own and line, the paint (which covers most of the surface) is a brownish Mack, and puiple is spread ficcly on the ornaments; white is not used, and incision is icgular for outlines and inner details. The shape is elegant with its short oflset lip, nairow conical foot and very thin wall: diameter at die lip varies from 10 to 30 cm or more. On some of these cups the narrow handle held is icserved and in an old-fashioned way decorated with opposed triangles, separated by vertical strokes; it is tempting to think these earlier than the one illustrated here. On the outside the lip usually has a tooth pattern, the Handle field a cable or comparable ornament, the main held on the belly a band of floral units (which may be lotus flowers, buds - sometimes framed in a circle - or palmettes) and lound the foot rays or tongues. Inside there may be a big star or, moie showily, lotus and palmette, sometimes with a Aisette in the centre; the whirligigs of I'iguie 14.1 are so far unique. With pioper restraint the foot is left without decoration. A lew amphoras, both necked and one-piece, stamnoi (some at least with lids), bowls anil pel haps a hydria are decorated in the same technique, although moie simply.2 On some of these pots Vroulian decoration is only ol the uppei part, on others it covers all the available surface. The ornaments used aie lotus flowers, palmettes and buds, which may be encircled; subsidiary ornaments are not used. Similar decoration appears on some of the situlas described in the next chapter, although there with one exception it is subsidiary to a black-figure panel (Figure 15.1). . Rhodes is the principal place of finding, both for cups and other shapes. Cups are known also from Mersin, Tell Sukas, Naucratis and Cyrene,3 and the other shapes from Naucratis and Tell Defenneh. Of the corresponding situlas three come from Rhodes, the rest from Tell Defenneh, Hut this dispropoition may not He so significant.4 Anyhow, for Vroulian clay analysis as well as distribution makes Rhodes the likeliest home. Its date is perplexing. The finds at Vroulia tail off around 600 (that is when Early Corinthian was ending), but at Tell Defenneh the situlas should be of the 'third quartet of the sixth century, and graves on Rhodes give contexts of the mid sixth century for a cup and the third quarter or later for other 114

Vroulittn

(a)

Figure 14.1 Vrotili.in cup: lieilin Inv. 2960. l i t 15.5cm. Mid 6th ccniuiy.

shapes. 5 Yet one would m>t expect so small .i group with so little stylistic development to have been piodticed over a long peiiod. The pioMcm is h.it illy important.

"5

CHAPTER 15

SITULAS

What is known as ,i Simla is a sizable tubular jar, swelling towards its base, witli a flat lip and a low loot (Figure 15.1a); on decorated specimens there is a small ridge below the lip. Sometimes, perhaps regularly, there was a ltd. The shape is obviously useful and may well be frequent in kitchen ware, d one silted ihrough the plain sherds from domestic debris. In fact fragments of five were found in such contexts at Vroulia, decorated simply with bands of the dark paint and between the handles a wavy line crossed by oblique bars.1 These were presumably made on Rhodes. Their date may be late seventh or early sixth century. As a decorated pot die situla is rare. The earliest, preserved only in its upper part, turned up on Santos.1 Its original height was probably about 40 cm. The main field, between the handles, is decorated in an orthodox Middle Wild Goat style, and below there are broad bands of paint. This is at present a unique piece, evidently South Ionian; it is very unlikely that if was made on Rhodes. On ihe situlas of what may be called Groups B and C3 the system of decoration is more considered. The body is divided into three fields of about equal height with a smaller field at the base. Although the uppermost is the most important, there need not be a direct connection with the S,»mos situla, since (his is an obvious solution for the shape. Group H consists of five pieces. The clay is fine and brownish; purple is used for enhancements; details on figures are incised. The shape of the pot is sturdy, With ihickish wall and three-reeded handle; heights seem to be about 50 cm. The lower fields, separated Hy reserved bands, are painted dark. The ' upper, on each side ol the handles, are sometimes divided into three panels, the central one containing a single figure - Typhon, winged youth (accompanied by small (.anna), draped man with staff, griffin - and the flanking fields filled with a lozenge or diagonal ornament: where the handle field is undivided, only animals are known. Filling ornament is used erratically and can be coarse, framing bands too occur, not always happily contrived. The effect can be pleasing, although the style is neither assured nor very competent, and the side panels have a curiously Subgeometric look. Group B looks like the work of a painter or workshop without much contact with other contemporary schools of painted pottery. The finding places have been Tell Defenneh, Memphis and Rhodes, where I imagine they were made; the clay loo looks suitable for Rhodian. There are no contexts and u6

— Si I II la j

(..)

Figure 15.1 Situlas: British Museum. 1) c

a H8.2-8.1 I. l i t 4 6 c m . {Jill 10 | IS95|, 37 lig. I) 88.2-8.7 + 22. Scale c. 1:2. Late in t h u d quarter ol 6th century. 88.2-8.13 + 30 + 41. Scale c. 1:2. Third quarter til 6th century.

Tell Defennch gives no help, since neither ol us contributions can be included in the main deposit: vague stylistic comparisons suggest a date near the middle ol the sixth century. Group C (l'lgure 15.1) is better represented with more than thirty examples. The clay is generally paler in colour ami tends lo flake oil and the paint, usually a dark brown, was unevenly applied and not very durable: whether these defects were due to poor materials or poor workmanship is not clear, but the Iikellura and Clazomenian pottery in the same deposit at Tell Defenneh did not suffer as much damage. Purple is frequent, according to convenience on a dark undercoat or directly on the clay; there is no white; and incision is used for inner details and some outlines. 1 he shape varies in its proportions: those silulas that are well enough preserved for certainty have a slimmer Hody than is attested in Group 1J, but (he splaying of the sides o/ "7

— Sit ill in

—

some less complete pieces suggests a dumpier version. W.ills ARC thin. 1 l.mdles, u.sii.iily four-reeded, are mostly ol the lug kind, although sometimes - pei haps later - ring handles are preferred. 1 leiglits seem to have been rather less tli.in in Group B, peiliaps ranging around 40 cm. l'or the decoration the tripartite system continues, Init the two lower fields - and on one exceptional piece all three delds - have adopted the Vroulian mode with palmettes, lotus (lowers (with inner petals or palmette filling) and occasionally buds. In the principal fields between the handles figures are a requisite, but composition rarely goes beyond a quadruped, solitary or sometimes mauling another, or an antithetical human pair. Besides the usual repertory of beasts and monsters there are also a fleecy ram, felines carrying small game in their mouths (one with blood dripping from the victim), and birds of various species which pticli, usually on volutes, strut or fly. From human and mythical life come Hdlerophon and his chimera (on opposite sides of the pot), a pair of confronting winged youths, a Gorgon, a winged horse and, more originally, two satyrs nuking music on either side of a mixing Howl and a pair of men lighting with clubs; one of the two latest situlas adds a woman with a flower, the other on its two sides a crouching soldier and a bearded rider who brandishes ,t spear (so that this can hardly He Achilles and Troilos). Occasionally an incised rosette appears m the field. The style is basically East Greek, but the quality ol the drawing is very uneven, ranging from good (I'igure 15.1b) to poor (figure 15.1c), and on two late pieces it is execrable. These two come I mm lalysus on Rhodes from contexts of 500-490, the rest - except for one Iragment from lalysus - arc from Tell Defenneh and so .should not be later than 525. This suggests that the duration of Group C is from the 530s to about 500; stylistic comparisons, such as they are, do not disagree. It is likely, both from their rarity and the uniform system of decoration, that these Group C situlas were the product of a single workshop, hut students are divided on whether that workshop was on Rhodes or in Egypt (and, if in Egypt, at or near fell Defenneh, since no fragment of a si tula w«s found at Naucratis). The arguments for Egypt are, first, the nearly complete1 restriction of finds to Tell Defenneh; next, of course, Egyptian subjects have been claimed - a hawk sitting on a Neb basket and men, perhaps fcfrcumcised, lighting with clubs; and perhaps too the poor quality of the fired "clay ,\nt.\ paint could he added. None of these arguments is decisive. The number of situlas at Tell Defenneh can be explained in another way;4 Egyptian subjects, even if deliberate, could be painted outside Egypt (especially il intended lor sale there), and technically poor potting occurs in Greek lands. What seems to me at present to tip the halance in favour of Rhodes is the couple of late specimens from lalysus, although admittedly it is surprising that no earlier ones have turned up on the island,5 and also the result of clay •analysis, though only of a single fragment of Group C, which showed a composition acceptable lor Rhodes. More analyses would be helpful.

n8

C l IA I ' l l I I 1 6

LATE BLACK-FIGURE

There has been little study of late East Greek black-figure, nor is there much to study. A few amphoras from Rhodes have such Clazomenian features as sirens, scale pattern anil rows of while dots on their figures, although the drawing of those figures is feeble; on others it is too abject for close comparisons, although I here may be some vague relationship with the Cla/omenian sarcophagi.' Such a relationship is more evident on an incomplete krater from Cyme in Aeolis with in the main fields revellers

-Hi

Figure 16.1 Late East Greek Mack-figure oinochoe: Cherson (?) (from Berezan). Last quarter ol 6th century. Ml)

— Late lilack-jigtire — - one at least a sort of satyr - and riders and in the subsidiary field below a youth among animals; like the sarcophagi it substitutes painted white lines lor incision and its ambitious, though mediocre, painter has attempted a three-quarter view ol a torso.2 The pieces from Rhodes, some of which have contexts, are presumably all of the last quarter of the sixth century, the Cyme krater hardly earlier than 500. There are also a number of small pots, competently potted but with decoration which dispiritedly imitates inferior Attic.3 Examples have been noted on Rhodes and at Berezan (Figure 16.1) and may well have been overlooked or ignored elsewhere. Youths in conversation groups are a stock formula, though sometimes they enact 1 leracles wrestling with the lion; or their place may be taken by an execrable panther. One would hardly expect work of this quality to be exported (although perhaps one expects too much of ancient taste) and the greater depravity of some Berezan examples may well indicate their manufacture there. Contexts from graves on Rhodes are of the last third ol the sixth century.

120

).

CHAPTER 17

CLAZOMENIAN

SARCOPHAGI

Where and when Greeks practised inhumation, collins ol tired day were sometimes used. These were usually simple, plain boxes, but at Clazomcnae there was for a time a fashion for versions with painted decoration of the rim and exceptionally other parts too;' the rim, of course, w.is ihe only part properly visible, when the coffin had been put in the gi.ive, ready for the luneral. Naturally this meant some enlargement ot die rim and, as decoration became more elaborate, there were some consequent changes in its proportions and shape. The clay is brownish and very coarse, like that ol tiles or architectural revetments. The outside of the box, which was not meant to be seen, was left rough and unpamted; the inside, which could be glimpsed, had some smoothing and was daubed with the dark paint, at least in the more developed series.2 l o r the rim or face, which was to have decoration, a better surface was needed and this was provided by a thick application ol a cream or yellowish slip. The decoration it sell was done m dark paint, presumably the same as that used for pots, but because ol the size ol the saicophagi it was difficult to keep the firing even and often the black has been oxidised to red. The hist stage in the development from plain to painted sarcophagi required a modest widening of the top ol the wall — H-1) cm is a usual diameter. The commonest decoration was ol broad wavy lines,1 doubled at the ends and single at the sides; but a meander ol simple type was sometimes prelerred, especially lor the ends, and there is also egg and dait, this perhaps only at the ends. Saicophagi ol this Monasnrakia type have turned up in great number, but they are very rarely exhibited or even acquired by museums. Ihe development from the Monastnakia model can be followed in the work of the Borelli painter, who was presumably its pioneer, lirst if a logical sequence is justified for so lew examples — rectangular projections were inserted at the inner corners of the face with a narrow band of ornament running across to frame the end fields, but the rest ol the decoration remained of Monastirakia type: these projections, incidentally, had no structural or practical value and their purpose must have been aesthetic. The next innovation was momentous, the introduction ol figure decoration for the fields at the ends, that is the head and lool of the sarcophagus, and these fields were deepened to give them more importance, as to

^^^

, _ - . ' <e~a^

«|&

|«n

JHB

JI^B

Jfl

( Ui/ o»i cruan sarcophagi

—•

i..r,

i

(b)

ligure 17.1 122

— (Aa/onu

man

Sin lofhiigi

—

a lessei extent wcic the fields ol the sides At lust, d lic.ul ,md foot fields both H.id ammils in icseivtng tcehnii|ue, these lulds weie of .ihout equal dimensions and the fate lemaincil iect.mgnl.ii Bin when human (lgines in a son ol black-figuie technique w u c intioduced into the head held, tins field was enlarged luithei and the lace k i . i m o liapc/oulal (1 iguie 17 2), a refinement that m a milder foim eventually Became usual foi saieophagi with only reserving decoiation Ilicic weie otlici impiovcnients too I oi the side fields the standitd dccoiation was now a L \l>le, noimally spiouting palmettes, and at eaih end a small panel was mttiposed to make a liansinon to the touier snips and the end fields I lit' edges too ol the late wt'it moie distinctly modelled and given then oi namem Uion Usually, d the sucophagus has only leseivmg dccoiation, the innti edge gets a meandti oi latci slug l/ke blobs, while the outei one is ltd plain, lot hl.itk rigmed s.ntophagi the lnsiele has a meandei or less oltcn egg ind ilut, and the outside egg and dait The only fuithei development was the elahoi xtion, eluelly on hi ick-/(gti;e SAttopUagt, of siibwcli.uy l>.mi sd)

topbttf>i

—

IN gioups o! IIULC, as m the leseivmg style, horn which the types ton .11 c taken A lew ol the lalei saicophagi expeument, not very successfully, with w h u may be called icd-liguie, though the giound is cream There aie also some laigc piolile heads, diawn summaiily in outline, which occasionally lill uppci 01 lowci panels, hoplttes, bearded men, youths and women aie u picsenttd 1 he Boitlh pamtei (l'iguic 17 1) looks the earliest of the hguie pamtcis Ilis icscivmg woik is in a fanly conventional Wild Goat style, which was still being used on potteiy, there aie in fact fragments of a bowl and lid detot ucd in his pecultai mannei s 1 hs black-figure too is substantially 1 ast (jictk 111 chai.ulci, lesemblmg most that of the Cl.i7omeni.in I'etnc painter I he liotelli paintei's rtseiving style, neat and manneied, is mildly attiactive, Ins bhck-figuie, manneied too, is lathei wooden The Ilanovei pamtei, a vounge'i contempoiai v, is heavy-handed, but innovative I hs leseiving animals suggest that he may not have been familial with any oitliodox veision o( the Wild Goat style and certainly not that of the Boielh pamtei, 111 his blaek-figuie, known only fiom a single saicophagus, theie aie East d i n k details, but Attic inlluenee is evident 'the Dennis painter in Ins 1>1 ick liguie woik is 1 elated to the Doielli pamtei - there is the same spaeiousmss and ailieulation of human bodies - but foi his leseiving animals he uses ddleient and moie degeneiate models A nunibei of othei liguied saicophagi aie appaiemly contempoiaiy with these pamteis, they 1 mge fiom skilful to incompetent I he •Mbeituumi painter (1'iguies 17 2 and 17 1), who lollowed, established a near monopoly foi figured saicophagi I le was ,\n accomplished diaughtsman, but gives me at least the r impiession that he was often boied with his woik His black figuie style eonuins some 1 ast d e c k elements, but owes much 11101c to Attic Poi leseiving animals lie ihew on the same source as the Dennis pamtei, Hut tidied them up 1 le also lncd Ins hand at led-hguie (01 rather wlnte-hguie, since leseivation was on the whitish slip), but did not pel severe, peihaps because the daik giound of the icd-liguie parts contiasted too starthngly • with the light giound ol the test of the lace l'oi the shape of his saicophagi he tended to a moic stiongly trapezoidal face, and theie aie a few moie eliboiale specimens, modelled on chests with panelled sides and with gabled lids lhe Ilopkinson panitei who followed had little talent and wisely simplified the deeoialion and - on piesent evidence - did not attempt blackfiguie, though some of the outlined heads 111 his side panels have a naive nieiit With Him the manufactuie of painted sarcophagi peteied out, though two 01 thiee ecccntiie pieces show a painter's 01 customer's nostalgia at the end ot the fitih centuiy Most of the known painted saicophagi have been found (11 the temtoiy o! ( la/omen le and theie aie a Tan iiumbei liom Smyrna and I cos'' None is lecoided liom 1 lythiae itscll, although a few turned up at Moulogan 126

1

4U*'-. C la/omciium

stino/ibtigi —

ON the east of the Mimas peninsula auoss the watei horn Cla/omenac. CM two specimens liom Ephesus one is of Monastuakia type, the othci has abeirant decoiation which suggests local inantil ictuie 1'ive sucophagi fiom lalysus and Camntis ON Rhodes aie all By ihc I lopkmson pamtei So too is the one from Acanthus on the noith coast ol the Aegean I'tntliei east theie arc OIK liom Galcpsos and loin liom Ahdeia, one of which is evidently by tlie AlHertinum pamtei the icst may have been made locally I rom Methymna on I eshos conies a piece ol the end of the Idlli centiny, unique and especially at that time unlikely to have been impoited At 1'ilane on the mainland five Monastnakia sircophagt Have been found, then decoialion is standaid, but the loimula is easy so that style is not a sine indication o( place of ongin 1 istly t h i n aie saicopHagi liom Saidis, decoiated in sometimes deviant veisions ol the Monastnakia style and leasonablv considered I ydian pioducts I Ins distnbution points to Cla/omenae as the home of the painted saicopliagi with a Ian dillusion into the imnudiatcly ad|oinmg tcmtoiies Moie distanl expoit was laie, as might he expected loi such heavy anil cumbeisome aitilacts - ,\n aveiage black-figuie saicophagus weighed about 9 cwt (4")0 kg) - but the finding places of the 1 lopkmson pamtei are puzzling, since only one ol his ceitam pioducts is at all likely to have been lound at Cla/omcnae, wheie piesumably lie had his tiaming, Hut wlielliei he lonlinucd to woi k theic oi tiavelled lonnd is a question that only city analysis lias much Hope ol answei ing In then home temtoiies the painted ( la/omemaii saicopliagi weie veiy laiely accompmied by giave olfeimgs, at leist dtnaHle ones, noi weie these a regular featuie elsewhcie 1 vulcntly a decoiated saiiophagus was consid cied to show siilficient lespect lor the dead and loi lamily honotii At Pilane a siicopliagus ol Monastnakia type contained a Cm intluan pot of the thud quartet ol the sixth century At 1 pliesus a piohablv local saicophagus with lesciving animals had in it a I ikelhua amphonskos of the late sixth century At" lalysus an Atlic lekylhos ol 470-60 was found in a saicophagus by the I Iopkinson pamtei At Galepsos the simple and piohably local saicophagus had m it a torn assigned lo the end ol the (ifth centiny So, unless moie contexts become available, one must lely on stylistic compansons and general piobabihties The Boielh pamtei, because of some similanty to the Petrie pamtei, should have been active aioinul the 510s anil, to judge by the ntimbei ol his suiviving saicopliagi anil the lack of development in his style, can haidly have begun much bcfoie S40 The Hanover and Dennis pamteis look lathei youngei I he Albertmiini paintei shows in occasional twisted poses anil piolile eyes that he was awaie ol innovations visible on some Attic woik ol the veiy mil ol the sixth centiny, most of his woik may He assigned piovisionally lo the lust thntv yeai s ol the lilth ccntui y The I lopkinson pamlei has a context ol the second quailei ol that eeiHuiy and some ol his panel heads suggist a sunilai date



>

CIIIAM'I R 20

GREY WARE AND BUCCHERO

(•'or lii ing their painted pottery the Greeks normally used a three-stage process. In the first, oxidising, stage the clay Hecamc Hrown and the paint a strong red; in the second, reducing, stage the blown turned giey and the red Black; in the third, re-oxidising, stage firing continued till the clay was again brown, but the denser paint still black. l o i Giey waie and Buechcio firing stopped at the second stage. In the East Greek legion such reduced waie was made regularly in Aeolis and in very much smaller quantity further south.

AI'OI.IAN CRF.Y WAR I' In what became Aeolis and iurlhei inland Giev ware had been m common use for cenluiies when the Greek settlers ai lived early in the Iron Age and the settlers, rather unusually, adopted the native practice. (It is, incidentally, because of this continuity that 'Grey ware' has more or less superseded 'Bucchero' as the name lor the Greek pioduu.) Not much is known about this Iron Age Aeolian Grey ware. In general it is not decorated aiul, where there is decoration, it is usually simple; finds are mostly ol fragments; exploration ol sites in Aeolis has been patchy; and with one exception publication ol major finds has so lai been pel lunctoi y.1 Grey ware has been found at various places on Lesbos anil, to |udge from excavation at Antissa,' was almost the only line ware there till the late sixth century, when Attic imports became appreciable; horn then on its popularity seems to have diminished, although production continued at least into the I lellenistie period. There is no good evidence that painted pottery was made on the island. O n the mainland Grey ware is widespread, but not (it appears) as dominant. At Troy, usettled about 700, it accounted for about two thuds of the pottery of the seventh and sixth centuries, 1 and it is reported from other sites in the Troad. At Pergamum it was still in use in the I lellenistie period, but there is not the evidence to determine its frequency.4 fragments have turned up at Myrina too, s but at 'L.irisa* (Buruncuk) a rich dump of dedications was more intoi mative:'' here Grey ware was as liequent as painted ware in the seventh century, but quantity and quality both fell olf in the sixth. There is a similar report on I'hocaea. Lastly, at Smyrna Grey waie was plentiful belore the seventh century, but "3 5

— Grey ware and Bucchero — alterwards disappeared. One would expect that there were distinct local versions, if not schools, of this Grey ware - it is hard to believe that 'Larisa' with its provincial Wild Goat style was not provincial in its Grey ware too, and differences in clay have been noted - but present knowledge is too slight to confirm this and description has to be general. The clay is as a rule fairly fine and fired a lightish grey; often the exposed : surface is polished or has a wash of finer clay. There is a full range of shapes, mostly of standard East Greek types, though they tend to be less precisely articulated than the painted wares. Decoration - on the comparatively few pieces that are decorated - is by incision or less often in relief and usually is sparse. For incision the staple is a wavy line or set of wavy lines; a few pieces, presumably of the eighth and seventh centuries, have big hatched meanders and smaller hatched triangles; and a pair of rather later sherds from Mytilene show economically drawn animals.7 Relief , decoration is known best at "Larisa', partly because the deposit there was of showy dedications, but it may also have been a South Aeolian speciality. Ridges and grooves and little bosses are commonest, but at 'Larisa' there are also elaborate designs with figures, moulded and sometimes reworked, and a few impressions from seals. Very little Aeolian Grey ware was exported, and perhaps mainly from Lesbos. Some has been found on Chios and Samos, on Thasos, and at Al Mina and Naucratis.8 From other sites odd pieces have been reported, but H identification is not always easy, since unpretentious Grey ware could be made locally, as for instance is claimed for Thasos and Histria.9 The Grey ware common in southern France was neither imported nor related to Aeolian, but an indigenous product.10 'RHODIAN' BUCCHERO There is also what is caHed 'Rhodian' Bucchero - 'Rhodian' because of finds ON Rhodes, then considered a major producer of East Greek pottery, and 'Bucchero' since it has no Bronze Age pedigree to induce a change of name. It is a very minor product, technically similar to Aeolian Grey ware but, to judge by distribution, made in the southern part of the East Greek region. In older studies the two are sometimes conflated. As a rule 'Rhodian' liucchero is, at least on its surface, considerably darker than Aeolian Grey ware. The principal shapes, modelled with some precision, are the aryballos, small and round, and the fusiform alabastron, often 20 cm long:" the aryballoi may be vertically ribbed, the alabastra usually have lines incised sparsely round the body. There are also some larger bucchero pots, mainly oinochoai and plates or stemmed dishes, which are sometimes decorated in white and purple with lotus buds and other simple motives;12 shapes and ornaments recall the Middle II Wild Goat style. These two i

136

— Cjrcy ware

ami

iiiiiibero

—

groups, the small plain pots and the larger decorated ones, may well come from different workshops. 'Rliodian' Buccherci is lound sporadically in the southern parts of the East Greek region and there was a little, although far-flung, export of the first group, alabastia in particular being relatively numerous in Sicily. Its floruit should be late seventh and early sixth century, contemporary roughly with Early and Middle Corinthian.

LIZ

C11AITIK 2 1

R E L I E F WARE

J „ 1 f j jl jj

* '

Relief waie, that is waie on winch lehef is the d o m i n a n t and not, as on some Geomcti ic p o t s (Liguie S 3 ) and a few cups of Little Mastei shape, a suhsidiaiy foi m of decoiation, is liable to turn u p at any time and place It v a m s widely m quality and ehaiaetci — ichcf is a technique and not a slyle - and in the d e c k woild did not become c o m m o n till the I Iellenistic pcuod the best k n o w n eaihei I ast Greek veision and the only one that can he studied salislactoiily is that ol the Rhodian Relief pithoi' ('pitlios' in tins context is a big neck amplioia) These, some m o r e than 2 meties high, weic made to sci vc as stoiage bins, but occasionally were reused for h u i y i n g t* clnldiui in, so that a few have survived more or less complete T h e y were made of coaise i l a y , foitilied with giog, the suiface was smoothed and sometimes slipped, and then coloui after filing was b l o w n to lcddish Difteienccs have been noted on Rhodes between those found at I mdos and ( m i n u s and lalysus, although it is perhaps excessive to talk of local schools » What look the eaihest members of the sei les come fiom L m d o s These include fiagmenls of other shapes besides the a m p h o i a and this is relatively small, nevei m u c h m o i e than a metie high and with its parts not cleaily defined 1 oi tlie next stage examples come fiom C a m n u s and lalysus too. by now the shape is sharply aiticulated, with a tall neck and elahoiate tieatmLNt ol the s u p p o t l s between it and the vertical handles In the third stage some of the tautness goes Since presumably these big pithoi were set against a wall and sunk to some d e p t h in the ground, it was normal, if decoration ' wis wanted, to icstiict it to the front of the neck and of the uppei pait of the body I he system followed was one of n a n o w bands of simple repeated motives, not vaiying much in depth and running horizontally on the body and in the mam vertically on the neck Execution was mostly by roller stamps with units of the design cut into them, but sometimes a punch was pieteiied and occasionally, especially for chevrons, free-hand modelling I he stock ol motives was limited Spuals of one sort or another were the favomius, theie aic simple zigzags with hooks projecting from their upper apices and stiaight lines fiom their lower ones, and a rough step pattern is not u n c o m m o n , but the meander is little used Figuies occur too, although allowed no m o r e importance than the ornaments and indeed, when in vertical bands, set sideways on Besides animals - sphinx, griffin, hoisc anef 138

Relief

U'dIV

bull - theie aie soldieis, war chanots and ilucls, sometimes with ccntauis and mildly notable for the double axe wielded By one ol the combatants (of human, of couise, not equine toim) In geneial the appeaiance of the ornaments is Geometnc or Eaily Oiientahsmg; so too with the figures, though a lew aie more advanced 'I licit" is vei y little stylistic connection with the painted pottei y of the legion, rat tic i mine with I ale Geometnc and SuHgeometiic metalwoik, where spnals aie familial Students have spoken of Mycenaean survivals, peihaps tashly, smce cuivilnieai ornament might have been leintroduced from the I'ast oi even been i cm vented Dating is less secure than might be expected foi objects ol which a do/en oi so Have contexts Unfoi tunately, as wcai and even icpaus show, some ol these pithoi weie old when lcquisilioncd foi Inuials, so that we have only a lowei limit foi then date I he stimps as well may have had a long lile and those used on one pithos need not all have been ol the same age To give a lough estimate, the fust Mage ol these lehel pithoi began peiliaps hetoie the end of the eighth centuiy, but llounshed in the eaily seventh; the second stage occupies the lest of tint centuiy, and the thud stage continued till neat the end of the sixth 'Iheie need be no doubt that these pithoi were made on Rhodes, and fiagments liom Daea (Datelia) on the Cnidian peninsula look as if they too tie Rhodian, whethei expoited liom Rhodes oi made locally by tiavelhng Rhodian pottei s It is said also that siiiiil.ii pithoi weie found at Smyrna, although the hagments published aie not vei y inloimative; 2 theie may well be moic linds liom othei I ast Gieek sues In Sicily a tiagmeni decoiated liom moulds ol Rhodian type turned up at Gela ' A very dilfeient iclief style appeals on liagmcnts lound on Chios M\L\ Th.isos. 4 Ileie loutciia oi peiinhanteila - shallow peilestalled bowls like fancy gaiden bird-baths - aie eommonei than pithoi, mil theie aie a lew pieces ol othei shapes, including sarcophagi I he style, much grander than that of the Rhodian pithoi, is that of the aichiteetuial tenacottas of their time, which in some instances evidently weie made in the same woikshops. 1 gg and dait, or eggs alone, aie especially fieqiient, and the occasional figuies aie of a standaul compaiable to tint of othci blanches of contempoiaiy ait None of these Cln.iii pieces looks e.nliei than the sixth centuiy Besides these laige oh)ects a few small pieces ol potteiy with icliel decoration have turned up here and theie in the I'ast d e c k icgion These look like copies of more expensive woik in metal, ivoiy oi wood Theie are also what aie called plastic vases, that is figmmes oi othei objects adapted for use as flasks, but these belong to figiiiincs s

'39

CHAPTER 22

FAIENCE

v,

; fi j :

What archaeologists misguidedly call 'faience' is a glazed frit, composed of natron and silica with a little fine clay as a binding agent. Faience, so defined, was an old speciality oi Egypt, though at times there was manufacture elsewhere loo. It had been made on Crete and the Greek mainland in the Middle and Late Bronze Age, but after that there was only very occasional import in the Aegean, till about the middle of the seventh century workshops were set up in the East Greek region and particularly, to judge by distribution, on Rhodes.1 Although its products travelled widely, the industry remained a very minor one. The common forms of this East Greek faience were figurines, pots, amulets and scarabs. They were small objects, the largest rarely more than 10 cm high or wide. The principal colour was green; yellow and dark brown c.ime next; and sometimes effective use was made of the whitish ground. Some figurines were moulded, others and the pots were modelled by hand. The quality varies Irom fine and meticulous to crudely negligent. i Production began with moulded containers, especially in the form of a figure kneeling in front of a jar. This series probably lasts till near the end of the seventh century (that is till the end of Early Corinthian). More or less contemporary is a series of straightforward little pots - pyxis with lid, long alabastron, pointed aryballos and miniature trefoil oinochoe, the first two of Oriental and the others of current Greek type. The decoration, kwhich is incised, favours a row or two of figures - lions and herbivores in familiar postures, sometimes with intrusive herdsmen - and in other - registers floral ornaments; the style is unassimilatedly Egyptian or Oriental •Egyptianising. As this first stage was ending, production turned to figurines, 'human and animal, generally crude in workmanship; their style too is 'Egyptianising, unmodified by contemporary Greek. These seem to have persisted till about the middle of the sixth century. Lastly, apparently in the second quarter of that century, spherical aryballoi appear and plastic pots, some imitating (not always accurately) East Greek terracotta types. The industry was dead by 500. The first workshops making East Greek faience were most probably on Rhodes. Whether it was ever made at other places in the region is not known, but after Greeks were established at Naucratis it is evident that manufacture flourished there too and in fact a faience workshop was discovered on the site. It is tempting to attribute to Naucratis those plastic 140

— Faience

—

pots tint show misunderstanding ol E.ist Greek details and the pieces with cartouches of Egyptian kings, But in distinguishing Rhodian and N.uicratite products students have still to rely on their preconceptions. Greek and also Oriental and true Egyptian faience was exported widely. It was popular in the West, including Carthage, and in the sixth century round the Black Sea too, but in mainland Greece it is hardly (mind except in frequented sanctuaries.

141

*V

. ^ ^ < * \ "TT7

•n

K> J U ^ ^ A * ^ v ^fa-PmJfa %/^F A*-* oft ^ *fcaf' C MAI1 I I R 2 3

ARCHAIC EAST GREEK TRADE AMPHORAS

INTRODUCTION Until not so long ago, the unsuitable appellation 'Ionian' amphoias was common I \ used to design ue a laige and heteiogcneous i ange ot containcis, oidy a pait ol which w u e actually maNiifactuied in I ast (jieece, the tenumdei oi igmating cithci lioin mainland d e c k centies (e £ 'SOS' series) oi liom Western Medilei 1 ancan colonial wot kshops (e g Tonian-Masiahote' seucs) I oday, actual pioducts liom last Greece are mort lestrictively icicnccl to by scholars as '1 ast Gieek' Ihcsc 1 asi dicck lianspoit amplioias, used foi foodstulfs such as wine, oh\c oil and, piobihly loo, pickled sei lood, have been found fiom the AulniL penod on wauls thiougliout the Meditei lanean countiies and cs.pi; cially iioiuul the Blick Si a the laltei aiea did in fact piovide the highest density ol linds and the most complete range of shapes, which can piohahly H he explained l>y us geogiaphical pioximity, a high density of settlements in close contact with tlicn mcliopolis aud a Husk, though seemingly ovcre'stinuled, ti ade with the natives It seems also that 1'gypt constituted anotliei pole ol atti action, Hut of lesser impoi lance 1 he rest of the niatenal . appois lalhei scallered, fiom 1 luelva to Mcsad Hasliavyahu, from foeia

'

' | J B

I

' J

to Aegina

It is thcicloie no accident thai the two pioneers who initiated the studying ol Aiehaie I ast Gieek contameis vveie both working on the Black Sea Maieelle I anibnno in the IV30s' anel especially Iieida /eest IN the i IVSOs ' I he nn|oi connihution ol Vuginia Grace ON Sainian amplioias did not appi.ii until a little lalei l Since that time, om knowletlge Has progiessed gieatly as a result e>f the 'recent excavations IN the Hlack Sea with the woik of the Histna expedition4 ,^and of the amphoiologieal school of the late Soviet Union,'' as well as in Itiuna,' 1 Sicily7 and immland Giecce (Athenian Agoia and Keiameikos, Aegina island) k One must also point to the new finds made in I ast Gieece piopei, at Cl i/omenae,'' at Miletus10 and on Samos " In the same way, lahoiatory analyses have contributed to solving some piovenaNce piohlems, and have led, unoug otliei icsulls, to the identification of Clazomenian and Milesian lypes ol conlameis u It lollowed thai, in spite of a complete lack ot any elaboiate epigiaphical stamping, the till then undiflci euliated bulk ol Archaic 'Ionian' amphoias >

t

142

—

Archaic

I ast

Chtik

ttaili

iiniffjoitii

—

could He split up into several distinct classes, icpicscuimg as many identilied, picsumed oi still undetci mined aieas ol p i o d u c t i o n We aie now able to distinguish C Hun, C l a / o m c n i i n , 1 esht.m, Milesian and Sannui senes, to be complemented - (oi icasons explained He-low - w i t h t l i u e Itntliei units of M i s '/eesl's classification hei tjpes 3 ('Saini in'), I S ( ' I ' l o l o l l n s i a n ' ) and IS ('1 h.isi.in uiele') n I h e i e is i stiong dispanty m (he disd i l w t i o n ol the last Gieek contameis in the d i t l e i c n l m.it kcis In l l i t Hl.it. k Sei, the y oliviously c onstilulc (lie ovciwhelinmg m.i|otity ol the finds, while llie impoiis t i o m Giecce (Atliens, C o i m l h ) aie leduccd to a lew licit logtncous putes " Inveiselv, in Weslein Mcchteiianean aicas, llie last Gieek | \ i s aie in a m m o i i t y in tlic I tec ol the competition ol Athens, ( o i m l h .\nc\ I l i u i i a , inel llien, l i o m the mid sixth centmy o n w i i d s , ol the western colonial Mile gioweis ('Ionian (VI issahote' sencs) In the same w i y , the lelative p i o p o i t i o n s ol llie chlleieiit pioducmg centics i c v c i l stiong elispaiilics foi instance, I N Sicily and 1 H u m , the so-called 'Sainian' i m p h o i is - actually Samian plus M i l e s t u i ones — repicsent SO to (>0 pel cent ol (he consignments l i m n Ionia, the impoits l i o m ( hios aie I N second pi lee, and those l i o m the olhei eenties lai Behind ls the situalion is chlfcient louiicl llie Mlack Sea, whcie (he C lnot pioducts (c 30 pel cent ol the whole) genei illy take the lead, though closely lollowed l>y those l i o m I eshos and iclaled scnes (., lowest band of the belly) and others around handle attachments, and a large | ^ ,

if

J

(j.

»

— Archaic East Check trade amphoras — The amphoras found in lururia are said to have been covered with 'colourless' slip, and an additional Hand of glaze encircles the foot. The Ukrainian specimens, seemingly of the same period, are slipped and bear additional decoration (band around the foot, X pattern crossing the neck, 'moustaches' slanting down from the lower attachments of handles). From the last quarter of the seventh century onwards, one already notices some slight tightening of the belly, which becomes ovoid, and of the neck, which is less massive than before41 (Figure 23.1b), Then, towards the end ol the century, a real mutation of the general profile begins in which it takes on a straighter and more slanting profile of the shoulder, ••and tins involves a noticeable lengthening of the handles (Figure 23.Id). The containers of that stage, contemporaneous with the Early Corinthian style, are also scattered around the Mediterranean12 and the Black Sea.43 The trend increases during the first half of the sixth century, the neck .gets more slender, the diameter of the belly and of the foot becomes smaller, and the total height increases (to about 70cm) (Figure 23.le and f). In the meantime, the fine, thick, cream-coloured slip degenerates into a thinner chalky-while wash, and the broad painted bands turn into thin ones. A good number of spindle-shaped specimens from Cyprus, Egypt44 and Sicily45 probably date Irom this period. The series finally comes to an end towards the end of the third quarter of the sixth century with specimens excessively elongated (up to 85-90 cm), by the extension of neck, belly and foot (Figure 23.lg). The distribution in Cyprus, Egypt46 and Sicily is the same as before, supplemented by a couple of finds at Thera and i Xanihos.47 We still know very little about the capacities of these containers: those of the oldest type were probably about 37-38 litres (supposedly corresponding to 12 hypothetical Chiot chocs); those of the most recent type were noticeably smaller, about 29 litres for a Cerveteri specimen, and a fractional jar found in Cyprus was even of only about 10 litres. Before ihe extinction ol the white-slipped series, a new range of ,• amphoras appears towards the end of the second quarter of the sixth century with a hist type (Figure 23.2a), attested from the Black Sea to the western • Mediterranean, of which the mam feature is a slender neck (height about 15 cm), constricted at the base, hence the Russian appellation of 'funnelnecked' amphoras;48. the belly is ovoid, and the foot deeply hollowed out. There is almost no longer any white slip and, of the former elaborate painted decoration, there survive only a single or double band around the shoulder (plus sometimes a single one around the lower part of the belly) and the rim band slightly overlapping onto the upper part of the neck. Moreover, ' the line of the handles slants inwards towards the base. The floruit of these 'funnel-necked' amphoras of Zeest's, alias Lambrino's Al type,49 is especially the third quarter of the sixth century, but their distribution seems to continue down to the years around 510 (Figure 23.2b). At the turn of the

.

^

'•*"

.

' '

' * •

•

.

•

•

\

•

1 4 8

*

frvf— wm



(•^

iwT

iW>

(iis

rtrt "^^»

%m* riflr^wi- Kim* H^'mH- ^ # Mm-

V

•/

— Aftbitii

f

I.ail

Cheek

Hade

amphorai

JL,

—

In a second stage (second third ol the sixtli century) the belly becomes more ovoid, the maximum diameter diminishes (down to c. 35 cm) and the loot Hares outwards (diameter 7-8 cm) as the Hollow beneath gets deeper. The neck is now about as broad as it is High, .ind the handles are set vertically ON ;i . ihe shoulder (Figure 23.3b). A few scattered pieces from Clazomenae, Olbia •'• and Patiasvs, tinlorttinately ill-dated, seem to belong to tins stage. Alter the middle of the sixth century, the proportions get more slender. K. The neck becomes higher than its width, and the ovoid profile ol the belly ? is moie elegant. The loot undergoes almost no change, but the handles are olten broader ih.w belore (Figure 23.3c). An almost complete vessel from lhe Eastern Nile delta, from a context contemporary with the Persian invasion ol 525, provides a landmark for the thud quarter ol the sixth century.''' Such specimens as Agora P. 24872, or that of the Bon Porte wreck (Cote i- d'Ay.ur, oil Saint Trope/.) still with a rounded belly, should date to about 520. The Mack Sea complete pieces (Olbia, Torikos etc.) are not so precisely ' dated by context. ' Then, by the end of the sixth and at the beginning of the fifth century, the general outline gets slimmer: the shoulder slopes down more steeply, the lower belly profile is more conical, and the foot narrower (diameter (>-£>.!> cm). The neck looks more slender, and the nm less prominent; the V , " longer handles slant slightly outwards from their base (Figure 23.3d). »•''• Among the characteristic examples of that period, mention should be jj »• made ol Agora P. 24871/° and ol another complete piece from the Sacred , !«•„ • i" Area in 1 listria,71 both dated by context; a further find from Salamis in '•

(neck

Dailc

amphoi

as —

oi ied-u>loiiied pots, on the otliei hand, the situation in mainland Aeolis - w h a t 1 csbos also li.u) .1 laige pciaea - does not seem to Have been very tlillcitnt Of tomse, I csbos levelled, it not piedominantly, at least in sutficient t)uaiitity, gicy amphoias piescniing the ehaiacteiistics mentioned above, wliii-H coultl suppoit the idea of a producing aiea either on the island .done, oi on the adjacent mainland, oi on both Anyway, the distribution of these contamcis thiougliout the Mediterranean and the Black Sea can only have come lioni a fust tank pioducei of wine and olive oil, as 1 esbos ceitamly was s s Solving this vexed pioblem of origin is all the moie impoitant m that these gicy amphoias aie in lact only the head of a laiger family, which includes anolhei sei ics ol containers i elated in shape (especially by then cylindrical Handles) but piesenlmg oxidised clays. This is the reason why, altei the woik of 1 /cest*'' and, more recently, of \\ Chnkenbeard, it became the habit to leserve I lie teim T esbian amphoras' foi the grey series, winch had also olhei pecuhat lties such as a um often flattened on top and slanting inwards, nelge below, and lower belly neatly truncated At the base As concerns the oxidised vaiunts, they are known under two thffeient names we owe the hist to '/test, who named them 'tumbler-bottomed' amphoias,''0 and the second one to Clmkenbeaid, who preleis the term 'liactional icd' '" Neithei of these teims is completely satisfactoi y the first one is a bit vague (the tianslation 'tumble)' peihaps does not make it cleai enough that thtie is no distinct foot, and the term is appiopnate only foi the pointed bottom of late Aichaic fctage); the second one, although moie tonvemeni, is inappiopnate, because the capacity standards of these containers do not always correspond to a fiaction of those of the giey seiies,'12 and also, because the clay colour does not always constitute a decisive tiitenon. Among then otliei distinctive features, the shape of

i!

I

I itii

the 11in diffeis bom that ol the grey specimens: it is lounded, and often beak-shaped in section Hut most of all, what diffeientiates the oxidised specimen is its foot, systematically much nattower than that of the grey I'one Nowadays, some Ukiainian specialists (I eipunskaia, Ruban) actually piclei to call them 'conical-fooled red-clay' amphoras'" I he origin of these Zeest's 'tumbler-bottomed' amphoras or Chnkcnbeaiel's 'liactional led' has already been the subject of sharp controveisy At fust, Zeest, basing her opinion on tepresentations of such containers on Attic led-figuied potteiy, suggested Athenian manufactuie, .m idea icvived m the seventies by V V Ruban, but at once refuted by I.B. Brasliinskn1'4 and, latei, by N A I eipunskaia '" Recently, a new hypothesis evolved Hy Chnktnbeard claimed that 'a type of amphora, with basically I tsbian leatuies did exist separately fiom the grey amphoras, and was being nuiuif.utured on I hasos, but that it piesumably carried Lesbian wine because ol the 1 esbian identifying chaiactenstics' " Ilowevei, if we admit that that sample was really a misbied piece - a fact which has not been 15S

rf- ibi(W ^ ^

{

m^^>

^ ^ ^

— /Irc/jrtfc

Last

^ ^ 1^

Tin 'T* *V

W*

>•>

— Arcban

Hint ijieek

trade ampboras —

MILESIAN AMPHORAS In her icview ol the Sanuan amphoras, Beside the above mentioned shape with thickened lim, iliicctly borrowed from Zeest's classification and supposedly constituting the Samian standard shape of the beginning of the fifth century, Viigmia Giace still distinguished what she thought to be a valiant with high lip, attested By a find from the sea, off Samos island.1"7

Figure 23.7 Milesian amphoras a Ovoid belly. Eaily type. End of the 7th—first quailci of the 6th ccntuiy b Ovoid belly. Middle type. Second—thiid quatlcrs of the 6th century t Bioad belly. Latei type. Thud quarter of the 6th century, d Ogiv.il belly. Later type. Second half of the 6th century c Ovoid belly. Later type. Second half of the 6th century I Gonii.d belly. Later type Second half of the 6th century g 'Table' .imphoia. Larly type. First half of the 6th century h 'Table' amphot.1. Later type. Second half of the 6th century

, ,

S

} • ,j ')

' i • '

. *

Figure 23.8 Milesian amphoras. Details of shapes a Early type. End of the 7th century b Standaid lype. Second-third quarters of the 6th century c St.ind.ud type. c. 560-500 d Standard type. Last quarter of the 6th century e Standaid type. First half of the 5th century I Variants of rims g Valiant model. Second half of the 6th century h Vaiiant with thickened lim. Last third of the 6th century i-m Foot profiles Figure 23.9 Samian and Milesian amphoras. Later types a Samian. Thiid quarter of the 6th century b Samian. Last quarter of the 6th century c Samian. First half of the 5th century d Milesian (high lip). First half of the 5th century e Milesian (thickened rim). Mid 5lh century f Milesian? (thickened lim). First half of the 5th century g Milesian (thickened lim). Mid 5th century 170

K riife^l

w

1^

u u

3

re r ^ bo

3=

]B

I >»
'

1 a*

also a variant with thicker, squarish rim (trapezoidal or parallelogram shaped in section) and massive toe, Hardly hollowed beneath21' (Figure 23.yi-g). The development continues until at least the beginning of the fourth century, to judge by two finds from Athens220 and Phanagoria,221 both Iroin late fifth century deposits, and another complete one from the sea ofl SainoS island,222 seemingly slightly later. Two other close specimens from Chersonesus,221 with conical belly and very high tapering neck, should logically represent a more advanced stage (first half of the fourth century?). As lor capacities, the scanty data at our disposal point to 33-34 litres tor two sixth century specimens from the sea off Samos22'* and from Novoalexandrovka (Rostov-on-Don district),225 and to 23.8 litres for a fifth century spindle-shaped container from Olbia.22'' Seemingly, some smaller sixth century related models, with broad ring-foot, squat belly partly glazed or with band decoration, which occurred too on several sites (Athens,227 Rhodes,228 Cerveteri229) may have been fractional containers rather than 'table' ampborctlcs of common pottery230 (Figure 23.7g-h). Such seems to be, in the present slate of research, the sequence of development of this main line of Milesian containers over the Archaic and Classical periods. Their morphological features - especially their High lip — generally distinguish them from their Sanuan counterparts reviewed above. Indeed such a distinction will last - not necessarily according to the same morphological features - at least into the Hellenistic period, to judge by the terms ol Xenon's papyrus no. 59015 (recto). Attention must be called to the fact that the continuous development of these Milesian containers with high lip from the end of the seventh to at least the mid filth century leads us to refute the new reconstruction put forward by V.V. Ruban,-11 where these high lipped models would have been succeeded towards 550 by new ones with thickened rim, corresponding to Zeest's 'Samian' and 'Protothasian' types. Moreover, the large variety ol synchronous differences observed within the range ol Milesian containers with high lip, concerning the clay (micaceous or not), the belly (ovoid, ogival or conical), the junction oi neck and shoulder (gorge, ridge or gutter folding) or the moulding system at the top ol the neck, points to the existence of several centres of manufacture presumably scattered all over Cana, each having developed its own version of the original shape, rather than the linear development of a single original shape. As usual, only some of these centres - presumably here the ones sealed in the vicinity of Miletus - did supply the exporting agricultural estates with then containers. Anyhow, differentiating between Milesian and Samian amphoras is far from obvious in every case. In Miletus itself, the amphora finds show a very large diversity, and thickened rims close to the Samian ones do occur too212 (Figure 23.8i). On the export markets, intermediate rim profiles are 176

4JA w»*!?f> Vfr~"T>^W rt^^h f> **» t>r*>

•+>

— Archaii

Emi ilreek

irtide atn/'hnytii —

also frequent, especially Irom the cud ol llu- sixth ccnlinv (inwards. In the course ol the lust Hall ol the lilili century, tlie- general development seems to have Hcen the same in both centres, the lypical spindle-shaped models ol tli.it period having inuch m coniinon except lor details. I here is obviously some kind ol South lom.ui amphoric kitiui', perhaps partly linked to the tact that Sanios also owned a penica on the continent north ol ('ape Mycale, and to the possible interaction with the local products ol other cities ol the Latminn Gull (lMiene?) about which we still know nothing. We arc actually not much belter informed about the Milesian ibimt and, as proved to be the case with painted pottery, Carian workshops of the hinterland COtlld very well have produced hybrid shapes. This problem ol individual discrimination between Mdcuis ami Sanios is all the more acute in that the spindle-shaped mid fifth century models h.ive already revealed a lew exceptional cases ol stamping. The most Famous is a single specimen from Olbia,'" the handle ol which Hears a circular anepigraphical stamp with an amphora representation that Ikasluiiskii has connected with the same device found ON some Samian coins, already referred to by V. Grace and 11. Maiiingly-'" The second type ol stamp is far from being unique, since a dozen are already reported from the Black Sea,-'"1 the Athenian Keraniejkos,-'11' Cyprus,- 1 " KgypCJM and, particularly, Palestine (seven specimens);-1'' it is rectangular anil bears the monogram upsilon-plii-alpha or alpha-phi upsilon, the meaning ol which is not yet explained. A p a r t from these lew exceptional s t a m p s , the o t h e r marks applied before firing are not particularly original: we .lie still laced with the same small s t a m p e d circles set in pairs o n the upper part ol the neck (I lislria, Phanagoria'10). A l t h o u g h their frequency there appears to be, on the whole, relatively small, the Black Sea, the 'Milesian l a k e ' , has proved to He ellcctivcly the main outlet lor these c o n t a i n e r s , especially the n o r t h - w e s t coast (I lisina, Berezan, O l b i a , lagorlyk). T w o reasons may be advanced to explain this fact: first, these a n i p h o r a s were very likely containers loi oil, a staple usually consumed m u c h m o r e sparingly than wine, and secondly, ilns Milesian category stilt r e m a i n s ill-identified by o u r ex-Soviet colleagues, despite s o m e clumsy recent advances by N . A . I c i p u n s k i i r " and V.V. Kuban.- Mi

In the Mediterranean, they arc especially attested on Cyprus (Kition, Marion, Snlamis) and in Sicily (Megara I lyblaea, Naxos, C'ani.irma) but occur almost everywhere else as well: in I tiuiia (Giavisca, Regisvilla . . . ), on 1'ithekoussai, al the Athenian Agora, Acgina, I heia. In East Greece proper, except in then homeland - Milcius-Didynia region and C.arui — they seem to He quite rare on S.unos,-'" in North Ionia and on Chios. Inversely, several complete specimens occurred in Rhodian cemeteries (l.indos, lalysus).

>77

— /ln/;d;c Last Greek trade ampboras —

ZEEST'S 'SAMIAN' AND TROTOTHASIAN' AMPHORAS We decided tentatively to tieat Zeest's 'Samian' containers separately from the Sami.in ones pioper, because, on the one hand, of the doubts hanging ovei then genuine Samian origin and, on the other hand, of then obvious relationship with the 'Protothasian' models of the same scholar. As alieady pointed out ahove, this 'Samian' type of Zeest's244 (Figure 23.10a-d), lefening to ovoid-bellied vessels, with cylindrical neck, protruding cornice-shaped rim (Figure 23.12J), and ring-foot bevelled at its base (Figuic 23.12c—j), does Not really fit with the local pattern of S.unos.24'' In spite of a certain resemblance in the general outlines, their type of nm and, tor some of them, their double-bevelled foot, are still un.ittested on the island. Moreovei, we Have seen that the lineage of Samian containers may have developed in a different way from that in Gi ace's reconstruction, within which '/cost's 'Samian' type corresponded only to an intermediate stage around 500. M

'.

I

f-g

Figure 23.10 Zecst's 'Samian' amphoras a-d Staudaid types. Second hall of the 6th century e Pithoid valiant. Last qu.itter of the 6th century (?) liiiermedi.il y types between Zeest's 'Samian' and 'Protothasian'

' '

Figure 23.11 '/cost's 'Protothasian' amphoras ,\ L.iige model with ogiv.il belly. End of the 6th-

'

lirsi

i] i

©

*r

la

M

I\ 3

—— .*:

)

f'

'

— A> t.hitu

I > *• I i •

.i, *' g r'

I list

(J) eek

trade

amphora*

—

1 nvci scly, nioi phologieal li inn cs such as die pi oti tiding eoi ince-i 1111 and the double hevcllid loot ait loimd, .done 01 in Association, ON smaller \ Lssi Is with nun c 01 less t ipci mg conical helly, icfci i ed to as 'Piotolliasian' In / t e s t ' 1 7 (I igtnc 21 I k g), w h o based Hei assumption fust of all on the <J \\ appeaiance mil on the special piofilc of the foot, iclaled to that of the I hasian containers of the louitli centuiy l'urthei suppoiting evidence has been le'ecntly piovided by the new finds made on 1 hasos 248 and at AHdiia, 1 '' 1 both ilanng to the- fnsi Half of tlie fifth centuiy 1 m all these icasons, it seems bettei today to considei '/eest's 'Sanuan' M\t loittntously toi insunce, a ligaltne delta-alpha, which occuis Both in the lomi of laige post liinig ili/'inti on the sliouldei ol two 'Piotothasian' vessels,2"2 and in a single instance, as a gtajjito, on a 'Samian' one " " As foi the pre-firing maiks, ihcy seem ol lessci inteiest, Being limited to the well known small cucle, single oi multiple, painted on the top ot the neck, and, on one of the 'Piotothasian' senes, icpeated on the sliouldei2811 (I iguic 23 Ifg) I he capacity slandaid ol /.cost's 'Samian' type was c. 24—25 litres, with a simlki model of 12 lilies oi so (1 lgme 23 10b), and peihaps too a "table' model SS AS loi the 'Piotothasian' contameis, they seem to couespond to two li iclional slandaids, one ol c 17-IV hues, the olhei of < 8-11 hues {i c ven close to the smallei 'S.imiiu' one) Moieovei, a laiger standaid, i supposedly a little ovei 30 htics, is likely to be found m a tall shape (height '" t (>Vli8 em), wall ogival belly (max diametei t 38-41 cm), piesent in Pantie ipeum s '' uul, mostly, in Milcltis,2117 dated to the beginning of the lihh eeniuiv (I igmc 23 I la) Anothei tall specimen horn the Athenian Kciamukos' s s (height 61 cm), but with conical Belly, lepiesenls peihaps an intciiikdiatc smidaid \ little ovei 20 hues (I iguie 23 l i b ) I o sum up, one cannot lad to lemam pu/zled by the lalhei late emeigence "* ((. nel ol the second quailti ot the sixth centuiy) ol this 'Samian'u'l'ioiotliasian' lineage ol containeis, eompaied with the olliei tategones of °Aiih.iie I asi (iieik tiaele amplioias. less onmceount of the chionological gap t% pi ope i, (lian because ol i lice ounce lion wilb tlieeaily lange of Gi ace's Samian | _ eoniaineis, |usl covei ing the lust pail ol the sixth centui y All things consul 5 eied, linlhti investigations - both typological and laboiatoiy ones - aie

(

tugenllv icc|uucd

'

, *

'

t ' ,

?, |

t

I

i j * '

_

} '

Zhl'ST'S "1IIASIAN C1RCLL'

l o i the s u n c icisons as loi ihe pieeeding '1'iototliasian' seues, the speeinu'iis that we aic now giouping undei the label 'Tliasian ciiele' aie to be set apait IIOIII the genuine Ionian eoniaineis We aie again indebted to Mis / i t s l ' s sagieity loi this appellation, which she used to desciiHe a senes ol shipes ol the C lassical penoel, ehfleiing liom the fifth eentuiy unstamped I liasnn sltndaid models, but yet close to them in some moiphologieal lcatuies - mmely a shai p n m scl olf by a gioove - and by the chiractei DI the cl.is v l Meanwhile, new evidence has appealed, which allows us to li ace them Hack to the Aichaic penod Until iccciitlv indeed, the possibility of precuisois to tins pen I II.IM.II] i uige ol pioduels had been only i.uiliously envisaged I h e late Aichaic ICVLIS ol sivcial sites ol the N o i l l u m Black Sea - moie paiticulaily 186

*'

—

1

|

'

I

I I

' ' I '

Archaic

I ast

(iii'i'lc

liadv

am

/'hot

<Ti

—

I Itstua290 and Olbia-Ueiezair'" - h.ul loi a long time olfcred a good numbei ol ielated specimens, but, seemingly Because ol then lack ol homogeneity, the excavators weie puzzled and leluclant 10 consulci them as eailiei than the oklest I hasian stamped specimens (last quaitei of the fifth ccntuiv) identified by V Giace, oi those, tmstamped, ol /eest's oiigiual "I hasian cnclt' IN the meantime too, a Hold new hypothesis ol I 15 lii-tshmskn's Had thrown students into conlusion Hy shilling the giound data ol the piohlem This Soviet scholai suggested that the untie stamp on the handle of a fiagmentaiy amphoia, belonging to '/eest's 'THasian cnclc' and I omul in Olhia in a context of the end of the sixth oi lust hall ol the filth centuiy, was in fact Aeginetan.2'' Although at fust glance alti.ic.tivc, his aigument, based on numismatic compansons, is by no means suppoitcd by facts 1 ven il such shapes ate indeed not at all laic on Aegina,"" they aie lai liom forming the piedominant amphoric lacies theic ami, in .Miy else, it is haul to conceive what food-staples this island would have packaged in them for expoit, when many of the wines of I hi ace and Macedonia had at .w eaily date acquned a flatleung icputatiou -"'' I in thei moic, the tmlle design is by no means exclusive to Aegina, but appeals on piodticts horn othei ceuties, fust of all I hasos itsell 20'' finds ol which around the Mediterranean suggest a continuous development all through the lihh century. Compared to types A and 1$, the features ol type C are definitely more slender (height c. 59-64 cm; max. diameter c. 37-39 cm; ratio - diamelei :lieiglit - 0.62-O.M). 1 he neck is narrower and tapering upwards, with a liapc/oidal run (diameter c. 9-11 cm) no longer set oil by any groove. The broad bandies (c. 4.4 cm by 2.4 cm) bear the usual finger impression at either lower attachment and are longer Hecau.se of the steeper shoulder. The ovoid belly rests on

iSy

— Atcb,iic

I |

\x ('

j ,,

j i

t

* JT k

f

liasl

Greek

amphoras

—

an outward flaring loot (diameter c. 6-7 cm), sometimes ring-shaped, sometimes massive with a small depression beneath. The clay is buff, more orange near the centre, and micaceous. Available capacity data (Classical period only) point to 30 litres or so. It seems that the Archaic series starts at the beginning of the fifth century (Miletus, 507 Black Sea108) but really expands only from the second quarter onwards. 309 On the inside of these three types, traces of a daik, supposedly resinous coating have been frequently reported, so confirming their presumed use as wine containers." 0 Further supporting evidence lies in a very small number of anepigraphical stamps. These include the turtle mentioned above on an Olhian container of type A, which, as one now knows, is no longer an isolated find, and the double device (phiale? and spear-head?) applied at the top of a neck fragment from Histiia,' 11 seemingly from a jar of type C. Mention must be made loo of a third interesting stamp, also ciicular but much larger, the device of which - a heraldic eagle - is puzzling: it is attested both on Thasos, on complete containers related to Zeest's 'Samian' and 'Protothasian' types and considered as local products by the excavators,112 and in the Black Sea (Dnestr liman), 113 where it rather seems to be associated with vessels i elated to the 'Thasian circle', Zeest's so-called 'plain-bottomed' aniphoras. iM If .so, we would hereby have at our disposal a direct link between Zeest's 'Samian' and 'Protothasian' types and Her 'Thasian circle". ,i The I act that we are confronted with so diveise a range of shapes suggests some constellation of regional workshops wather than a single centre of manufacture and no doubt several distinct cities were in fact involved. Still, cjur local references icmain too incomplete to allow accurate attributions, even if some evidence already points in particular directions. So do, for our type A, the latei finds at Acanthus or, for the specimens with a rim set off by a double groove and a plain foot, the connection cited with the Classical models o! Mende. Inversely, if the new excavations on Thasos have indeed revealed a good number of fragmentary pieces from contexts of the first Half of the fifth century,""' their comparison with the late Archaic shapes of the 'Thasian ciicle* does not prove conclusive enough for the moment. The evidence now available would therefore rather point to Chalcidice and to die lower Strymon valley as the most probable home of the workshops of the 'Thasian circle', t.e. an area extending for a good part over the Thasian peraca. In any case, we are dealing with the products of a major wine region, the exports of which had a widespread, though still quantitatively small, distiibution as far as the Western Mediterranean as early as the end of the sixth ccntuiy. Most significant seems to be their appearance in the Black Sea, in association with the properly Ionian products, a fact seemingly connected with the close links between East Greece (especially Miletus and Chios) and the regions of Tin ace and Macedonia. 316

i f

trade

'90

i*

*»•'*'

c o '5b va

C/5

CQ

6 a.

u !-•

3

in

i NOTES

CHAPTER l: INTRODUCTION 1 A li.uuly collection in G. Huxley, The liarly Jonittns (London, 1'aber, 1986), noi.ible equally lor erudition and simple faith. 2 11ns Smyrna was at modern liayrakh, north of the Hellenistic and modern city. 3 Sumo students prefer much earlier dates for Politic colonies, relying on late traditions, hut the archaeological finds do not support them: see for instance A.J. Graham in J.-P. Dcscocudres (ed.), Creek Colonies and Native Populations (Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1990), 52-54 and contra J. Boardman, OJA 10 (1991), 387-90. Boaidman's explanation of the sherds supposedly from Histria (though discreditable to me) must, 1 think, be right.

;

CHAPTER 2: THE EVIDENCE

i I Sec chapter I, n.S. 2 Witli the exception ot A. Biliotti's campaign ol 1863-4, when lie kept a record and sent it with the finds to the British Museum. Ironically no use was made ol it until about 1950; the contexts had been thought unreliable, since they did not conform to the synchronisms then fashionable. 3 K..1-. Kinch, Vnmiiir, C. Blinknibcrg, Lindas I (Berlin, de Gruyter, 1931); G. |acopi, Clara Rboilai 3, 4, 6/7; L. l.aurenzi, Clara Rhodos 8; K.K Johansen, I'xocbi (Copenhagen, Munksgaard, 1958). 4 Jacopi, Clara R/iodos 6/7, 469-552. 5 L Morriconc, ASA 56 (1982), 9-427. 6 W. Technau, AM 54 (1929), 6-64; R. F.ilmann, AM 58 (1933), 47-145; H. Walter, Samos 5; L. Walter-Karydi, Sttinos 6.1. 7 J. BochLui, Am iomschen uncl ittliiscbcn Nckrapolcn (Leipzig, Teubner, 1898), which incidentally is the first publication of Last Greek contexts. 8 J Boanlinan, Creek i.itiporio. 9 W. Lamb, USA 35 (1934-5), 138-63.

10 A.A. l.cuius, Archaic Pottery of Chios (Oxlord, Oxford Univ. Com. lor Archaeology, 1991). 11 W. Lamb, HSA 32 (1931-2), 41-61. Cf. JUS 52 (1932), 1-12 for sherds mainly from Mciliymna. 12 J. Bochlau and K. Schefold, Lansa am Hermos 3 (Berlin, de Gruyter, 1942). Unfortunately the finds from Assos are unhelpful, although published with exemplary promptness, in Asia Minor Stmlien 5, 10, 21 (1992, 1993, 1996). 13 J.K. Anderson, USA 53-54 (1958-9), 138-51; Emporio, 152-81; J.M. Cook, HSA 60 (1965), 114-53. More Atlic Black-figure lias now been published by Y. TunaNorling, 1st. i'orsth. 41 (1995), [hough she did not have access to the contexts. She also published the Attic Black-figure from Pitane, with the same restriction.

— Notes

—

14 Most DI the finds from G.P. Oikononios's campaigns ol 1921-2 w n t abandoned and lost; M.-C T/.inuis has studied tlie records .mil surviving material from the c e m e t e r y . H e r results await publication hy ilic authorities in A t h e n s .

15 Enough at tlicni arc published in R.M. Cook, (l.izowoiiiui Zabern, 1981). 16 In lit. Mill.

Sanop/Mgi (Mainz,

17 A few illustrations in ASA 39/40 (1961-2), 5 0 5 - 7 1 ; 47/48 ( ! % 9 - 7 0 ) , 4 6 1 - 5 3 2 . 18 A c c o r d i n g t o T u r k i s h archaeologists (J. boys.il in II. U. Cain (•"( il/. (ctl-), Festschrift f&r N. Hitnmelmann [ M a i n z , Z a b c r n , 1989), 81 n.l) t h e cemetery was at Darnlibogaz near Milas (Mylasa), t h o u g b nearer Bccin, which might h i v e hcen the- original site of Mylasa (J.M. C i i o k , USA 56 | I 9 6 I | , 98 101). I assume thai lliis c e m c l c i y is [he s o u r c e ol virtually all ihe complete Carian MHI genuinely Last G r e e k pots of tlic period from tin 1 mid seventh to the laic sixth c e n t u r y that have c o m e on die m a r k e t since t h e late 1960s. S o m e reference*, in H A . I l e m e l i i j k , BABesch. (.2 (1987), 33 n.l a n d in An.iloli.i 21 (1987), 74 n.H, .\nd in OJA 12 (1993) 109-15. 19 C.I I. G r e c n e w a l t , CSCA

3 (1970), 5 5 - 8 9 ; 6 (1973), 9 1 - 1 2 2 . Also r c p o i i s in

BASOR. 20 E. Walter-Karydi, Ait-Agina 2.1 (M.iin/, / i i m i , l9(->2), 9-18; 1). Williams, AA 1983, 155-86. 21 M. Robertson, JHS 60 (1940), 2 - 2 1 . 22 Ci. Biichner and I). R i d g w a y , Pitbekonssm I (Rome, lirctschncider, 1995), pi. 126-7. 23 L. Gh.ili Kahil, Etudes Thasicnnes*7 (Paris, d e Hoecanl, 1966), also I1. S.iKiat in

24

25

26 27 28

29

Lei C 'eramiquei 'Ic lit Grccc dc I'Est el tew diffusion en I'tii'ddeM (I'ans, C!NKS, 1978), 87-92. P. Alcxandiescu, Unhid 4 (Bueuresti, Acacl. Rep. Soc. Rom., 1978); S. nimitriu, Histria 2 (1966); M.I-'. Lambrino, Les Vasesarchahfuei d'tiistria (Huc.irest, lund. Keg. Carol 1, 1938). V. Y. * Skudnova, JI\llV(llt(Vil, .Soy. I / W I Ark. fltlf* 1 1957, ' .H i I128-39; ttfj—•' ' y II960, XMW, I153 . ' . ' " '67; "', II . I V l ) | l l ' l k l l l . l Ii n S. lioriskovskaya (cd.), Khnda2bestvcnnye l/.ttcliiit Anlichnyhh Mitslvnn' (St Petersburg, Iskusstvo, 1982), 6-35; V.N. Korpusova in S.I). Kiy/liitskii, KttftiiM Ndselenija Ol'vii ieeokrugi (Kiev, Academy ol Sciences ol Ukraine, 1987), 35-53. J. liiuiclnun ami J. t layes, Excavations at !<ji>~t< I and 2 (London, Thames and Hudson, 1966 and 1973). G.I'. Scluus, The extramural Sand tuny of Doncto and 1'i'rsepbtme at C.'yrcnc 2 (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Univ. M u s , 1985). Much ol n m various museum catalogues and special articles: foi .i list SCLM. Venn, Greek Painted Pottery from Namratn in Egyptian Museums (WiniMia Lake, Lisciihrauns, 1988), ix n.2-3. W.M.I"'. Pctric, Jann 2 (London, Irubnci, 1888), separately paginated section

'Dcfennch (TaJipanhes)";CV/4 British Museum 8 (1954), 57-60 ami plates passim. 30 J. Naveh, Israel Exploration journal 12 (1962), 89-113

31 P. Dupont, Hist'ia 5 (1973), 63-165; IXiu.i \7 (198.!), |9 43; hi. Milt. Heiliefl 31 (1986), 57—61. Also R.E. Jones, Greek and Cyprinl Pottery (Adieus, British School at Athens, 1986) - a more general study.

CHAPTER 3: CHRONOLOGY I For tlic system see R.M. Cook, duck- Painted Pottery (3rd edn) (London, Routledgc, 1997), 259-69; JHS 109(1989), 164-70. I'M

— Notes

—

2 The loundaiion dates given by l'scudo-Skymnos and Eusebius for H,\st Greek colonies .seem to me unreliable. 3 J.C. W.ildh.uim and J. Manners, AJA 101 (1997), 23-40: their conclusions arc based on a carclul examination ol destruction deposits at scvtr.il Palestinian sites ami scent incontrovertible. 4 Assuming that the Persian capture ot Sardis was in 547, which cannot be more than a year or so out. 5 O H . Kalctscli, Historic! 7 (1958), 1-47. He suggests 607 for the beginning of Alyattes' reign. This is, .is it happens, near the 604 of the Parian Chronicle and the 609 of Kuscbius, though neither of these sources is especially trustworthy. Sec also A. Fuitw.iugler, AM 96 (1981), 127-33, a judicious survey; and A.J. Spalinger, JAOS 98 (1978), 400-9, where the death of Gyges is put in 644. It is woitli noting that, though 1 lerodotus's dates are rejected, his account of events is 11m. , 6 |.M. Cook, USA 53/54 (1958-9), 25-27; J.K.. Anderson, ib., 143-8; J.M. Cook, !| USA 80 (1985), 25-28. 7 l k l t i, 95.

8 Conk (1985), above n.6, 28. 9 C.I I. Greencwalt ct less Greek style {AJA 74 11970), pi. 43.17.

, '

l:

CHAPTER 8: THE WILD GOAT STYLE There arc two important general studies. C. Kardara, Rodiaki Angeiographia (Athens, Estia, 1966) with useful lists of workshops and many illustrations (review in Gnomon 37 [I965J, 502-7); and W. Schiering, Werkstdtten Orientalisincndcr Keramik an) Rhodos (Berlin, Gebr. Mann, 1957), helpful especially on shapes, launa and ornaments. For grave groups on Rhodes and Nisyros see Clara Rhodos 3, 4, 6/7 anil 8. Por illustrations of iinds on Samos and much other material Samos 5 and 6.1 are invaluable. The last important use was by Kardara. Used by Schiering, Walter, W.dter-Karydi and Akurgal. For the first version A. Runipf, JdJ 48 (1933), 61 n.l 1, 69-83; for the second Schienng, above n.l. Some Iiarly pieces arc listed here, according to place of finding. Rhodes: Brussels A I960, oinochoe (CVA Bruxulles 3, pi. 104.6; Schiering, pi. ' 3.1, 12.1; Samos 5, pi. 90; detail here Figure 8.2). Rhodes, oinochoe (Clara Rhodos 10, 187-99, fig. 1-4; Samos 5, pi. 87-88 no.492; Schiering, pi. 16.1; Kardara, fig.6). Louvre S 1708, oinochoe (Schiering, pi. 3.2; Kardara, fig.34). Laon 37.786 {Mcdanh. Suppl. 1 [1990), 55-6. pi. 9.2; detail here Figure 8.4) Samos: Samos, fragments {Samot-5, pi. 57-59 - except no.350; pi. 64.369 and 65.371 - both aberrant; pi. 66-68.377). Miletus: Miletus, fragments (/if. Mitt. 9-10 [1959-60], pi. 80.2; 2I[I971], pi. 36; 23/24 11973-4J pi. 26.80; pi. 28 - some of these sherds should be Early). 196

p l * M f wm^D mm-iwm mm^wm:

—

Notes

—

Mylasa (probably):

6

7 8 9 10 11

12 13 14

15 16

17 18 19

20 21 22

23 24

IJoclmin S 9K5, oinochoc [Alltiken atti rbeiniscbem Privatbesilz (Bonn, I labclt, 1973, pi. I%j lure l ; igure 8.3). Calymnoi (perhaps): St. Petersburg, fragment (l.Kopojkmn, Soul/, linn 37 [ IV73), 36-40, tig.2). The l-.iily Wild Goat style, as defined here, corresponds more o r less lo Kard.ua's 'Orientalising Rhoilian style' and Sclnei ing's ' I-i iilnn icntalisici ciidcr Sill. A convenient batch of illustrations is in Samw 5, pi. 91-97, 100-10 (no.525 looks Early), 112-13. Middle 1 corresponds roughly to Kaidara's 'Later Orientalising Rhodian siyle' plus her Arkadea school; slie also provides a good number ot illustrations. JUS 60 (1940), pi. le. Vroulia, fig. 102. Sarnos 5, pi. 105-10. JUS 60 (1940), pi. I m, n, p-r. N.A. Onajko, Anticnyj Import v Pndneprov'e i I'obn/.'e v Vll-V vekith do n.e. (Moscow, Nauka, 1966), pi. 1-2; E. Bclin de Uallu, Olbia (Leiden, Hull, 1972), pi. 25.1-2. Incidentally the goose has been identified - nghily or wrongly - as the Nile goose and llie goat as caper negngnis. Above, n . l l . K. Brown, Jbe Question oj Near Eastern textile Decoration of the Early lint Millennium BC tis a source for Greek Vast' Piunting oj the < Orientalising Si yle (Ann Arbor, U.M.I., 1989); she argues reasonably thai Near Eastern textiles had no effect on the annuals ot the^Greek Orientalising style. JUS 60 (1940), pi. la-j, m, n; 2d, e, j-p, i. Onajko, above, n . l l , pi. 1-3, I lie Si Petersburg oiimchoe (Figure 8.5) is also horn a native settlement; it was lound at Tctnir Cora near Kerch in the Crimea. These and several other pieces from native sites are earlier than any certain finds from the Greek colonies round the Black Sea, except for a fragmentary oinochoc from Berczan (Korpusova, chapter 2, n.25, (i^. 14): trade evidently began before settlement (on mistaken objections see J. Board man, OJA 10 (1991), 387-90). Waller-Karydi, chapter 2, n.20, 11-12, pi. 3. /:.g. 1st. Mitt. 31 (1986), pi. 4; it also has a hatched meander, set diagonally. R.K. Jones concluded from Ins analyses ol Elie clay ill Middle 1 sherds from Al Mina that they were not Chian, Sainiau, Rhodian, 'North Ionian' or Milesian (Greek and Cypriot Pottery [Athens, British School .it Allans, 1986], 696-8 and also 667: Ins reference groups ol local clays were, however, less complete than he would have liked. Representative batches ol illustrations in Samos 6.1, pi. 62-65, 73-75, 77-80 (except no.673); anil Samos 5, pi. 120-2. 602-7. Relcrences for these sites can be lound in Chapter 2. C.H. Grecnewalt jr, CSCA 6 (1973), 91-122, describes and illustrates a number of specimens, l b s suggestion that they may be l.ydian seems unlikely because of the purity ol their style and the matching ol then clay with that horn a deposit near Lpliesus (Dupont, 29 n.23). That Hphesus was not an important produce! of fine pottery in the Archaic period is suggested strongly by the finds made there (A. Gasser, BC1I Suppl. 23 |1992), 189-93). Dupont, 35-6. l i e tells me that he is now less certain that the composition ot the clay could not be Aeolian. For a limited leasseition ol manufacture at Naucratis see chapter 9.

•97

«•_

MM

tmm wmm.

— Notes —

| ti,

25 Curiously the chief sponsor of the form 'Cluan' also sponsors some manufacture at Njucralis, though at least lor the products of potters expatriated from Chios, 'Chiot' might He more appropiiatc. 26 A.A. Lemos, Archaic Pottery of Chios (Oxford, Oxford University Committee for Archaeology, 1991) gives a detailed, very fully illustrated account; hut Uoard man's Empurto, which does more than report his excavation, remains important.

p-

27 Sec Emporw.

!

28 29 30 31

,

32 33 34 35 36 37 38

j • • f !«• j " I'

39 40 41 **

J. Hayes, chapter 2, n.26, 37-63. J . M . C o o k , USA 60 (1965), 141. Lemos, above, n.26, 182-3. I.cmos's identification of three pieces as of Early W i l d G o a t style (ahove, n.26, 64-67) n o w seems t o me mistaken, though I once upheld it f o r t w o of them: tor her no.2 the addition of another fragment suggests a much later date and the other t w o arc not diagnostic enough. Emporio, no.634, f i g . 9 9 - I O I , p i . 53-54; Lemos, above, n.26, p i . 42-45. Alt-Smyrna I, p i . B, C , 38-39; Samos 5, p i . 124, no.612. Lemos (above, n.26, 11 n.35) thinks it n o t C h i a n . Lemos, above, n.26, p i . 24-25 ( M i d d l e I I ) , 178-9, 188-9 (Black-figure). O n Chian HIack-figurc see Chapter 9. D u p o n t , 25. Sec pp. 67-68. D u p o n t , 25-26, 31—33. W a l t e r - K a r y d i i n Santos 6.1 had already made a generally coirc.il localisation of the N o i t h Ionian W i l d Goat styles. See chapter 2, n.24 and 26-28. C/Virvi lihodos 3, grave 45; 6/7, grave 2. There may be more f r o m Pitane. What happened alter the sack is not yet clear. T h e first o p i n i o n was that the site was unoccupied f o r t w e n t y or t h i r t y years (E. A k u r g a l , Bayrakli, 65; J . M . C o o k , BSA 53/4 (1958-9), 31), but after renewed excavation immediate rcoccupation is asserted, t h o u g h at what rate is not made clear ( A k u r g a l . AltSmyrna 1, 72-75. V r o m what little 1 have seen I t h i n k there may be a gap i n the sequence of p o t t e r y , but not o f as much as t w e n t y years.

. / 42l$ill-Smyrna >. -. ,}

I

1, pi. 36c.

4^ £' g. il>., pi. 36b (carlyish), 40c; Bayrakli, pi. 1 Ib. The remarkably fine fragment • t from Daskylcion is a puzzle (E. Akurgal, Griechische und Romische Kunst in da Tiirkei |Munich, Mirmer, 1987], pi. 3a) 44 Sihicring, whose Vlastos group is rather wider than what is here called the Late Wild Goat style, is informative about shapes and the units of decoration, but reticent on stylistic associations. Kardara in her Transition and Mixed Technique styles has put together some groups of varying consistency, but is too logical in making Late pots without black-figure decoration earlier than those with. For illustrations the most useful conspectus is again Walter-Karydi's in Samos 6.1, pi. 105-15 (excluding 923, 930-1, 976 and perhaps 996).-

45 See p. 128. 46 Boehl.ni, chapter 2, n.7, 86-89. 47 A late Wild Goat style dish was found in a grave with a Late Corinthian ai yballos (Larisa 3 [chapter 2, n.12], 158 fig.66). Less helpful is a grave recorded by L. Kjellberg in 1902 {ib., 59, pi. 15.4 and 47.9), which contained a Trotocorintlnan alabastron and fragments of the same style'; but the definition of 'Protocol inthian' was not precisely the same then as it is now, and an alabastron is not likely to be earlier than the third quarter of the seventh century.

198

— Notes

—

48 M. Manyas (Akurgal) has set out the contexts of the dishes (but not the more distinctive amphoras) in a sadly unpublished dissertation (in Tuikish) for Ankara University. 49 Schefold in Larisa 3 (chapter 2, n.12) arranged the 'Larisa' finds in a generally convincing sequence, though I think Ins dating of the early groups too high. Walter-Karydi (AK Beili.7 (1970], 3-18) put together a moie orthodox group, which she assigned optimistically to l'hocaca, hut is too hold in her identification of other groups. There are other useful illustrations, especially of finds from Pitane, in Akuigal, above, n.43, pi. 3b, 4, lOd, 17, 21b, 102b, 103-5. 50 Smyrna (J.M. Cook, USA 80 [1985 ],28, pi. -She); found wiib an Attic fragment by the Heidelberg painter, which suggests a dale in the 560s or 550s). Nisyros (Clara Rhodos 6/7, 506-10, fig.34-35); the context looks about the middle of the first half of the sixth century. 51 A preliminary list in Walter-Karydi, above, n.49, 3-4: an e.uliei grouping in Kardara, 271-6. 52 See above, n.23. 53 Samos 6.1, pi. 134.1056; Kopejkina, above, n.5, fig.l-4 (fig.2 might be F.aily Wild Goat style). 54 Samos 6.1, pi. 137.1049-51, 1065, 1110. 55 This comprises Kardara's plates of her Later Orientalising style, her Group of the Gorgon plate, and her Nisyros and I lail Groups; for Schiering it is the liuplioibos group; and Walter-Karydi puts them in her 'Ostdoris' (in Samos 6.1). l o r illustrations see S.vnos 6.1, pi. 130, 131 (1044-5) 132-3, 134 (1045, 1069, 1075 - perhaps a Thasian imitation - and 1076), 135 (except 1060), 136 (1121), 137 (1073), 138 (1079, 1099, 1102), 139 (1094 is one of two eccentric pieces from Cuidos with a ship in the exergue), 140 (except 1057). 56 Samos 5, pi. 129.623; a light brown is used lor flesh and there is incision on f lector's shield device. 57 lb., pi. 130.626; incision on the skiit. 58 Samos 6.1, pi. 136.1 121; exceptionally the technique is black-hgiiie throughout. 59 E.g. Ergon 1968, fig.121-2. 60 Samos 6.1, pi. 134.1075. 61 lb., pi. 89.680. 62 lb., pi. 133.1077, 139.1117. 63 lb., pi. 135.1067, 139.1097. 64 Louvre A3O4 (CVA l.oHvre I, pi. 19.10): information fiom 1'. Dupont. See also Dupont, 29. 65 K. Schefold (/9

— Notes

—

69 /:'.j; Columbia 71.113 (W.G. Moon and E. Beige (eds), Creek Vase-painting in Midwestern Collections |Chicago, Art Institute of Chicago, 1980], no.11); Sydney 72.68 (A. Cainbitoglou (ed.), Classical Art in the Nicholson Museum [Mainz, ZabcrA, IVJ5J, pi. 17-18 - this paper was written in 1989 and some of my opinions have changed; Kassel Alg 52 (Gerckc, chapter 5, n.6, no.26). 70 Some notes on this painter in OJA 12 (1993), 109-15. 71 C.H. Greenewalt, CSCA 3 (1970), 55-89 and, for a tamer group with neater rilling ornament, CSCA 4 (1971), 153-80 and W. Schiering, Berliner Museen 18 (1968), 2-6. Sonic other pieces, not from the Sardis excavation, in K. Dielil, AA 1964, 593-8; Greenewalt, CSCA 1 (1968), 139-54. 72 Dupont, 36. ,73 O n the home of such imitations see pp. 89-90. 74 Duponi, 36 n.3H.

,

..

75 p. Salviat and N. Weill, liCtl 85 (1961), 98-122. 76 Ib., hg.ll-14. 77 ll>., lig.l-5, 8, 10, 17; Delos 10, pi. 14.72, 59 (inaccurate drawing); Vll Olympia Kcmbt (Berlin, dc Gruytcr, 1961), 188 (ig.102. 78 Salviat and Weill, above, n.75, fig.15-16; Delos 10, pi. 15. 79 Leinos, it may be noted, suggests Maroneia rather than Tliasos as the home of this version of Chian, but I do not know if she would make the same claim for the versions of the Wild Goat style and Attic Black-figure. 80 This date is rather lower than has been proposed (for references see Salviat and Weill, above, n.75, 121-2). 81 Lemos, above. i\.26, 209-22, pi. 226-34, 238-9 and in subsidiary use 222-5; and further HC.lI Suppl. 23 (1982), 157-73; F. Salviat in Let Ce'ramiqucs . . (chapter 2, n.23), 87-92, pi. 47-52. As place of manufacture Lemos prefers Maroneia, r which was a colony of Chios. Admittedly the common opinion, that this school is Tlusian, is based in part on the accident that the finds from Tliasos are numerous and known, and it is salutary to remember that for a similar reason Archaic Chian was once thought to have been made at Naucratis; but Thasos still seems to me likelier. 82 See chapter 9, 83 Much lias been written Oil the Swallow painter and illustrations are scattered: A.Giuliano, Jdl 78 (1963), 183-99 and AA 1967, 7-11; J.G.F. Mind, AA 1970, 131-5; W. Schiering, KA 1974, 3-14; A. Giuliano, Prospetuva 3 (1975), 4-8; N. Kunisch, Anltken aus Sammlung Funcke (Bochum, Ruhr-Universitat, 1972), no.54; Xenia 3 (1982), 12 fig.13; J.G. Szllagyi, St.Etr. 1984, 3-17; Pill' 246 (1989), 164 lig.1; M. I'.indolfini in Anheologia clella Tuscia 2 (Rome, CNR, 1986), pi. 46.1, wiih context. The dinos was on the London market in 1996. 84 P. Zalciropoulou, Ihovlemata tis Miliakis Angeiographias (Athens, Archaeological Society, 1985), a good and well illustrated study of 'Melian', although some of her dates seem to me too high.

CHAPTER 9: CHIAN: GRAND AND BLACK-FIGURE STYLES 1 Lemos, chapter 8, n.26, 94-118, pi. 92-112 and colour pi. 1-4 (except the tirst five pieces on pi. I and nos 470 anil perhaps 803 and 806 on pi. 4). 2 Leinos, 95, lists a few fragments of other shapes, but her nos 803, 805 and 806 seem to me doubtful attributions. 2OO

— Notes

—

3 This has been interpreted as a Dan.tut ctcnttMistnuitig iili.il utK'dicucc, as A|*ave ami I'cntheus and as ISM icisscinhling Osiiis, though not \ci as Jinlitli and 1 lolopheincs. 4 l i o m Kavala, on tlie DI.IIIII.UHI opposite Tliasos (I ciuos, nos 798, 804 and inure certainly die column krater shown on pi. 221-5). O n i hasian manutuiiuic see p. 68. 5 Chapter 8, n.56. 6 J. Boardman, USA 51 (1956), 55-62; further modilicd In |. ISoaulnian and C.E. Vapliopoulou-Richardson (eds), Chios (Oxloiil, Clarendon IVcss, 1986), 251-8. 7 R.M. Cook and A.G. Woodhcad, USA 47 (1952), 159-70, with a lisi of inscriptions: important corrections and additions by Bo.u ilni.tn, above, n.6 (l)oth items), and by 1). Williams, AA 1983, 155-86. A kanduios ill tins shape appeals on Figure 9.lh. 8 'Aiguptis' and 'Mikis' (or '-inikis'). 9 l.emos, chapter H, n.26, 133-52, pi. 161-92. 10 I'. Salviat in La Cent/nit/ua . . . (chapter 2, n.21), pi. 53; I.enios, chapter 8, n.26, 220, pi. 235-7 (pi. 231.1 is bastard in us black-figure). See also p. 68. 11 I.enios, 163-75, pi. 194-207. 12 l.cmos, 154-62, pi. 193; she calls it the tilack-ligurc Grand style. 13 1 am grateful to I LW. Catling and R.W.V. Catling lor eon tinning this observation. 14 li/npono, 168-9; Lcmos, 177-80 (she includes some doubtfully Cluan pieces).

CHAPTER 10: FIKELLURA 1 For a general account of the style USA 34 (1933-4), 1-98, now in pan superseded or revised by G.P. Schaus, USA 81 (1986), 251-95. l-'oi luller illustration see Homos 6.1, pi. 2, 4-14, 40, 68-72, 83-88 (the nssigninent to different places ol manufacture is brave, but mistaken); also CVA Ihttish Museum 8, pi, 568-81. References in this chapter are to USA 81 Joi ilie Altenbuii^ paintei ami die Painter ot the Running Salyi.s, to USA 34 tor the other groups (designated by a capital letter). 2 Louvre N2342 (Santos 6.1, pi. 65.537). 3 Though the upper part ol the shape is paralleled in Milesian trade aniplioias, which go back to the beginning ol the sixth cenluiy (Figure 2i.8c). 4 //'., [>l. 11 I - the liist six. 5 / / A , pi. 4-5. 6 /A., pi. 10. 7 Les Ciratnitfiit'S . . . (chapter 2, n.23), pi. 37.26 28 - unusually elaborate: USA 34 (1933-4), 58 lig.7 - lor the shape. 8 Delos 17, pi. 50. 9 Samos 6.1, pi. 68.550 and 88.640 (with fancier handles). 10 JO., pi. 88.642. 11 lb., pi. 40 and lig.27. 12 N . Kunisch, AA 1972, 553-67. 13 Schaus (above, n.l), 253 no.4, 270 (but I douln the Kiev example). 14 lb., 284; 1st. Mitt, 23-24 (1973-4), pi. 27.93 ami 25 (1975), pi. I 1.55: it looks as if these sherds join (Schaus, above, n.l, 289 n.l27). 15 Schaus (above, n.l), 270 anil 284. There is now a lid ol ,i dinos or kratei (1st. Mitt, 42 11992|, pi. 19.2). 16 A. Akersironi, Die Anf)itektonisj,he/i Tvrrakotten Kleiihisiens (Lund, Gleenip, 1966). 2OI

., pi. 47.424). 4 Dupont, 27 ,\m\ M. 5 The implication was seen by Scliaus (chapter 10, n.l, 292); but his suggestion that Samian painters of Little Mastei cups moved to Miletus and there founded the Fikellura style seems to me too complex.

CHAPTER 12: CLAZOMEN1AN BLACK-FIGURE 1 See Chapter 17. 2 USA 47 (1952), 123-52 - tentative classification and lists (without the finds from Smyrna); J.M. Cook, USA 60 (1965), I 14-53 (finds from Smyrna; more has been found since); CVA lititiih Museum 8, pi. 582-94 - for illustiations mostly of I'etrie and Urla groups; Santos 6.1, pi. I 13.923, 930-1 (Knmann gioup or near), 119.976 (miscellaneous), 127.919 and 965 (Tiibingen gioup), 128.934 (Petrie group), 935 (miscellaneous), 129.936-7 (miscellaneous); 1..V. Kopejkina, Soi>hsicni)a C7os. Enmtaza 1979, 7-25 - a selection of finds, mostly of the Knmanii group, from Berczan and Olbia. 3 I liese riders arc not Greek Godivas, as some have suggested. White is used in other Clazomcman groups for the flesh even of bearded men (Figure 12.8); and the protuberant shoulder is paralleled in undeniably male figures of this Pctrie group. 4 I lie kind of beard had appeared already in the Tubingen gioup (Figure 12.2, in the lower field of the neck). 5 So far as 1 know, there is no complete amphora of this ^ioup. Unfoitunatcly at Tell Defcnnch, whcic it seems likely that, when the pots were broken, the fragments were not dispersed, the excavators raiely kept shcids without substantial decoration on them. 6 These arc illustialed in CVA Ihitish Museum 8, pi. 590.20-21, 593.1, 590.17, 594.1 and I'Ali 1973, pi. 147a (also AR !>)7.}-74, 31-32 fig.60). 7 J.M. Cook, above, n.2, 122-8 - 'North Ionian Column Kratcrs' and 'Column Kraters of Lydian Class'. I know them only from this publication. 8 As pointed out by Kopejkina (above, n.2), the octopus appears on ainphoras of Knmann type as well as on askoi. I had once assigned these askoi to the Knipovitch group. (For knowledge and translation of Kopejkina's paper I am indebted to Dr J.G.F. Hind). 9 J.M. Cook, above, n.2, 134.

10 CVA Cambridge 2, pi. 498.1-6. II 12 13 14

For the sherd from the shoulder CVA linissch 3, pi. 106.5; AM 23 (1898), pi. 6. J. Bo.mlm.in,//ft" 78 (1958), 4-12. pi. 1. J.M. Cook, above, n.2, 136-7, fig.16, pi. 40.137. B. Kreu/er, Ituhe Zeitbner 1500-500 vt» (Jin, (Catalogue of Exhibition, I'leiburg i/Br., 1992), no.51; J. Bo.udman, I'be Greek's Oi'erseas (2ml cdn) (London, Thames and Hudson, 1980), fig. 164. 15 For example, Boardman, above, n.l2. 16 See chapter 15, n.4. 203

— Nutes —

CHAPTER 13: NORTHAMPTON AND CAMPANA GROUPS AND CAERETAN HYDRIAS

t,

•j •

B

I J

\\- , ;'

i'

1 I . H.innestad, I be Paris Painter (Copenhagen, Munksgaard, 1974) - esp. 30-31; and The Followers i>) the Paris Painter (Copenhagen, Munksgaard, 1976). 2 Study ol the Northampton group is patchy. The recognised four aniplioras arc all well illustrated and references to discussions listed in CVA Castle Ashby, pi. A .uul 1-3; CVA Mtmchen 6, pi. 297-300; E. Langlotz, Griecbiscbt Vasen in Wiiry.bmg, pi. 16-17. Some illustrations also in Samos 6.1, pi. 129.922—3. 3 lor the Campana group there is a useful general discussion hy F. Villard, Mori, 1'ial 43 (19-19), 33-57, and modification* and additions by R.M. Cook and J.M. I IciiK'Irijk in Jb lierlnier Mm. 5 (1963), 107-20; at least two more dinoi have come to light more recently (CVA Wiirv.burg I, pi. 26-28; J.P. Getty Mtis. J 12 (I9K4), 250). See also J.M. Ilcmchijk, Caeretan Hydnae (Mainz, Zabern, 1984), I«•>—7; and M. Manclh, I'rospettiva 27 (1981), 2-14, with a markedly different allocation to painters. A hydria and three dinoi are illustrated in Samos 6.1, pi. 127.977 and 128.954-6. 4 Cook ,\ni\ 1 Iciucli i|k, above n.3, fig.1-8. 5 G. Kicci, ASA 24/26 (1946-8), 49-57, pi. 3-6. 6 This was pointed out to me hy J. Boardman. 7 Thin is relevant lor the l'.nmann group and its relatives. 8 See above, n.3 and Boaidm.in, chapter 12, n.12, 9 - 1 1 .

9 Though a lew lUruscan Buixhcro kantharoi reached Berezan. 10 Reported by lioaidman, CVA Castle Asbby, p.2. II J.M. riemelrijk, Cavrctan flytlriae (Mainz, Zabern, 1984) - a detailed and excellently illustrated study.

CHAPTER 14: VROULIAN

t

'

|

,

I

'•'

I Vroulin, 168-88 wilh good illustration, simic of it in colour; Kinch's Class A is no* usually excluded. Also Samos 6.1, pi. 76. l!,.l, 2-> References, unlikely to be complete, in Vroulia, 185-8, supplemented in CVA British Museum 8, p.31 n.3-6. 3 Mersin - I.AAA 26 (1939-40), pi. 49.34; Sukas - G. Ploug, Sukas 2 (Copenhagen, Munksgaard, 1973), 73; Cyrenc - J. Boardman, USA 61 (1966), 152. Berezan is sometimes included as a finding place, but the fragments cited (Vroiitin, 182 mi.21) arc from a cup of Kinch's Class A, that is without incised decoration. The fragments from AmatluiS (J.P. Thalmann, AlARS 26 [1972], 158-60. pi. 15.6-9) aic not Vioulian as defined here, since they use while as well as purple 4 See chapter 15, n.4. 5 Chini Rhados 3, grave IV (fig.11-12); 8, Manuaro graves 19 and 42 (fig.123 and 148).

|

i \'

CHAPTER 15: SITULAS 1 Vronlia, 125-6 (with illustrations): in the reconstruction the handles should, 1 ilnnk, be more like ki^s. 2 Samot 5, pi. 115.591.

—

No I a

—

3 l ; oi the situ las ol Groups B and C see (..VA HntiJ/ Miucum 8, p.29—37, pi. 596-605.3, where most ot them are illustrated; to die lists ^ivcn there .uld a Group B situla in Philadelphia (Univ. Mm. Bulletin 6.1 IJM5J, pi 14 15) ami fragments of a Group C situla liom lalysus (A. di Vila, ASA 47 | 11>K5|, 368). Two examples of Group 15 are illustrated in Santos 6.1, pi. 135-6.1060 and 1061. 4 The demand lor fine Greek pottery at Tell Dctcnnch must have been relatively small, requiring only occasional supply, so thai choice was more than usually dependent on the taste or connections ol a particular supplier. So it is not surprising that the Clazonicman lound [here is mostly ol the i'ctrie and Urla groups, the products ol two or perhaps only one workshop. I lie Group C suulas too might have been a job lot. 5 Except possibly the fragmentary silula from laivsus (above n.3); I have not seen it and no illustration is published.

CHAPTER 16: LATH BLACK-HGURl1 CVA British Museum 8, pi. 606.1-2 and p.38 loi references. 2 Ik, pi. 595. 3 E. Kunze, AM 59 (1934), 119-20 with briet commentary ami a short list.

CHAPTER 17: CLAZOMENIAN SARCOPHAGI 1 R.M. Cook, Clitzomcnian Sarcophagi (M.iin/, Zabcni, I 981), copiously illustrated, but more have been found since: some errors are corrected ill lliis chapter Two studies, important especially for the simpler sarcophagi, arc expected soon M.-C. Tzannis on the excavation in the public cemetery ol Clazomenac by G. Oikonomos in 1921-2 and I. Baku on her recent excavation ot another part ol that cemetery. 2 I have no record about the inside ol the simpler sarcophagi, but tliink they were unpainted. 3 There is no need to interpret these wavy lines as chtliomc snakes; there was room enough for heads and tails 4 The latest and sanest of these studies is lh.it by l\. Knchiiei, Jill 102 (1987), I 19-61. for meaning in the reserving animals !•'. I lolschcr, Die lied cutting archaistber 1 lerkiunpjbildcr (Wur/burg, Trilisch, 1972), wnh which I disagree. 5 Discovered and identified by G. Baku, who also saw that there was a join with an obscure sherd in the Louvre, picked up at Gl.i/omcnae more than eighty years earlier. 6 At Teos besides the three examples recorded in publications there are, M. Uz kindly told me, fragments ot more than a dozen from near the temple ol Dionysus. 7 1 know of only two or three isolated exceptions - a krater from Cyme in Aeolis (chapter 16, n.2), a fragment of a big pilhos said to be from 87

Duponi (198.1), above n.5N, 25. I*. Duponi, PI' 204-207 (1982). 200, iig.4. Grate (IV6I), above ».S7, fi^.53. H. ClinkenHe.ird, 'Lesbian wine and storage ainphoias', Hcsperia 51 (1982), 252, nn.2y.-30. 88 Ibid., 254-256 (lesbian wine); Stheizer (1880), above n.3l, 114-115, 246 (Mylilcne's olive oil); I'ickendev (1922), above n.81, 19+ map (olive growing on I lie- mainland opposite Lesbos). 89 Zeesr (I960), above n.2, 72-73, pi. 11.7-8. •>o\/i»;ni ni'ibnem Ihmu (Leningrad, Naukt, 1980), 107 no. I, pi. 1, Vll (EU?.avctovskoe); S. Ju. Monakhov and li.N. Abiosunov, in Antichnyi mir i iirkbculogiiii (Saratov, Univ. Press, 1991), 122-123, pi. 1.3, t.ibl. pi. 15 (Chersom-sus). 215 N . I)i Sandro, A1ON, Arch. St. Ant. 3 (19X1), 7-8, lig.3.3. 216 B. Gr.uien, CCE 5 (1997), pi. ii tig.2.a (hclow). 217 Dupunt (1982), above n.12, 204-205 fi K .6-7. 218 Tuchelt (1963-64), above n.213, 53 no.51, lig.16 (nglu); T. Sch.vllner, AA I9H9, 2, 202 fig.85.l. 219 Monakhov-Abrosiinov (1993), above n.214, 122, pi. 1.4, pi. 15 Tabl. n.i.H (ChtTsonesiis); A.I. Meliukova, 'I'osclciiie N.idlim.uisUoc 111 n.i iK'rt'gu Dnestrovskogo Innana', in IssL'ttovittuiii ]>o tvilubnai iirkfot'oiogii }it\*i*-/tipiida Ukmmskoi SSR (Kiev, Naukova Dumk.l, 1980), 12, lig.3.fi (Natllmunskoe III, Dnestr estuary); the specimens mini Tell I'.l I Icrr belong n> a Liter stage ol development. 220 Grace (1971), above 11.3, 77-78, 76 flR.3.3 (Agor.i I'. 27530, plausibly connected w i t h ilic lower p a n ol belly I'. 27531) A . A . Z a v o i k i n , A W Arkh. ( 1 9 9 2 ^ 5, 44 fig.l.l ( w i l d hulluwcd foot), 50 l i g J J , Grace (1971), a b o v e n . 3 , 77, 94 n o . 9 , pi. 15.9. M o n a k h o v and A b r o s i m o v (1993), above n.2l I, 123, 111 p|. 2.5-6. G r a c e (1971), a b o v e n . 3 , 9 3 - 9 4 iu>.4, pi. 15.4. V K o r e n i s k o a n d S. L u k ' i a s h k o , .S/l (1982), >, 157, li^.S. B r a s h i n s k i i (1984), a b o v e n . 5 , 103 A p p . I, Tabl. 3 n,>. I. IS.A. Sparkca a n d L. T a l c o t t , The Athenian Agont 12 ( P r i n c e t o n , I b e A i n c r k a n S c h o o l of Classical S t u d i e s at A t h e n s , 1970), 189, 338 no.I 170(1'. 10752), pi. 62. 228 A. M a i m i , ASAA 6 - 7 ( 1 9 2 3 - 2 4 ) , 264 Ii;;. 164 (ccnire) (l.ilvso.s, rirsl li.il/ »l 6ih c e n t u r y ? ) , 285 fij;.l83 ( u p p e r n i w , i ) (l.ilysos, sii'COltd ball ol 6th n - i i l u i ) ) ; G . Jact>pi, in Clara Rbodia IV ( R h o d e s , I s t i t u l o SIOIIL'O A i c h e o l o j j i c o , 1931), 221 222 223 224 225 226 227

229 230

231 232 2ii 234 235

190 fig.198 (Camiros, Macri l.anguni, T. I.XXXIV, togelhei wiili an A n n polychrome phialc ot the end ol the 6th century), Rizzo (1990), above n.6, 69-70 iu>4, jiK.M, Fractional containers need to be taken into acount as well is standaul aniphoias. The greater part ol the oil shipment registered in the / c n o n papyrus 59015 (recto) (see above n.184) was carried in Milesian containers namely 459 kertlttIM and 115 hemikadia., i.e. a high proportion ol fractional containers. During ibv Archaic period, we may assume that the situation was approximately the same. Ruban (1991), above n.204. I am indebted to Prof. V. von Graevc (Boclnun Univ.) for permission to look through the finds in the excavation deposit. Brashinskii (1967), above n.214, 24 fin.4.1-2; «

w>

*\

,-trs

•>

»>

#>

«>

— Notes —

0

2U> U. Kniggc, A A 1975, 457 hg.4. 237 l i o i n Kiilon, uiipuHli.shed (inloiin.uion kindly piovided by I)r Y. Calvct, Mai.son de I'Oticni, I.yon Univ.).

'

v

•

, • k

f

2 IS | . ( I . Milne, (.'.,it. (l')')2), 3, 51 tig.4.2. 241 l.tipunskaia (1987), above n.5, 91, lin-32: 5 ('Aniplioras with funnel-shaped iiuuiilr, type 3), 95 ('Aniplioins will) ellipsoid rim', type I). 242 KiiUan (1991), above n.204, 182-195. 24 i The two specimens illusliated by Ciiace (1971), above n.3, pi. 15.4 anil 9, and t|iioted bv her as Samian linds, arc both Irom the sea off the island. 244 Zicsl (I960), above n.2, 70, pi. 1.3. 245 I owe tins inlot inalion to A. l ; urtwangler (Saarbiiicken Univ.), to whom I subjected a batch ot diawmgs representative of all Zeest's 'Samian' and

'1'iototliasian' types.

I \ • 'f

* *

I

;

:

' •* ' " t« i * , / h-j_'. ' '/

• \ •

l»tr. Ci.u-c (1971), above u.3, T\, li(;.2.4, pi. 15.3. 247 /ei'M (I960), above n.2, 79-80, pi. V.15a-b; Vl.l5v-g; sec also 107, pi. XXV. 5f.a b. 24S Ch. Koukouli - C'.liivsantliaki, AD 34 (1979) [1987], 1V2, pi. 142; cad., AD 35 | (IVS0) |I988|, l i ' 2, 419, pi. 249b-g (Thasos-Liinenas). 149 ('. I'eiisteii - ( ) l a t / i , 'Ampluiies ct timbres amphoiiques d' Abdcie', BCItl 1 Suppl. H (I9K6), 496, (ig.13-14. , 150 I-. Salvial, 'l.e vin dc Thasos. Ampliores.vin et sources ecritc", BCII Suppl. 13 (I9S6), US-196; id., Vigncs ct vins ancicns dc Maronee a Mende, Kcthcnbcs JiAimo-bi'lli'iiif/nci I, Mimni D. l.tr/.aridi (Thcssaloniki, F'lench School at Athens i ' and Kavala Auhaeologicil Museum, 1990), 457-476. J51 l'ensteri (1986), above n.249. 151 I I . (K-iicke, Cu-jtiisdMstclliingcn auf gncchisibcn Vasen (Heilin, Vcrlag B. llesslin^, I 970), 65-66, 67-68. A53 V. R. l i anke ,\\u\ M. I lit nier, Die (Inccbisibc Miinzc (Miinchen, Dinner Vei lag, I • !%!«), pi. 130 (lop Iclt). 25-1 Ibid., pi. 123 (lop Ich). 255 C. Kocblei, 'Dandling ol Creek ii.msport aniphoras', HCll Suppl. 13 (1986), 5«Hig.lO. ' 256 I'.l'.. Arias and M. Ilirmer, Die griccbische Vase (Miinchen, Dinner Vcrlag, I960), pi. 122-123 (Kleopluadcs Painter). inside sevci.il 'Samian' .specimens Irom Mesembria (Athenian Agora) (Bulgaria) 257 Kohcits (1986), above n.8, 65 nos 412-413. I noticed myself the same practice and on both Samian and Protothasian ones from Simagre (Colchis). Incidentally, the presence of rcsin-coating inside a storage-vessel is not always conclusive about a wine content: not so long ago in Portugal, oil-containers wcie similarly coaled (I owe this infoimation to M. Picon, Lahoratoirc de Cctamologic, Lyons). 258 l.eipiinskaia (1987), above n.5, 94 ('aniphoras of Protothasian type' [type 4]), 95, 97 ('Samian amplioias' [types 2-31; sec also A.W. Johnston (1990), above n.8, 47. 259 W. VoiKtl-inder (1981), above n. 10, 125 fig.14.2-3; id., (1982), above n. 10, 45 2lX

— Notes

260

261 262 263

264 265

266

267

—

fig.7.39, 47-49; 69 fig.27.167; 70 fig.28.172. The icl.itivcly sni.ill number of puhlished examples badly represents the true piopoitiou ot these matciials amon^ the hiuls stored m the excavation deposit. I'lsewhcrc in Ionia, the shape seems to he scarcely attested: J. de la (icnitie, ('ithicrs tic (.ADOS I (Paris, Kditions Recherche sur les civilisations, 1992), 47 lig.l I.! I l-l 12 (Clams) (Zecsl's 'Samian'); A.N. Tsaianopoulos, Horns 4 (1986), pi. 31.5 (Chios) /.rest's 'Piotothasian'); two necks of 'Prototliasian' containers aic also attested among the finds of Old Smyrna (I am indebted to R.M. Cook lor having placed at my disposal Ins late brother J.lvt. Cook's records on the amphoiic material of the site); in Clazomenae too, I noticed myself some ' Piolothasian' nm fragments among the surface finds. Possibly combined with some local imitations. On Milettis's special interest in I hrace in the late 6th century, I lerodotus, v, I I (Myt kuios J;I anted lo 1 itstiacus by Darius). Zeest (i960), above n. I, 70, pi. 1.3. l.a/arov (1973), above n.67, pi. VI.64, 66 68; VII.72; XXIV: 65, 68. Lambiino (1938), above n.l, 215 fig.173, 218 hg.180, 224 fig. 196b; Dimilriu, Zirra and Condtirachi (1954), above n.4, 175 fig. 150; Dimilriu (1966), above n.4, pi. 55.539; pi. 56.551-552, 554-556; seveial lurihei specimens came out in the Sacred Area and in the cboiii (Nuntasi, T.uivcule). Meliiikova (1980) above n.219, fig.3.2; S. B. Okliotnikov, Nixhncc Podncstrov'c v Vl-^vv. do N. I-. (Kiev, Naukova Dumka, 1990), 22 h'g.10.3, II. l.eipunskaia (1987), above n.5, 95, 97, lig..M.I-2; S.I). Ki y/liitskii, S.U. Buiskikh, A.V. Kurakov and V.M. Olreshko, Scl'skiii* oknigii OI'vit (Kiev, Naukova Dumka, 1989), 59 fig. 19.1-4 (Tiotoiliasian'); Rulun (1991), above n. 204, 185 fig.3.2-4 (Bere/an), 186 fig.4.4, 7, 9-15 (Keikusb), 187 fig.5.1-5 (Cheitovatoe II), 6-16, 18 (Chertovatoe Vll), 17 (Olhia) ('Samian' ,\m\ 'Piotothasian'); In. Kozub, Pcrctlmisttiti Ol'vii, Arkhcolngiiii (Kiev) 29 (1979), 23 I I J ; . I 7 . I - 2 (Olbia) ('Prototliasian'); numerous ollui unpublished specimens from the Olbia-Betezan region are stored in the I lei milage, in Kiev and Odessa. From Kutsevolovka (l)nepi i. bank), two complete pieces have been recently reported (N.M. Bokii and V.S. Ol'khovskii, «». Aik-b. (1994), 2, 155 fig.3.1). V.A. Kutaisov, Antkhnyi goroii KcrkbiiiiiLt VIII vv. do N /:'. (Kiev, Naukova Dumka, 1990), 36 fig. 12.4, 37 fig.13.23 (Ke.kinitis) ('.Samian'); V.I". Gaidukcvicli, MIA 25 (1952), 83 fig.104.3 (Tiritakc) ('Proiothasian'), 143 lig.16 (Mimickion) ('Prototliasian'); id., Mirmckii. Sovctskic raskopki v I1)id g. (ti)34-1956) (Warsaw, Nauka, 1959), = Sovctsko pul'ikic i-nko/'ki Mirmckua, vol. 2, 47 (Minnekion) ('Prototliasian'); A.P. Abramov - A.A. Maslennikov, 'Amfory V v. do N. ]•'. iz raskopok poseleniia iu Myse /.ink', S/l 1991.3, 235 fig.1.3 (Cape Ziuk) ('Samian'). A.P. Abramov and Ja.M. Paromov, 'Ranneaniichnye poselenii Tamanskogo poluostrova', in liosporskii Sburnik 2 (Moscow, Arkhc, 1993), 31-33, 40 fig.3.28-40 (Taman) ('Samian' and 'Prototliasian'); V S . Dolgorukov and A.B. Koleshnikov, Ross. AM. (1993), I, 122, 121 fig.8.10, II, 17 (Plianagoria) ('Samian'); Zeest (1960), above n. 2, pi. VI. 15v (Kepoi) ("Pi otothasian', fractional): numerous other specimens came out in recent excavations; II.M. Alckseeva, Grechcskaia kolomzatsua sevcro-ziipadtiogo Kavkaza (Moscow, Nauka, 1991), pi. 20.18-26; 22.7-11; 23.10-16; 24.15-24; 26.23-24; 28.17-21; 29.1 I-12; 32.13-15; 59.11-29 (Anapa); N.A. Onaiko, Arkhaitbcshii Ionk untulmvi gnrodna scverovoslokc Pont* (Moscow, Nauka, 1980), 69, 71, 12?- 124 iu>s 38-44, 65, 125 nos 70-73, pi. IV.38-44, 65, V.77, VI11.38, 4 I, 70-72, IX.70-72, 77-82 (Torikos). 2 19

— Notes — 268 (X l.ordki[>.\i>id/c, 'Colchis in the early antique period and her relations with the Greek WoiUf, Artbeoio%in (Warsaw) 19, 1968, 39-40, fig.21a-b (from Sim.igrc near 1'II.IMS).

269 Sp.irkes and Talcolt (1970), ..hove n.227, 347-348 nos 1582-1583, fig.13.1583, pi. 70.1582-1583 CSanii.ni1); Roberts (1986), above n.8, 64 ng.41.412-413, pi. 17.412-413 ('Samian'), 71 hg.44.442 ('Samian' with double-bevelled foot), fig.44. 440-441 ('Sainian', pithoid variant); Grace (1971), above n.3, 76 fig.3.1 ('Piotothasian', upper part only); Kmggc (1976), above n.8, pi. 49.3 ('SamianV 'Prolotliasian', imermediate shape). 270 Johnston (1990), above n.8, 48 fig.7.99-105, 114; 49 fig.8.115-117, 121; 50 hg.9.99-100; 51 hg.10.102, 105, 122. 271 Calvel and Yon (1977), above n.147, pi. XI.II3 (Salamis) ('Samian', fractional); I V. tCaragCM-ghis (1970), above n.114, 80 no.4, pi. CXXXI, C C X X X (Salaniis, nt-crop., T. 52, 'Cypio-Arcliaic II'); A.W. Johnston (1981), above n.203, pi. XXVI11.4I, XXX1.4I (('Saniian'), XXIX.48, XXXII1.48 ('Prototliasian'); I. Nicolaou and J.Y. Kmpeicui, 'Aniphores rhodicnnes du Musee de Nicosic', HCII Suppl. 13 (1986), 531 no. 16, 530 Iig.l5a-L> (Cyprus, uncertain origin) ('Samian', pithoid variant). 272 C. Morsclh and K. Tortoiici, ' l a siiu.r/ione di Regisvilla', in / / commercia etrttsca ttrcaico (1985), above n.6, 35 fig.8.1-6 ('Samian'); G. Camporeale, in Let lit)toques et VEimipe (Paris, 1992), 119 no. 50 (Gravisca). 273 Petrie (1888), above n.46, pi. XXXU1.I (Tell Defenneli) (Samian); id. (1909), above n.79, pi. 1.V.855 (Gurna) ('Samian', fractional); C.C. Edgar, JUS 25 (1905), 125-126, hg.6 (Naucratis: 'Protolliasian'?). 274 Odessa, Archaeological Museum, O A M 24907 (unpublished, said to be from ; Olbia). 7p5 Roberts (1986), above n.8, 72 nos 440-441, fig.44.440-441, pi. 19.440 Agora Museum, P.24K84-24885). 276 Nicolaou and limpcreur (1986), above n.27l, 531 no.16, 530 fig.I5a-b (Nicosia, Arcliacologic.il Museum, CMC. 205). 277 G. Jacopi, in Clara Rhmlos IV (Rhodes, 1931), 178-179 (T.1.XXV1I) no.4, 182 li£. 1X8 (loinul logctht'l1 with a likclhna amphora ol the 'Volute zone g r o u p ) . 378 Sec above n.262-267, passim. 279 Nicolaou and Knipcrcui (1986), above n.271 (Cyprus, pithoid variant) - see also Y. Calvct, Salainine tic Cby/irc J.. I.es timbres amphorujttcs (Paris, De

H

1 e

j I I

1

280 281 282 283 ' 21J4

285

Boccaul,l972), no. I 18, lig. 129; unpublished stamp O. 71/1160 in Kiev Archaeological Institute (Olbia, upper part ol 'Protoihasian amphora') - other stamped 'Protolliasian' specimens are attested in lasos and in Tyrambe (Tainan peninsula) (here double-lambda or sigma?); Johnston (1990), above n.8, 51 fig.10.122 (Acgnia, very probably from a 'Samian' vessel); several other epsilon stamps on isolated handles aie known from the Northern Black Sea: E.i. Levi, in Ol'viui, TemeiHH i A^ora (Moscow, N.uika, 1964), 136 fig.3.2 (Olbia); Hermitage B. 70-219 and IS. 70-220 (Here/an) (very likely honi 'Protothasian' containers). Above n.248. A. Meliukova (1980), above n.219, fig.3.1. Kozut) (1979), above n.265, 23 lig.17.1 (Olbia); Hermitage U. 90-210 (Berezan). Johnston (1990), above n.8, 50 fig.9.99 (Aegina). Dimitriu, Zina and Condutachi (1954), above n.4, 375 fig.180 (Histria); Hermitage B. 67-174 (Berezan); Olbia, excavation deposit, O. 72/86.11 (Olbia, sccteui A CD). L. Gliali-Kalnl, /uncles Ibiisienna 7. I it ciramique grecqHe (Paris, De Boccard, 196,0), pi. XIX.6, pi. C (1'hasos).

I

— 286 287 288 289 290 291 292

293 294 295

296 297

Notes

—

MOSCOW, Pushkin Museum, M. 65 607/3 N.4MI. Voigtlandci (1981), above n.10, 125 IIJ;.I4.2;!(/. (1982), above n.10, 69 lig.27.167. K n i ^ e (1976), above n.8, 25, 101 no.SO, p|. 49.1 (as d'i'lginc*, m Alt Mtvoir dc la culture antique. Atclaiigci R. Maraihe (Kenncs, Presses Univcisiiaiivs, 1992), 243-249. C. lUuiiniopiuilou, Attlpbom tie la netm/Kile ti'Aawlhc, HC'.ll Suppl. 13 (1986), 479 -4Xi. IL>UL, 480

fi|>.I-2.

298 Knigge (1976), above n.8, 85 no* 5, pi. 44.7; 171 no.l ; 9 (c 26), pi. 85.2; 172 no. K I I (d 49), pi. 85.3; 173 no.E 14 (c 24), pi. 88.6; 177 no.l- }7 (h 21), pi. 89.3 (Athenian Kci.uneikos); Roberts (1986), above n.8, 68 no.424-428, (itt.43, pi. 17 (Athenian Agora); Johnston (1990), above- n.8 (except perhaps fin 13 no. 133): (Acgina); Voigdander (1981), above n. 10, 125 tin.H.I, 5 (Miletus); SB. Okhotuikov, 'l'oselenua Vl-V vv. do N. \i. v m/hiicin I'oiliasMuv'e', in hilcttovarWii po atuuljfiot (irkbeologii jii^it-/,ip,itLi UkrrfinsktH S.S/\ (Kiev, Naukova D.nnka, 1980), 90, fig.3.8 (t)nfsli liiii.ui); «/., (1990), above n.264, plu.io 2.8 (Naillimanskoe 111); Onaiko (1980), above n.267, pi. IV.75-76, 1X.67--69 (Toiikos); Abiamov and Masleilllikov (1991), above n.266, 238 lig.3.7-8, 14 (Cape Ziuk, Crimea) . . . 299 Roberts (1986), above n.8, 69 (ig.43.424, pi. 17.424. lirsi attribution ol mid Sih century models to Mende: C. Boulter (I95i), above n.55, 106-107 no.161, 101 fig.5.161. On later Mendean aniplunas: I B . Itiaslunslui, 'Ainloiv Mcndy', in Kbiulozbeslvcnnaia knl'tnra i arkbeoiogiid miticbiiogt) >>ur,i (Moscow, Nauka, 1976), 67-74; id. (1984), above n.5, 35-36. 300 Roberts (1986), above n.8, fig.43.431, pi. 19.431. 301 Kniggc (1976), above n.8, pi. 61.7 (Aihcnian Kci.uncikos, t . 460 450); lioulter (1953), above n.55, pi. 39.157 (Athenian Agora, mid 5ili ceniury); Brasliinskii (1984), above n.5, pi. V.I (Nymphaeuni, second hall ol the 5(h century), X V I I . 1-6 (Thflsian, second liall ol the 5th-licj;uiniiig ol the 4ih century). 302 Long, Miro and Volpc (1992), above n.15, 223, 226 hg.45.4. 303 Roberts (1986), above n.8, 69 fig.43.429-430, pi. 17.429, pi. 18.430; Kiliggc (1976), above n.8, 88 no.16, pi. 44.6. 304 Knigge (1976), above n.8, pi. 61.7 (Atlieman Keramcikos, second i|tiarter ot the 5th century). 305 Except perhaps in Tonkos: Onajko (1980), above n.267, p|. V I I I 64, IX.64. 306 Zeest (I960), above n.2, 82, pi. VII.1Kb 307 Voigtlandcr (1981), above n.10, 125 lig.14.3, pi. 42.1. A possible sligluly earlier 221

w

«-

•

«^

#•
oitomcd amphoras 1S8, 160-2 Ukraine, native sites 18 Urla group 100-1 Vlastos group 32 Vroulian 114-15

—

wash xxix waster xxix Wavclme ware 206 (th19, n 2) Wild Goat style 32-70 Zeeu's 'Piototlusian' 178-86, 'Sanmn' 178 86, 'Thasian circle' 186-90

226