Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T23:34:11.590Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Clay Analyses of Archaic Greek Pottery

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 September 2013

J. Boardman  and
F. Schweizer
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The study of Greek pottery of the Archaic period has reached the point at which most groups can be identified on stylistic grounds alone and confidently assigned to their place of manufacture, while in some groups works of individual studios, painters, and potters can be detected. There remain, however, both many problem pieces whose origin is disputed or unknown, and some major classes about which, for example, it is still possible to argue whether they were made in Italy or Greece. This is a field in which the techniques of clay analysis might prove beneficent, and this article presents the provisional results of the first of a series of tests designed to explore this potential.

Type
Research Article
Information
Annual of the British School at Athens , Volume 68 , November 1973 , pp. 267 - 283
Copyright
Copyright © The Council, British School at Athens 1973

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 BSA lviii (1963)94 ff.; and articles in Archaeometry iv–xi (1961–9).

2 And see Archaeometry viii (1965) 16.

3 ‘Hellenistic Glazed Ware from Athens and Southern Italy: Analytical Techniques and Implication’, by A. J.N.W. Prag, F. Schweizer, L. R. Llewellyn, and J. Williams.

4 Noble, J. V., The Techniques of Painted Attic Pottery (1965) 2 f.Google Scholar, 90 f., 212; Farnsworth, M., AJA lxviii (1964) 221 ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

5 Perlman, I. and Asaro, F. in Science and Archaeology (ed. Brill, R. H., 1971)Google Scholar, and Archaeometry xi (1969) 21 ff.

6 For the statistics see Boardman, J. and Hayes, J., Tocra ii (1973) 5.Google Scholar

7 Noble, J. V., The Technique of Painted Attic Pottery (1965) 1–3.Google Scholar Cape Kolias (just SE of Phaleron) is mentioned as a source by ancient writers; see Richter, G. M. A., The Craft of Athenian Pottery (1923) 97.Google Scholar

8 BSA lviii (1963) 103 ff. no. 5, Group C.

9 See Cook, R. M., Greek Painted Pottery (1972) 158Google Scholar for a brief statement of the problem, admitting Etruria as a possible alternative source.

10 CVA Munich vi. 23 f.

11 In Chalkidische Vasen (1927) 167 f.

12 REA 1956, 46 f. and, on the whole problem, in Rhégion et Rancié (1958) 211 ff.

13 BSA xlvii (1952) 30 ff.

14 Articles by Amyx, D. A., AJA xlv (1941) 64 ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Ure, A. D., JHS lxxx (1960) 160 ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar, lxxxii (1962) 138 ff., lxxxviii (1968) 140 f., BICS vi (1959) i ff., xii (1965) 22 ff.; by the writer in BSA lii (1957) 18 ff.; von Bothmer, D., Metr. Mus. Journal ii (1959) 27ff.Google Scholar

15 For the Bronze Age sites see BSA lxi (1966) 60 f. (Lefkandi), 64–6 (Amarynthos); M. Popham and H. Sackett, Excavations at Lefkandi (1968).

16 Details in Archaeometry xi (1969) 8 no. 32.

17 Details in BSA lviii (1963) 103 ff. no. 7a, Amarynthos I, Group D.

18 The figures given in Archaeometry xi (1969) 8 are from a wider choice of sherds.

19 Louvre CA 2365 (BSA xlvii (1952) pl. 7), Berlin 2664 (BSA lii (1957) 16 fig. 2), Athens 2244 (ibid., pl. 2 f; from Tanagra).

20 Metr. Mus. Journal ii (1969) 33, 38.

21 Archaeological Reports for 1962–63, 42 f. fig. 21, and Mrs. Ure, ibid. 56, hydria from Berezan, the island site near Olbia. AA 1912, 360 fig. 50, lekythos from Olbia, , JHS lxxxii (1962) 139.Google Scholar See also Mrs. Ure in this volume, p. 31.

22 Metr. Mus. Journal ii (1969) 30.

23 BSA lviii (1963) 104 ff., Group A.

24 Archaeometry viii (1965) 19 ff. Type B*.

25 BSA lviii (1963) 105 ff. no. 4. The readings are corrected here.

26 Ibid. 105 f. Group A.

27 The writer, in Acta of the Second Cretological Conference i (1967) 134–6.

28 BSA lviii (1963) 109 f. Group B; Archaeometry ix (1966) 96 fig. Id.

29 Height preserved 28·0 cm. Painted within the neck to its base.

30 Pictures of these features conveniently in BICS xii (1965) pl. 3.1–3.

31 Metr. Mus. Stud. iv (1932) 25 fig. 9, where the centre bottom member is a palmette, not a lotus, and the upper corners have flowers.

32 Rumpf, pis. 204–5 (Vatican 223); and CVA Adolphseck ii pis. 61.3, 4; 62.

33 e.g. CVA Munich vii pis. 332, 336.

34 Metr. Mus. Journal ii (1969) 30 fig. 5.

35 Unattached floral cross on Rumpf, pl. 46 (22). Vertical pendent florals of a quite different type, ibid. pls. 52 (35), 84 (50) and in pseudo-‘Chalcidian’, pl. 212 (XI).

36 For this feature in ‘Chalcidian’ and Attic see H. R. W. Smith, The Origin of Chalcidian Ware 91.

37 Metr. Mus. Stud, iv (1932) a 7 fig. 16, 31 fig. 21.

38 Above, n. 34.

39 e.g. Rumpf pis. 211–19.

40 As Rumpf pls. 60 (30), 67 (33), 68 (34), 139 (151).

41 The fallen warrior on his hands and knees is a little unusual but can be matched in ‘Chalcidian’: Rumpf, pl. 7 (3) for Eurytion, and cf. pls. 115 (65), 218 (XVII); and in Attic, e.g., for another Eurytion, ABV 133, 8 (Buitron, D. M., Attic Vase Painting in New England Collections (1972) 28 f. no. 10Google Scholar).

42 As Rumpf, pls. 27–30 (Kunstwerke der Antike, Coll. Käppeli, D 23) and K. Schefold, Meisterwerke no. 153.

43 Rumpf pls. 206 (III), 216 (XV).

44 Some examples published since Rumpf: Corbett, P. E., BMQ xvi (1951) 74–6 pl. 27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

CVA Adolphseck ii pls. 61.3, 4; 62.

von Bothmer, D., Metr. Mus. Bull, iv (1947) 131 ff.Google Scholar (New York 46.11.5).

Münzen und Medaillen Auktion xi no. 315.

Vallet, G., REA 1956, 42 ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar (Louvre Campana 10498, 10532).

Reading University, see above, analysis (23).

It is generally agreed that the Polyphemos Group is more strongly Atticizing than the main ‘Chalcidian’ series, yet closely linked to it, old-fashioned, and comparatively late (last third of die sixth century). If it is so late (and I am not wholly convinced—Rumpf suggested c. 530) I do not see how it could exhibit long-out-of-date Attic features (the centre leaf or spike and patterned bands on the lotuses) unless it was either made in an area of mainland Greece where such features lingered, as they did in Boeotia and at Eretria, or by an emigrant (presumably to Italy) from that area (presumably Chalcis) at a date appreciably later than that of the inception of the main ‘Chalcidian’ series. Either circumstance would explain some similarities to the Oxford vase. The earliest of the Polyphemos Group would be the Vatican (Rumpf II) and Adolphseck (above) vases, but even if they are brought nearer the mid century their connection wim the rest of the series is clear, since similar archaizing features persist (the colourful florals, the animals with the old Attic double shoulder line) and Rumpf's arguments for a single hand remain unshaken. All this indicates an artist who did not take much notice of the styles affected by the ‘Chalcidian’ series in the 530s; perhaps a man who learned something, but not enough, from the artist of the Melchett amphora.

45 Most fully by G. van Hoorn in Choes and Anthesteria (1951). But dissociated by Rumpf, in Bonner Jahrbücher clxi (1961) 208–14.Google Scholar

46 Green, J. R., AA 1970. 475 ff.Google Scholar

47 Crosby, M., Hesperia xxiv (1955) 76 ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

48 L. Deubner, Attische Feste 142–7 and in Abhandl. Preuss. Akad. Wiss. 1943.12, ‘Das attische Weinlesefest’.

49 In general see F. Brommer, Satyrspiele (1959) and A. W. Pickard-Cambridge, The Dramatic Festivals of Athens (1968). In the later sixth century it seems that priests of Dionysos could impersonate satyrs in the Anthesteria, accompanying the god on his ship car through the streets of Athens; see Boardman, J., JHS lxxviii (1958) 6 f.Google Scholar

50 Kenner, H., Das Phänomen der verkehrten Welt in der griechisch-römischen Antike (1970) 112.Google Scholar

51 Oxford 1966.1007, Ashmolean Museum, Beazley Gifts 1912–66 pl. 8.95, as Boeotian.

52 Athens 1721; van Hoorn, op. cit. 68 no. 68; Wolters, P. and Bruns, G., Das Kabironheiligtum bei Theben i (1940) 126 pl. 61.6Google Scholar; Karouzou, S., AJA 1 (1946) 130 n. 48.Google Scholar