Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-t5tsf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-03T01:59:39.344Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

CULTURAL SHIFT OR SHORT-LIVED FASHION? INTERPRETING THE ROLE OF HELLENISTIC BRAZIERS FROM THE AGORA OF NEA PAPHOS, CYPRUS

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 April 2022

Kamila Nocoń*
Affiliation:
Polish Centre of Mediterranean Archaeology, University of Warsaw
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper offers an overview of a number of fragments of Hellenistic braziers collected during several seasons of excavations in the Agora of Nea Paphos, Cyprus. Its primary aim is to demonstrate their presumably local production and the production of examples manufactured outside of Cyprus during the Hellenistic and Early Roman periods by using a methodology that combines the macroscopic analysis of fabrics and typological study. Special attention is given to what this collection tells us about some of the human practices in the city between the third century BCE and the Early Roman period. This study seeks to obtain data that will help to address gaps in the material culture of Hellenistic Nea Paphos and deepen the understanding of the broader process of Hellenisation.

Πολιτιστική αλλαγή ή προσκαιρη μόδα; Ερμηνεία του ρόλου των ελληνιστικών πυραύνων από την Αγορά της Νέας Πάφου, Κύπρος

Η παρούσα εργασία είναι μια επισκόπηση ενός αριθμού θραυσμάτων ελληνιστικών πυραύνων που έχουν συλλεχθεί κατά τη διάρκεια ανασκαφών που διενεργήθηκαν σε πολλές περιόδους στην Αγορά της Νέας Πάφου στην Κύπρο. Πρωταρχικός στόχος είναι να αναδειχθεί η κατά τεκμήριο τοπική παραγωγή τους καθώς και η παραγωγή παραδειγμάτων εκτός Κύπρου κατά την ελληνιστική και την πρώιμη ρωμαϊκή περίοδο χρησιμοποιώντας μια μεθοδολογία που συνδυάζει τη μακροσκοπική ανάλυση του πηλού και την τυπολογική μελέτη. Ιδιαίτερη προσοχή δίνεται στα αποτελέσματα που προσφέρει η μελέτης της συλλογής και αφορούν ορισμένες από τις ανθρώπινες πρακτικές στην πόλη μεταξύ του τρίτου αιώνα π.Χ. έως την Πρώιμη Ρωμαϊκή περίοδο. Η παρούσα μελέτη επιδιώκει να συγκεντρώσει δεδομένα που θα βοηθήσουν στην κάλυψη των ερευνητικών κενών στον υλικό πολιτισμό της ελληνιστικής Νέας Πάφου και στην εμβάθυνση της κατανόησης της ευρύτερης διαδικασίας του ελληνισμού.

Μετάφραση: Έλενα Αντωνιάδη

Type
Articles
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Council, British School at Athens

INTRODUCTION

This paper investigates new evidence concerning braziers in terms of their provenance, typology, and distribution, offering a socio-economic interpretation supported by archaeological and historical data. The collection of braziers studied here was excavated in the Agora of Nea Paphos under the direction of Prof. E. Papuci-Władyka from the Jagiellonian University in Kraków. The result of several excavation seasons (2011–19) of the Paphos Agora Project (PAP) provided a large amount of data.Footnote 1 This allowed for a new interpretation of the functioning of the area in terms of changes in the economic infrastructure of the ancient city by evaluating the architecture of the Agora, the finds, and the use of landscape within the socio-economic and administrative context of the Hellenistic and Roman periods (Papuci-Władyka and Machowski Reference Papuci-Władyka, Machowski and Balandier2016; Papuci-Władyka et al. Reference Papuci-Władyka, Machowski, Miszk, Biborski, Bodzek, Dobosz, Droste, Kajzer, Marzec, Nocoń, Rosińska-Balik and Wacławik2018; Papuci-Władyka Reference Papuci-Władyka2020a; Papuci-Władyka Reference Papuci-Władyka2020b). The excavations, so far, have produced a very large amount of systematically collected ceramic assemblages: tens of thousands of fragments of cooking pottery, tableware, and amphorae, including sets of whole vessels, and many other categories of artefacts. Amongst this, as is commonly found in Hellenistic contexts at such sites, brazier fragments are very scarce. Nevertheless, this collection is extremely diverse in terms of both fabrics and shapes. Two fragments of braziers from the Agora assemblage have already been published by the author; however, only information of general nature has been provided so far (Nocoń Reference Nocoń2020a, 309–10, pl. 106). In this paper, different methods were applied: macroscopic fabric identification, typological and chronological studies, regional approach, and consumption theory. The combination of these approaches and comparison with fabrics which had been previously documented in Nea Paphos provided systematic data and established valuable conclusions concerning some aspects of everyday life in ancient Nea Paphos.

Portable braziers, made of clay utensils frequently connected to cooking processes, produced in different shapes (Fig. 1ad),Footnote 2 were popular across the Mediterranean from the Early Hellenistic (EH) period to the Early Roman (ER) period. In recent years, braziers have received much attention in terms of provenance,Footnote 3 distribution,Footnote 4 and certain social behaviours associated with the manner and context of use,Footnote 5 which has allowed for an understanding of not only some aspects of everyday behaviour but also a broader view of certain cultural codes characteristic of a given community (Foxhall Reference Foxhall2007, 235–6, 240; Tsakirgis Reference Tsakirgis2007, 225, 228; Banducci Reference Banducci, Spataro and Villing2015, 157).

Fig. 1. Types of the Hellenistic braziers (a) with high stand and (b) low stand (Rotroff Reference Rotroff2006, figs 92:750, 94:786). (c) Brazier with tray (Rumscheid Reference Rumscheid, Delemen, Çokay-Kepçe and Özdizbay2008, 1089, fig. 15). (d) Early Roman brazier (Robinson Reference Robinson1959, 34–5, cat. no. G123, pl. 38). (e) Lead ship type brazier (based on Ashkenazi et al. Reference Ashkenazi, Fischer, Stern and Tal2012, 87, fig. 2).

Braziers found in the area of ancient Nea Paphos have been examined previously; however, a review of relevant literature revealed few studies regarding these artefacts. What we know about braziers is largely based on research undertaken by J.W. Hayes (Reference Hayes1991, 75–7) from his examination of the pottery assemblage from the House of Dionysos. This study was the first to classify the braziers of presumed Cypriot origin and identify the imports. Additional information has been provided by E. Papuci-Władyka (Reference Papuci-Władyka1995, 124–5, no. 135, pl. 22; Reference Papuci-Władyka, Ioannidis and Chatzistyllis2000, 735, pl. 7:5) from the Maloutena residential area and by F. Giudice (Reference Giudice1993, 297) from Garrison's Camp. However, although the presence of braziers of different provenance was demonstrated, little attention has been paid to the role of these artefacts in the society of ancient Nea Paphos.

METHODOLOGY

The methodological approach taken in this study is based on the macroscopic fabric examination of the many categories of pottery that occurred in the Agora (Marzec, Kajzer and Nocoń Reference Marzec, Kajzer and Nocoń2020) by adapting the procedure provided by Orton and Hughes (Reference Orton and Hughes2013, 277–82). Twenty-seven fragments of braziers were selected for this study, including fragments of attachments, handles, fire bowls, stands, and bases. The fragments of braziers were divided into macroscopic fabric groups based on certain features of the clay combined with their shape and chronology.

The first step in this process was to identify macroscopic fabric groups by using the following parameters: frequency, sphericity and roundness, size and colour of the inclusions; frequency, size, and shape of voids; surface treatment and colour of the external surface; hardness, feel of the surface and the character and colour of a fresh break. Additionally, the firing core types were identified. The colours were described using the Munsell Soil Color Charts (2013). The brazier fragments were examined macroscopically with the naked eye and with a 10x magnifying glass in natural light.

The second step was complemented by comparative studies and chronological analysis. The chronology of examined fragments was established on the basis of the typological parallels of individual examples and/or their chronological context (which was determined by the range between the earliest and latest fragments in the context). Thanks to the careful excavation most of the presented fragments were found in the well-stratified fill layers with a well-established chronology, spanning from the Late Hellenistic (LH) or ER periods (Miszk Reference Miszk2020). These steps resulted in the formation of the Braziers Macroscopic Groups (Br MGs). The final stage of the study aimed to establish the role of braziers in Hellenistic Nea Paphos. This was achieved by applying consumption theory (Albero Santacreu Reference Albero Santacreu2014, 195) to the historical and archaeological data.

RESULTS

The macroscopic examination resulted in the identification of seven Br MGs within the studied assemblage. The general descriptions of the macroscopic groups are presented in Table 1, while the catalogue of fragments belonging to the groups is presented in Table 2. Groups are discussed in the following order: discussion of fabric provenance, followed by chronological and typological analyses of fragments.

Table 1. The characteristics of the Br MGs discussed in the article.

Table 2. The catalogue of the braziers fragments from the Agora.

Br MG 1 – ‘Western Cypriot’ production(?)

The characteristics of the fabric of the Br MG 1 (Table 1) could match those observed in earlier studies concerning braziers from Nea Paphos. This fabric might correspond to Ware I of presumed Cypriot origin defined by Hayes (Reference Hayes1991, 75), which occurred from the Middle Hellenistic to the end of the LH period and was represented by more than a dozen examples. Another example of a brazier fragment that may be linked to this fabric was recorded in Maloutena in deposit D.5 (layer II), dated to the end of the second century BCE (Papuci-Władyka Reference Papuci-Władyka1995, 71, 125, no. 135). The ceramic mass of the brazier fragment from the Agora is comparable to Western Cypriot cooking pottery fabric dated to the LH period (Nocoń Reference Nocoń2020a, 300). However, due to the limited number of fragments of braziers found within the city, it is not certain if they were produced in Nea Paphos. Together, there are fewer than 20 fragments recorded so far (Table 3). No moulds have been found. Further laboratory analysis is required to solve this issue.

Table 3. Finds of braziers in the Nea Paphos area.

The fragment presented here (Table 2:1, Fig. 2a) is too poorly preserved to establish a type, and precise dating is problematic as well. It was found in a context of mixed character and contains part of a bearded mask; it is difficult to determine to which type it belonged: head with pilos, head with onkos, or head with ivy wreath (Conze Reference Conze1980, 120–4; Rotroff Reference Rotroff2006, 208). The fragment under consideration possesses a part of a face with large open mouth, covered by a long, twisted moustache and a long beard. Close resemblances to the shape of the beard and mouth can be found among the fragments from the House of Dionysos (Room ΓΞ, Well 17), of presumably local production and dated from the mid- to the third quarter of the first century BCE (Hayes Reference Hayes1991, 75, cat. no. 2, 171, cat. no. 9, pl. 17:2). Other good parallels are from Akko (Berlin and Stone Reference Berlin, Stone, Hartal, Syon, Stern and Tatcher2016, 168, fig. 9.14:1) and Dor (Rosenthal-Heginbottom Reference Rosenthal-Heginbottom and Stern1995, fig. 5.1:5), both dated to the middle of the second century BCE.

Fig. 2. Brazier Macroscopic Group 1 – Western Cyprus(?): (a) no. 1. Brazier Macroscopic Group 2 – Knidos?: (b) no. 2, (c) no. 3, (d) no. 4. Courtesy of Paphos Agora Project.

Br MG 2 – Knidos origin(?)

Br MG 2 (Table 1) was tentatively linked with the south Aegean region, with Knidos as the most probable place of manufacture (Şahin Reference Şahin2001, 129–30; Reference Şahin2003, 86). This fabric is not very frequently occurring in the studied assemblage and consists of only three examples, which were found in contexts dated to the LH and ER periods in Rooms 16 and 20 within Trench II. Two fragments of brazier attachments belonged to the brazier with a low stand. The first one (Table 2:2, Fig. 2b) is a fragment of the upper part of a support with square, slightly concave, edges and a thin horizontally projecting rim. In the field surrounded by the ridge there is an onkos with eight preserved locks where the four on top form a V-shape. The second (Table 2:3, Fig. 2c) belongs to the same type, but with four preserved locks on one side of the onkos. Its inner surface is blackened. These fragments belong to the Conze III type (Conze Reference Conze1890, 126–9) and represent the head with parted and curve hair type proposed by Şahin (Reference Şahin2001, 102–3, cat. nos Ha33, Ha37); they are dated to the second half of the second century BCE. They are also correlated with the Athenian Agora III.1.b type – Satyr with onkos distinguished by S. Rotroff (Reference Rotroff2006, 208). This type is widely distributed in many Mediterranean sites (Rotroff Reference Rotroff2006, 208–9). An example is also known from Priene (Fenn Reference Fenn2016, 360, table 61:A454), dated to the second century BCE. No traces of inscription have been noted on the presented fragments. Further fragments of this group belong to a brazier with the horizontal tray (Table 2:4, Fig. 2d). A few are known from Priene dated to the third quarter of the second century BCE (Rumscheid Reference Rumscheid, Delemen, Çokay-Kepçe and Özdizbay2008, 1083); however, the largest collection of this type of brazier comes from Delos, where they are dated to the beginning of the first century BCE (Didelot Reference Didelot and Drougou2000, 143).

Br MG 3 – Asia Minor fabric 1

This fabric may be correlated with the Égéen type described by O. Didelot (Reference Didelot and Müller1997, 381) and Quartz Cooking fabric, identified on the basis of the finds from the Athenian Agora and probably produced in one of the centres located in the Aegean region (Rotroff Reference Rotroff2006, 40). It is another minor fabric group found in the Agora in Nea Paphos, consisting of four pieces. A fragment of the base of a brazier (Table 2:5, Fig. 3a) comes from a well-stratified context dated to the first century BCE, and we can surmise from the diameter of its base that it probably belonged to a large brazier; however, this type of base appears earlier at many sites. The closest analogies can be found in Priene (Fenn Reference Fenn2016, 427, pl. 102:B363) and in the Athenian Agora (Rotroff Reference Rotroff2006, fig. 95:803), dated to around the first quarter of the second century BCE. Another type of base included in this group (Table 2:6, Fig. 3b), which possesses two deep grooves on the top, was also found in this context, dated to the LH period. It is nearly square-shaped in the cross-section and could be tentatively linked with one example found in Priene (Fenn Reference Fenn2016, 361, pl. 61:A459), its fabric interpreted as being of Aegean origin dated to the middle of the second century BCE (Fenn Reference Fenn2016, 100–1). A further fragment of the base in the assemblage probably belonged to a smaller brazier (Table 2:7, Fig. 3c), though with no direct analogies. This group is also represented by the fragment of an upper part of a stand, with an impressed ovolo stamp (Table 2:8, Fig. 3d) – a pattern frequently used on the braziers, with close parallels found in Samaria (Rahmani Reference Rahmani1984, 227, no. 11, pl. 30:9,11), Knidos (Şahin Reference Şahin2003, pl. 30:KF5), the Athenian Agora (Rotroff Reference Rotroff2006, 322–3, pl. 86:812), Athens (Vogeikoff-Brogan Reference Vogeikoff-Brogan2000, 308, fig. 39), and Priene (Fenn Reference Fenn2016, 426, pl. 101:B358) with a chronology that spans the second and first century BCE. It seems that these fabrics emerged in the Agora in the LH period.

Fig. 3. Brazier Macroscopic Group 3: (a) no. 5; (b) no. 6; (c) no. 7; (d) no. 8. Courtesy of Paphos Agora Project.

Br MG 4 – Benghazi local fabric 1, Benghazi shell rich ware, or Cyrenaican marl clay fabric

The most characteristic feature of this fabric (Table 1:Br MG 4) are macrofossils on the surface visible to the naked eye, which allows for the fabric to be linked with Benghazi local fabric 1, named also as Benghazi shell rich ware established by J.A. Riley (Reference Riley and Lloyd1979a, 305; 1979b, 38) and recently named Cyrenaican marl clay fabric (Swift Reference Swift2018, 85–8). The place of production was attributed to ancient Berenike, located in Cyrenaica, on the basis of the common features of this fabric, such as its pale orange-brown colour and a large number of grey shells of the foraminiferal genus Heterostegina, typical for the geology of the Benghazi region (Riley Reference Riley1979b, 38; Krywonos et al. Reference Krywonos, Newton, Robinson and Riley1982, 64). This fabric was mainly used for the production of several series of cooking pots (Riley Reference Riley and Lloyd1979a, 305; Swift Reference Swift2018, 86), as well as amphorae (Göransson Reference Göransson2007, 46–9) and frying pans, the shape of which was inspired by Phocean frying pans (Swift Reference Swift2018, 86). Braziers were produced there from the Hellenistic period until the third century CE (Riley Reference Riley and Lloyd1979a, 304).

This group is the most numerous and contains 11 fragments of braziers, of which four were found in contexts with a well-established chronology. The majority of fragments were found at the Agora in several rooms located in the central part of Trench II and one in the area of Trench I. All the presented fragments are blackened from the inside, which indicates use.

Benghazi brazier ‘Type A’

Several fragments can be linked to the Hellenistic Benghazi brazier ‘Type A’ (Riley Reference Riley and Lloyd1979a, 304–5, fig. 113:691). The earliest example from the studied assemblage is a fragment of a support with square and slightly concaved edges and a minor part of the high central groove – ‘nose’ like type – located on the internal surface (Table 2:9, Fig. 4a). A small part of the rim of the fire bowl has a triangular shape in the cross-section. This fragment was found in the area tentatively interpreted as an ‘Office of the Paphos Surgeon’ (Papuci-Władyka Reference Papuci-Władyka2016), in a context including thousands of fragments of tableware, cooking pottery, as well as amphorae, dated to the second century CE. The closest parallel (a fragment of an attachment) can be found in the House of Dionysos (Room ΓΛ), from the bottom of the deposit dated to the second quarter of the second century BCE (Hayes Reference Hayes1991, 76, cat. no. 18, fig. 26:18, pl. 18:4). The second parallel (fragment of a female mask) also comes from the House of Dionysos (Room AΛ), dated to the late second century BCE (Hayes Reference Hayes1991, 77, cat. no. 22, 140). The lower part of the support with a projecting horizontal groove on the external surface confirms that the influx of this type of braziers continued in the LH period (Table 2:10, Fig. 4b). It was excavated in Room 22 (Trench II) in a context that contains many fragments of cooking pottery and amphorae as well as fragments of rims of ESA form 15, form 19, and form 22. The further fragment is a rim and upper part of a fire bowl (Table 2:11, Fig. 4c), which was found in the context ranging from the LH to the ER periods, with most of the material dated to the Augustan period.

Fig. 4. Brazier Macroscopic Group 4: (a) no. 9; (b) no. 10; (c) no. 11; (d) no. 12; (e) no. 13; (f) no. 15; (g) no. 16. Courtesy of Paphos Agora Project.

Benghazi brazier ‘Type B’

Typical for the LH period, the Benghazi brazier ‘Type B’ (Riley Reference Riley and Lloyd1979a, 305, fig. 113:692) is represented by two fragments of attachments with an internal, central ‘nose type’ projection and with a fragment of the rim of the bowl (Table 2:12,14, Fig. 4d). Another fragment that belonged to this type is the rim of the fire bowl (Table 2:13, Fig. 4e). Fragments of this type of brazier usually occur in layers dated to the LH period, although they rarely appear in contexts that contained significant quantities of pottery dated to the Augustan period. A further parallel can be found in the House of Dionysos, from an upper deposit of Room ΓΞ dated to the Augustan period (Hayes Reference Hayes1991, 76, cat. nos 17, 18, fig. 26:17).

Other fragments

The fragment of a handle with pentagonal shape in the cross section is a very rare find (Table 2:15, Fig. 4f). It was discovered in the context dated to the LH period. In Greece, they occur much earlier, as indicated by examples from Corinth and Athens from the second century BCE (Edwards Reference Edwards1975, 119–20, pl. 61:647; Rotroff Reference Rotroff2006, 219, 333, cat. no. 814, pl. 84:814; Liston, Rotroff and Snyder Reference Liston, Rotroff and Snyder2018, 8, 85, cat. no. 69, fig. 77). In the studied assemblage, a few fragments belonging to the fire bowls with a part of a rounded perforation and often blackened by fire from the inside have been found (Table 2:16–19, Fig. 4g). They were most frequently found in contexts dated to the LH period and rarely to the ER.

Br MG 5 – dark fabric with grey inclusions

This group is represented by fragments of probably two different types of braziers. The largest fragment is a part of the tray with a concave shape (Table 2:20, Fig. 5a). The pieces of tray show similarities to the ship type brazier used in the LH and ER periods (Leonard Reference Leonard1973, 25, no. 11; Galili and Rosen Reference Galili, Rosen and Tripani2015, 342, fig. 7; Doksanalti and Aslan Reference Doksanalti and Aslan2018, 665, fig. 4m). The fabric is also found in the fragment of the base with two deep grooves on the external surface (Table 2:21, Fig. 5b). Other parts belonged to the attachments of the large horseshoe-shaped fire bowl (Table 2:22–4, Fig. 5c). Those fragments may be linked to a low brazier on a stand with a tray. Two very close parallels come from the Bodrum Museum collection (Leonard Reference Leonard1973, 24, nos 7 and 8), dated to the Hellenistic period. The braziers of this type are less common in the studied assemblage than those mentioned above. The fragments under consideration were found in the context dated to the LH and ER periods; a few were found in the surface layer of mixed chronology in the area of Trench II. The source of this fabric is unknown.

Fig. 5. Brazier Macroscopic Group 5: (a) no. 20; (b) no. 21; (c) no. 22. Brazier Macroscopic Group 6: (d) no. 25. Brazier Macroscopic Group 7: (e) no. 26. Courtesy of Paphos Agora Project.

Br MG 6 – dark brown fabric with dark orange inclusions

Only one brazier fragment of this group (Table 1) has been identified amongst the finds from the Agora: a part of the plain support with rounded edges. The position of the support to the rim suggests that the support was inclined inwards (Table 2:25, Fig. 5d). A fragment of the rectangular rim is visible in the cross-section. Braziers with these plain supports are not common in the Eastern Mediterranean. Several are known from the Athenian Agora (Rotroff Reference Rotroff2006, 221), Knidos (Şahin Reference Şahin2003, 50–1), and Caesarea Maritima (Gendelmann Reference Gendelmann2006, 33); however the provenance of the fabric is not specified. The closest analogies regarding the shape of the presented fragment can be found in the collection of braziers from the Athenian Agora, dated to the third century BCE onwards (Rotroff Reference Rotroff2006, 219–20, cat. nos 830–1). Even so, the shape of the whole brazier is still unrecognised. It also cannot be ruled out that the fragment belongs to a ‘horseshoe’ cooking stand, which is often found on many sites and is dated to the second and early first centuries BCE (Rotroff Reference Rotroff2006, 220). Dating based on the stratigraphy is problematic due to the mixed character of the context in which the fragment was found. Braziers with this type of support are rare in Nea Paphos, and the fragment in question must be regarded as the first of its kind.

Br MG 7 – dark brown fabric with transparent inclusions

Three small perforated fragments, with the diameter of the holes of approximately 1–2 cm (Table 2:26–7, Fig. 5e), possibly belong to the hemispherical bowls. They were found in Room 15 (Trench II) in a context dated to the LH period. Another fragment comes from the same room but from the context dated to the ER period. The provenience of the fragments classified in this group is problematic to determine, due to the damaged caused by burning, which makes it difficult to identify the clay macroscopically. Rotroff (Reference Rotroff2006, 217) argues that the way of manufacturing may suggest the place of origin, and thus the construction of the holes may suggest the Aegean tradition of manufacture.

DISCUSSION

So far, our analysis of braziers has described their provenance and their typological and chronological variability. Fragments within examined Br MGs represent the whole assemblage currently known from the Agora. Although the presented results are preliminary, they nevertheless allow for some conclusions to be drawn. For a better understanding of the role of braziers, it is necessary to harmonise the finds within a wider social and economic context.

The influx of braziers to Nea Paphos in archaeological and historical context

In the late third or early second century BCE, Nea Paphos became the capital of the island, which broadly affected the society and economy of the city and its vicinity (Młynarczyk Reference Młynarczyk1990). Due to its location along the main maritime route between many poleis of the Eastern Mediterranean, the city came to play a major role in the island's prosperity and cosmopolitanism. As previously noted, the earliest examples of braziers are dated to the Early Hellenistic period on the basis of evidence from the House of Dionysos (Hayes Reference Hayes1991, 75) supported by the finds from the Agora. The presented data indicates that braziers were imported from two main directions: from the places of production located in Asia Minor (Br MG 3, Br MG 5, Br Mg 6) and from Benghazi (Br MG 4). The emergence of braziers from the Aegean region by the end of the second century BCE is undoubtedly linked to the large number of imports (Lund Reference Lund2015; Papuci-Władyka and Miszk Reference Papuci-Władyka and Miszk2020, 516–19, table 2). The contrast between the number of brazier fragments and the very large number of imports, including many categories of tableware (Lund Reference Lund2015; Marzec and Kajzer Reference Marzec and Kajzer2020), amphorae (Dobosz Reference Dobosz2020), cooking pottery (Nocoń Reference Nocoń2020a; Reference Nocoń2020b), and lamps (Kajzer Reference Kajzer2020; Kajzer et al. Reference Kajzer, Marzec, Kiriatzi and Müller2021) dated to the Middle and LH periods, from several centres in Asia Minor, is very noticeable. Nevertheless, brazier groups imported from this direction are evidence of strengthened economic and cultural links with the Aegean region. A fragment from the Agora indicates the beginning of imports of braziers from Berenice in the second century BCE; however, these are very rare. With the beginning of the LH period, the economic relations of Nea Paphos on the supra-regional market intensified. The position of Nea Paphos was further boosted when it became an important centre of ceramic manufacture, as demonstrated by evidence such as the group of Colour Coated Ware (Marzec et al. Reference Marzec, Kiriatzi, Müller and Hein2019), lamps (Kajzer Reference Kajzer2020; Kajzer et al. Reference Kajzer, Marzec, Kiriatzi and Müller2021) and cooking pottery (Nocoń Reference Nocoń2020b; Marzec et al. Reference Marzec, Nocoń, Miziołek, Kiriatzi and Müllerin preparation; Nocoń and Marzec Reference Nocoń and Marzecin preparation). The local production of many categories of pottery undoubtedly affected economic conditions and trade. Therefore, further considerations about the production of braziers in Nea Paphos are very important (Br MG 1). Braziers from the Aegean region dominated in the Agora in the LH period. Several examples from the studied assemblage are dated to the second century BCE but were mostly found in the LH contexts. During this period, the number of fragments produced in Berenike increased. At the Agora, apart from the brazier fragments, a few other objects from Cyrenaica were found, however mostly in contexts dated to the ER period: a fragment of the upper part of a disk of a lamp (M. Kajzer, pers. comm.), a few coins dated to the Early Imperial period (Bodzek Reference Bodzek2020, 389), and amphorae (Dobosz Reference Dobosz2020, 344). A further major socio-economic and political change occurred after 58 BCE when Cyprus was annexed by the Romans (Młynarczyk Reference Młynarczyk1990), although only a few brazier fragments were attested in contexts dated to the Augustan period.

The proportion of different groups of braziers from the Agora confirms the trend of imports of this category of artefacts noted so far in the city (Table 3). The dominance of fragments of braziers of Aegean origin, the largest number of which were found in the Agora, confirms the general tendency of the distribution of braziers in the Eastern Mediterranean (Didelot Reference Didelot and Drougou2000; Rotroff Reference Rotroff2006, 200). However, it seems that finds from this direction are fairly evenly distributed within the city. The second most frequent group of brazier fragments was of Benghazi production. Besides the above-mentioned fragments from the House of Dionysos, a few examples of braziers of this fabric have also been uncovered during the Polish Excavations in Maloutena (E. Papuci-Władyka, pers. comm.). Among the rarest are braziers of presumed Cypriot origin, which predominate in the House of Dionysos. The beginning of the production of local imitations of braziers dates to the early second century BCE. A similar process occurred in Athens during the same period (Liston, Rotroff and Snyder Reference Liston, Rotroff and Snyder2018, 87).

The archaeological evidence from many sites in the Mediterranean region indicates that braziers were mostly supplied to coastal communities living in cities located on major sailing routes (Rotroff Reference Rotroff2006, 201; Fabbri Reference Fabbri and Peignard-Giros2019, 15). This trend is also confirmed in Cyprus (Fig. 6); however, as can be seen in Table 4, the proportions of the distribution of braziers on the island are very diverse. Apart from four cases, we know almost nothing about the Hellenistic braziers from other parts of the island. However, the clear regional trajectories are illustrated by the contrast between the number of finds from Nea Paphos and the finds from the other coastline poleis like Kition-Bamboula, Kourion, Salamis, and – additionally – a village located in the hinterland named Panayia Ematousa. These finds mostly include fragments of attachments of braziers with a high and low stand, represented by the most common type: bearded head with onkos or pilos. There is no available dating for the braziers from Benghazi from other sites on Cyprus, and it seems that braziers of this provenance only reached Nea Paphos. Braziers produced from this ceramic fabric were very rarely found in the Mediterranean, as in the case of the above-mentioned fragments from the Athenian Agora. Another example comes from Alexandria (Hayes and Harlaut Reference Hayes, Harlaut and Empereur2002, 115, fig. 72, pl. 2:3) and is dated to the first half of the second century BCE. An important point that emerges from the variation in the spatial distribution of braziers in Cyprus is that generally they were not as common as in other parts of the Eastern Mediterranean. Nevertheless, the finds from Nea Paphos provide support for J. Lund's (Reference Lund2015, 159) argument concerning the distribution of pottery in Cyprus during the Hellenistic and Early Roman periods, designating Western Cyprus as the area with the most intense circulation of pottery. However, it is important to keep in mind that the region of Nea Paphos has been the subject of many more archaeological investigations than other parts of the island.

Fig. 6. Regional trajectories of distribution of Hellenistic braziers on Cyprus.

Table 4. The proportions of recorded braziers in Cyprus.

Braziers in Nea Paphos in the social context: cultural shift or short-lived fashion?

As mentioned above, braziers were used in many areas of the Mediterranean and were a manifestation of certain ideas connected to individual or group identities. Cyprus was located on the borders of strong economic and cultural networks (Lund Reference Lund2015), but the case of the supply of braziers to the island suggests relatively weak links between the producers and consumers. Contrarily, considering the size and importance of the city of Nea Paphos in the Hellenistic period, the large number of fragments of braziers for which there is evidence is not surprising. The distribution of portable braziers in Nea Paphos articulates the choices and social needs of the community of the city and could have taken place as a consequence of different factors. Still, the number of braziers, compared to other categories of import, is small. When dealing with such limited imports, it seems likely that they were not caused by a specific or sustained demand, but rather were derivative of regional interactions in the network of more sustainable economic connections. Braziers are generally rare finds at all sites and only found in large numbers where vast quantities of other ceramics were uncovered. This is probably due to their relative rarity, durability and probably long use-life. At this point, discussion will turn to the hypothetical functions of braziers in Nea Paphos.

The hypothesis that braziers may have been used as kitchen utensils is strengthened not only by the archaeological evidence (Didelot Reference Didelot and Drougou2000, 137–8), but also by archaeological experiments, which have indicated that braziers, which were compact in size, allowed for speedy food preparation under specific environmental conditions (Mosyak et al. Reference Mosyak, Galili, Daniel, Rozinsky, Rosen and Yossifon2017; Doksanalti and Aslan Reference Doksanalti and Aslan2018, 662–3). However, the context of the finds of braziers in the Agora does not directly indicate their use in the process of food preparation. Most of the analysed fragments were found in a number of rooms located within Trench II, which are tentatively connected with a commercial and/or artisan function (Miszk Reference Miszk2020, 153). Fragments of braziers have also been found in places with similar functions in Athens (Rotroff Reference Rotroff2006, 201) and Tell Atrib (Południkiewicz Reference Południkiewicz, Jakubiak and Łajtar2020). It is also important to keep in mind that kitchen areas in Greek houses are hard to identify (Foxhall Reference Foxhall2007, 240), and no traces of kitchens dating back to the Hellenistic period have been found so far, neither in the Agora nor at the other sites within Nea Paphos. Nevertheless, such a place, interpreted tentatively as a kitchen, was discovered in Maloutena, dated to the Early Roman period (Więch Reference Więch2017a). The size of the attachments and the diameters of the bases suggests that most of the braziers found on the Agora appear to have been small in size. This may indicate that their reduced proportions required a smaller amount of fuel to cook, which would need to be constantly replenished. This may have caused less efficient heating and a slower process of cooking. As was noticed by Scheffer (Reference Scheffer2014, 180–1), a small number of braziers could be used by an equally small group of people. The analysis of cooking pottery from the Agora dated to the LH and ER periods suggests that the prevailing way in which food was prepared was by boiling and stewing, as indicated by the very large quantity of cooking pots and casseroles produced during these periods. Many of the fragments of these vessels are blackened by the fire or even burnt. The contrast between the very large number of many of types of cooking vessels, which had a production peak in the LH period, and a relatively small number of braziers leads to the conclusion that in Nea Paphos braziers may not have been used as a primary source of fire during the cooking process.Footnote 6 However, at other sites, also plain or simple cooking stands seem to have been used (Rotroff Reference Rotroff2006, 220–2).

The hypothesis of another function should also be considered. M. Şahin (Reference Şahin2003) has argued, by reference to the more frequent sanctuary finds and the decorations, that relief-decorated braziers with high stands and mould-made attachments were used in cultic contexts during sanctuary visits as well as at home. In many locations in Greece and Asia Minor, a large number of braziers and their fragments (mainly attachments) were found in sanctuaries or in their vicinity (Scheffer Reference Scheffer2014, 178). However, our comprehension of the role of braziers in the worship of the local deities in Nea Paphos is problematic, as there is no precise evidence linking them to this practice. Another possibility is that braziers were deployed as altars connected with the worship of Hephaistos, the patron of metalworkers (Conze Reference Conze1890). This hypothesis is linked to the interpretation of the function of the area of Trench IV on the Agora, where traces of a metal workshop were found with remains of the kiln as well as many fragments of casting moulds with preserved channels and fragments of slag (Papuci-Władyka Reference Papuci-Władyka2016). Due to the paucity of data, this hypothesis is offered tentatively, but given the strong metallurgical traditions found in Cyprus, it is not impossible. Braziers in the vicinity of the workshops were also found in Tell Atrib (Południkiewicz Reference Południkiewicz, Jakubiak and Łajtar2020, 93). Even if their original use was ritual or domestic, it is possible that they were recycled for use in workshops. Industrial use is suggested by an example from Naukratis, with traces of pine pitch which were found on it (Thomas Reference Thomas, Villing, Bergeron, Bourogiannis, Johnston, Leclère, Masson and Thomas2015, 4). The fact that very few braziers were found in Nea Paphos can also be associated with a very strong cult of local gods, especially in the Hellenistic period, not to mention the strongly anchored, continuous, and indigenous cult of Aphrodite. Nevertheless, it is likely that the various inhabitants of Nea Paphos who used the braziers in their daily rituals had their own personal understanding of and relationships with the deity.

Perhaps, therefore, this small collection of braziers may be interpreted as ‘exotica’ in the material culture of Hellenistic Nea Paphos. Nevertheless, they provide further evidence that the local consumers were connected to wider trends and fashions. Moreover, they are also an indication of the transfer of some practices, connected with collective habits of certain groups of people in the specific cultural context.

CONCLUSIONS

This article has examined the Hellenistic braziers uncovered by the excavations on the Agora in Nea Paphos. Analysis was undertaken through a combination of macroscopic analysis of the ceramic mass with typological comparanda and chronological studies. The studies delivered new evidence for seven Brazier Macroscopic Groups characterised by different features including fabric, types, and chronology. The second aim of this research was to better understand the emergence of braziers in Nea Paphos in a socio-economic context. The theoretical implications of these findings are yet to be finalised; however, the main developments covered in the discussion are important in furthering our understanding of the role of braziers in everyday life by offering different hypotheses regarding their use as utensils for cooking or their association with certain practices of a religious nature. These results make an important contribution to research concerning certain aspects of the material culture of the Hellenistic period and strengthen the idea of the circulation of pottery in the western part of Cyprus. However, more research on this topic needs to be undertaken to confirm or reject the evidence for the production of braziers in Nea Paphos.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This research was carried out as part of a MAESTRO 6 grant (no. 2014/14/A/HS 3/00283) led by Professor Ewdoksia Papuci-Władyka (Jagiellonian Univeristy in Kraków, Poland), the director of the Paphos Agora Project, and financed by the National Science Centre in Poland. I would like to express my sincere thanks to prof. E. Papuci-Władyka for permission to study the braziers from the Agora and the discussion concerning braziers from Maloutena. The photographs were provided by A. Oleksiak, M. Link-Lenczowski and the author. Drawings are by A. Jurkiewicz-Cora, and by the author.

Footnotes

1 The following abbreviations are used in this article: Br MG – Brazier Macroscopic Group; ESA – Eastern Sigillata A; PAP – Paphos Agora Project; R. – Room; S. – Structure. Abbreviations used in the description of inclusions: A – Angular; SA – Sub Angular; SR – Sub Rounded; R – Rounded; WR – Well Rounded; HS – High Sphericity; LS – Low Sphericity.

2 The most prominent braziers are those with a cylindrical – usually decorated – high or low stand (Fig. 1ab) and a pierced hemispherical bowl with three attachments, plain or mould-made, differentiated in their iconography by heads of bearded men wearing a pilos, an onkos, or an ivy wreath. Such decorations are the most commonly found elements and can be very precisely dated (Conze Reference Conze1890; Le Roy Reference Le Roy1961, 476–7; Siebert Reference Siebert and Bruneau1970, 267–76; Şahin Reference Şahin2003; Rotroff Reference Rotroff2006, 200–2). At the same time, braziers (Fig. 1c) with a U-shaped chimney with plain supports, tray and low stand have been produced (Bakalakis Reference Bakalakis1934, 204–7; Leonard Reference Leonard1973, 19–22; Rumscheid Reference Rumscheid, Delemen, Çokay-Kepçe and Özdizbay2008, 1078–9). During the Early Roman period, braziers had a similar chimney shape (Fig. 1d), but with a rounded tray and low feet (Robinson Reference Robinson1959, 34–5, cat. no. G123, pl. 38). Since the first century BCE, ship-type braziers (Fig. 1e) became increasingly popular, and their counterparts were also manufactured from lead. Most of those known have been discovered in wrecks dating back to the Early Roman period in the Eastern Mediterranean (Leonard Reference Leonard1973, 22, pl. 2; Galili and Rosen Reference Galili and Rosen2012, 416–17; Reference Galili, Rosen and Tripani2015, 336–8, figs 3–5; Aslan Reference Aslan2017, 15–17; Doksanalti and Aslan Reference Doksanalti and Aslan2018, 659).

3 Studies focused on the provenance of the braziers have shown that these shapes were copied in different workshops in Greece (Athens, Corinth, Rhodes), Asia Minor, Egypt (Alexandria and Naukratis), and Libya (Berenice/Benghazi), and on the Phoenician coast and probably on Cyprus as well (Fraser Reference Fraser1972, 287; Leonard Reference Leonard1973, 19–22; Hayes Reference Hayes1991, 70; Didelot Reference Didelot and Müller1997, 376; Reference Didelot and Empereur1998; Şahin Reference Şahin2001, 126–9; Reference Şahin2003, 4; Reference Şahin and Drougou2004, 294; Rotroff Reference Rotroff2006, 203; Rumscheid Reference Rumscheid, Delemen, Çokay-Kepçe and Özdizbay2008, 1080; Regev Reference Regev2009/10, 157; Wicenciak Reference Wicenciak, Fisher-Grenz, Gerber and Hamel2014, 121; Thomas Reference Thomas, Villing, Bergeron, Bourogiannis, Johnston, Leclère, Masson and Thomas2015, 3; Fenn Reference Fenn2016, 102). More recent attention has been focused on the correlation of brazier fabrics with local coarse ware pottery production (Rotroff Reference Rotroff2006, 39–45; Fenn Reference Fenn2016, 102).

4 The most widespread are braziers of Aegean origin, with Knidos as the most likely place of production and whose products reached an extra-regional distribution (Rotroff Reference Rotroff2006, 199–200). Their spread also extended to the western part of the Mediterranean, although to a lesser degree (Kapitӓn Reference Kapitӓn1980, 127; Bernal-Casasola and Vargas Girón Reference Bernal-Casasola and Vargas Girón2017, 39; Fabbri Reference Fabbri and Peignard-Giros2019, 13, fig. 2).

5 The function of braziers is connected to the preparation and processing of food (Conze Reference Conze1890; Vogeikoff-Brogan Reference Vogeikoff-Brogan2000, 307–8; Rotroff Reference Rotroff2006, 200); they are interpreted as a type of altar associated with rituals of a religious nature, often combined with the act of communally eating meat; or they are interpreted as incense-burners for domestic cults (Leonard Reference Leonard1973, 22; Şahin Reference Şahin2003, 119–21; Rotroff Reference Rotroff2006, 200). There is little evidence to suggest that braziers were used in funerary rites (cf. Riley Reference Riley and Lloyd1979a, 304; Fabbri Reference Fabbri and Peignard-Giros2019, 15). They are linked also to the manufacturing of pine pitch (Thomas Reference Thomas, Villing, Bergeron, Bourogiannis, Johnston, Leclère, Masson and Thomas2015, 4).

6 Nocoń Reference Nocoń2020b; Nocoń and Marzec Reference Marzec, Nocoń, Miziołek, Kiriatzi and Müllerin preparation. Other utensils combined with food processing are very rare in Nea Paphos. Only a few examples of lasagna have been discovered in the House of Dionysos in Nea Paphos dated to the 3rd century BCE (Hayes Reference Hayes1991, 100, cat. nos 19 and 20, fig. 30:6, pl. 16) and Maloutena (Więch Reference Więch2017b, 450, fig. 12). Another example has been found in Kourion (Connelly Reference Connelly1983, 279, fig. 6:6,7, pl. 47:15–17).

References

REFERENCES

Albero Santacreu, D. 2014. Materiality, Techniques and Society in Pottery Production. The Technological Study of Archaeological Ceramics through Paste Analysis (Warsaw and Berlin).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ashkenazi, D., Fischer, M., Stern, A. and Tal, O. 2012. ‘Technology of an ancient ship brazier. A unique example from the southern Levant’, Skyllis: Zeitschrift für Unterwasserarchäologie 12.1, 8593.Google Scholar
Aslan, E. 2017. ‘Ship type braziers of the Roman Imperial Period’, TINA. Maritime Archaeology Periodical 8, 1023.Google Scholar
Bakalakis, G. 1934. ‘Un réchaud d'un nouveau type à Délos’, BCH 58, 203–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Banducci, L. 2015. ‘Fuel, cuisine and food preparation in Etruria and Latium: cooking stands as evidence for change’, in Spataro, M. and Villing, A. (eds), Ceramics, Cuisine and Culture: The Archaeology and Science of Kitchen Pottery in the Ancient Mediterranean World (Oxford), 157–69.Google Scholar
Berlin, A.M. and Stone, P. 2016. ‘The Hellenistic and Early Roman pottery’, in Hartal, M., Syon, D., Stern, E. and Tatcher, A. (eds), Akko, vol. 2: The 1991–1998 Excavations. The Early Periods (Israel Antiquities Authority Reports 60; Jerusalem), 133202.Google Scholar
Bernal-Casasola, J.M. and Vargas Girón, D. 2017. ‘El clíbano decorado del Olivillo: un posible brasero de tradición helenística en Gades’, Boletín Ex Officina Hispana 8, 3640.Google Scholar
Bodzek, J. 2020. ‘Coin finds’, in Papuci-Władyka 2020a, 377400.Google Scholar
Connelly, J.B. 1983. ‘A Hellenistic deposit on the Kourion acropolis’, RDAC, 275–80.Google Scholar
Conze, A., 1890. ‘Griechische Kohlenbecken’, JdI 5, 118–41.Google Scholar
Didelot, O. 1997. ‘Réchauds d'epoque hellenistique: la diffusion des signatures’, in Müller, A. (ed.), Le moulage en terre cuite dans l'Antiquité. Création et production dérivée, fabrication et diffusion. Actes du XVIIF Colloque du Centre de recherches archéologiques – Lille III (7–8 dec. 1995) (Travaux et recherches Université de Lille 3; Villeneuve-d'Ascq Nord), 376–95.Google Scholar
Didelot, O. 1998. ‘Réchauds hellénistiques du Musée Greco-Romain d'Alexandrie: importations et productions locales’, in Empereur, J.Y. (ed.), Commerce et artisanat dans l'Alexandrie Hellénistique et Romaine. Actes du Colloque d'Athènes, 11–12 décembre 1988 (BCH Suppl. 33; Athens), 275306.Google Scholar
Didelot, O. 2000. ‘Réchauds à foyer ouvert de la Maison des sceaux de Délos’, in Drougou, S. (ed.), E′ Επιστημονική Συνάντηση για την Ελληνιστική κεραμεική. Χρονολογικά προβλήματα Kλειστα. Πρακτικά (Athens), 137–44.Google Scholar
Dobosz, A. 2020. ‘Hellenistic and Roman transport amphorae’, in Papuci-Władyka 2020a, 323–62.Google Scholar
Doksanalti, E.M. and Aslan, E. 2018. ‘Ship type brazier found in Knidos underwater research and ship type Braziers of the Roman Imperial period’, RCRFActa 45, 659–66.Google Scholar
Edwards, G.R. 1975. Corinth, vol. 7/3: Corinthian Hellenistic Pottery (Princeton, NJ).Google Scholar
Fabbri, F. 2019. ‘Greek Hellenistic braziers in Italic context. Exchanges of pottery and culture across the Mediterranean’, in Peignard-Giros, A. (ed.), Daily Life in a Cosmopolitan World: Pottery and Culture during the Hellenistic Period (International Association for Research on Pottery of the Hellenistic Period 2; Vienna), 1320.Google Scholar
Fenn, N. 2016. Späthellenistische und frühkaiserzeitliche Keramik aus Priene. Untersuchungen zu Herkunft und Produktion (Priene 4; AF 35; Wiesbaden).Google Scholar
Fourrier, S. and Kiely, T. 2012. ‘Excavations at Kition-Bamboula 1879. Finds in the British Museum’, Cahiers du Centre d'Etudes Chypriotes 42, 273304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foxhall, L. 2007. ‘House clearance: unpacking the “kitchen”’, in Westgate, Fisher and Whitley 2007, 233–42.Google Scholar
Fraser, P.M. 1972. Ptolemaic Alexandria (Oxford).Google Scholar
Galili, E. and Rosen, B. 2012. ‘A Roman nautical lead brazier: its decoration and origin, and comparable coastal finds’, IJNA 41.2, 416–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Galili, E. and Rosen, B. 2015. ‘Lead cooking braziers from a shipwreck off the Ashkelon coast, Israel’, in Tripani, S. (ed.), Shipwrecks Around the World: Revelations of the Past (New Delhi), 335–46.Google Scholar
Gendelmann, P. 2006. ‘From Strato's Tower to Cesarea Maritima. Hellenistic and Early Roman ceramics assemblages’ (unpublished PhD thesis, Univeristy of Haifa).Google Scholar
Giudice, F. 1993. ‘Paphos, Garrison's Camp. Campana 1989’, RDAC, 294327.Google Scholar
Göransson, K. 2007. The Transport Amphorae from Euesperides. The Maritime Trade of a Cyrenaican City 400–250 bc (Acta Archaeologica Lundensia, Series 4° No. 25; Stockholm).Google Scholar
Hadjisavvas, S. 1999. ‘Chronique des fouilles et découvertes archéologiques à Chypre en 1998’, BCH 123, 599633.Google Scholar
Hayes, J.W. 1991. Paphos, vol. 3: The Hellenistic and Roman Pottery (Nicosia).Google Scholar
Hayes, J.W. and Harlaut, C. 2002. ‘Ptolemaic and Roman pottery deposits from Alexandria’, in Empereur, J.Y. (ed.), Alexandrina, vol. 2 (Études Alexandrines 6), 99130.Google Scholar
Herscher, E. 1998. ‘Archaeology in Cyprus’, AJA 102, 309–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leonard, M. 1973. ‘Braziers in the Bodrum Museum’, AJA 77, 1925.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Le Roy, Ch. 1961. ‘Réchauds déliens’, BCH 85, 474500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liston, M.A., Rotroff, S.I. and Snyder, L.M. 2018. The Agora Well Bone (Hesperia Supp. 50; Princeton, NJ).Google Scholar
Lund, J. 2015. A Study of the Circulation of Ceramics in Cyprus from the 3rd Century bc to the 3rd Century ad (Gösta Enbom Monographs 5; Aarhus).Google Scholar
Kajzer, M. 2020. ‘Hellenistic and Roman lamps’, in Papuci-Władyka 2020a, 283–98.Google Scholar
Kajzer, M., Marzec, E., Kiriatzi, E. and Müller, N.S. 2021. ‘Production and supply of ceramic oil lamps in Hellenistic and Early Roman Nea Paphos, Cyprus: integrated typological, chronological and provenance studies’, BSA 116, 291357.Google Scholar
Kapitӓn, G. 1980. ‘Three terracotta braziers from the sea off Sicily’, IJNA 9.2, 127–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krywonos, W., Newton, G.W.A., Robinson, V.J. and Riley, J.A. 1982. ‘Neutron activation analysis of some Roman and Islamic coarse wares of western Cyrenaica and Crete’, JAS 9.1, 6378.Google Scholar
Marzec, E. and Kajzer, M. 2020. ‘Hellenistic table wares (from the 4th to the 1st century bce)’, in Papuci-Władyka 2020a, 223–48.Google Scholar
Marzec, E., Kajzer, M. and Nocoń, K. 2020. ‘Methodology – macroscopic analysis of pottery (table wares, unguentaria, lamps, and kitchen wares)’, in Papuci-Władyka 2020a, 217–22.Google Scholar
Marzec, E., Kiriatzi, E., Müller, N.S. and Hein, A. 2019. ‘An integrated typological, technological and provenance investigation of Late Hellenistic colour-coated pottery from Nea Paphos, Cyprus’, Archaeological and Anthropological Science 11, 4103–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marzec, E., Nocoń, K., Miziołek, M., Kiriatzi, E. and Müller, N.S. in preparation. ‘Provenance of the Hellenistic and Early Roman cooking pottery form Nea Paphos, Cyprus: local production and imports’.Google Scholar
Meyza, H. and Papuci-Władyka, E. 1999. ‘Nea Paphos, Cyprus. Pottery from cistern STR1/96-97’, in Śliwa, J. (ed.), Centenary of the Mediterranean Archaeology at the Jagiellonian University 1897–1997. International Symposium, Krakow, October 21–23 1997 (Kraków), 7592.Google Scholar
Miszk, Ł. 2020. ‘Stratigraphy and architecture of the Agora’, in Papuci-Władyka 2020a, 127–84.Google Scholar
Młynarczyk, J. 1990. Nea Paphos, vol. 3:. Nea Paphos in the Hellenistic Period (Warsaw).Google Scholar
Mosyak, A., Galili, E., Daniel, D., Rozinsky, I., Rosen, B. and Yossifon, G. 2017. ‘Thermodynamics of a brazier cooking system modelled to mimic the lead brazier of a Roman ship’, JAS: Reports 16, 1926.Google Scholar
Munsell Soil Color Charts. 2013. Munsell Soil-Color Charts with Genuine Munsell Color Chips (Grand Rapids, MI).Google Scholar
Nocoń, K. 2020a. ‘Hellenistic and Roman kitchen and cooking pottery’, in Papuci-Władyka 2020a, 297322.Google Scholar
Nocoń, K., 2020b. ‘Zmiany społeczne, kulturowe i ekonomiczne w Nea Paphos na Cyprze w okresie w okresie hellenistycznym i rzymskim w świetle badań nad ceramiką kuchenną ze stanowiska Agora’ (unpublished PhD thesis, Jagiellonian University in Kraków).Google Scholar
Nocoń, K. and Marzec, E. in preparation. ‘Continuity and changes in the local production of Hellenistic and Early Roman cooking pottery from Nea Paphos (Cyprus)’.Google Scholar
Orton, C. and Hughes, M. 2013. Pottery in Archaeology, 2nd edn (Cambridge).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Papuci-Władyka, E. 1995. Nea Pafos. Studia nad ceramiką hellenistyczną z polskich wykopalisk (1965–1991) (Kraków).Google Scholar
Papuci-Władyka, E. 2000. ‘Hellenistic pottery from the Polish Excavations at Nea Paphos (Maloutena), 1965–1995: the status of research and prospects for future study’, in Ioannidis, G.K. and Chatzistyllis, S. (eds), Πρακτικά του Τρίτου Διεθνούς Κυπρολογικού Συνεδρίου, Λευκωσία, 16–20 Aπριλίου 1996 (Nicosia), 721–38.Google Scholar
Papuci-Władyka, E. 2016. ‘Season 2016’ (available online <https://paphos-agora.archeo.uj.edu.pl/en_GB/sezon2016> accessed April 2021).+accessed+April+2021).>Google Scholar
Papuci-Władyka, E. (ed.) 2020a. Paphos Agora Project (PAP), vol. 1: Interdisciplinary Research of the Jagiellonian University in Nea Paphos UNESCO World Heritage Site (2011–2015) – First Results (Kraków).Google Scholar
Papuci-Władyka, E. 2020b. ‘Paphos Agora Project (PAP): its aims, stages of development, methodology and chronology’, in Papuci-Władyka 2020a, 7390.Google Scholar
Papuci-Władyka, E. and Machowski, W. 2016. ‘Paphos Agora Project results of the 2011–2012 seasons of the Jagiellonian University (Krakow, Poland) excavations’, in Balandier, C. (ed.), Nea Paphos. Fondation et développement urbanistique d'une ville chypriote de l'antiquité à nos jours. Études archéologiques, historiques et patrimoniales. Actes du 1er colloque international sur Paphos Avignon 30, 31 octobre et 1er novembre 2012 (Ausonius Mémoires 43; Bordeaux), 6778.Google Scholar
Papuci-Władyka, E., Machowski, W. and Miszk, Ł. (in collaboration with Biborski, M., Bodzek, J., Dobosz, A., Droste, M., Kajzer, M., Marzec, E., Nocoń, K., Rosińska-Balik, K. and Wacławik, M.) 2018. ‘Paphos Agora Project (PAP) 2011–2014: first preliminary report on excavations by Jagiellonian University in Krakow, Poland (with Appendix 1: Preliminary observations on animal remains from Krakow University excavations at the Agora of Nea Paphos by P. Croft)’, RDAC, New Series 1, 533–70.Google Scholar
Papuci-Władyka, E. and Miszk, Ł. 2020. ‘Summary of the results’, in Papuci-Władyka 2020a, 505–25.Google Scholar
Południkiewicz, A. 2020. ‘Braziers from Athribis (Nile Delta)’, in Jakubiak, K. and Łajtar, A. (eds), Ex Oriente Lux. Studies in Honour of Jolanta Młynarczyk (Warsaw), 8796.Google Scholar
Rahmani, L.Y. 1984. ‘Hellenistic brazier fragments from Israel’, IEJ 34, 224–31.Google Scholar
Regev, D. 2009/10. ‘Akko-Ptolemais, a Phoenician city: the Hellenistic pottery’, MeditArch 22/23, 115–91.Google Scholar
Riley, J.A. 1979a. ‘Coarse pottery’, in Lloyd, J.A. (ed.), Excavations at Sidi Khrebish Bengazi (Berenice) (LibAnt 5 Supp., vol. 2; Tripoli), 91466.Google Scholar
Riley, J.A. 1979b. ‘The petrological investigation of Roman and Islamic ceramics from Cyrenaica’, LibSt 10, 3546.Google Scholar
Robinson, H.S. 1959. The Athenian Agora, vol. 5: Pottery of the Roman Period: Chronology (Princeton, NJ).Google Scholar
Rosenthal-Heginbottom, R. 1995. ‘Imported Hellenistic and Roman pottery’, in Stern, E. (ed.), Excavations at Dor, Final Report IB: Areas A and C: The Finds (Jerusalem), 183288.Google Scholar
Rotroff, S. I. 2006. The Athenian Agora, vol. 33: Hellenistic Pottery: The Plain Wares (Princeton, NJ).Google Scholar
Rumscheid, F. 2008. ‘Ein in situ entdecktes Kohlenbecken aus dem Haus des Lampon in Priene. Neues zur Verwendung, Chronologie, Typologie und technischen Entwicklung hellenistischer Kohlenbecken’, in Delemen, S., Çokay-Kepçe, A. and Özdizbay, Ö. (eds), Euergetes. Prof. Dr. Haluk Abbasoğlu'na 65. Yaş Armağanı / Festschrift für Prof. Dr. Haluk Abbasoğlu zum 65. Geburtstag, vol. 2 (Istanbul), 1077–90.Google Scholar
Şahin, M. 2001. ‘Hellenistic braziers in the British Museum: trade contacts between ancient Mediterranean cities’, AnatSt 51, 91132.Google Scholar
Şahin, M. 2003. Hellenistische Kohlenbecken mit figürlich verzierten Attaschen aus Knidos (Knidos-Studien 3; Möhnesee).Google Scholar
Şahin, M. 2004. ‘Hellenistische Kohlenbecken aus Knidos’, in Drougou, S. (ed.), ΣT′ Επιστημονική Συνάντηση για την Ελληνιστική Κεραμική. Πρακτικά. Βόλoς, 17–23 Aπριλίoυ 2000 (Athens), 289–96.Google Scholar
Scheffer, Ch. 2014. ‘Cooking stands and braziers in Greek sanctuaries’, OpAthRom 7, 175–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Siebert, G. 1970. ‘Les rechauds’, in Bruneau, P. (ed.), L’îlot de la Maison des comédiens (Délos 27; Athens and Paris), 267–76.Google Scholar
Swift, K. 2018. ‘Ceramics, clays and classification in Cyrenaica’, LibSt 49, 8191.Google Scholar
Thomas, R. 2015. ‘Portable stoves and braziers in terracotta’, in Villing, A., Bergeron, B., Bourogiannis, G., Johnston, A., Leclère, F., Masson, A. and Thomas, R. (eds), Naukratis: Greeks in Egypt. The British Museum, Online Research Catalogue, 15 (available online <www.britishmuseum.org/naukratis> accessed April 2021).Google Scholar
Tsakirgis, B. 2007. ‘Fire and smoke: hearths, braziers and chimneys in the Greek house’, in Westgate, Fisher and Whitley 2007, 225–31.Google Scholar
Westgate, R., Fisher, N. and Whitley, J. (eds) 2007. Building Communities: House, Settlement and Society in the Aegean and Beyond, Proceedings of a Conference Held at Cardiff University, 17–21 April 2001 (BSA Studies 15; Athens).Google Scholar
Wicenciak, U. 2014. ‘Pottery production in the Late Hellenistic and Early Roman periods at Jiyeh – ancient Porphyreon (Lebanon)’, in Fisher-Grenz, B., Gerber, Y. and Hamel, H. (eds), Roman Pottery in the Near East. Local Production and Regional Trade. Proceedings of the Round Table Held in Berlin, 19–20 February 2010 (Roman and Late Antique Mediterranean Pottery 3; Oxford), 103–24.Google Scholar
Więch, M. 2017a. ‘Searching for the kitchen in the Early Roman phase of the “Hellenistic” House at Nea Paphos (Cyprus)’, ÉtTrav 30, 439–57.Google Scholar
Więch, M. 2017b. ‘Cooking ware pottery from the “Hellenistic” House at Nea Paphos seasons 2014 and 2016’, Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean 26.1, 441–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Winther Jacobsen, K. 2006. ‘Cooking wares’, in Wriedt Sørensen, L. and Winther Jacobsen, K. (eds), Panayia Ematousa, vol. 1: A Rural Site in South-Eastern Cyprus (Monographs of the Danish Institute at Athens 6.1; Athens), 231–43.Google Scholar
Vogeikoff-Brogan, N. 2000. ‘Late Hellenistic pottery in Athens: a new deposit and further thoughts on the association of pottery and societal change’, Hesperia 69, 293333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Figure 0

Fig. 1. Types of the Hellenistic braziers (a) with high stand and (b) low stand (Rotroff 2006, figs 92:750, 94:786). (c) Brazier with tray (Rumscheid 2008, 1089, fig. 15). (d) Early Roman brazier (Robinson 1959, 34–5, cat. no. G123, pl. 38). (e) Lead ship type brazier (based on Ashkenazi et al. 2012, 87, fig. 2).

Figure 1

Table 1. The characteristics of the Br MGs discussed in the article.

Figure 2

Table 2. The catalogue of the braziers fragments from the Agora.

Figure 3

Table 3. Finds of braziers in the Nea Paphos area.

Figure 4

Fig. 2. Brazier Macroscopic Group 1 – Western Cyprus(?): (a) no. 1. Brazier Macroscopic Group 2 – Knidos?: (b) no. 2, (c) no. 3, (d) no. 4. Courtesy of Paphos Agora Project.

Figure 5

Fig. 3. Brazier Macroscopic Group 3: (a) no. 5; (b) no. 6; (c) no. 7; (d) no. 8. Courtesy of Paphos Agora Project.

Figure 6

Fig. 4. Brazier Macroscopic Group 4: (a) no. 9; (b) no. 10; (c) no. 11; (d) no. 12; (e) no. 13; (f) no. 15; (g) no. 16. Courtesy of Paphos Agora Project.

Figure 7

Fig. 5. Brazier Macroscopic Group 5: (a) no. 20; (b) no. 21; (c) no. 22. Brazier Macroscopic Group 6: (d) no. 25. Brazier Macroscopic Group 7: (e) no. 26. Courtesy of Paphos Agora Project.

Figure 8

Fig. 6. Regional trajectories of distribution of Hellenistic braziers on Cyprus.

Figure 9

Table 4. The proportions of recorded braziers in Cyprus.