Version classiqueVersion mobile

Dossier : Des vases pour les Athéniens

Dossier : Des vases pour les Athéniens (vie-ive siècles avant notre ère)

Athenian Vases for whom?

A new workshop of the late 4th century in the Athenian Kerameikos

Norbert Eschbach

Résumé

En 2010, l’auteur a eu l’opportunité d’examiner le matériel provenant d’une petite fouille de sauvetage dans la région du dème Kerameis, exécutée en 1966. Plus de 100 vases et des milliers de fragments ont été alors rassemblés, provenant du puits fermé d’un atelier de potier. Un certain nombre de défauts caractéristiques permet de conclure que ces vases avaient été écartés à cause d’accidents survenus durant la phase de fabrication. Leur datation se situe manifestement à la fin du IVe siècle, donc tous les vases proviendraient d’un ou éventuellement de deux fours effondrés. Trois grands types de vases dominent dans la production destinée à trois groupes distincts de clients : des magistrats athéniens, des particuliers et l’exportation.

Texte intégral

  • 1 Alexandri 1967, p. 36 f. fig. 1 (map) site no. 16; p. 58 pl. 73 α. β. – Map and numbers in fig. 1 a (...)
  • 2 Eschbach 1986, p. 2 note 17.

1At very short notice Olga Alexandri did inform us about a rescue excavation in 1966 on a plot at the crossing of Odos Achilleos and Plataion (fig. 1, no. 12), north of the Kerameikos.1 She did refer to a waste pit with some black-glazed, some red-figured vases and two vessels of a specific type, which I was very much interested in, when I was preparing my PhD. But then, in 1980, I could not get any possibility to take a view.2

  • 3 I have to thank O. Tzachou-Alexandri for the opportunity to work with the material, N. Valakou-Diva (...)
  • 4 A comprehensive study of the whole filling of the pit is in preparation, it will take a while. The (...)

2In 2009, the 3rd Ephorate at Athens gave the permission and a – as I thought – little project could start.3 Just during the first campaign in spring 2010 it was clearly visible, that the amount of 29 vases from the pit, mentioned by Olga Alexandri, has been only a small part of the quantity of ceramics really found. Altogether 70 more or less complete vases and 18 big boxes in the magazine, full to the brim with about 6500 fragments could be identified as belonging to the old rescue excavation. In September 2010, I was able to study the material – and so, my contribution is a preliminary report. Many signs indicate that the pit was filled up and sealed within a very short period of time.4

3Even at first glance it was clear, that we are not dealing with normal household waste, but with a pit of a potter’s workshop: more than 150 fragments of clay-rings – used as burning supports – in three or four different sizes are listed (fig. 2). There are higher conical supports, too, the biggest examples with one or more holes cut into the wall. Some twenty potsherd perforated with a hole seem to have been prepared as test samples during the heat up of the kiln. The surface of most of these tools is preserved in perfect condition, traces of use could be stated on a minority only.

  • 5 Monaco 2000, p. 34 – 56, 59 – 80, 167 – 238.
  • 6 Baziotopoulou-Valavani 1994, p. 45 – 54.

4Although a large number of vase painters and potters from the 6th to the late 4th centuries BC is known after more than 100 years of research, it is really astonishing, how little information we have about their workshops, their location in Athens, their organisation and the production process. The known workshops and pits in Athens and Attica have been collected by Maria Chiara Monaco.5 For the area from the Kerameikos to the Academy of Platon, Evstathia Basiotopoulou-Valavani had given us more detailed information some years earlier.6

5In three cases only and based on the shards of the pits, the workshops of well known and important vase-painters of the 5th and early 4th century BC are identified – respectively published, only one of these three is exactly localized, for none of them a usable context is known:

    • 7 Baziotopoulou-Valavani 1994, p. 47 n. 13; Maffre 1984, p. 113 – 118; Monaco 2000, p. 211 – 213 D II

    Three pits of a workshop in Odos Marathonos 2, where the Brygos-Painter, the Briseis- and Triptolemos-Painter have been busy (fig. 1 no. 9a).7

    • 8 Baziotopoulou-Valavani 1994, p. 51; Monaco 2000, p. 201 – 206 B II; Paul-Zinserling 1994; Bentz, Ge (...)

    The shards of the Jena-Painters workshop, discovered some time before 1852 (fig. 1, perhaps close to no. 10).8

    • 9 Basiotopoulou-Valavani 1994, p. 47 note 16 f.; Monaco 2000, p. 195 – 201 B 1a/b/c; Bentz, Geominy, (...)

    “At the Metrostation near to the Theseion”, a pit has been found some time before 1904, 54 of 466 fragments were decorated by the Dinos-Painter, but the filling covers a larger period of time, the last 40 years of the 5th century BC (fig. 1, perhaps close to no. 11).9

6In all other cases in the Demos Kerameis between the city walls and the area of the Academy waste pits of potter’s workshops had been filled up over a longer period of time and their contents are only partly published at all. All pits – and the above mentioned pits, too – are dated by the stylistic analysis of the ceramics – and not by other findings independent from painted pottery. A pit, whose content is strictly limited to a short period of time in the second half of the 4th century BC is not known.

  • 10 The diary of the excavation allows the reconstruction of the daily works, the sequence and the loca (...)
  • 11 For the type of Panathenaic Prize Amphorae see Bentz 1998.

7Let’s return to our excavation.10 Because of illegal building operations, nearly all the ancient structures and their contexts have been destroyed with only one exception: in the north-eastern part of the site and around 1,50 m beneath the modern street level, traces of walls and a room with a well prepared floor have come to light. The floor has been created directly over a rectangular pit, 3,25 m long, 2,75 m wide and only 35 cm deep. The building and the floor must have been constructed shortly after the pit; the building itself has been destroyed perhaps in the second half of the 3rd century BC. The ceramics out of our pit can be divided into three big groups: 1, the black-glazed ware; 2, the red-figured shards, and 3, black-figured Panathenaic Prize Amphorae.11

1. THE BLACK-GLAZED POTTERY

8The black-glazed pottery covers a specific range of forms. Closed vessels and big open forms are rare, smaller open forms provide the majority, as there are plates, fish-plates, bowls and kantharoi.

  • 12 The dated contexts: Rotroff 1997, p. 18 – 36. – Kerameikos, Building Z, especially Z 3 (320 – 307 B (...)

9The framework for dating such forms and their periods of use in later classical and Hellenistic times – from the middle of the 4th into the 1st century – is constructed and supported by a number of closed contexts, which are dated by findings like coins or historical conclusions, but for the second half of the 4th century and into the early 3rd such fix points are rare; the findings from Building Z on the Kerameikos (and there the levels 5 to 3c), published by Ursula Knigge in 2005, are offering comparable examples for some of our material.12

  • 13 Eschbach 2013, p. 41 fig. 2 (A 3880) note 14.
  • 14 Rotroff 1997, p. 142 sq. note 1; see p. 310 Cat. 645 – 649, esp. 646, 648 fig. 46.

10Plates are available from our pit in four different sizes; a well preserved example is the greatest variant with a diameter of nearly half a meter (42-48 cm, 4 examples).13 Four other plates are showing a diameter of 30 cm, more than ten between 24 and 25 cm (fig. 3), only two are smaller, not more than 16 cm. Independent from their size, the profiles of all plates from the pit are the same. The incised or stamped decoration varies from small handmade circles, multiple hatched circles and sometimes asymmetrical tendril stars with stamped palmettes on the tips. The ring of seven hatched circles framed by shallow grooves on one of the plates (A 3880) is an unusual motif. Close parallels to our plates are provided by the Athenian Agora; they are placed in the late 4th, the last decade of the 4th century or around 300 BC.14 Their diameters vary from 13 to 25 cm, our two big types do not exist.

11The picture of defects not only on the plates but visible on the whole material from our pit is the same: often the forms are warped, the rims are dented, the glaze shows a very variable colouring – a fine black glaze, as it should be, is very uncommon. Some fragments show breaks, which occurred during the firing process. Very often asymmetrical circles are visible on the surface, which are corresponding with the diameter of the bases. The plates have been stacked together when placed in the kiln.

  • 15 Rotroff 1997, p. 146 – 148 note 11; p. 315 sq. Cat. 709 – 715 fig. 50.

12The fish-plates (fig. 4) must have been arranged in the same way in the kiln: 330 fragments belong to some 40 examples divided into three different sizes, most of them vary between 20 and 22 cm, but two of them with a diameter of 42 cm reach our biggest plates. All pieces are of the same type, the foot is profiled underneath, the inner part is slightly lifted. There is a groove at the edge of the lip and a smaller one around the fine and pointed bead ring at the edge of the inner bowl. Here, too, the next parallels from the Agora point to the late 4th century BC.15

  • 16 Rotroff 1997, p. 165 (“Small Bowl: Broad Base”). 345 no. 1050 – 1059 fig. 65.

13Hundreds and hundreds of fragments belong to bowls of different sizes, the main types are, first: some 15 examples of small and flat variants with a massive ring foot (fig. 5). They are often decorated with a little cross of four palmettes, the stamp is the same as on the plates. Here, again, next parallels from the Agora are set in the last decade of the 4th century – or (perhaps) in the first quarter of the 3rd century.16

  • 17 Rotroff 1997, p. 161 (“Echinus Bowl”). 338 sq. no. 970 – 976 fig. 62.

14Especially numerous are the bigger bowls with higher rounded walls (echinus bowls), listed from the pit in three different sizes: ca. 20 pieces with a diameter of the foot about 7, 5 to 8,5 cm, 50 pieces from 10 to 11 cm and only two slightly bigger examples (fig. 6). Some of them are undecorated inside, most of them bearing the motives known from the plates and the small bowls. Parallels from the Agora are dated to the known period of time.17 The bowls, too, had been stacked together into the kiln, the shadows of the foots are showing that the smaller one’s had been set into the bigger pieces of this form.

  • 18 Rotroff 1997, p. 85. 245 sq. no. 37 – 43 fig. 6.

15Some 500 fragments belong to more than 40 kantharoi with plain or ripped walls. The form is noticed in four different sizes; the diameter of the biggest pieces is 16 to 17 cm for the rim, around 15 cm for most of them, 10, 5 up to 12 cm for the next, and 9 to 9,5 for the smallest kantharoi. Within the group of the ripped Kantharoi the smallest class is unknown, examples of the third size are rare. The profiles of foot and lips varies the same scheme a little bit, the ripped kantharoi used to be more carefully formed than the type with plain walls. Again, examples from the Agora are dated in the last quarter of the 4th century or around 300 BC.18

  • 19 For the best preserved piece see Eschbach 2013, p. 41 fig. 3 (A 3870).
  • 20 Rotroff 1997, p. 137 – 139. 304 Cat. 590 – 594 fig. 42 sq.

16A very uncommon form, a big and deep basin, is represented by six examples.19 Their height is between 24 and 25 cm, the diameter of the rim around 45 cm. On the profiled foot – it seems to be a standard-foot of the workshop, used for bell-kraters, too – rests a globular body with a slightly sloping rim and semicircular handles. At the moment, parallels for this form are unknown to me and to Susan Rotroff, too. Some examples of basins similar in a wider sense of the word are known only from the Agora. Susan Rotroff supposed the origin of the form in the second quarter of the 3rd and a lifespan down into the early 2nd century BC.20 As our basins demonstrate, this form must have been invented earlier, in the last quarter of the 4th century.

  • 21 For the gilded black-glazed ware see Kopcke 1964. – The Bell-krater in Vienna: Kopcke 1964, p. 39 f (...)

17Five black-glazed bell-kraters in type and size as the best preserved piece (fig. 7, the diameter of the rim is 45 to 46 cm!) do not have any decoration except the ornament on the lip. Foot and stem have been flaked off, the breaks are very sharp and on many preserved bodies and stems of bell-kraters from the pit the same kind of defects exist: there are no traces of conscious damage. It sounds a little bit strange, but up to now I could not find any other example except for a black glazed bell-krater in Vienna21 with its gilded decoration, which tentatively has been set in the second quarter of the 4th century BC.

  • 22 Kopcke 1964, p. 31 – 34 (list). 32 no. 46: CVA Ensérune, Collection Mouret, p. 23 pl. 19, 1. 4.
  • 23 Eschbach 2013, p. 41 fig. 4 (A 3810).
  • 24 Kopcke 1964, p. 27 no. 12 (Athens, Kerameikos 2330, “320 – 310 BC”; Dm ca. 24 cm). no. 13 (Athens, (...)

18On the fragments of three big calyx-kraters (fig. 8) traces of a fine applied decoration – the well-known gilded necklace-like forms or floral ornaments are partly well preserved – but there are no traces of gilding, which has been applied as a last step in the production process. The lack of gilding not only here, on the calyx-kraters, but on every piece with applied decoration from the pit could be taken as an indication, that all these vases had not been taken worth for this last step of treatment, when they were taken out of the kiln. In form and dimensions we can put aside a calyxkrater from Enserune22 dated in the last quarter of the 4th century BC. Also ungilded remained the floral decoration on the lid of a big pyxis (diameter 20 cm).23 The distinctive structuring of the surface with grooves and bead rings together with the decoration in applied clay finds their best parallels on fragments of lids from the Kerameikos dated by Kopcke24 into the last quarter of the 4th century BC.

19As well as the big craters the highly decorated pyxis could have been a special order to the workshop – these vases do clearly not belong to the simple everyday tableware produced in higher quantities in stock for the Athenian households. This tableware had been potted in three or four different sizes – but there are no signs of general standards, because the same forms from other findspots can differ or vary in their sizes more or less freely. Based on the compared material no piece from the pit can be dated earlier than 320 or later then the end of the 4th century BC.

2. THE RED-FIGURED POTTERY

  • 25 Pelike Rethymnon: Tzanakaki 1997, p. 20 sq. fig. 1 a. b (Rethymnon, Mus. Inv. P 759; Amazon Painter (...)
  • 26 The Amazon Painter and his work: ARV2 1478 – 1480; Para 496 sq.; Add2 381 sq.; Schefold 1934, p. 13 (...)
  • 27 Rethymnon, Mus. P 2228, Tzanakaki 1997, p. 30 sq. fig. 8 a. b. (Amazon Painter [M. Langner]).
  • 28 Athens, Agora P 1104, 1105: Thompson 1934, p. 333 no. B 1; p. 334 no B 2. – Moore 1997, p. 143 no. (...)

20The red-figured vases appear mainly in two forms: pelikai and bellkraters; only some fragments from lekanides are noticed. Nearly 1000 fragments belong to pelikai in only two different sizes. Some 60 ringshaped bases show a diameter of 7 to 8 cm for the smaller class (25), 10 to 11 cm for the higher vases (30). The pictures on the front side feature mostly two topics, griffins with or against warrior and/or amazon. On the backside there are mostly two, sometimes three dressed youths in conversation. The ornamental decoration shows a carelessly drawn egg pattern with or without points at the baseline, on the neck and on the rim. A next parallel to A 3875 (fig. 9), and from the same hand, I found in Rethymnon in western Crete, unfortunately without provenience.25 In spite of the big amount of pelikai found in that area in tombs of the second half of the 4th century BC it seems possible that this pelike has been found in such a context, too. The piece has been given to the Amazon Painter, a well known artist in the late 4th century BC.26 The second topic shows a head of a woman wearing a clumsy, sometimes alopekis-like shaped cap in different combinations: between griffins, with horse (fig. 10) and together with griffin and horse. A next parallel for our pelike A 3789 and from the same hand is, again, a pelike in Rethymnon.27 All pelikai from our pit – and all the red-figured vases in general – are damaged in the same way: dents and distortions are noticed, the black glaze is coloured in the same way as our household pottery. On other fragments the ornament is a little bit richer; at the moment a minimum of three or four different painters have been identified, who find their better preserved examples within the vases given to the Amazon Painter and his workshop. Pelikai like this are very uncommon in Athenian find spots; some fragments and two nearly complete pieces did find their way in contexts from the Agora, two of them should belong to our workshop.28

  • 29 Alexandri 1967, p. 58 pl. 73 b. – Eschbach 2013, p. 42 fig. 6.

21Fragments of 18 Bell-kraters are listed from the pit, five are more or less complete. The shape of the most complete one (fig. 11) is strongly warped, the rim is dented, foot and stem have been flaked – and not knocked – off at the connection with the basin.29 All five Bell-kraters are of nearly the same height, between 30 and 32 cm, the diameter of their rims varies slightly between 32 and 34 cm.

  • 30 Regarding the problems of interpretation I would like to refer to Frederike Fless for the moment, w (...)
  • 31 LIMC VIII (1997) Suppl. p. 923 – 941 s. v. Pan (J. Boardman).

22The topic here is – as on many vases of the later Group G and the more than 20 known pieces of the Amazon Painter and his workshop – not easy to determine: three humans wearing almost the same dress – two of them with faces and hands painted in white – are fighting against a griffin (?), or the two let us say “Amazons” with a griffin against a man on the left (?), or: the human groups against each other in unreflected presence of a griffin?30 The range of topics on the bell-kraters of our workshop is not significantly wider than that of the pelikai: there are dionysaic dancers, fights with griffins, men and women with griffins, symposia, and one picture depicts some men riding on sea-creatures. On one krater (fig. 12) a man grasps a woman at her wrist, she tries to run away, a thyrsos in her left hand. At the right end of the scene, Pan is depicted, one of the latest representations of the good in vase-painting.31 On the bottom of the basin screwed grooves are visible, made for a better connection between stem and basin, additional glaze has been used as an adhesive. The breaks are very sharp-edged; here again the stem has been flaked off, as in other cases mentioned above.

  • 32 Tzanakaki 1997, p. 19 – 35; Skordou 1997, p. 36 – 61.

23Looking for the find spots of vases of the late 4th century belonging to Group G and to the Amazon Painter and his workshop, a majority of them have been found in southern Russia (Kertsch) in Libya (Cyrenaica), in northern Greece and only some at home, in Athens. New researches allow to complete the picture for the southern route; vases of this group did find their way into tombs in western Crete.32 According to pelikai of the same kind and hands from the pit, our workshop must have had a good connection to these trading routes. The same seems to be possible for the trade to northern Greece and southern Russia.

  • 33 Fless 2002, p. 88 – 93, esp. 90; Langner 2005, esp. p. 61 – 65.

24About the Athenian exports especially to southern Russia we are well informed by publications of Frederike Fless and Martin Langner. The quality of the painting on our vases surely has not been the reason to buy them.33 Perhaps some of the above mentioned topics of the pictures could support / or have been interpreted by the customer as supporting a certain format of identity within a society mixed up with Greeks and different indigenous groups of population, partly influenced strongly by local customs and traditions. The pelikai, for example, seem to have been used as a necessary set of gifts in poorer tombs, too. The bell-kraters could have been connected with special customs outside the tomb.

3. THE PANATHENAIC PRIZE AMPHORAE

  • 34 Alexandri 1967, p. 58 pl. 73 α (= A 3889).
  • 35 Frel 1972, p. 289 note 2. – A detailed study will be published soon, see note 4.
  • 36 Except of the amphorae from our pit the archont’s name is known from a small fragment from Eretria (...)

25At last a short view on vases of the 3rd group, the black-figured Panathenaic Prize Amphorae found in the pit. Olga Alexandri did mention only two vases of this form,34 some years later Jiri Frel informed us about eight amphorae, but there are now definitely 12.35 On seven, the Archon’s name is written: it is Polemon, the Archon of the year 312/11 BC (fig. 13).36

  • 37 Eschbach 2013, p. 44 figs. 8 – 10.

26The best preserved example (fig. 14)37 – together with the missing parts of foot and mouth and completed with one of the 12 lids found in the same pit, too – is the biggest known Panathenaic Amphorae of the 4th century with a height of ca. 1,15 m. A short note on some of the characteristic motives of the year: the symbol on the columns is a flying Nike in profile presenting a branch to Athena. The garment of the goddess shows a very constant treatment over all the known amphorae, very typical features are the depiction of her hair, of the aegis, and the stand for the helmet crest. The scene on the backside shows wrestlers in action, a referee on the right, and another athlete on the left side. The very careful kind of drawing not only on this amphora is really astonishing, considering that we are at the end of the 4th century!

27The Panathenaic Prize Amphorae of Polemon provide us with a fixed date for the whole material filled in the pit, maybe, a short time after 312/11 BC. The workshop at the crossing of Odos Achilleos and Plataion, who removed the waste from perhaps one kiln crashed during the process of firing, was not a minor one. It must have been big and professional enough for an order given by the officials of the city-state in preparation for the Panathenaic games in 310/9 BC. A second field of work has been the production of special forms on request of the merchants involved in the trade for customers far away. Last but not least the shop did produce normal household ceramics for the daily Athenian clientele – and even special orders of some customers, too.

Fig. 1: Potters workshops between the Kerameikos and Platon’s Academy: () of the 5th and partly early 4th century BC; () of the 4th century BC (© see note 1)

Fig. 2: Burning supports from the pit

Fig. 3: Plate, Inv. A 3818

Fig. 4: Fish-plate, Inv. A 3829

28

Fig. 5: Small bowl, Inv. A 3808

Fig. 6: Echinus bowl, Inv. A 3820

Fig. 7: Black-glazed bell-krater, Inv. A 3881

Fig. 8: Black-glazed calyx-krater, fr

Fig. 9: Pelike, Inv. A 3875

Fig. 10: Pelike, Inv. A 3789

Fig. 11: Bell-krater, Inv. A 3868

Fig. 12: Bell-krater, Inv. A 3867

Fig. 13: Panathenaic Prize Amphora, frr., Inv. A 3833. 3834

Fig. 14: Panathenaic Prize Amphora, Inv. A 3389 (B).
(Fig. 2-14: All photographies and drawings by the author)

Bibliographie

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Alexandri 1967: Olga Alexandri, ΓἘφορεία Κλασσικῶν Ἀρχαιοτήτων. Ἀρχαιολογικὸν Δελτίον 22, 1967, Β’1, p. 37 – 130.

Baziotopoulou-Valavani 1994: Evstathia Baziotopoulou-Valavani, «Ανασκαφές σε αθηναϊκά κεραμικά εργαστήρια των αρχαϊκών και κλασικών χρόνων», in William D. E. Coulson, Olga Palagia, Theodore Leslie Shear, Jr., Harvey Alan Shapiro, Frank J. Frost (ed.), The Archaeology of Athens and Attica under the Democracy, Oxford, 1994, p. 45 – 54.

Bentz 1998: Martin Bentz, Panathenäische Preisamphoren. Eine athenische Vasen-gattung und ihre Funktion vom 6.– 4. Jh. v. Chr, Antike Kunst, Beihefte, Basel, 1998.

Bentz, Geominy, Müller 2010: Martin Bentz, Wilfred Geominy, Jan Marius Müller (ed.), TonArt. Virtuosität antiker Töpfertechnik, Petersberg, 2010.

Eschbach 1986: Norbert Eschbach, Statuen auf Panathenäischen Preisamphoren des 4. Jh. v. Chr., Mainz, 1986.

Eschbach 2013: Norbert Eschbach, “Handelswege. Das Warenspektrum einer Werkstatt frühhellenistischer Zeit im Demos Kerameis”, in Nina Fenn, Christiane Römer-Strehl (ed.), Networks in the Hellenistic World, According to the Pottery in the Eastern Mediterranean and Beyond. International Conference at Cologne/Bonn, February 23 – 26, 2011, Oxford, 2013, p. 35 – 46 (BAR Int. Ser.).

Fless 2002: Frederike Fless, Rotfigurige Keramik als Handelsware. Erwerb und Gebrauch attischer Vasen im mediterranen und pontischen Raum während des 4. Jhs. v. Chr., Rahden, 2002.

Frel 1972: Jiri Frel, «Quelques noms d’archontes sur les amphores panathénaiques», RA 1972, p. 285 – 290.

Heisserer 1986: Andrew J. Heisserer (ed.), Classical Antiquities, The Collection of the Stovall Museum of Science and History, Oklahoma, 1986.

Knigge 2005: Ursula Knigge, Kerameikos. Ergebnisse der Ausgrabungen, Bd. XVII: Der Bau Z, München, 2005.

Kopcke 1964: Günter Kopcke, “Golddekorierte attische Schwarzfirniskeramik des vierten Jahrhunderts v. Chr.”, MDAI (A) 79, 1964, p. 28 – 84.

Langner 2005: Martin Langner, “Barbaren griechischer Sprache? Die Bildwelt des Bosporanischen Reiches und das Selbstverständnis seiner Bewohner”, in Frederike Fless, Mikhail Treister (ed.), Bilder und Objekte als Träger kultureller Identität und interkultureller Kommunikation im Schwarzmeergebiet. Kolloquium in Zschortau/Sachsen vom 13. 2.– 15. 2. 2003, Rahden, 2005, p. 53 – 66.

Langner 2013a: Martin Langner, “Grundlagen der Chronologie spätrotfiguriger Vasen aus Athen”, BABesch 88, 2013, p. 127 – 170.

Langner 2013b: Martin Langner, “Amazonen auf Kertscher Vasen. Wechselnde Blick winkel auf ein populäres Bildmotiv”, in Charlotte Schubert, Alexander Weiss (ed.), Amazonen zwischen Griechen und Skythen. Gegenbilder in Mythos und Geschichte, Berlin, 2013, p. 221 – 257.

Maffre 1984: Jean-Jacques Maffre, « Fragments inédits de skyphoi attiques à figures rouges des années 480 », in Herman A. G. Brijder (ed.), Ancient Greek and related pottery: Proceedings of the International Vase Symposium in Amsterdam, Amsterdam, 1984, p. 113 – 118 (Allard Pierson Series 5).

Monaco 2000: Maria Chiara Monaco, Ergasteria. Impianti artigianali ceramici ad Atene ed in Attica dal protogeometrico alle soglie dell’Ellenismo, Roma, 2000.

Moore 1997: Mary B. Moore, The Athenian Agora. Results of the Excavations conducted by the American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Vol. XXX: Attic red-figured and white-ground pottery, Princeton, 1997.

Paul-Zinserling 1994: Verena Paul-Zinserling, Der Jena-Maler und sein Kreis. Zur Ikonologie einer attischen Schalenwerkstatt um 400 v. Chr., Mainz, 1994.

Rotroff 1997: Susan I. Rotroff, The Athenian Agora. Results of the Excavations conducted by the American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Vol. XXIX: Hellenistic Pottery. Athenian and imported wheel made Table Ware and related Pottery, Princeton, New Jersey, 1997.

Schefold 1934: Karl Schefold, Untersuchungen zu den Kertscher Vasen, Berlin-Leipzig, 1934.

Skordou 1997: Maria Skordou, «Ύστατες ερυθρόμορφες πελίκες από την επαρχία Κισάμου», in L. Kypraiou (ed.), Ελληνιστική Κεραμική από την Κρήτη, Chania, 1997, p. 36 – 61.

Steffelbauer 2007: Ilja Steffelbauer, “Lage und Grenzen des Demos Kerameis und des Kerameikos von Athen”, MDAI (A) 122, 2007, p. 229 – 261.

Stroszeck 2003: Jutta Stroszeck, “Horos Kerameikou. Zu den Grenzsteinen des Kerameikos in Athen”, Polis 1, 2003, p. 53 – 85.

Thompson 1934: Homer Armstrong Thompson, “Two Centuries of Hellenistic Pottery”, Hesperia 3, 1934, p. 311 – 480.

Travlos 1971: John Travlos, Bildlexikon zur Topographie des antiken Athen, Tübingen, 1971.

Tzanakaki 1997: Katerina Tzanakaki, «Ερυθρόμορφες πελίκες στο Μουσείο Ρεθύμνου», in L. Kypraiou (ed.), Ελληνιστική Κεραμική από την Κρήτη, Chania, 1997, p. 19 – 35.

Notes

1 Alexandri 1967, p. 36 f. fig. 1 (map) site no. 16; p. 58 pl. 73 α. β. – Map and numbers in fig. 1 after Baziotopoulou-Valavani 1994, p. 46 fig. 1, extension of the area of the Demos Kerameis added after Steffelbauer 2007, p. 239 fig. 2, see also Stroszeck 2003; the area of the Academy after Travlos 1971, p. 318 fig. 415. – A map for the whole city of Athens and the sites with pits separated from sites with other traces of workshops see: Bentz, Geominy, Müller 2010, p. 128, fig. 34.

2 Eschbach 1986, p. 2 note 17.

3 I have to thank O. Tzachou-Alexandri for the opportunity to work with the material, N. Valakou-Divari and E. Baziotopoulou-Valavani from the 3rd Ephorate of Praehistoric and Classical Antiquities for their kind permission. Without the great support by the staff of the depots of the 3rd Ephorate (Odos Drakontos and Odos Melidoni) I would not have been successful; I am particulary grateful to E. Servetopoulou, L. Bournias and K. Sarris. The German Archaeological Institute of Athens granted generous technical support. I express my special thanks to the Gerda Henkel Foundation, which funded the project for a year. Astrid Puckett (Giessen) did correct the English version of the manuscript.

4 A comprehensive study of the whole filling of the pit is in preparation, it will take a while. The discussion of the Panathenaic Prize Amphorae from the pit will follow in 2014. – A shorter notice of the finding will be published in Eschbach 2013.

5 Monaco 2000, p. 34 – 56, 59 – 80, 167 – 238.

6 Baziotopoulou-Valavani 1994, p. 45 – 54.

7 Baziotopoulou-Valavani 1994, p. 47 n. 13; Maffre 1984, p. 113 – 118; Monaco 2000, p. 211 – 213 D II.

8 Baziotopoulou-Valavani 1994, p. 51; Monaco 2000, p. 201 – 206 B II; Paul-Zinserling 1994; Bentz, Geominy, Müller 2010, esp. p. 128 – 150.

9 Basiotopoulou-Valavani 1994, p. 47 note 16 f.; Monaco 2000, p. 195 – 201 B 1a/b/c; Bentz, Geominy, Müller 2010, esp. p. 150 – 169.

10 The diary of the excavation allows the reconstruction of the daily works, the sequence and the localization of the most of the separated groups.

11 For the type of Panathenaic Prize Amphorae see Bentz 1998.

12 The dated contexts: Rotroff 1997, p. 18 – 36. – Kerameikos, Building Z, especially Z 3 (320 – 307 BC): Knigge 2005, p. 49 – 79.

13 Eschbach 2013, p. 41 fig. 2 (A 3880) note 14.

14 Rotroff 1997, p. 142 sq. note 1; see p. 310 Cat. 645 – 649, esp. 646, 648 fig. 46.

15 Rotroff 1997, p. 146 – 148 note 11; p. 315 sq. Cat. 709 – 715 fig. 50.

16 Rotroff 1997, p. 165 (“Small Bowl: Broad Base”). 345 no. 1050 – 1059 fig. 65.

17 Rotroff 1997, p. 161 (“Echinus Bowl”). 338 sq. no. 970 – 976 fig. 62.

18 Rotroff 1997, p. 85. 245 sq. no. 37 – 43 fig. 6.

19 For the best preserved piece see Eschbach 2013, p. 41 fig. 3 (A 3870).

20 Rotroff 1997, p. 137 – 139. 304 Cat. 590 – 594 fig. 42 sq.

21 For the gilded black-glazed ware see Kopcke 1964. – The Bell-krater in Vienna: Kopcke 1964, p. 39 f. no. 118 pl. 25.

22 Kopcke 1964, p. 31 – 34 (list). 32 no. 46: CVA Ensérune, Collection Mouret, p. 23 pl. 19, 1. 4.

23 Eschbach 2013, p. 41 fig. 4 (A 3810).

24 Kopcke 1964, p. 27 no. 12 (Athens, Kerameikos 2330, “320 – 310 BC”; Dm ca. 24 cm). no. 13 (Athens, Kerameikos 2339, “310 – 300 BC”; Dm ca. 22 cm); p. 70 – 72 Beil. 13, 1 – 2.

25 Pelike Rethymnon: Tzanakaki 1997, p. 20 sq. fig. 1 a. b (Rethymnon, Mus. Inv. P 759; Amazon Painter [M. Langner]). – Some other pelikai from the pit: Eschbach 2013, p. 42 fig. 5.

26 The Amazon Painter and his work: ARV2 1478 – 1480; Para 496 sq.; Add2 381 sq.; Schefold 1934, p. 134 sq.; Langner 2013a, p. 147 – 149, 161. – Beazley has given 48 pieces to the painter or near to him, the Beazley Archive counts 57 listings. M. Langner included 147 Vases for the painter and his workshop, among them 125 pelikai, 20 bellkraters and two hydriai. – I have to thank M. Langner for the possibility to use his database of Attic vase-painting of the 4th century BC.

27 Rethymnon, Mus. P 2228, Tzanakaki 1997, p. 30 sq. fig. 8 a. b. (Amazon Painter [M. Langner]).

28 Athens, Agora P 1104, 1105: Thompson 1934, p. 333 no. B 1; p. 334 no B 2. – Moore 1997, p. 143 no. 64 f. pl. 14 (Amazon Painter). – The fragments: Athens, Agora P 19346, Moore 1997, p. 214 no. 521 pl. 55 (19346 a, Amazon Painter); Norman, Univ. Mus. of Art, C 53-54/60, Heisserer 1986, p. 57 no. 91 (near Amazon Painter).

29 Alexandri 1967, p. 58 pl. 73 b. – Eschbach 2013, p. 42 fig. 6.

30 Regarding the problems of interpretation I would like to refer to Frederike Fless for the moment, who discussed different models some years ago: Fless 2002, p. 90 – 93. 99 f. – See also: Langner 2005, p. 53 – 66; Langner 2013b, p. 225 – 248.

31 LIMC VIII (1997) Suppl. p. 923 – 941 s. v. Pan (J. Boardman).

32 Tzanakaki 1997, p. 19 – 35; Skordou 1997, p. 36 – 61.

33 Fless 2002, p. 88 – 93, esp. 90; Langner 2005, esp. p. 61 – 65.

34 Alexandri 1967, p. 58 pl. 73 α (= A 3889).

35 Frel 1972, p. 289 note 2. – A detailed study will be published soon, see note 4.

36 Except of the amphorae from our pit the archont’s name is known from a small fragment from Eretria only, Bentz 1998, p. 180 Cat. 4.129; Eschbach 2013, p. 45 note 35.

37 Eschbach 2013, p. 44 figs. 8 – 10.

Table des illustrations

Légende Fig. 1: Potters workshops between the Kerameikos and Platon’s Academy: () of the 5th and partly early 4th century BC; () of the 4th century BC (© see note 1)
URL http://books.openedition.org/editionsehess/docannexe/image/3149/img-1.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 496k
Légende Fig. 2: Burning supports from the pit
URL http://books.openedition.org/editionsehess/docannexe/image/3149/img-2.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 508k
Légende Fig. 3: Plate, Inv. A 3818
URL http://books.openedition.org/editionsehess/docannexe/image/3149/img-3.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 528k
Légende Fig. 4: Fish-plate, Inv. A 3829
URL http://books.openedition.org/editionsehess/docannexe/image/3149/img-4.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 504k
Légende Fig. 5: Small bowl, Inv. A 3808
URL http://books.openedition.org/editionsehess/docannexe/image/3149/img-5.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 204k
Légende Fig. 6: Echinus bowl, Inv. A 3820
URL http://books.openedition.org/editionsehess/docannexe/image/3149/img-6.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 572k
Légende Fig. 7: Black-glazed bell-krater, Inv. A 3881
URL http://books.openedition.org/editionsehess/docannexe/image/3149/img-7.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 472k
Légende Fig. 8: Black-glazed calyx-krater, fr
URL http://books.openedition.org/editionsehess/docannexe/image/3149/img-8.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 196k
Légende Fig. 9: Pelike, Inv. A 3875
URL http://books.openedition.org/editionsehess/docannexe/image/3149/img-9.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 140k
Légende Fig. 10: Pelike, Inv. A 3789
URL http://books.openedition.org/editionsehess/docannexe/image/3149/img-10.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 92k
Légende Fig. 11: Bell-krater, Inv. A 3868
URL http://books.openedition.org/editionsehess/docannexe/image/3149/img-11.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 116k
Légende Fig. 12: Bell-krater, Inv. A 3867
URL http://books.openedition.org/editionsehess/docannexe/image/3149/img-12.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 160k
Légende Fig. 13: Panathenaic Prize Amphora, frr., Inv. A 3833. 3834
URL http://books.openedition.org/editionsehess/docannexe/image/3149/img-13.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 176k
Légende Fig. 14: Panathenaic Prize Amphora, Inv. A 3389 (B).(Fig. 2-14: All photographies and drawings by the author)
URL http://books.openedition.org/editionsehess/docannexe/image/3149/img-14.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 427k

Auteur

Justus-Liebig-Universität Gießen. Institut für Altertumswissenschaften. Klassische Archäologie

© Éditions de l’École des hautes études en sciences sociales, 2014

Licence OpenEdition Books

Rechercher dans OpenEdition Search

Vous allez être redirigé vers OpenEdition Search