Version classiqueVersion mobile

Multidisciplinary approaches to food and foodways in the medieval Eastern Mediterranean

 | 
Sylvie Yona Waksman

Introduction

Introduction

The POMEDOR project “People, pottery and food in the medieval Eastern Mediterranean”

Sylvie Yona Waksman

Résumé

Within the rapidly expanding area of research on food and foodways, the intention of the POMEDOR project was to explore and develop this field in the medieval Eastern Mediterranean, using a multidisciplinary archaeological, archaeometric and historical approach. It was mainly based on studies of different categories of pottery involved in the production, storage and transportation, preparation and cooking, and consumption of food – from transport amphorae to table wares, through cooking wares and sugar molds. Case studies from Greece, Turkey, Cyprus and the Levantine coast focused especially on developments in transitional periods related to new rules and to the arrival of new populations (Crusades, Turkish conquests), and to the cohabitation of populations having different cultural identities and food traditions (Byzantine, Latin, Muslim, Turkish and others). Examined in a broader context were changes in pottery repertoire in archaeological contexts with known dating and nature of occupation, adaptation of pottery production to new uses and fashions as shown by analyses of raw materials and techniques of manufacture, and food products revealed by analyses of organic residues. From preliminary approaches to medieval amphorae contents to regional syntheses on Crusader Cyprus and the Levant, from insights into the introduction of new wares and techniques in early Turkish western Anatolia to highlighting the prominent role of the harbor of Chalcis throughout the Byzantine and Frankish periods, the POMEDOR project provided new and steadier grounds on which further studies may be built. It also created research and educational tools and assembled a network of researchers contributing different specialties to the study of food and foodways, for a period and in a region in which such studies had been little developed thus far.

Texte intégral

Context

  • 1 I also develop this point in Vroom et al. 2017a, pp. 13‑17.
  • 2 Not surprisingly, Guy Sanders (Corinth), Sabine Ladstätter (Ephesus: Ladstätter 2015), Chris Light (...)

1Research into food and foodways in ancient societies has undergone spectacular developments over the past years, and is increasingly seen as a highly effective way of studying economic, social and cultural issues (e.g. Flandrin & Montanari 1996; Mee & Renard 2007; Leclant et al. 2008; Bescherer Metheny & Beaudry 2015). Within this rapidly expanding area of research, the medieval Eastern Mediterranean is still very much an unexplored area, especially when compared to its western counterpart (e.g. Menjot 1984; Laurioux 2002; 2005; Montanari 2004; 2012; Ruas 2005; Woolgar et al. 2006; Woolgar 2016). This situation may be related to a combination of factors,1 starting with the scarcity of primary archaeological data. Excavations focusing on medieval sites in the Eastern Mediterranean are still rare, with some noticeable exceptions (such as Acre, Paphos, Amorium, Anaia Kadıkalesi, Istanbul (Saraçhane) and lately the metro-Marmaray and Küçükyalı excavations: Stern & Syon, forthcoming; Megaw 1971; 1972; Green et al. 2014; Lightfoot 2003; Lightfoot & Ivison 2012; Mercangöz 2013a; Harrison 1986; Istanbul 2007; Kocabaş 2010; Ricci 2019), and extensive excavations of the late occupations of antique sites are few (Corinth, Ephesus/Ayasuluk, Pergamon: Sanders 2003; Williams 2003 and bibliography cited; Ladstätter 2010; 2015; Rheidt 1991). Another factor is methodological, as excavation directors who involve a large range of specialists to study medieval and post-medieval contexts are the exception rather than the rule,2 whereas it is common practice in the study of earlier periods to subject pottery as well as human skeletal, animal and plant remains to analysis. Structural factors related to educational systems (the comparative rarity of Byzantine, Islamic and Crusader archaeology departments) or to scholarly traditions (the marginal role taken by material culture in Byzantine studies) must also be taken into account.

  • 3 It is also very significant that a series of conferences on Byzantine studies, the “International (...)

2However, Byzantine and Crusader archaeology has lately developed significantly3 (Lock & Sanders 1996; Boas 1999; Daim & Drauschke 2010; Niewöhner 2017), and the study of domestic structures (Boas 2010) and specific contexts, such as a destruction context in Crusader Apollonia (Tal 2011), provide a wealth of information on food and foodways. Field surveys in Israel, Turkey, Greece and Cyprus have provided insight into settlement patterns and exploitation of agricultural resources in Byzantine and Frankish territories (Armstrong 1989; 2002; Ellenblum 1998; Geyer & Lefort 2003; Given & Knapp 2003; Bintliff et al. 2007; Given et al. 2013). Sugar refineries are the subject of several recent studies (von Wartburg 2001; 2014; Politis 2015; Jones 2017), which shed light on this particular food industry.

  • 4 Especially since the inclusion in 1999 of the Eastern Mediterranean area in those covered by the A (...)
  • 5 See also Laiou & Morrisson 2007, pp. 115‑121, 184‑188; François 2017.

3Research on pottery also benefitted from this evolution. Although pottery specialists for the period are still very few, the increasing number of papers on ceramics of the Byzantine and Crusader periods,4 together with the organization of specific conferences (Déroche & Spieser 1989; Böhlendorf-Arslan et al. 2007; Papanikola-Bakirtzi & Coureas 2014; Vroom 2015a) are encouraging signs. Typo-chronologies may rely on a few reference publications of major excavations (Hayes 1992; Sanders 2000; 2003), and synthesizing works at the regional level, such as the one proposed by Stern and Avissar (Avissar & Stern 2005) for the Crusader and Mamluk periods in Israel, have been constructed. However, studies that include quantification are still rare, and Eastern Mediterranean medieval pottery is only starting to be better understood in its broader socio-economic and cultural framework (Sanders 1995; 2000; 2003; Stern 1997; 2012; Vroom 2003; 2015a; 2015b; Gabrieli 2006).5

4The potential role of pottery in the study of food and foodways has been increasingly acknowledged, as pottery is intertwined with food in a number of ways, from the production of food, its storage and transportation in trade, its preparation and cooking, to its consumption, representation and perception (Bats 1988; Alexandre-Bidon 2005; Papanikola-Bakirtzi 2005; Batigne Vallet 2008; Ravoire & Dietrich 2009; Karageorghis & Kouka 2011; Spataro & Villing 2015; Vroom et al. 2017b). Using archaeological, historical and iconographic data, the pioneer work of Vroom (e.g. 2000; 2003; 2007a; 2007b; 2009; 2015b; Vroom & Tzavella 2017; Bağcı & Vroom 2017) opened the way to the use of pottery as a tool to investigate food and foodways in Byzantine and Ottoman Eastern Mediterranean contexts. An important feature of her work is that it covers all categories of ceramics, not only the glazed table wares as is often the case. Each category responds differently to outside influences, as analyzed by Gabrieli in her studies of medieval cooking wares on Cyprus (Gabrieli 2006; 2007; 2008; 2009). Among the categories whose study had long been neglected, cooking wares are increasingly seen as objects of trade and of specific technological value (Picon 1995; Tite & Kilikoglou 2002; Waksman 2002), and were shown to be highly significant in the adoption of new cultural behavior and food habits, as seen in a few case studies in the medieval Eastern Mediterranean (Joyner 1997; 2007; Gabrieli 2006; 2007; 2009; Vroom 2009; Vionis et al. 2010; François 2012). The study of the names and forms of pottery implements in relation to their function may also be fruitful (Bakirtzis 1989; François 2010; see also Koder, in this volume).

5Laboratory investigations played an important role in these developments. Firstly, they engendered a gradual shift in the definition of ceramic wares, from an art historical viewpoint, focusing on types and styles, to production-based definitions, based on workshop evidence and on the characteristics of the ceramic material (Megaw & Jones 1983; Maguire 1997; Papanikola-Bakirtzi 1999; Waksman & François 2004-2005; Waksman & von Wartburg 2006; Papanikola-Bakirtzi & Zekos 2010; Shapiro 2012; Waksman 2012; Waksman et al. 2014). This change in viewpoint is essential in any attempt to understand pottery production and diffusion in their economic dimension (Waksman 2018), as well as in their relationship to food and foodways. Secondly, methodological developments in the analysis of organic matter provide and make available more detailed information concerning food residues in pottery, and in soils where food-related activities occurred (Evershed 1993; 2008; Garnier 2007; Pecci 2009a; Regert 2011; Inserra & Pecci 2011). As for the medieval period, the study of organic residues in pottery has been applied mainly for the Western Mediterranean (Mottram et al. 1999; Evershed 2008; Salvini et al. 2008; Pecci 2006; 2009b; Pecci & Salvini 2007; Giorgi et al. 2010), but it also has great potential for the Eastern Mediterranean, as first attempts have shown (Kimpe et al. 2002; Romanus et al. 2007). Furthermore Pecci (Pecci et al. 2012) demonstrated the possibility of retrieving such information from glazed pottery, an important aspect in the region under study, where most of the research has concentrated on glazed table wares, and where in fact cooking wares may be glazed as well.

  • 6 See also Reuter (in this volume) for archaeobotany, and Vroom (in this volume) for additional bibl (...)

6Other approaches to medieval diet in the area, using archaeozoology, archaeobotany or biological anthropology, are still rare (Lev-Tov 1999; De Cupere 2001; Mitchell et al. 2008; Margaritis et al., forthcoming), with some noticeable exceptions such as extensive research carried out by Bourbou (Bourbou & Richards 2007; Bourbou 2010; 2013; Bourbou et al. 2011; Bourbou & Garvie-Lok 2015).6 Although not all the indicators necessarily point to the same trends, their correlation may be significant when trying to establish cultural boundaries (Arthur 2007). Studies in the medieval Eastern Mediterranean based on a variety of material remains, such as pottery, human and animal bones, botanical remains, as well as textual sources, are still exceptional but show the potential of an integrated approach (Joyner 1997; 2007; Vionis et al. 2010; Vroom 2009; 2015b; François 2012), although more caution against over-interpretation is necessary due to the present scarcity of data.

  • 7 More adequate presentations and bibliographies by Philippe Trélat (Crusader States), Ilias Anagnos (...)
  • 8 And see Redford 2004; 2015.
  • 9 A notable study concerning a neighboring region is that by Lewicka (2011) on medieval Cairo.
  • 10 And see Koder’s contributions in Mango & Dagron 1995; Papanikola-Bakirtzi 2005; Brubaker & Linardo (...)
  • 11 See the proceedings of a series of meetings they organized since the 1990s on the history of wine, (...)

7Historical approaches are those which have probably provided the most numerous studies in relation to food and foodways so far, although the state of their research is variable in regard to the Crusader kingdoms, the Byzantine Empire, and the Seljuk territories, for example.7 The latter are still very much unexplored, the PhD thesis of Trépanier (2014)8 being an exception, while research on food in the Crusader states can draw on several extensive studies, mostly devoted to the production and transportation of food supplies. From early fundamental synthesizing works (Heyd 1885-1886) to recent ones, such as Ouerfelli’s (2008), which has renewed knowledge on production, trade and consumption of sugar, historical sources have provided a wealth of information on various food-related subjects (e.g. commodities mentioned in Jacoby 1997; 2005; 2009), including agricultural production on Cyprus and in the Levantine area (Richard 1977; 1985), the transportation of food supplies (Balard et al. 1994) and the military logistics of food during the Crusades (Pryor 2002).9 Research into the Byzantine Empire has also addressed several aspects of food and foodways, from rural economies and production and consumption of agricultural products to the food supply of the capital, from monastic dietary rules to ritual and symbolic aspects, and may rely on long-term research such as Koder’s (Koder 1993; 2002; 2014; 2016;10 Kislinger 1996; Mayer & Trzcionka 2005; Brubaker & Linardou 2007; Caseau 2015, and contributions or chapters in Mango & Dagron 1995; Laiou 2002; Laiou & Morrisson 2007; Kaplan 2007; Magdalino & Necipoğlu 2016). In recent years, Anagnostakis and his group have been particularly active in developing multidisciplinary approaches11 (Anagnostakis & Papamastorakis 2005; Anagnostakis 2008a; 2008b; 2013a; 2013b; Anagnostakis et al. 2011; Anagnostakis & Pellettieri 2016).

Scope of the POMEDOR project

8In this context, the POMEDOR project intended to take advantage of the great potential suggested by recent advances, to explore and develop the new field of food and foodways in the medieval Eastern Mediterranean using an interdisciplinary historical, archaeological and archaeometric approach. It focused on the evolution of dietary practices in contexts related to the arrival of new populations (Crusades, Turkish conquests) having different cultural identities and culinary practices. The medieval Eastern Mediterranean saw encounters between different communities: Muslim, Byzantine, Latin, Turkish and others. Various aspects of these encounters, predominantly conflicts and economic exchanges, have been studied by historians, but little had so far been examined regarding cohabitation and cultural interactions. Food was seen as a particularly significant factor in understanding such relationships, not only as a marker of social and cultural identities, but also as a possible interaction point. How did the newcomers adapt to local food customs? Did they import their own food culture – products, ways of processing and cooking, dining habits? Did they impose their own food culture? How does material culture, and especially pottery, reflect these developments and interactions?

9The developments in the production, procurement, processing and consumption of food were investigated mainly through archaeological and archaeometric studies of different categories of pottery – from transport amphorae to serving dishes, through cooking wares and wares used for the manufacture of sugar. Changes in pottery repertoire in archaeological contexts for which the date and nature of occupation are known, adaptation of pottery production to new uses and fashions as shown by analyses of raw materials and techniques of manufacture, food products examined through analyses of organic residues, were studied in their broader historical context. Through case studies related to Cyprus, the Levantine coast, Turkey and Greece, the project’s intention was to connect data of different kinds within a framework of diachronic and synchronic approaches.

10The establishment of the POMEDOR network, involving experienced researchers and students contributing different specialties to the study of food and foodways in the medieval Eastern Mediterranean, was aimed at favoring further research, including a wider variety of food-related indicators, such as those provided by archaeozoological, archaeobotanical and bioarchaeological studies. The creation of the POMEDOR website and the development of online ceramics databases are intended to provide educational and research tools for a rapid dissemination of the results of research.

11Two initiatives were directed towards the general public, a culinary event in collaboration with the Paul Bocuse Institute and the preparation of material for future exhibitions. The latter includes both pottery from the collections of French museums, and 3D models of reference collections. They were selected to present, with the help of food-related archaeological objects, the meeting of medieval Muslim, Byzantine, Latin and Turkish cultures through the medium of food, and to propose a resonance in today’s meeting of communities and cultures.

Implementation

Geographic and chronological frameworks

  • 12 Lebanon was included through previous studies, and Crimea through a French-Ukrainian DNIPRO projec (...)

12The geographic framework encompassed Cyprus, Israel, Greece, Turkey, as well as Lebanon and the Crimea (fig. 1).12 Although overall the chronology extends from the 10th to the 17th century, the project focused more specifically on the medieval period, with special emphasis on transitional periods. Several case studies were made, to investigate transitions from the Fatimid to the Crusader period on the Levantine coast (Stern et al., in this volume), from the Byzantine to the Crusader period in the Aegean (Kontogiannis et al., in this volume), from the Byzantine to the Ottoman period in western Anatolia (Burlot et al., in this volume), and the Frankish and Venetian periods in Cyprus (Gabrieli et al., in this volume). Each case corresponds to changes in rule and to movements of populations related to the Crusades (Israel, Lebanon, Greece, Cyprus) or to the Turkish conquests (Turkey, Crimea), and to different combinations of resident and incoming populations.

Fig. 1 – Map showing the location of the sites investigated within the framework of the POMEDOR project (red dots: terrestrial sites; red circles: shipwrecks; sites not named on the map, in Greece: Aliveri, Akraifnion, Orchomenos; in Israel: el-Kabri, Horbat ‘Uza, Horbat Bet Zeneta, Horbat Manot) (base map O. Barge, MOM Lyon, map S.Y. Waksman).

Fig. 1 – Map showing the location of the sites investigated within the framework of the POMEDOR project (red dots: terrestrial sites; red circles: shipwrecks; sites not named on the map, in Greece: Aliveri, Akraifnion, Orchomenos; in Israel: el-Kabri, Horbat ‘Uza, Horbat Bet Zeneta, Horbat Manot) (base map O. Barge, MOM Lyon, map S.Y. Waksman).

Selection of archaeological sites and contexts

  • 13 Israel Antiquities Authority.
  • 14 University of Sydney and University of Western Australia.
  • 15 Leiden University. Vroom’s research was carried out within the framework of the VIDI project she d (...)
  • 16 Research was made possible thanks to the collaboration of many individuals and institutions (archa (...)
  • 17 A detailed presentation of sampling strategies is available for some case studies on the POMEDOR w (...)

13The selection of archaeological sites (fig. 1) and contexts in order to study these transitions was an essential part of the project. It was coordinated by Edna Stern13 in Israel, by Smadar Gabrieli14 in Cyprus, and by Joanita Vroom15 at Ephesus and Athens. Other contexts were selected in concert with Nikos Kontogiannis, Stefania Skartsis, Giannis Vaxevannis (Chalcis, Thebes, and other sites in the area), George Koutsouflakis (Kavalliani shipwreck) in Greece; Lisa Yehuda (Apollonia) in Israel; Beate Böhlendorf-Arslan (Miletus), Sarah Japp (Pergamon), Asa Eger (Ḥiṣn al-Tīnāt), Scott Redford and Marie-Henriette Gates (Kinet Höyük) in Turkey; Iryna Teslenko (Aluston, Funa, Cembalo), Yana Morozova and Sergiy Teslenko (Novy Svet shipwrecks) in Ukraine.16 A large variety of sites were made available for study – urban and rural sites, harbors and inland sites, re-occupied antique sites and newly founded ones, etc. Each case study and associated sampling campaigns were designed in a self-consistent way, but possible connections between them were looked for as well, in order to reach different levels of analysis.17

  • 18 Laboratory studies on Tarsus could not be included in the project. Samples from Kinet Höyük and Hi (...)
  • 19 One exception is the site of the Türbe in the Artemision in Ayasuluk/Ephesus, but unfortunately ne (...)

14Two categories of sites and contexts were preferentially selected. Firstly, sites corresponding to long-term pottery production (such as Chalcis, Ephesos, Pergamon, Beirut, Acre), where developments in form and decoration, choices of raw materials and techniques of manufacture may reflect changes related to food production, preparation, cooking, and consumption. Secondly, we looked for key contexts within the sites studied, for which the chronology and the nature of the occupation were well defined, and for which quantitative data on ceramics assemblages were available. A practical limitation was the permission to export samples for laboratory investigations.18 Also, our initial design to include sites for which other food-related indicators were available as well, based on archaeozoological, archaeobotanical or bioarchaeological studies, could not be met within the framework of the project.19

Categories of archaeological pottery considered

  • 20 For previous research see: Günsenin & Hatcher 1997; Shapiro 2012.

15A large variety of food-related categories of pottery were considered – sugar molds and molasses jars for the production of sugar, amphorae for transport and storage, common wares and cooking wares, table wares. For each category and case study, the state of the art differed widely, so that studies varied from exploratory ones (e.g. on amphorae) to refining regional syntheses (e.g. for the southern Levantine coast). Medieval transport amphorae had not yet been the subject of extensive archaeometric studies concerning their origins and contents,20 so that we chose to focus on widely distributed types (Günsenin 1989). Cooking wares were studied from the angle of their typological, technical, and functional evolution in the long term, as a potential reflection of the adoption of new food-related behaviors (Gabrieli 2006; 2007). We also investigated their regional and long-distance diffusion (Waksman 2002; 2011) and their potential relationships with specific food products, food preparations, and groups of population (Gabrieli 2007). Pottery used for the manufacture of sugar, the study of which has benefitted from recent advances (von Wartburg 2014; Stern et al. 2015; Jones 2017), was looked at in relation to long-term developments. Studies on table wares focused on the emergence of local wares of different typological and technological traditions, and their possible connections with the arrival of new populations and/or the needs of specific cultural groups (Stern 2015; Waksman 2015, p. 306; 2017, pp. 155‑156).

Studies of collections in French museums

  • 21 “Cité de la Céramique”, Sèvres.
  • 22 INRAP, Éguilles.
  • 23 Louvre Museum, Department of Islamic Art.
  • 24 See infra, n. 76.
  • 25 For a recent study of Byzantine collections in the Louvre museum, see François (2017), including a (...)

16Museum collections may include representatives of the archaeological productions under study, through which research may be disseminated to a wider audience. We intended to select ceramic objects which could illustrate a variety of cultural backgrounds and dining habits and reflect the cross-fertilization of Muslim, Byzantine, Latin and Turkish cultures, an approach conceived with Laurence Tilliard.21 Eastern Mediterranean medieval ceramics were sought out in museums in southern France (Marseille, Aix-en-Provence, Cannes, Saint-Raphael) by Catherine Richarté.22 They were inventoried and selected, as part of the internship of Marie-Pierre Delanos, in the collections of the “Cité de la Céramique” in Sèvres and the Louvre museum (Department of Islamic Art), in collaboration with Laurence Tilliard, Carine Juvin and Charlotte Maury,23 respectively. Some were analyzed non-destructively, in order to check their attribution to productions defined on the basis of archaeological examples, and scanned in 3D.24 In this way, we wished to provide new information gained through the POMEDOR project for museum collections, whose provenance and chronology is not always well defined, and to integrate the latest research into future exhibitions.25

Laboratory investigations

  • 26 Barcelona University.
  • 27 In collaboration with Fernanda Inserra and Miguel Ángel Cau Ontiveros (Barcelona University), Nico (...)
  • 28 Gas Chromatography Mass Spectrometry

17Laboratory investigations were carried out in order to investigate contents, provenances and technologies of manufacture. Alessandra Pecci26 was in charge of organic residue analysis, carried out27 in Barcelona, Vic‑le-Comte and Bristol by GC-MS,28 taking advantage of recent advances such as the ability of this technique to investigate glazed wares (Pecci et. al. 2012), and the identification of chemical markers specific to red wine (Garnier & Valamoti 2016). This part of the study focused on Middle and Late Byzantine amphorae (Pecci et al., in this volume), and on Cypriot and Levantine cooking wares (Pecci et al. 2015; Gabrieli et al. 2017; in this volume).

  • 29 Israel Antiquities Authority.
  • 30 Wavelength-Dispersive X-Ray Fluorescence, carried out at the Ceramology analytical platform, CNRS (...)
  • 31 Lyon 2 University and UMR 5138.
  • 32 Scanning Electron Microscopy – Energy Dispersive Spectroscopy, carried out at the CTμ microscopy a (...)
  • 33 University Pierre & Marie Curie.
  • 34 PhD thesis “Premières productions de céramiques turques en Anatolie occidentale: contextualisation (...)
  • 35 Bordeaux Montaigne University.
  • 36 X-Ray Diffraction, carried out at the Ceramology analytical platform, CNRS UMR 5138, Lyon.

18Provenances and technologies were investigated through chemical, petrographic and mineralogical analyses of ceramic bodies, slips and glazes carried out in Lyon, Jerusalem and Paris. Anastasia Shapiro29 through petrography and Yona Waksman through WD-XRF30 carried out provenance studies. Jacques Burlot,31 using SEM-EDS,32 as well as Raman spectroscopy together with Ludovic Bellot-Gurlet,33 studied the technologies of slips and glazes of western Anatolian productions, as part of his PhD.34 Lucie Courbe35 investigated the Byzantine and Ottoman productions of Athens during her MA internship, with Yona Waksman using WD-XRF and with Jacques Burlot using XRD.36 Chemical, petrographic and mineralogical analyses enabled us to identify the local repertoires, their technological features, the developments in the choice of raw materials and techniques, special attention being paid to the emergence of new wares and new techniques (Waksman 2015; 2017; Waksman et al. 2017; Burlot 2017; Burlot et al. 2018; 2020; in this volume; Gabrieli et al., in this volume; Kontogiannis et al., in this volume; Shapiro et al., in this volume; Stern et al., in this volume). The diffusion of pottery – amphorae, cooking wares, table wares – was investigated as well (Waksman et al. 2014; 2018a; 2018b; Morozova et al., in this volume; Gabrieli et al., in this volume; Stern et al., in this volume; Kontogiannis et al., in this volume).

  • 37 Proton Induced X-Ray Emission and Proton Induced Gamma-Ray Emission, carried out at the AGLAE faci (...)
  • 38 PSL Chimie ParisTech and C2RMF Paris.
  • 39 “Accélérateur Grand Louvre d’analyse élémentaire”.

19Material in museum collections was analyzed non-destructively using PIXE and PIGE37 by Anne Bouquillon,38 Jacques Burlot and Yona Waksman, in collaboration with the AGLAE39 team (Burlot et al. 2019).

Study of textual and iconographic sources

  • 40 University of Rouen, associate researcher.
  • 41 National Hellenic Research Foundation, Athens.
  • 42 University of Mississippi.
  • 43 This document is accessible to members of the POMEDOR network through the POMEDOR collaborative pl (...)
  • 44 Leiden University, within the framework of J. Vroom VIDI’s project.

20Historical research required library studies of different types of sources, such as diplomatic sources, economic and social history sources, including notarial minutes (especially Genoese and Venetian), trade manuals, account books and wills. Among the narrative sources, chronicles and travel accounts may provide live testimonies of dining habits and food consumption. Historical research was coordinated by Philippe Trélat,40 who with the help of Ilias Anagnostakis41 and Nicolas Trépanier42 developed a program-questionnaire for a historical survey. It included different lines of research: choice of cultivated plant species and livestock and hunted animals; places of distribution; methods of food preservation; cultural values of different cooking methods; changing dietary boundaries between communities.43 In parallel, iconographic sources, inventories of utensils and cookery books, which may provide information in the area under study and beyond (Yerasimos 2001; Dalby 2003; Nasrallah 2007; Rodinson et al. 2009; Lewicka 2011; Redford 2015, and see Yenişehirlioğlu, in this volume), were investigated in their relationship to ceramic material and to food habits by Joanita Vroom and Yasemin Bağcı44 (Bağcı & Vroom 2017; Bağcı 2017).

Activities and tools

  • 45 www.pomedor.mom.fr/ (accessed 28/11/2017). The POMEDOR website and platform are hosted by the serv (...)
  • 46 Within the framework of the “Séminaires de céramologie” of the “Archéologie et Archéométrie” labor (...)
  • 47 Co-organized with Emmanuelle Vila (CNRS UMR 5133, Lyon) and Sabine Fourrier (CNRS UMR 5189, Lyon) (...)
  • 48 In collaboration with Andrea Berlin (Boston University, LCP project, see infra).
  • 49 In collaboration with Joanita Vroom and Roos von Oosten (Leiden University).

21The POMEDOR website45 was created in order to disseminate information on the project (general presentation, ongoing actions, meetings, publications, etc.), as well as related information, to a larger audience. The attached collaborative platform offers online spaces for the participants in the POMEDOR network to share files and discuss specific issues. The implementation of the program started with two meetings to launch it in Athens and Nicosia. Before the final POMEDOR conference, which resulted in the present volume, several seminars,46 study days and a workshop were organized at the “Maison de l’Orient et de la Méditerranée” in Lyon. They focused on case studies (Acre, Ephesus) or on specific themes (storage and conservation of food products,47 ceramic database issues48). A session entitled “Medieval MasterChef. Eastern Cuisine and Western Food Customs: an Archaeological Perspective”, which expanded perspectives to the medieval Western Mediterranean and north-western Europe, was organized49 in Istanbul as part of the 20th meeting of the European Archaeologists Association; its proceedings were published (Vroom et al. 2017b).

Summary of scientific results

Food containers and their trade: advances in medieval amphorae studies

22Middle and Late Byzantine amphorae have been the subject of a number of studies (e.g. papers in Déroche & Spieser 1989; Günsenin 1990; 2018; Hayes 1992; Sazanov 1997; van Doorninck 2002; forthcoming; Todorova 2012). But unlike their Early Byzantine counterparts, little was known about their contents, and only a few of their workshops had been identified, either archaeologically or with the help of archaeological science (Yakobson 1979; Günsenin 1993; Ivaschenko 1997; Poulou-Papadimitriou & Nodarou 2014; Todorova, in this volume).

  • 50 For a discussion of the terminology of “classes” and “types”, we refer to van Doorninck (forthcomi (...)

23Within the POMEDOR project, we studied amphorae which were widely distributed in the Eastern Mediterranean, the Black Sea and beyond, through investigations of three of the four main types50 of amphorae as proposed by Günsenin (1989; 1990; 2018), her types II, III and IV (Waksman et al. 2018a; Pecci et al., in this volume; Morozova et al., in this volume). The latter are among the last pottery containers for maritime trade in the area, before other kinds of containers, especially barrels, replaced them (Bevan 2014; Todorova, in this volume). We also examined the contrasting situation of a type of amphorae corresponding to a restricted distribution (the Levantine coast) and time period (the Crusader period) (Stern 2012, vol. 1, pp. 38‑40; Shapiro 2012; Pecci et al., in this volume).

24Based on samples taken from different contexts, amphorae of types Günsenin II and III were investigated for their provenance (Waksman et al. 2018a; Morozova et al., in this volume), and types Günsenin III and IV for their contents (Pecci et al., in this volume). As far as we know, these are the first investigations of this kind carried out on these main types of medieval amphorae.

25In all the examples sampled for organic residue analysis (Pecci et al., in this volume), Pinaceae products, related to the coating, and residues indicative of wine, which could in several cases be specified as red wine, were identified. They were associated with lipids of either plant (oil?) or animal origin. Although the latter could be part of the coating mix, the results support the view that these containers have been used several times (van Doorninck 1989; Todorova, in this volume), and that they may have carried different types of contents successively, wine and olive oil for example. Because residue analysis does not enable us to determine the primary content, further insight may be gained from research on volume capacity in relationship to contents (van Doorninck 1993; 2015; forthcoming).

26For the Levantine amphorae, evidence of plant oils other than olive oil, together with the absence of red wine markers in 2 of the 3 samples considered, may differentiate their contents from those of Byzantine amphorae of types Günsenin III and IV. However, further systematic analyses would be required to confirm this trend, before any attempt at interpretation in relation to the Frankish presence in the Levant is made (Pecci et al., in this volume). Overall, these preliminary results, obtained from a limited number of samples, appear to be very promising and clearly call for further research.

  • 51 However, the role of transshipment and of reuse of amphorae containers, which cannot be evaluated (...)

27Besides these exploratory archaeometric approaches to contents, decisive advances were obtained in the identification of the origins of amphorae, and thus presumably of the regions of production of their contents.51 Irrespective of their dating, the morphological sub-type to which they belong or the context from which they come, all the samples of type Günsenin III and a portion of those of type Günsenin II considered within the POMEDOR project were attributed by chemical analysis to workshops located in the surroundings of Chalcis (Chalkida, Greece) (fig. 2). The fact that there are samples from different sites and contexts, including examples representative of the cargoes of the Novy Svet ships sunk off the Crimea (Waksman et al. 2018a; Morozova et al., in this volume) is significant for the importance of this Aegean harbor, as we will see below.

Fig. 2 – Examples of amphorae, common wares (above) and MBP table wares (below) manufactured in Chalcis/Chalkida, dating from the 11th to the 13th or beginning of the 14th century, depending on the type. Most of these types were widely exported and are found as cargo in shipwrecks.

Fig. 2 – Examples of amphorae, common wares (above) and MBP table wares (below) manufactured in Chalcis/Chalkida, dating from the 11th to the 13th or beginning of the 14th century, depending on the type. Most of these types were widely exported and are found as cargo in shipwrecks.

From excavations of the 23rd Ephorate of Byzantine Antiquities in Chalkida, Thebes and Akraifnion (Greece); from underwater excavations of Kiev National Taras Shevchenko University in Novy Svet (Crimea), and of the Ephorate of Underwater Antiquities in Kavalliani (Greece); at the “Cité de la Céramique”, Sèvres (analyzed examples, Lyon laboratory id. numbers or Sèvres inventory numbers are indicated; photos S.Y. Waksman, except BZY600, BZY606: Kiev National Taras Shevchenko University, CAD J. Burlot and S.Y. Waksman; after Waksman et al. 2014; 2018a; 2018b; Waksman 2018; Morozova et al., in this volume; Kontogiannis et al., in this volume).

28Chemical analyses also showed that amphorae of type Günsenin II were produced in other workshops as well, whose locations are not yet known. The patterns of distribution associated with each of them should open new perspectives, as indicated by the analysis of examples found as far as Sweden (Roslund 1997; Waksman & Roslund, forthcoming). We will be able to construct distribution maps according to productions instead of types, or rather according to the association of both; that is, determine the distribution of products from a given site or region, directly in relation to actual trade routes, and not just the spread of a “packaging concept” (Lemaître 2015).

29The results obtained so far, showing the continuity in fabrication between types Günsenin II and Günsenin III in Chalcis, and identifying this location as a main production site, are major results for Byzantine amphorae studies. They call for further research on transitional types and chronology as well as origins, distribution areas and trade routes.

Production and trade of amphorae and table wares throughout the Byzantine and Frankish periods: Chalcis revealed as a major maritime hub

  • 52 See also François 2015; Vroom 2016.

30Known as Euripos or Negroponte in the Byzantine and Frankish periods respectively, Chalcis has appeared up to this point as an important harbor in the historical records, though maybe not so prominent before the 13th century (Koder 1973; Jacoby 2004; 2010; Kontogiannis 2012). However, the results obtained or finalized within the POMEDOR project, together with those presented in other contributions to this volume, combine in a new picture which calls for a re-consideration of its role (Waksman et al. 2014; 2018a; 2018b; Waksman 2018; Kontogiannis et al., in this volume; Morozova et al., in this volume; Koutsouflakis, in this volume; Mercangöz, in this volume).52

  • 53 Koutsouflakis reminds us not to over-interpret such evidence, p. 450.

31An impressive number of shipwrecks, revealed by underwater explorations in the Aegean and in the Black Sea (Zelenko 2008; Koutsouflakis, in this volume; Ginkut & Lebedinskiy 2018), carried cargoes of type Günsenin III amphorae, and to a lesser extent type Günsenin II, which may have come from Chalcis. The possibility that many, if not all of them, did, based on the results of chemical analysis mentioned above, and on the location of many of these shipwrecks closely after Chalcis on a maritime trade route from Italy to Constantinople and the Black Sea (Koutsouflakis, in this volume, fig. 1),53 is somewhat startling. The amphorae found in the shipwrecks could have transported a range of agricultural products from Euboea and Boeotia, and have been associated with other cargoes having the same origin, including table wares and possibly more precious products such as silk, as Chalcis was the harbor for an important silk-producing region, including the city of Thebes (Jacoby 1991-1992; 2005; 2010; Louvi-Kizi 2002; Kontogiannis 2012; Kontogiannis et al., in this volume).

  • 54 This terminology refers to the chronological framework, as it is usually accepted, and not to Byza (...)
  • 55 See also Koutsouflakis (in this volume, fig. 2).
  • 56 Poster presented at the POMEDOR conference: A. Bouquillon, J. Burlot, S.Y. Waksman, L. Tilliard, C (...)
  • 57 See Koutsouflakis (in this volume) on the looting of Byzantine shipwrecks.

32Stronger evidence supports the possibility that Chalcis, as the production site of the so-called MPB (“Main Middle Byzantine Production”,54 Waksman et al. 2014; fig. 2, below), was the origin of most of the cargoes of table wares known from 12th-13th century shipwrecks55 (fig. 3). This evidence includes the results of chemical analysis of samples from the Kavalliani shipwreck, and of examples on display at the “Cité de la Céramique, Sèvres”56 (fig. 2: MNC26571, MNC24782; Waksman 2018; Waksman et al. 2018b; Burlot et al. 2019). The Sèvres examples are representative of many well-preserved bowls displayed in museums worldwide, which were most probably found in shipwrecks,57 as revealed by concretions visible on their reverse sides (François 2015; Waksman 2018; Burlot et al. 2019).

Fig. 3 – Location of medieval shipwrecks, containing significant cargoes of table wares, which appear as the best identified for the 11th-13th century. Cargoes shown (Kavalliani) or expected to correspond to the MBP from Chalcis are dominant (in red; after Waksman et al. 2014; 2018b; Waksman 2018; base map O. Barge MOM Lyon, map S.Y. Waksman).

Fig. 3 – Location of medieval shipwrecks, containing significant cargoes of table wares, which appear as the best identified for the 11th-13th century. Cargoes shown (Kavalliani) or expected to correspond to the MBP from Chalcis are dominant (in red; after Waksman et al. 2014; 2018b; Waksman 2018; base map O. Barge MOM Lyon, map S.Y. Waksman).
  • 58 Poster presented at the POMEDOR conference: L. Courbe, S.Y. Waksman, “Identifying the Byzantine an (...)

33Large plates and bowls, similar in form and decoration to the MBP of Chalcis, were also manufactured at other production sites such as Corinth (White et al. 2006) and Athens.58 But according to chemical analysis of examples coming from both terrestrial and shipwreck contexts, only the products of Chalcis appear to have been traded on a large scale (Waksman & von Wartburg 2006; Waksman et al. 2014; Waksman 2018). That several workshops were manufacturing the same kind of products indicates that these forms, sizes and decorations were popular at the time for table use, presumably for communal dining (Vroom 2003; 2015b).

  • 59 As yet unpublished chemical analyses carried out at Lyon of examples of “Aegean Ware” found at Kin (...)
  • 60 See also Jacoby 2014; Fleet 1999, p. 75, for connections between Negroponte, Anaia and Acre, based (...)

34The arrival of western populations (Koder 1973; Jacoby 2004; Kontogiannis 2012) in these Frankish territories newly established in the Aegean does not appear to have ended the manufacture of MBP in Chalcis, or its diffusion and use over a wide area (Waksman et al. 2014; Kontogiannis et al., in this volume). The diffusion of the MBP may even have been boosted by the closer inclusion of Chalcis/Negroponte in the Venetian trade networks. The concentration of evidence along the maritime routes directed towards the Frankish states of the Levant may also reflect changing trends in maritime trade: the impressive quantity of MBP examples found on sites such as Anaia (Mercangöz 2013b, pp. 38‑54, 56, 58; in this volume; Waksman 2013), the MBP cargoes in several shipwrecks off the southern coast of Turkey (fig. 3), the finds of MBP on Cilician and Levantine sites – in main harbors such as Acre (Stern 2012), but also in noticeable quantities at smaller port towns such as Kinet Höyük (Redford et al. 2001; Blackman & Redford 2005)59 and even on rural sites (Stern & Tatcher 2009).60 The use of MBP wares may have continued for as long as a century after the Fourth Crusade, according to the dating to the early 14th century of examples from Kinet Höyük (Redford et al. 2001). However, changes in consumption patterns and dining customs were probably progressively introduced during the 13th century, as studied by Vroom (2015b), who discusses the influence of the “westerners” and the shift towards the use of individual utensils for dining. Another model of tableware then became more popular, that of the “sgraffito with concentric circles” style initially related to the “Zeuxippus Ware” (Waksman & François 2004-2005; Waksman et al. 2014; Kontogiannis et al., in this volume).

Cooking and consumption of food in the medieval Levant and in Cyprus

35In the Levant and in Cyprus, the impact of the Crusades on food and foodways, and of the arrival of new populations of “westerners”, was examined through studies of locally manufactured pottery, and especially of cooking wares (Pecci et al. 2015; Gabrieli et al. 2017; in this volume; Stern et al., in this volume; Shapiro et al., in this volume), as the latter are seen as the most conservative category of pottery and thus indicative of significant changes in food behavior (Gabrieli 2006).

  • 61 A.H.S. Megaw, who directed the excavations at Saranda Kolones from 1957 to 1989, was also a pionee (...)

36In Cyprus, we focused on both local and imported cooking wares, in the cities of Paphos (Pecci et al. 2015; Gabrieli et al. 2017) and Nicosia, with further insight gained from other sites studied by Gabrieli (Gabrieli et al., in this volume). Cooking wares imported from the Crusader mainland, mostly from Beirut, are present in large proportions on Crusader sites such as the castle of Saranda Kolones,61 but also in “indigenous” households (Odos Ikarou in Paphos: Gabrieli 2006; 2008). However, they appear to have had a limited influence on the development of local cooking wares, even when the fall of the Crusader states brought refugees from the mainland to Cyprus (Gabrieli 2014). Whether the Levantine cooking wares could have been used in a different way, and/or to prepare different ingredients, is not clear, except for the frying pans/baking dishes. The 12th-13th century Levantine pans (fig. 4e) differ from the local ones, both in technique (they are wheel-thrown and glazed, as opposed to the hand-made unglazed Cypriot pans) and in function, as shown by residue analysis (Pecci et al. 2015). The Cypriot pans actually stand out because of the scarcity of organic residues recovered from them, which indicates uses which left no detectable residues, such as parching, or cooking of vegetables or grains. The association of animal fats and plant oils found in the Levantine baking dishes clearly indicates different uses, perhaps related to new dishes, but possibly explained by other factors as well (Gabrieli et al. 2017; in this volume). Still ongoing research is expected to provide further insight, by expanding analyses in different directions. Firstly, similar wares found in the Hospitallers complex in Acre are being analyzed for comparison of use in a typical Crusader context (Acre) to that of an indigenous Cypriot context (Paphos, Odos Ikarou). Secondly, different isotopic methods will be used, in order to provide additional information on diet, such as the species of animals consumed and the consumption of dairy products (Evershed 2008).

Fig. 4 – Selection of pottery manufactured in Beirut (a-e) and in the area of Acre (f-j) in the Fatimid (a-b, d-e, i-j) and Crusader (c, e, f-h) periods: buff wares in the Islamic tradition, made of calcareous clays (a, f); with a clear surface resulting from the use of sea water (g-h); wares similar to Italian productions (g); widely exported types of table and cooking wares (a-e); sugar mold (i) and molasses jar (j).

Fig. 4 – Selection of pottery manufactured in Beirut (a-e) and in the area of Acre (f-j) in the Fatimid (a-b, d-e, i-j) and Crusader (c, e, f-h) periods: buff wares in the Islamic tradition, made of calcareous clays (a, f); with a clear surface resulting from the use of sea water (g-h); wares similar to Italian productions (g); widely exported types of table and cooking wares (a-e); sugar mold (i) and molasses jar (j).

From excavations of the Israel Antiquities Authority in Acre and el-Kabri, and of Solidere in Beirut (analyzed examples or representative of analyzed examples, Lyon laboratory id. numbers are indicated; photos S.Y. Waksman, CAD J. Burlot and S.Y. Waksman; after Waksman 2011; 2017; Stern et al., in this volume; Shapiro et al., in this volume).

37On the Levantine coast, our investigations extended from the Early Islamic to the Early Ottoman periods, with a focus on the evolution in local productions from the Fatimid to the Crusader ones (Stern et al., in this volume; Shapiro et al., in this volume).

  • 62 But were still present farther north in Kinet Höyük up to the early 14th century. We would like to (...)

38The tradition of Islamic glazed table wares in buff calcareous fabric, present in Acre and flourishing in Tiberias workshops in the Early Islamic period, developed in Beirut in the Fatimid period (fig. 4a). Beirut buff glazed wares were to disappear from archaeological contexts excavated in Israel soon after the beginning of the Crusader period.62 But the tradition of buff or buff-looking wares may have somehow survived through unglazed common wares. The pottery workshops of Crusader Acre and its region manufactured both jugs with filter, still made of calcareous clays and clearly related to the Islamic world (fig. 4f), and jugs which have close parallels in Italy (fig. 4g) (Stern 2015; Stern et al., in this volume). Furthermore, sea water was used for a large part of the repertoire, so that clear-colored surfaces were obtained with non-calcareous clays which would otherwise have fired red (fig. 4h; Shapiro 2012).

  • 63 A fairly similar question is associated with the wide distribution of the Late Roman/Early Byzanti (...)
  • 64 It was unfortunately not possible to find enough samples suitable for residue analysis in the Fati (...)

39In Beirut, glazed buff wares in the Islamic tradition (fig. 4a) were produced together with red-pasted table and cooking wares (fig. 4b-e; François et al. 2003; Waksman 2002; 2017). Trade in these wares, already seen in the Fatimid period (fig. 4b, d-e; Waksman 2011), may well have been favored by the newly established Crusader States (Pringle 1986; Stern 2012). Beirut then dominated the market of glazed cooking wares on a large part of the coast, while concurrent workshops probably existed farther north (Gabrieli et al. 2017). Whether this wide diffusion could have been associated with specific uses is still an open question, in spite of the results mentioned above concerning Beirut baking dishes/frying pans exported to Cyprus63 (fig. 4e; Pecci et al. 2015; Gabrieli et al. 2017; in this volume). The potential relationship between the typological development of Beirut cooking pots (fig. 4d; Stern et al., in this volume, fig. 9) and changing food and foodways is also still to be investigated.64

40The diversified repertoire of the main pottery workshops of Acre and Beirut suggests that they were adapted to the opportunities of the market and to the uses and tastes of different communities, without a clear change as seen at the transition to the Mamluk period (Stern 2009). A change also appears then in pottery used in the manufacture of sugar (fig. 4i-j; Stern et al. 2015; Shapiro et al., in this volume). Shapiro’s study shows that their workshops changed location at the same time as the transfer from Acre to Safed of the seat of the government, which indicates its involvement in the control of sugar wares production and distribution.

Changing populations, dining habits and pottery technologies in western Anatolia between the Byzantine and Early Ottoman periods

41The late periods were also investigated in another area, western Anatolia (Waksman 2014; 2015; Waksman et al. 2017; Burlot 2017; Burlot et al. 2018; 2020; in this volume). The settlement of Turkish populations in Beylik and Early Ottoman western Anatolia coincides with the introduction of a new repertoire of glazed table wares. These new wares were shown by chemical analysis to be manufactured in a number of sites, some of which could be identified. It is thus seen as a regional phenomenon, whose extent can only be roughly evaluated at this stage.

42The archaeometric study of the coatings (slips and glazes), combined with the contextualization of the finds, enabled us to follow the evolution of techniques in the local repertoire (fig. 5; Burlot 2017; Burlot et al. 2018; 2020; in this volume). Besides clayey slips and high-lead glazes, already in use in the Byzantine period, it shows the introduction of a new recipe of lead-alkali glaze, enabling the production of turquoise-colored glazes, which were widespread in the Islamic world. The Early Ottoman period sees the introduction of chromium and cobalt-based pigments and of new kinds of slips. These slips are synthetic, made with recipes mixing different components (typically crushed quartz, fragments of glass or glass frit, and clay). They appear in western Anatolia on a type of pottery known as “Miletus Ware”, manufactured in Iznik and another as yet unknown production center, whose chronology has been reconsidered thanks to well-dated contexts from the Crimea where these ceramics were exported. Initially only present in slips, this synthetic material was to be extended to ceramic bodies in later Ottoman times, so that “Miletus Ware” may be seen as the technical precursor of the famous Iznik “fritwares”.

Fig. 5 – New wares and techniques introduced into western Anatolia at the beginning of the Turkish period: (a) new style; (b) new forming technique; (c) new glaze recipe; (d) new pigments and synthetic slip.

Fig. 5 – New wares and techniques introduced into western Anatolia at the beginning of the Turkish period: (a) new style; (b) new forming technique; (c) new glaze recipe; (d) new pigments and synthetic slip.

From excavations of the Austrian Archaeological Institute in Ephesus, and of the German Archaeological Institute in Miletus (analyzed examples, Lyon laboratory id. numbers are indicated; photos S.Y. Waksman, CAD J. Burlot and S.Y. Waksman; after Waksman 2014; 2015; Burlot 2017; Burlot et al. 2018; in this volume).

43Some of these types and techniques were known in the Near East well before they entered the western Anatolian repertoire (Mulder 2014; Waksman 2015; Waksman et al. 2017). Our methodology and results provide steadier grounds for further research on their diffusion, together with the uses, tastes and fashions they are related to.

Research on historical and iconographic sources

  • 65 Communication “Pratiques et cultures alimentaires à Chypre à l’époque latine (1191-1570). Identité (...)

44Historical research was carried out on fish consumption in Frankish and Venetian Cyprus by Philippe Trélat. He investigated the location of fish supplies, the modalities of production, trade and consumption and the role of fish in diet, the control established over this resource by the political power (Trélat, in this volume). In another study, he investigated food and foodways of different cultural and social groups present in Frankish Cyprus, and how the new Latin elites both adapted their food culture to the context of the island and preserved their own identity.65

  • 66 Within the framework of the VIDI project directed by Vroom and of the PhD thesis of Bağcı (Bağcı 2 (...)

45Other studies were carried out by Yasemin Bağcı and Joanita Vroom66 on food and foodways in the Abbasid period, based on the pottery repertoire of Tarsus, the recipes of the cooking manual Kitab al Tabikh and on iconographic sources (Bağcı & Vroom 2017; Bağcı 2017).

Other scientific, educational and… culinary outputs

  • 67 The dinner took place during the POMEDOR final conference on 19th May 2016, at the Vivier Castle, (...)
  • 68 www.regismarcon.fr/ (accessed 28/11/2017).
  • 69 www.pomedor.mom.fr/ongoing/content/169 (accessed 11/02/2020).
  • 70 These recipes are included in the present volume: pp. 14‑15, 58‑59, 208‑209, 400‑401.
  • 71 Maxime Michaud, Alain Dauvergne and Jean Philippon, together with Philippe Rispal who was in charg (...)
  • 72 poteriedeschals.free.fr/poteriedeschals.html (accessed 28/11/2017).
  • 73 The one-week training course “Archaeological and Archaeometric Approaches to Ceramics. Byzantine W (...)

46The study of historical sources also led to the creation of a “Byzantine” dinner67 thanks to the mentoring of Chef Régis Marcon.68 The dinner and its preparation were partly recorded for inclusion in the documentary film series “The journey of food” shot by Anemon Productions (Athens)69. As recounted by Dalby (in this volume), the dinner was designed by Ilias Anagnostakis, in collaboration with Andrew Dalby, who translated and interpreted letters written by Eusthatios of Thessaloniki, a Byzantine author of the 12th century (Anagnostakis, in this volume), by Sally Grainger, who created the recipes inspired by these letters,70 and by a team of the Paul Bocuse School of Cuisine and Research Institute71 where the dinner was prepared and presented. The association with this event of a historian of Byzantium, deeply involved in the study of food and foodways (e.g. Anagnostakis 2013b), and of two researchers specialized in food history and experimental archaeology who had already been successful in bringing ancient recipes, especially Greek and Roman, to a larger audience (Dalby & Grainger 1996; Dalby 1996; 2003; Grainger 2006), was an exceptional experience. The dishes and the wines were introduced by Andrew Dalby during the dinner, and Byzantine pottery replicas were used for the table service. The replicas were made by the potter Jean-Jacques Dubernard,72 based on models selected among the best-preserved examples from excavations in Greece, Turkey and the Crimea (Papanikola-Bakirtzi 1999; Romanchuk 2003; Istanbul 2007). This collection of replicas actually covers the history and evolution of Byzantine table wares, from the 10th century “Byzantine Glazed White Wares II” up to the late Byzantine “Elaborated Incised Ware”. It is now used as an educational tool, to introduce the main types of Byzantine pottery in MA courses (Lyon 2 University) and in specialized training courses.73

  • 74 Members of the research team “Archaeological ceramics: materials, markets, societies” of the UMR 5 (...)
  • 75 The IT interns Bryan Boni and Gabriel Coutu (Lyon 1 University) participated in these endeavors, b (...)

47Other research and educational tools developed during the project will be used to make the results of research available through online databases. The CERAMO database, including some 45,000 pottery and clay samples which have been analyzed chemically at the “Laboratoire de céramologie” in Lyon since the 1980’s, has been revised with this perspective (Öztürk et al. 2015), thanks to teamwork involving Charly Eyango, Aybüke Öztürk, Marie Delavenne, Celine Brun, Valérie Merle, Jacques Burlot, Cécile Batigne Vallet and myself.74 At first including mainly chemical data and short descriptions of the analyzed samples, it has been augmented with 2D and 3D images, such as drawings, photos of sherds and fabrics, and 3D models.75 An important work of data specification and organization was carried out by Marie Delavenne on the data generated by the POMEDOR project.

483D scans were carried out76 by Shadi Shabo,77 Jacques Burlot and myself, on complete or nearly complete examples representative of different productions studied within the project. They were taken from collections in Greece, Israel, Turkey and France: amphorae of types Günsenin I to IV from the reference collection of the American excavations in the Athenian Agora, or stored at the Ephorate of Byzantine antiquities in Chalkida (Chalcis); sugar molds, Acre wares and Beirut cooking wares in the storerooms of the Israel Antiquities Authority; table wares belonging to the main “Middle Byzantine Production”, “Port Saint-Symeon Ware”, “Miletus Ware” and others, at the “Cité de la Céramique” in Sèvres, in the Louvre Museum (Department of Islamic Art), and in a private collection. Besides being accessible in the Lyon database, these 3D scans may also be displayed in online papers proposing such a function (Waksman et al. 2018a).78 They will also be available for exhibitions, to present in virtual form those collections that are either difficult to access or seldom shown, such as sugar wares and cooking wares.

  • 79 Levantine Ceramics Project, directed by Andrea Berlin (Boston University), www.levantineceramics.o (...)
  • 80 PhD thesis “Design, implementation and analysis of a description model for complex archaeological (...)

49Ongoing research is directed towards tools which can harvest and combine complementary data from different online resources. Databases such as those of CERAMO (specializing in chemical analyses) and the Levantine Ceramics Project79 (specializing in typo-chronologies and fabrics) provide different kinds of information on the same pottery productions, the combination of which provides further insight into various issues, including diet. IT tools for data mining, clustering and harvesting and database interconnection form the subject of ongoing research, partly carried out within the framework of the PhD of Aybüke Öztürk.80

Concluding remarks

50The POMEDOR project provided a wide range of new results concerning pottery commodities involved in the production, transportation, cooking and consumption of food in the medieval Eastern Mediterranean. From preliminary approaches to medieval amphorae contents to synthesizing work concerning Crusader Cyprus and the Levant, from insights into the introduction of new wares and techniques in early Turkish western Anatolia to highlighting the prominent role of the harbor of Chalcis throughout the Byzantine and Frankish periods, the project has expanded knowledge through investigations of provenances, technologies and contents of pottery found in well-defined archaeological contexts. Examples of pottery carefully selected in Cyprus, Israel, Greece and Turkey, as well as in Lebanon and the Crimea, have enabled us to study developments in transitional periods which saw the arrival of populations having different cultural and culinary backgrounds. What changes did these populations induce in the local pottery repertoires? Can they be related to new products, recipes, uses, fashions? Can we specify when they occurred and thus gather information on the dynamics of changes? Did they involve the introduction of new techniques of manufacture? What was the impact on the diffusion of wares traded from these territories, both qualitatively and quantitatively?

51If some of these questions could be answered, many of our results correspond to upstream research which was required to address them, for example on transport amphorae. They establish solid foundations for further work on food and foodways and other issues, thanks to a methodology combining the contextualization of artifacts and the use of archaeological science. This methodology is still too uncommonly used in the medieval Eastern Mediterranean, so our results should help build future syntheses on more solid ground.

52Many “ingredients” are still needed before such syntheses can be proposed. The availability of primary data is the initial pre-requisite, more excavations of medieval sites with well-defined and well-dated contexts being necessary, in which various specialists analyzing different food-related indicators are involved. There are some encouraging signs, such as the ongoing work in Komana (Erciyas & Tatbul 2015), of a move towards excavation methodologies in the field, including a more systematic collection of the material remains requested for such studies. Pottery studies that cover the whole range of wares and include quantification are still too rare to access a more complete picture. Changes in methodology, with quantification according to productions and not only to types, would provide information not only on functions, uses and styles (viewpoint of type) but also on the organization of production, diffusion and trade (viewpoint of production). The latter viewpoint enabled us to identify phenomena occurring within the scope of a site and its hinterland (e.g. production of wares in both the Islamic and occidental traditions in the Acre region in the Crusader period), within the scope of an entire region (e.g. the introduction of new wares and techniques related to the Islamic world in early Turkish western Anatolia), or to reveal large-scale and long-lasting productions which continued throughout Byzantine and Frankish rule in Aegean lands (Chalcis production of amphorae and table wares).

  • 81 I also develop this point in Vroom et al. 2017a, p. 17.

53Much work remains to be done in order to connect information drawn from pottery with that obtained from other implements (e.g. Parani 2010; Vroom 2015b), from archaeological structures (Yehuda, in this volume; Teslenko, in this volume), from archaeozoological, archaeobotanical, anthropological data (Reuter, in this volume; Onar, in this volume; Bourbou, in this volume); for comparison with historical sources, which may not reflect the same reality; overall, for a move from a multidisciplinary to an interdisciplinary approach that includes these various fields. The role of the specialist is central for the identification of parallels and for the discovery of connections between different sites in relation to specific indicators, upon which such integrated approaches may be built.81

54POMEDOR should be seen as a pilot project, to be further developed within an European framework, for example. By producing primary data and identifying connections between them, by developing IT-based educational and research tools, and through the creation of a network of researchers contributing different specialties to the study of food and foodways, it is hoped that the POMEDOR project has provided tools to foster research directed towards these objectives.

Acknowledgements

55The POMEDOR project was funded by the French National Research Agency (ANR) from 2013 to 2017. We gratefully acknowledge the support of the ANR under reference ANR-12‑CULT-0008.

56The project benefitted from additional funding for specific programs: from the Rhône-Alpes region ARC5 program to the CERAM3.0 project (co-directed by Jérôme Darmont and Stéphane Lallich, Lyon 2 University, and Yona Waksman), which funded a PhD fellowship for Aybüke Öztürk (database developments); from the Lyon University PALSE IPEm program to the CERAM.3D project (co-directed by Alain Trémeau, Saint-Étienne University, and Yona Waksman) for 3D applications; from the Comissionat per a Universitats i Recerca del DIUE of the Generalitat de Catalunya and from the Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad for a Ramon y Cajal contract (RYC 2013-13369) for Alessandra Pecci (residue analyses); from the French-Ukrainian PAI DNIPRO program for the part of the project carried out in the Crimea (co-direction Iryna Teslenko, Ukrainian Academy of Science, and Yona Waksman); from the French Institute of Anatolian Studies (IFEA Istanbul) for the organization of a session at the EAA meeting in Istanbul in 2014.

57The backbone of the project was a team based in our laboratory in Lyon (CNRS UMR 5138), starting with my two “right arms”: my assistant Jacques Burlot, also in charge of the archaeometric study of slips and glazes on western Anatolian pottery, and Nicole Flores, who dealt with administrative aspects; the research team “Archaeological ceramics: materials, markets, societies”, especially Céline Brun, Charly Eyango, Aybüke Öztürk, Valérie Merle, Alain Bernet and Cécile Batigne Vallet; the students who worked with us as interns: Marie Delavenne, Lucie Courbe, Caroline Castonguay-Boisvert, Bryan Boni, Gabriel Coutu, as well as Marie-Pierre Delanos who worked on museum collections in Paris; Shadi Shabo (UMR 5133 Lyon) who took care of 3D scans.

58The other members of the project team are located in several countries. The core team included Edna Stern and Anastasia Shapiro (Israel Antiquities Authority), Smadar Gabrieli (University of Sydney and University of Western Australia), Alessandra Pecci (Barcelona University), Philippe Trélat (Rouen University), Joanita Vroom (Leiden University), Laurence Tilliard (“Cité de la Céramique”, Sèvres), Catherine Richarté (INRAP, Éguilles), and this introduction is only a pale reflection of the work they carried out. The other partners with whom we worked on archaeological material were also essential contributors to the project: Nikos Kontogiannis (Koç University, Istanbul), Stefania Skartsis (Directorate of Byzantine and Post-Byzantine Antiquities, Athens), Giannis Vaxevannis (Ephorate of Antiquities of Euboea, Chalkida), George Koutsouflakis (Ephorate of Underwater Antiquities, Athens), Lisa Yehuda (Haifa University), Beate Böhlendorf-Arslan (Marburg University), Sarah Japp (German Archaeological Institute), Asa Eger (University of North Carolina, Greensboro), Scott Redford (SOAS University of London), Iryna Teslenko (Ukrainian Academy of Science), Yana Morozova and Sergiy Teslenko (Kiev National Taras Shevchenko University), Eva Todorova (Bulgarian Academy of Science). Our many thanks to colleagues who made these studies possible, as excavation directors, excavators, pottery specialists, staff of excavation teams, curators of collections: Sabine Ladstätter, Helmut Schwaiger (Austrian Archaeological Institute); Nicholas Cahill (University of Wisconsin, Madison), Bahadır Yildirim (Harvard University); Félix Pirson, Alexandra Wirsching (German Archaeological Institute, Istanbul); Philipp Niewöhner (Georg-August-Universität, Göttingen); Marie-Henriette Gates (Bilkent University, Ankara); John McK. Camp II, Sylvie Dumont (American School of Classical Studies at Athens); Fotini Kondyli (University of Virginia); Stephanie Larson, Kevin Daly (Bucknell University); Eliezer Stern, Danny Syon, Howard Smithline, Nimrod Getzov, Yoav Arbel, Ayala Lester, Giulia Roccabella (Israel Antiquities Authority); Oren Tal (Tel-Aviv University); Katherine S. Burke (UCLA); Stathis Raptou, Eftychia Zachariou (Department of Antiquities, Cyprus); Holly Cook; Natalya Ginkut (National Preserve of Tauric Chersonesos, Sebastopol); Yannick Lintz, Carine Juvin, Charlotte Maury (Department of Islamic Art, Louvre Museum). Our thanks also go to the excavation teams at Sardis, Ephesus, Pergamon, Miletus, the Athenian Agora, and to the staff of the Ephorate of Byzantine Antiquities in Chalkida and Thebes for welcoming us and for their help on the sites and in the storerooms.

59We would like to thank the institutions which gave permission for study, and for samples to be taken and exported for analysis: the Department of Antiquities of Cyprus; the Turkish Ministry of Culture and Tourism and the staff of museums in charge of the Ephesus, Miletus, Pergamon and Sardis excavations; the Greek Ministry of Culture and the staff of the Ephorates of Underwater Archaeology, of Byzantine Antiquities in Athens and in Chalkida, with special thanks to Pari Kalamara; the Israel Antiquities Authority, with special thanks to Gideon Avni.

60Laboratory analyses were carried out in collaboration with colleagues who are gratefully acknowledged: Anne Bouquillon and the AGLAE team (PSL Chimie ParisTech and C2RMF, Ministry of Culture, Paris), with special thanks to Claire Pacheco; Ludovic Bellot-Gurlet (Pierre & Marie Curie University); Simona Mileto, Richard Evershed (Bristol University); Fernanda Inserra, Miguel Àngel Cau Ontiveros (ERAAUB Barcelona University); Nicolas Garnier (Laboratoire Nicolas Garnier); and last but not least the staff of the analytical platforms in Lyon (CNRS UMR 5138, and CTµ Lyon 1 University). Our thanks also go to the Directors of the C2RMF, Marie Lavandier, then Isabelle Pallot-Froissard.

61The “Byzantine” dinner was made possible thanks to the support of Chef Régis Marcon and of the Director of the Paul Bocuse Institute, Dominique Giraudier, and to the creative work of the “dream team” who conceived and carried it out: Ilias Anagnostakis (National Hellenic Research Foundation, Athens), Sally Grainger, Andrew Dalby, and at the Bocuse Institute Maxime Michaud, Alain Dauvergne, Jean Philippon, Philippe Rispal, as well as the students of the Bocuse “Worldwide Alliance” program, are all gratefully acknowledged. Many thanks to the potter Jean-Jacques Dubernard for creating the bowls and plates based on Byzantine models that were used for the dinner.

62Special thanks also go to: the members of the POMEDOR network; the participants at the POMEDOR meetings, study days, workshop and final conference; Johannes Koder for writing the concluding remarks to the POMEDOR conference proceedings; Smadar Gabrieli, Philippe Trélat and John Tittensor for help during various stages of the project; Zoï Tsirtsoni, Estelle Herrscher and Line Clément for advice; Gwénaëlle Pequay for help and support; Jean-François Pérouse, Martin Godon, Aksel Tibet (IFEA Istanbul), Thomas Zimmermann (Bilkent University, Ankara) and colleagues from the Turkish Agency of Atomic Energy (Ankara) for help in Turkey; Hagit Rozen-Tahan and Irena Lidski-Reznikov (IAA), Burcu Aydıl, Oya Tuncer, Serkan Demir and anonymous members of the Ephesus, Sardis and Pergamon teams, Baptiste Solard, Françoise Notter-Truxa (FR 3747 Lyon) for contributions to the documentation (drawings, photos); Andrea Berlin (Boston University, LCP project); Jérôme Darmont and Stéphane Lallich (Lyon 2 University); Alain Trémeau (Saint-Étienne University); Demetra Papanikola-Bakirtzi (Leventis Museum, Nicosia); Yasemin Bağcı (Leiden University); Guergana Guionova (CNRS UMR 7298 Aix-en-Provence); Frederick van Doorninck (Texas A&M University); Agnès Vokaer (Université libre de Bruxelles); the Kolaşın family (Istanbul) for access to their collection; Pascal Arnaud (Lyon 2 University) and the staff of the ANR, especially Maria Tsilioni and Maëlle Sergheraert; the staff of the regional office of the CNRS in Villeurbanne, especially Catherine Drevet and Amal Labrhaila; at the “Maison de l’Orient et de la Méditerranée” (FR 3747 Lyon), the IT service for hosting the POMEDOR website and for help with IT issues, the accounting service, and the publication service for the realization of the POMEDOR conference proceedings; Laure Peraudin and Elizabeth Willcox for copy editing and for English revisions of the POMEDOR conference proceedings; Christophe Giros (Lyon 2 University & UMR 8167 Paris) for help with the bibliography of the volume; the laboratory “Archéologie et Archéométrie” (UMR 5138 Lyon) for hosting the POMEDOR staff and project; and all those who encouraged, supported and accompanied this project.

Bibliographie

Alexandre-Bidon 2005: Alexandre-Bidon D., Une archéologie du goût. Céramique et consommation, Paris, 2005.

Anagnostakis 2008a: Αναγνωστάκης Η. [= Anagnostakis I.], Βυζαντινός οινικός πολιτισμός. Το παράδειγμα της Βιθυνίας [= Wine culture in Byzantium: The Bithynian example], Athens, 2008.

Anagnostakis 2008b: Αναγνωστάκης Η. [= Anagnostakis I.] (ed.), Μονεμβάσιος Οίνος-Μονοβασ(ι)ά-Malvasia [= Monemvasian wine-Monovas(i)a-Malvasia], Athens, 2008.

Anagnostakis 2013a: Anagnostakis I., “Noms de vignes et de raisins et techniques de vinification à Byzance. Continuité et rupture avec la viticulture de l’Antiquité tardive”, Food & history 11/2, 2013, pp. 35‑59.

Anagnostakis 2013b: Anagnostakis I. (ed.), Flavours and delights: Tastes and pleasures of ancient and Byzantine cuisine, Athens, 2013.

Anagnostakis, in this volume: Anagnostakis I., “What is plate and cooking pot and food and bread and table all at the same time?”, in Waksman 2020, pp. 221‑228.

Anagnostakis & Papamastorakis 2005: Anagnostakis I., Papamastorakis T., “‘… and radishes for appetizers’. On banquets, radishes and wine”, in Papanikola-Bakirtzi 2005, pp. 147‑174.

Anagnostakis & Pellettieri 2016: Anagnostakis I., Pellettieri A. (ed.), Latte e latticini. Aspetti della produzione e del consumo nelle società mediterranee dell’Antichità e del Medioevo, Lagonegro, 2016.

Anagnostakis et al. 2011: Anagnostakis I., Kolias T.G., Papadopoulou E. (ed.), Animals and environment in Byzantium (7th-12th century), International symposium 21, Athens, 2011.

Armstrong 1989: Armstrong P., “Some Byzantine and later settlements in eastern Phokis”, Annual of the British School at Athens 84, 1989, pp. 1‑47.

Armstrong 2002: Armstrong P., “The survey area in the Byzantine and Ottoman periods”, in W. Cavanagh, J. Crouwel, R.W.V. Catling, G. Shipley, Continuity and change in Greek rural landscape: The Laconia survey, vol. I, Athens, 2002, pp. 339‑402.

Arthur 2007: Arthur P., “Pots and boundaries: On cultural and economic areas between Late Antiquity and the early Middle Ages”, in M. Bonifay, J.‑C. Tréglia (ed.), LRCW2: Late Roman coarse wares, cooking wares and amphorae in the Mediterranean. Archaeology and archaeometry, vol. 1, BAR International series 1662, Oxford, 2007, pp. 15‑27.

Avissar & Stern 2005: Avissar M., Stern E.J., Pottery of the Crusader, Ayyubid, and Mamluk periods in Israel, IAA reports 26, Jerusalem, 2005.

Bağcı 2017: Bağcı Y., Coloured ceramics of the Caliphs: A new look at the Abbasid pottery finds from the old Gözlükule excavations at Tarsus, PhD, Leiden University, 2017 (unpublished).

Bağcı & Vroom 2017: Bağcı Y., Vroom J., “Dining habits in the Early Islamic period: A ceramic perspective from Turkey”, in Vroom et al. 2017b, pp. 63‑94.

Bakirtzis 1989: Μπακιρτζής X. [= Bakirtzis Ch.], Βυζαντινά τσουκαλολάγηνα [= Byzantine pottery], Athens, 1989.

Bakirtzis 2003: Bakirtzis Ch. (ed.), Actes du VIIe Congrès International sur la Céramique Médiévale en Méditerranée (Thessaloniki, 11‑16 octobre 1999), Athens, 2003.

Balard et al. 1994: Balard M., Hocquet J.‑Cl., Hadziiossif J., Bresc H., “Le transport des denrées alimentaires en Méditerranée au Moyen Âge”, in K. Friedland (ed.), Maritime food transport, Cologne, 1994, pp. 91‑175.

Batigne Vallet 2008: Batigne Vallet C., “Approche de l’alimentation cuite en Gaule romaine à travers l’étude des céramiques à feu”, in P. Marinval (dir.), Boire, manger, cuisiner. Exemples de la Préhistoire à l’Antiquité, Archéo-plantes 3, 2008, pp. 113‑143.

Bats 1988: Bats M., Vaisselle et alimentation à Olbia de Provence (v. 350-v. 50 av. J.‑C.). Modèles culturels et catégories céramiques, Collection du Centre Jean-Bérard 14, Paris, 1988.

Bescherer Metheny & Beaudry 2015: Bescherer Metheny K., Beaudry M.C., Archaeology of food: An encyclopedia, 2 vol., Lanham-Boulder-New York-London, 2015.

Bevan 2014: Bevan A., “Mediterranean containerization”, Current anthropology 55/4, 2014, pp. 387‑418.

Bintliff et al. 2007: Bintliff J., Howard P., Snodgrass A., Testing the hinterland: The work of the Boeotia Survey (1989-1991) in the southern approaches to the city of Thespiai, Oxford, 2007.

Blackman & Redford 2005: Blackman M.J., Redford S., “Neutron activation analysis of medieval ceramics from Kinet, Turkey, especially Port Saint Symeon Ware”, Ancient Near Eastern studies 42, 2005, pp. 83‑186.

Boas 1999: Boas A., Crusader archaeology: The material culture of the Latin East, London, 1999 (2nd ed. 2017).

Boas 2010: Boas A., Domestic settings: Sources on domestic architecture and day-to-day activities in the Crusader states, Leiden, 2010.

Böhlendorf-Arslan et al. 2007: Böhlendorf-Arslan B., Uysal A.O., Witte-Orr J. (ed.), Çanak: Late antique and medieval pottery and tiles in Mediterranean archaeological contexts, BYZAS 7, Istanbul, 2007.

Bourbou 2010: Bourbou C., Health and disease in Byzantine Crete (7th-12th centuries AD), Farnham, 2010.

Bourbou 2013: Bourbou C., “Are we what we eat? Reconstructing dietary patterns of Greek Byzantine populations (7th-15th centuries AD) through a multi-disciplinary approach”, in S. Voutsaki, S.M. Valamoti (ed.), Diet, economy and society in the ancient Greek world: Towards a better understanding of archaeology and science, Pharos supplement 1, Leuven, 2013, pp. 215‑229.

Bourbou, in this volume: Bourbou C., “The biocultural model applied: Synthetizing research on Greek Byzantine diet (7th-15th century AD)”, in Waksman 2020, pp. 355‑362.

Bourbou & Garvie-Lok 2015: Bourbou C., Garvie-Lok J.S., “Bread, oil, wine – and milk: Feeding infants and adults in Byzantine Greece”, in A. Papathanasiou, M.P. Richards, S.C. Fox (ed.), Archaeodiet in the Greek world, Hesperia supplement 49, Princeton, 2015, pp. 171‑194.

Bourbou & Richards 2007: Bourbou C., Richards M.P, “The Middle-Byzantine menu: Stable carbon and nitrogen isotope values from the Greek site of Kastella, Crete”, International journal of osteoarchaeology 17, 2007, pp. 63‑72.

Bourbou et al. 2011: Bourbou C., Fuller T.B., Garvie-Lok J.S., Richards M.P., “Reconstructing the diets of Greek Byzantine populations (6th-15th centuries AD) using carbon and nitrogen stable isotope ratios”, American journal of physical anthropology 146, 2011, pp. 569‑581.

Brubaker & Linardou 2007: Brubaker L., Linardou K. (ed.), Eat, drink, and be merry (Luke 12:19): Food and wine in Byzantium, Society for the promotion of Byzantine studies publications 13, Aldershot, 2007.

Burlot 2017: Burlot J., Premières productions de céramiques turques en Anatolie occidentale. Contextualisation et études techniques, PhD, Lyon 2 University, 2017 (unpublished).

Burlot et al. 2018: Burlot J., Waksman S.Y., Böhlendorf-Arslan B., Vroom J.A.C., Japp S., Teslenko I., “The early Turkish pottery productions in western Anatolia: Provenances, contextualization and techniques”, in Yenişehirlioğlu 2018, pp. 427‑430.

Burlot et al. 2019: Burlot J., Waksman S.Y., Bouquillon A., Tilliard L., “Chalcis ou non? Recontextualiser des plats byzantins conservés dans un musée”, Techné 47, 2019, pp. 150‑157.

Burlot et al. 2020: Burlot J., Waksman S.Y., Bellot-Gurlet L., Şimșek Francı G., “The glaze production technology of an early Ottoman pottery (mid-14th(?)-16th century): the case of ‘Miletus Ware’”, Journal of archaeological science: Reports 29, 2020 (doi.org/10.1016/j.jasrep.2019.102073, accessed 16/02/2020).

Burlot et al., in this volume: Burlot J., Waksman S.Y., Böhlendorf-Arslan B., Vroom J.A.C., “Changing people, dining habits and pottery technologies: Tableware productions on the eve of the Ottoman Empire in western Anatolia”, in Waksman 2020, pp. 363‑384.

Caseau 2015: Caseau B., Nourritures terrestres, nourritures célestes. La culture alimentaire à Byzance, Monographies du Centre de recherche d’histoire et civilisation de Byzance 46, Paris, 2015.

Daim & Drauschke 2010: Daim F., Drauschke J. (ed.), Byzanz. Das Römerreich im Mittelalter, Teil 2. Schauplätze, Monographien des Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums 84/2, 2 vol., Mainz, 2010.

Dalby 1996: Dalby A., Siren feasts. A history of food and gastronomy in Greece, London-New York, 1996.

Dalby 2003: Dalby A., Flavours of Byzantium, Totnes, 2003.

Dalby, in this volume: Dalby A., “The making of the Byzantine dinner, by a participant observer”, in Waksman 2020, pp. 53‑56.

Dalby & Grainger 1996: Dalby A., Grainger S., The classical cookbook, London, 1996 (2nd ed. 2012).

De Cupere 2001: De Cupere B., Animals at ancient Sagalassos: Evidence of the faunal remains, Studies in Eastern Mediterranean archaeology 4, Turnhout, 2001.

Déroche & Spieser 1989: Déroche V., Spieser J.‑M. (ed.), Recherches sur la céramique byzantine, Bulletin de correspondance hellénique supplément 18, Athens, 1989.

Ellenblum 1998: Ellenblum R., Frankish rural settlement in the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem, Cambridge, 1998.

Erciyas & Tatbul 2015: Erciyas D.B., Tatbul M.N., The medieval settlement at Komana, Istanbul, 2015.

Evershed 1993: Evershed R., “Biomolecular archaeology and lipids”, World archaeology 25/1, 1993, pp. 74‑93.

Evershed 2008: Evershed R., “Organic residues in archaeology: The archaeological biomarker revolution”, Archaeometry 50/6, 2008, pp. 895‑924.

Flandrin & Montanari 1996: Flandrin J.‑L., Montanari M. (ed.), Histoire de l’alimentation, Paris, 1996.

Fleet 1999: Fleet K., European and Islamic trade in the Early Ottoman state: The merchants of Genoa and Turkey, Cambridge, 1999.

François 2010: François V., “Cuisine et pots de terre à Byzance”, Bulletin de correspondance hellénique 134/1, 2010, pp. 317‑382.

François 2012: François V., “‘Dans les vieux pots, les bonnes soupes’. Vaisselle d’usage culinaire à Byzance”, in S. Gelichi (ed.), Atti del IX Congresso Internazionale sulla Ceramica Medievale nel Mediterraneo (Venezia, 23‑27 Novembre 2009), Florence, 2012, pp. 557‑563.

François 2015: François V., “De la cale à l’atelier. La vaisselle byzantine de la donation Janet Zakos au Musée d’art et d’histoire de Genève”, in M. Martiniani-Reber (dir.), Donation Janet Zakos: De Rome à Byzance, Geneva, 2015, pp. 201‑217.

François 2017: François V., La vaisselle de terre à Byzance. Catalogue des collections du musée du Louvre, Paris, 2017.

François et al. 2003: François V., Nicolaïdes A., Vallauri L., Waksman Y., “Premiers éléments pour une caractérisation des productions de Beyrouth entre domination franque et mamelouke”, in Bakirtzis 2003, pp. 325‑340.

Gabrieli 2006: Gabrieli R.S., Silent witnesses: The evidence of domestic wares of the 13th-19th centuries in Paphos, Cyprus for local economy and social organisation, PhD, University of Sydney, 2006 (unpublished).

Gabrieli 2007: Gabrieli R.S., “A region apart: Coarse ware of medieval and Ottoman Cyprus”, in Böhlendorf-Arslan et al. 2007, pp. 399‑410.

Gabrieli 2008: Gabrieli R.S., “Towards a chronology: The medieval coarse wares from the tomb at Icarus Street, Kato Pafos”, Report of the Department of Antiquities, Cyprus, 2008, pp. 423‑454.

Gabrieli 2009: Gabrieli R.S., “Stability and change in Ottoman coarse ware in Cyprus”, in B. Walker (ed.), Reflections of empire: Archaeological and ethnographic perspectives on the pottery of the Ottoman Levant and beyond, AASOR 64, Boston, 2009, pp. 67‑77.

Gabrieli 2014: Gabrieli R.S., “Shades of brown: Regional differentiation in the coarse ware of medieval Cyprus”, in Papanikola-Bakirtzi & Coureas 2014, pp. 191‑212.

Gabrieli et al. 2017: Gabrieli R.S., Waksman S.Y., Shapiro A., Pecci A., “Cypriot and Levantine cooking wares in Frankish Cyprus”, in Vroom et al. 2017b, pp. 119‑143, 376‑377.

Gabrieli et al., in this volume: Gabrieli R.S., Waksman S.Y., Shapiro A., Pecci A., “Archaeological and archaeometric investigations of cooking wares in Frankish and Venetian Cyprus”, in Waksman 2020, pp. 97‑112.

Garnier 2007: Garnier N., “Analyse de résidus organiques conservés dans des amphores: un état de la question”, in M. Bonifay, J.‑C. Tréglia (ed.), LRCW2: Late Roman coarse wares, cooking wares and amphorae in the Mediterranean. Archaeology and archaeometry, vol. 1, BAR International series 1662, Oxford, 2007, pp. 39‑49.

Garnier & Valamoti 2016: Garnier N., Valamoti S.M., “Prehistoric wine-making at Dikili Tash (northern Greece): Integrating residue analysis and archaeobotany”, Journal of archaeological science 74, 2016, pp. 195‑206 (dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2016.03.003, accessed 11/04/2019).

Geyer & Lefort 2003: Geyer B., Lefort J., La Bithynie au Moyen Âge, Paris, 2003.

Ginkut & Lebedinskiy 2018: Гинькут Н.В., Лебединский B.B. [= Ginkut N.V., Lebedinskiy V.V.], “‘Воротничковые амфоры’ типа Gunsenin II с затонувшего близ Балаклавы византийского корабля” [= “‘Collar amphorae’ of the type Gunsenin II from a Byzantine shipwreck at Balaklava”], Античная древность и средние века [= Antiquity and Middle Ages] 46, 2018, pp. 151‑165 (dx.doi.org/10.15826/adsv.2018.46.010, accessed 10/04/2019).

Giorgi et al. 2010: Giorgi G., Salvini L., Pecci A., “The meals in a building yard during the Middle Age: Characterization of organic residues in ceramic potsherds”, Journal of archaeological science 37, 2010, pp. 1453‑1457.

Given & Knapp 2003: Given M., Knapp A.B., The Sydney Cyprus survey project: Social approaches to regional archaeological survey, Monumenta Archaeologica 21, Los Angeles, 2003.

Given et al. 2013: Given M., Knapp A.B., Noller J., Sollars L., Kassianidou V., Landscape and interaction: The Troodos archaeological and environmental survey project, Cyprus, 2 vol., Oxford-Oakville, 2013.

Grainger 2006: Grainger S., Cooking Apicius: Roman recipes for today, Totnes, 2006.

Green et al. 2014: Green J.R., Gabrieli R.S., Cook H.K.A., Stern E.J., McCall B., Lazer E., Paphos 8 August 1303: Snapshot of a destruction, Nicosia, 2014.

Günsenin 1989: Günsenin N., “Recherches sur les amphores byzantines dans les musées turcs”, in Déroche & Spieser 1989, pp. 267‑276.

Günsenin 1990: Günsenin N., Les amphores byzantines (xe-xiiie siècle). Typologie, production, circulation d’après les collections turques, PhD, University Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne, 1990 (unpublished).

Günsenin 1993: Günsenin N., “Ganos. Centre de production d’amphores à l’époque byzantine”, Anatolia Antiqua 2, 1993, pp. 193‑201.

Günsenin 2018: Günsenin N., “La typologie des amphores Günsenin. Une mise au point nouvelle”, Anatolia Antiqua 26, 2018, pp. 89‑124.

Günsenin & Hatcher 1997: Günsenin N., Hatcher H., “Analyses chimiques comparatives des amphores de Ganos, de l’île de Marmara et de l’épave de Serçe Limanı (Glass Wreck)”, Anatolia Antiqua 5, 1997, pp. 249‑260.

Harrison 1986: Harrison R.M., Excavations at Saraçhane in Istanbul, vol. 1, The excavations, structures, architectural décoration, small finds, coins, bones and molluscs, Princeton, 1986.

Hayes 1992: Hayes J.W., Excavations at Saraçhane in Istanbul, vol. 2, The pottery, Princeton, 1992.

Heyd 1885‑1886: Heyd W., Histoire du commerce du Levant au Moyen Âge, 2 vol., Leipzig, 1885‑1886.

Inserra & Pecci 2011: Inserra F., Pecci A., “A medieval tavern: Chemical analyses of floors at San Genesio (central Italy)”, in I. Turbanti Memmi (ed.), Advances in archaeometry: Proceedings of the 37th International Symposium on Archaeometry, Berlin, 2011, pp. 459‑464.

Istanbul 2007: Istanbul: 8,000 years brought to daylight: Marmaray, metro, Sultanahmet excavations, Istanbul, 2007.

Ivaschenko 1997: Ivaschenko Y., “Les ateliers de céramiques du vie au xve s. au nord de la mer Noire. Le problème de la continuité”, in G. Démians d’Archimbaud (ed.), La céramique médiévale en Méditerranée. Actes du VIe congrès de l’AIECM2 (Aix-en-Provence, 13‑18 novembre 1995), Aix-en-Provence, 1997, pp. 73‑85.

Jacoby 1991-1992: Jacoby D., “Silk in western Byzantium before the Fourth Crusade”, Byzantinische Zeitschrift 84‑85, 1991-1992, pp. 452‑500.

Jacoby 1997: Jacoby D., Trade, commodities and shipping in the medieval Mediterranean, Aldershot, 1997.

Jacoby 2004: Jacoby D., “The demographic evolution of Euboea under Latin rule (1205-1470)”, in J. Chrysostomides, Ch. Dendrinos, J. Harris (ed.), The Greek islands and the sea, Camberley, 2004, pp. 131‑179.

Jacoby 2005: Jacoby D., Commercial exchange across the Mediterranean: Byzantium, the Crusader Levant, Egypt and Italy, Aldershot, 2005.

Jacoby 2009: Jacoby D., Latins, Greeks and Muslims: Encounters in the Eastern Mediterranean (10th-15th centuries), Aldershot, 2009.

Jacoby 2010: Jacoby D., “13th-century commercial exchange in the Aegean: Continuity and change”, in A. Ödekan, E. Akyürek, N. Necipoğlu (ed.), 1. Uluslararası Sevgi Gönül Bizans Araştırmaları Sempozyumu – 12. ve 13. Yüzyıllarda Bizans Dünyasında Değişim Bildiriler / First International Sevgi Gönül Byzantine Studies Symposium – Change in the Byzantine world in the 12th and 13th centuries (Istanbul, 25‑28 June 2007), Istanbul, 2010, pp. 187‑194.

Jacoby 2014: Jacoby D., “Rural exploitation in western Asia Minor and the Mediterranean: Aspects of interaction in the 13th century”, in T.G. Kolias, K.G. Pitsakis (ed.), Aureus, Athens, 2014, pp. 243‑255.

Jones 2017: Jones R.E., Sweet waste. Medieval sugar production in the Mediterranean viewed from the 2002 excavation at Tawahin es-Sukkar, Safi, Jordan, Glasgow, 2017.

Jones & Grey, in this volume: Jones R., Grey A., “Some thoughts on sugar production and sugar pots in the Fatimid, Crusader/Ayyubid and Early Mamluk periods in Jordan”, in Waksman 2020, pp. 191‑206.

Joyner 1997: Joyner L., “Byzantine and Frankish cooking wares in Corinth, Greece: Changes in diet, style and raw material exploitation”, in A. Sinclair, E. Slater, J. Gowlett (ed.), Archaeological sciences 1995, Oxford, 1997, pp. 82‑87.

Joyner 2007: Joyner L., “Cooking pots as indicators of cultural change: a petrographic study of Byzantine and Frankish cooking wares from Corinth”, Hesperia 76, 2007, pp. 183‑227.

Kaplan 2007: Kaplan M., Byzance. Villes et campagnes, Paris, 2007.

Karageorghis & Kouka 2011: Karageorghis V., Kouka O. (ed.), On cooking pots, drinking cups, loomweights and ethnicity in Bronze Age Cyprus and neighbouring regions, Nicosia, 2011.

Kimpe et al. 2002: Kimpe K., Jacobs P., Waelkens M., “Mass spectrometric methods prove the use of beeswax and ruminant fat in Late Roman cooking pots”, Journal of chromatography A 937, pp. 151‑160.

Kislinger 1996: Kislinger E., “Les chrétiens d’Orient. Règles et réalités alimentaires dans le monde byzantin”, in Flandrin & Montanari 1996, pp. 325‑344.

Kocabaş 2010: Kocabaş U. (ed.), Istanbul Archaeological Museums: Proceedings of the 1st Symposium on Marmaray-Metro Salvage Excavations (5th-6th May 2008), Istanbul, 2010.

Koder 1973: Koder J., Negroponte, Untersuchungen zur Topographie und Siedlungsgeschichte der Insel Euboea während der Zeit der Venezianerherrschaft, Veröffentlichungen der Kommission für die Tabula Imperii Byzantini 1, Vienna, 1973.

Koder 1993: Koder J., Gemüse in Byzanz: Die Versorgung Konstantinopels mit Frischgemüse im Lichte der Geoponika, Vienna, 1993.

Koder 2002: Koder J., “Maritime trade and the food supply for Constantinople in the Middle Ages”, in R. Macrides (ed.), Travel in the Byzantine world: Papers from the 34th Spring Symposium of Byzantine Studies (Birmingham, April 2000), Birmingham, 2002, pp137‑148.

Koder 2014: Koder J., “Cuisine and dining in Byzantium”, in D. Sakel (ed.), Byzantine culture: Papers from the conference “Byzantine Days of Istanbul” (Istanbul, May 21‑23 2010), Ankara, 2014, pp. 423‑438.

Koder 2016: Koder J., “Lebensmittelversorgung einer Großstadt: Konstantinopel”, in F. Daim, J. Drauschke (ed.), Hinter den Mauern und auf dem offenen Land. Leben im Byzantinischen Reich, Byzanz zwischen Orient und Okzident 3, Mainz, 2016, pp. 31‑44.

Koder, in this volume: Koder J., “Multidisciplinary approaches to food and foodways in the medieval Eastern Mediterranean: Concluding remarks to the POMEDOR symposium”, in Waksman 2020, pp. 495‑506.

Kontogiannis 2012: Kontogiannis N.D., “Euripos-Negroponte-Eğriboz: Material culture and historical topography of Chalcis from Byzantium to the end of the Ottoman rule”, Jahrbuch der Österreichischen Byzantinistik 62, 2012, pp. 29‑56.

Kontogiannis et al., in this volume: Kontogiannis N.D., Skartsis S.S., Vaxevanis G., Waksman S.Y., “Ceramic vessels and food consumption: Chalcis as a major production and distribution center in the Byzantine and Frankish periods”, in Waksman 2020, pp. 239‑254.

Koutsouflakis, in this volume: Koutsouflakis G., “The transportation of amphorae, tableware and foodstuffs in the Middle and the Late Byzantine period: The evidence from Aegean shipwrecks”, in Waksman 2020, pp. 447‑482.

Ladstätter 2010: Ladstätter S., “Ephesos in byzantinischer Zeit. Das letzte Kapitel der Geschichte einer antiken Großstadt”, in F. Daim, J. Drauschke (ed.), Byzanz. Das Römerreich im Mittelalter, Teil 2. Schauplätze, Monographien des Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums 84, Mainz, 2010, vol. 2/2, pp. 493‑519.

Ladstätter 2015: Ladstätter S. (ed.), Die Türbe im Artemision. Ein frühosmanischer Grabbau in Ayasuluk/Selçuk und sein kulturhistorisches Umfeld, Sonderschriften des Österreichischen Archäologischen Instituts 53, Vienna, 2015.

Laiou 2002: Laiou A.E. (ed.), The economic history of Byzantium: From the seventh through the fifteenth century, 3 vol., Washington DC, 2002.

Laiou & Morrisson 2007: Laiou A.E., Morrisson C., The Byzantine economy, Cambridge, 2007.

Laurioux 2002: Laurioux B., Manger au Moyen Âge. Pratiques et discours alimentaires en Europe aux xive et xve siècles, Paris, 2002.

Laurioux 2005: Laurioux B., Une histoire culinaire du Moyen Âge, Paris, 2005.

Leclant et al. 2008: Leclant J., Vauchez A., Sartre M. (ed.), Pratiques et discours alimentaires en Méditerranée de l’Antiquité à la Renaissance, Paris, 2008.

Lemaître 2015: Lemaître S., “L’Orient en Occident. Formes et contenus d’amphores importées et produites à Lyon”, in S. Lemaître, C. Batigne Vallet (ed.), Abécédaire pour un archéologue lyonnais. Mélanges offerts à Armand Desbat, Autun, 2015, pp. 191‑198.

Lev-Tov 1999: Lev-Tov J., “The influences of religion, social structure, and ethnicity on diet: An example from Frankish Corinth”, in S.J. Vaughan, W. Coulson (ed.), Palaeodiet in the Aegean, Wiener laboratory monographs 1, Oxford-Oakville, 1999, pp. 85‑98.

Lewicka 2011: Lewicka P.B., Food and foodways of medieval Cairenes: Aspects of life in an Islamic metropolis of the Eastern Mediterranean, Islamic history and civilization studies and texts 88, Leiden, 2011.

Lightfoot 2003: Lightfoot C.S. (ed.), Amorium reports, 2, Research papers and technical reports, BAR International series 1170, Oxford, 2003.

Lightfoot & Ivison 2012: Lightfoot C.S., Ivison E.A. (ed.), Amorium reports, 3, The lower city enclosure: Finds reports and technical studies, Istanbul, 2012.

Lock & Sanders 1996: Lock P., Sanders G.D.R. (ed.), The archaeology of medieval Greece, Oxford, 1996.

Louvi-Kizi 2002: Louvi-Kizi A., “Thebes”, in Laiou 2002, pp. 631‑638.

Magdalino & Necipoğlu 2016: Magdalino P., Necipoğlu N. (ed.), Trade in Byzantium: Papers from the Third International Sevgi Gönül Byzantine Studies Symposium (Istanbul, 24‑27 June 2013), Istanbul, 2016.

Maguire 1997: Maguire H. (ed.), Materials analysis of Byzantine pottery, Washington DC, 1997.

Mango & Dagron 1995: Mango C., Dagron G. (ed.), Constantinople and its hinterland, Aldershot, 1995.

Margaritis et al., forthcoming: Margaritis E., Renfrew J.M., Jones M., Sherry F. (ed.), Wine in ancient Greece and Cyprus: Production, trade and social significance, forthcoming.

Mayer & Trzcionka 2005: Mayer W., Trzcionka S. (ed.), Feast, fast or famine: Food and drink in Byzantium, Brisbane, 2005.

Mee & Renard 2007: Mee C., Renard J. (ed.), Cooking up the past: Food and culinary practices in the Neolithic and Bronze Age Aegean, Oxford, 2007.

Megaw 1971: Megaw A.H.S., “Excavations at ‘Saranda Kolones’, Paphos: Preliminary report on the 1966‑67 and 1970‑71 seasons”, Report of the Department of Antiquities, Cyprus, 1971, pp. 117‑146.

Megaw 1972: Megaw A.H.S., “Supplementary excavations on a castle site at Paphos (Cyprus, 1970-1971)”, Dumbarton Oaks papers 26, 1972, pp. 322‑343.

Megaw & Jones 1983: Megaw A.H.S., Jones R.E., “Byzantine and allied pottery: A contribution by chemical analyses to problems of origin and distribution”, Annual of the British School at Athens 78, 1983, pp. 235‑263, pl. 24‑30.

Menjot 1984: Menjot D. (ed.), Manger et boire au Moyen Âge, Paris, 1984.

Mercangöz 2013a: Mercangöz Z. (ed.), Byzantine craftsmen – Latin patrons: Reflections from the Anaian commercial production in the light of the excavations at Kadıkalesi nearby Kuşadası, Istanbul, 2013.

Mercangöz 2013b: Mercangöz Z., “Archaeological finds on Late Byzantine commercial productions at Kadıkalesi, Kuşadası”, in Mercangöz 2013a, pp. 25‑58.

Mercangöz, in this volume: “A pottery production for whom and for what target? Thoughts on pottery finds from Kadıkalesi (Kuşadası) excavation”, in Waksman 2020, pp. 307‑322.

Mitchell et al. 2008: Mitchell P.D., Huntley J.P., Stern E., “Bioarchaeological analysis of the latrine soil from the thirteenth-century hospital of St John at Acre, Israel”, in V. Mallia-Milanes (ed.), The military orders, vol. 3, History and heritage, Aldershot, 2008, pp. 213‑223.

Montanari 2004: Montanari M., Il cibo come cultura, Rome-Bari, 2004.

Montanari 2012: Montanari M. (ed.), A cultural history of food in the medieval age, London-New York, 2012.

Mottram et al. 1999: Mottram H.R., Dudd S.N., Lawrence G.J., Stott A.W., Evershed R.P., “New chromatographic, mass spectrometric and stable isotope approaches to the classification of degraded animal fats preserved in archaeological pottery”, Journal of chromatography A 833, 1999, pp. 209‑221.

Morozova et al., in this volume: Morozova Y., Waksman S.Y., Zelenko S., “Byzantine amphorae of the 10th-13th centuries from the Novy Svet shipwrecks, Crimea, the Black Sea: Preliminary typology and archaeometric studies”, in Waksman 2020, pp. 429‑446.

Mulder 2014: Mulder S., “A survey and typology of Islamic molded ware (9th-13th centuries) based on the discovery of a potter’s workshop at medieval Bӑlis, Syria”, Journal of Islamic archaeology 1, 2014, pp. 143‑192.

Nasrallah 2007: Nasrallah N., Annals of the Caliphs’ kitchens: Ibn Sayyâr al-Warrâq’s 10th century Baghdadi cookbook, Leiden, 2007.

Niewöhner 2017: Niewöhner P., The archaeology of Byzantine Anatolia: From the end of Late Antiquity until the coming of the Turks, Oxford, 2017.

Onar, in this volume: Onar V., “Animals in food consumption during the Byzantine period in light of the Yenikapı metro and Marmaray excavations, Istanbul”, in Waksman 2020, pp. 331‑342.

Ouerfelli 2008: Ouerfelli M., Le sucre. Production, commercialisation et usages dans la Méditerranée médiévale, The medieval Mediterranean 71, Leiden-Boston, 2008.

Öztürk et al. 2015: Öztürk A., Eyango L., Waksman S.Y., Lallich S., Darmont J., “Warehousing complex archaeological objects”, in Modelling and using context, 9th International and Interdisciplinary Conference, CONTEXT 2015 Larnaca (Cyprus, November 2‑6 2015 proceedings), Lecture notes in artificial intelligence 9405, Cham, 2015, pp. 226‑239.

Papanikola-Bakirtzi 1999: Papanikola-Bakirtzi D. (ed.), Byzantine glazed ceramics: The art of sgraffito, Athens, 1999.

Papanikola-Bakirtzi 2005: Παπανικoλα-Μπακιρτζη Δ. [= Papanikola-Bakirtzi D.] (ed.), Bυζαντινών διατροφή και μαγειρείαι, Πρακτικά Ημερίδας “Περί της διατροφής στο Βυζάντιο”, Θεσσαλονίκη, Μουσείο Βυζαντινού Πολιτισμού, 4 Νοεμβρίου 2001 [= Food and cooking in Byzantium: Proceedings of the Symposium “On Food in Byzantium” (Thessaloniki, Museum of Byzantine Culture, 4 November 2001)], Athens, 2005.

Papanikola-Bakirtzi & Coureas 2014: Papanikola-Bakirtzi D., Coureas N. (ed.), Cypriot medieval ceramics: Reconsiderations and new perspectives, Nicosia, 2014.

Papanikola-Bakirtzi & Zekos 2010: Papanikola-Bakirtzi D., Zekos N., Late Byzantine glazed pottery from Thrace: Reading the archaeological finds, Thessaloniki, 2010.

Parani 2010: Parani M., “Byzantine cutlery: An overview”, Δελτίον της Χριστιανικής Αρχαιολογικής Εταιρείας [= Deltion of the Christian and Archeological Society] 31, 2010, pp. 139‑164.

Pecci 2006: Pecci A., “Rivestimenti organici nelle ceramiche medievali. Un accorgimento tecnologico ‘invisibile’?”, Archeologia medievale 23, 2006, pp. 517‑523.

Pecci 2009a: Pecci A., “Analisi chimiche delle superfici pavimentali. Un contributo all’interpretazione funzionale degli spazi archeologici”, in V Congresso nazionale di archeologia medievale, Florence, 2009, pp. 105‑110.

Pecci 2009b: Pecci A., “Analisi funzionali della ceramica e alimentazione medievale”, Archeologia medievale 36, 2009, pp. 21‑42.

Pecci & Salvini 2007: Pecci A., Salvini L., “La ceramica e l’alimentazione tra XIII e XIV secolo nella Toscana meridionale. Le olle modellate a mano”, in Proceedings of the Convegno internazionale della ceramica. La ceramica da fuoco e da dispensa nel basso medioevo e nella prima età moderna (secoli XI‑XVI), Florence, 2007, pp. 115‑119.

Pecci et al. 2012: Pecci A., Degl’Innocenti E., Giorgi G., Cantini F., “Are glazed ceramics really waterproof? Chemical analysis of the organic residues trapped in some post-medieval glazed slip painted wares found in Florence”, in S. Gelichi (ed.), Atti del IX Congresso Internazionale sulla Ceramica Medievale nel Mediterraneo (Venezia, 23‑27 Novembre 2009), Florence, 2012, pp. 332‑334.

Pecci et al. 2015: Pecci A., Gabrieli R.S., Inserra F., Cau M.A., Waksman S.Y., “Preliminary results of the organic residue analysis of 13th century cooking wares from a household in Frankish Paphos (Cyprus)”, STAR: Science & technology of archaeological research 1/2, 2015, pp. 99‑105 (doi.org/10.1080/20548923.2016.1183960, accessed 11/04/2019).

Pecci et al., in this volume: Pecci A., Garnier N., Waksman S.Y., “Residue analysis of medieval amphorae from the Eastern Mediterranean”, in Waksman 2020, pp. 417‑428.

Picon 1995: Picon M., “Grises et grises. Quelques réflexions sur les céramiques cuites en mode B”, in 1as. Jornadas de Cerâmica medieval e pós-medieval, Tondela, 1995, pp. 283‑292.

Politis 2015: Politis K.D. (ed.), The origins of the sugar industry and the transmission of ancient Greek and medieval Arab science and technology from the Near East to Europe, Athens, 2015.

Poulou-Papadimitriou & Nodarou 2014: Poulou-Papadimitriou N., Nodarou E., “Transport vessels and maritime routes in the Aegean (5th-9th century AD): Preliminary results of the EU funded ‘Pythagoras II’ Project: the Cretan case study”, in N. Poulou-Papadimitriou, E. Nodarou, V. Kilikoglou (ed.), LRCW4: Late Roman coarse wares, cooking wares and amphorae in the Mediterranean. Archaeology and archaeometry. The Mediterranean: a market without frontiers, vol. 2, BAR International series S2616, 2014, Oxford, pp. 873‑883.

Pringle 1986: Pringle D., “Pottery as evidence of trade in the Crusader states”, in G. Airaldi, B.Z. Kedar (ed.), I comuni italiani nel regno crociato di Gerusalemme, Genoa, 1986, pp. 451‑475.

Pryor 2002: Pryor J.H. (ed.), Logistics of warfare in the age of the Crusades, Aldershot, 2002.

Ravoire & Dietrich 2009: Ravoire F., Dietrich A. (ed.), La cuisine et la table dans la France de la fin du Moyen Âge. Contenus et contenants du xive au xvie siècle, Caen, 2009.

Redford 1998: Redford S., The archaeology of the frontier in the medieval Near East: Excavations at Gritille, Turkey, Philadelphia, 1998.

Redford 2004: Redford S., “On Saqis and ceramics: Systems of representation in the northeast Mediterranean”, in D.H. Weiss, L. Mahoney (ed.), France and the Holy Land: Frankish culture at the end of the Crusades, Baltimore, 2004, pp. 282‑312.

Redford 2015: Redford S., “Ceramics and society in medieval Anatolia”, in Vroom 2015a, pp. 249‑272.

Redford et al. 2001: Redford S., Ikram S., Parr E.M., Beach T., “Excavations at medieval Kinet, Turkey: A preliminary report”, Ancient Near Eastern studies 38, 2001, pp. 58‑138.

Regert 2011: Regert M., “Analytical strategies for discriminating archeological fatty substances from animal origin”, Mass spectrometry reviews 30, 2011, pp. 177‑220.

Reuter, in this volume: Reuter A.E., “Food production and consumption in the Byzantine empire in light of the archaeobotanical finds”, in Waksman 2020, pp. 343‑354.

Rheidt 1991: Rheidt K., Die Byzantinische Wohnstadt, t. 2, Altertümer von Pergamon XV, Berlin-New York, 1991.

Richard 1977: Richard J., “Une économie coloniale ? Chypre et ses ressources agricoles au Moyen Âge”, Byzantinische Forschungen 5, 1977, pp. 331‑352.

Ricci 2019: Ricci A., “The Küçükyalı ArkeoPark (Istanbul), 2016‑2018: Excavation, conservation, cultural heritage and public archaeology”, Anatolia Antiqua 27, 2019, pp. 255‑277.

Richard 1985: Richard J., “Agricultural conditions in the Crusader states”, in N.P. Zacour, H.W. Hazard (ed.), A history of the Crusades, vol. 5, The impact of the Crusades on the Near East, Madison, 1985, pp. 251‑295.

Rodinson et al. 2009: Rodinson M., Arberry A.J., Perry C., Medieval Arab cookery, London, 2009.

Romanchuk 2003: Ромaнчук А.И. [= Romanchuk A.I.], Глазурованная посуда поздневизантийского Херсона. Портовьıй район [= Glazed wares from Late Byzantine Chersonesos: The port area], Ekaterinbug, 2003.

Romanus et al. 2007: Romanus K., Poblome J., Verbeke K., Luypaerts A., Jacobs P., De Vos D., Waelkens M., “An evaluation of analytical and interpretative methodologies for the extraction and identification of lipids associated with pottery sherds from the site of Sagalassos, Turkey”, Archaeometry 49, 2007, pp. 729‑747.

Roslund 1997: Roslund M., “Crumbs from the rich mans’ table: Byzantine artefacts in Lund and Sigtuna c. 980‑1250”, in H. Andersson, P. Carelli, L. Ersgard (ed.), Visions of the past: Trends and traditions in Swedish medieval archaeology, Stockholm, 1997, pp. 239‑297.

Ruas 2005: Ruas M.‑P. (ed.), Dossier spécial : la fructiculture, Archéologie du Midi médiéval 23‑24, 2005.

Salvini et al. 2008: Salvini L., Pecci A., Giorgi G., “Cooking activities during the Middle Ages: Organic residues in ceramic vessels from the Sant’Antimo Church (Piombino-Central Italy)”, Journal of mass spectrometry 43, 2008, pp. 108‑115.

Sanders 1995: Sanders G.D.R., Byzantine glazed pottery at Corinth to c. 1125, PhD, University of Birmingham, 1995 (unpublished).

Sanders 2000: Sanders G.D.R., “New relative and absolute chronologies for 9th to 13th century glazed wares at Corinth: Methodology and social conclusions”, in K. Belke, F. Hild, J. Koder, P. Soustal (ed.), Byzanz als Raum. Zu Methoden und Inhalten der historischen Geographie des östlischen Mittelmeerraumes im Mittelalter, Vienna, 2000, pp. 153‑173.

Sanders 2003: Sanders G.D.R., “Recent developments in the chronology of Byzantine Corinth”, in C.K. Williams II, N. Bookidis (ed.), Corinth, vol. XX, Corinth: The centenary (1896-1996), Princeton, 2003, pp. 385‑399.

Sazanov 1997: Sazanov A., “Les amphores de l’Antiquité tardive et du Moyen Âge. Continuité ou rupture ? Le cas de la mer Noire”, in G. Démians d’Archimbaud (ed.), La céramique médiévale en Méditerranée. Actes du VIe congrès de l’AIECM2 (Aix-en-Provence, 13‑18 novembre 1995), Aix-en-Provence, 1997, pp. 87‑102.

Shapiro 2012: Shapiro A., “Petrographic analysis of the Crusader-period pottery”, in E.J. Stern, ‘Akko I. The 1991-1998 excavations: The Crusader-period pottery, vol. 1, IAA reports 51, Jerusalem, 2012, pp. 103‑126.

Shapiro et al., in this volume: Shapiro A., Stern E.J., Getzov N., Waksman S.Y., “Ceramic evidence for sugar production in the ‘Akko plain: Typology and provenance studies”, in Waksman 2020, pp. 163‑190.

Spataro & Villing 2015: Spataro M., Villing A. (ed.), Ceramics, cuisine and culture: The archaeology and science of kitchen pottery in the ancient Mediterranean world, Oxford, 2015.

Stern & Syon, forthcoming: Stern E., Syon D., ‘Akko. The excavations of 1991-1998, II, The late periods, IAA reports, Jerusalem, forthcoming.

Stern 1997: Stern E.J., “Excavations of the courthouse site at ‘Akko: The pottery of the Crusader and Ottoman periods”, ‘Atiqot 31, 1997, pp. 35‑70.

Stern 2009: Stern E.J., “Continuity and change: A survey of medieval pottery assemblages from northern Israel”, in J. Zozaya, M. Retuerce, M.Á. Hervás, A. de Juan (ed.), Actas del VIII Congreso Internacional de Cerámica Medieval en el Mediterráneo, vol. 1, Ciudad Real, 2009, pp. 225‑234.

Stern 2012: Stern E.J., ‘Akko I. The 1991-1998 excavations: The Crusader-period pottery, 2 vol., IAA reports 51, Jerusalem, 2012.

Stern 2015: Stern E.J., “Pottery and identity in the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem: A case study of Acre and western Galilee”, in Vroom 2015a, pp. 287‑315.

Stern & Tatcher 2009: Stern E.J., Tatcher A., “The Early Islamic, Crusader and Mamluk pottery from Horbat ‘Uza”, in N. Getzov, D. Avshalom-Gorni, Y. Gorin-Rosen, E.J. Stern, D. Syon, A. Tatcher, Horbat ‘Uza: The 1991 excavations, vol. 2, The late periods, IAA reports 42, Jerusalem, 2009, pp.118‑175.

Stern et al. 2015: Stern E.J., Getzov N., Shapiro A., Smithline H., “Sugar production in the ‘Akko plain from the Fatimid to the Early Ottoman period”, in Politis 2015, pp. 79‑112.

Stern et al., in this volume: Stern E.J., Waksman S.Y., Shapiro A., “The impact of the Crusades on ceramic production and use in the southern Levant: Continuity or change?”, in Waksman 2020, pp. 113‑146.

Tal 2011: Tal O. (ed.), The last supper at Apollonia: The final days of the Crusader castle in Herzliya, Tel Aviv, 2011.

Teslenko, in this volume: Teslenko I., “The composition of church festive meals in a medieval Christian community in the southern Crimea, based on ceramics and faunal materials”, in Waksman 2020, pp. 295‑306.

Tite & Kilikoglou 2002: Tite M.S., Kilikoglou V., “Do we understand cooking pots and is there an ideal cooking pot?”, in V. Kilikoglou, A. Hein, Y. Maniatis (ed.), Modern trends in scientific studies of ancient ceramics, BAR International series 1011, Oxford, 2002, pp. 1‑8.

Todorova 2012: Тодорова Е. [= Todorova E.], Амфорите от територията на България (VII‑XIVв.), дисертация предоставена за присъждане на ОНС “Доктор” [= Byzantine amphorae from the present-day Bulgarian lands (7th-14th century AD)], PhD, University of Sofia, 2012 (unpublished; extended abstract in English: www.academia.edu/17344373/Byzantine_Amphorae_from_Present-day_Bulgaria_7th_-_14th_century_AD_._Summary_of_a_PhD_thesis, accessed 15/02/2018).

Todorova, in this volume: Todorova E., “One amphora, different contents: The multiple purposes of Byzantine amphorae according to written and archaeological data”, in Waksman 2020, pp. 403‑416.

Trélat, in this volume: Trélat P., “Du lac de Limassol aux tables de Nicosie: pêcheries et consommation de poisson à Chypre sous la domination latine (1191‑1570)”, in Waksman 2020, p. 61‑74.

Trépanier 2014: Trépanier N., Foodways and daily life in medieval Anatolia: A new social history, Austin, 2014.

Van Doorninck 1989: van Doorninck F.H. Jr., “The cargo amphoras on the 7th century Yassı Ada and 11th century Serçe Limanı shipwrecks: Two examples of a reuse of Byzantine amphoras as transport jars”, in Déroche & Spieser 1989, pp. 247‑257.

Van Doorninck 1993: van Doorninck F.H. Jr., “Giving good weight in eleventh-century Byzantium: The metrology of the glass wreck amphoras”, The INA quarterly 20/2, 1993, pp8‑12.

Van Doorninck 2002: van Doorninck F.H. Jr., “The Byzantine ship at Serçe Limanı: An example of small-scale maritime commerce with Fatimid Syria in the early 11th century”, in R. Macrides (ed.), Travel in the Byzantine world: Papers from the 34th Spring Symposium of Byzantine Studies (Birmingham, April 2000), Birmingham, 2002, pp. 137‑148.

Van Doorninck 2015: van Doorninck F.H. Jr., “The metrology of the piriform amphoras from the 11th-century Byzantine ship at Serçe Limanı”, in D.N. Carlson, J. Leidwanger, S.M. Kampbell (ed.), Maritime studies in the wake of the Byzantine shipwreck at Yassıada, Turkey, College Station, 2015, pp. 35‑54.

Van Doorninck, forthcoming: van Doorninck F.H. Jr. (ed.), Serçe Limanı, vol. 3, College Station, forthcoming.

Vionis et al. 2010: Vionis A., Poblome J., De Cupere B., Waelkens M., “A Middle-Late Byzantine pottery assemblage from Sagalassos: Typo-chronology and sociocultural interpretation”, Hesperia 79, 2010, pp. 423‑464.

Von Wartburg 2001: von Wartburg M.‑L., “The archaeology of cane sugar production: A survey of twenty years of research in Cyprus”, Antiquaries journal 81, 2001, pp. 305‑335.

Von Wartburg 2014: von Wartburg M.‑L., “Ubiquity and conformity: A comparative study of sugar pottery excavated in Cyprus”, in Papanikola-Bakirtzi & Coureas 2014, pp. 213‑245.

Vroom 2000: Vroom J., “Byzantine garlic and Turkish delight: Dining habits and cultural change in central Greece from Byzantine to Ottoman times”, Archaeological dialogues 7, 2000, pp. 199‑216.

Vroom 2003: Vroom J., After Antiquity: Ceramics and society in the Aegean from the 7th to the 20th centuries A.C. A case study from Boeotia, Central Greece, Archaeological studies Leiden University 10, Leiden, 2003.

Vroom 2007a: Vroom J., “The archaeology of Late Antique dining habits in the Eastern Mediterranean: A preliminary study of the evidence”, in L. Lavan, E. Swift, T. Putzeys (ed.), Objects in context, objects in use: Material spatiality in Late Antiquity, Late Antique archaeology 5, Leiden-Boston, 2007, pp. 313‑361.

Vroom 2007b: Vroom J., “The changing dining habits at Christ’s table”, in Brubaker & Linardou 2007, pp. 191‑222.

Vroom 2009: Vroom J., “Medieval ceramics and the archaeology of consumption in Eastern Anatolia”, in T. Vorderstrasse, J. Roodenberg (ed.), Archaeology of the countryside in medieval Anatolia, Leiden, 2009, pp. 235‑258.

Vroom 2015a: Vroom J. (ed.), Medieval and post-medieval ceramics in the Eastern Mediterranean: Fact and fiction. Proceedings of the First International Conference on Byzantine and Ottoman Archaeology (Amsterdam, 21‑23 October 2011), Turnhout, 2015.

Vroom 2015b: Vroom J., “The archaeology of consumption in the Eastern Mediterranean: A ceramic perspective”, in M.‑J. Gonçalves, S. Gómez-Martinez (ed.), Actas do X Congresso Internacional a Cerâmica Medieval no Mediterrâneo (Silves-Mértola, 22 a 27 de Outubro de 2012), Silves, 2015, pp. 359‑367.

Vroom 2016: Vroom J., “Byzantine sea trade in ceramics: Some case studies in the Eastern Mediterranean”, in Magdalino & Necipoğlu 2016, pp. 157‑177.

Vroom, in this volume: Vroom J., “Eating in Aegean lands (ca 700‑1500): Perspectives on pottery”, in Waksman 2020, pp. 275‑294.

Vroom & Tzavella 2017: Vroom J., Tzavella E., “Dinner time in Athens: Eating and drinking in the medieval Agora”, in Vroom et al. 2017b, pp. 145‑180.

Vroom et al. 2017a: Vroom J., Waksman Y., van Oosten R., “Preface”, in Vroom et al. 2017b, pp. 13‑22.

Vroom et al. 2017b: Vroom J., Waksman Y., van Oosten R. (ed.), Medieval MasterChef. Archaeological and historical perspectives on eastern cuisine and western foodways, Turnhout, 2017.

Waksman 2002: Waksman S.Y., “Céramiques levantines de l’époque des Croisades. Le cas des productions à pâte rouge des ateliers de Beyrouth”, Revue d’archéométrie 26, 2002, pp. 67‑77.

Waksman 2011: Waksman S.Y., “Ceramics of the ‘Serçe Limanı type’ and Fatimid pottery production in Beirut”, Levant 43, 2011, pp. 201‑212.

Waksman 2012: Waksman S.Y., “The first workshop of Byzantine ceramics discovered in Constantinople/Istanbul: Chemical characterization and preliminary typological study”, in S. Gelichi (ed.), Atti del IX Congresso Internazionale sulla Ceramica Medievale nel Mediterraneo (Venezia, 23‑27 Novembre 2009), Florence, 2012, pp. 147‑151.

Waksman 2013: Waksman S.Y., “The identification and diffusion of Anaia’s ceramic products: A preliminary approach using chemical analysis”, in Mercangöz 2013a, pp. 101‑111.

Waksman 2014: Waksman S.Y., “Long-term pottery production and chemical reference groups: Examples from medieval western Turkey”, in H. Meyza (ed.), Late Hellenistic to Medieval fine wares of the Aegean coast of Anatolia: Their production, imitation and use, Warsaw, 2014, pp107‑125.

Waksman 2015: Waksman S.Y. in collaboration with Carytsiotis M.‑M., “Medieval ceramics from the Türbe excavations in Ephesos/Ayasuluk: An archaeometric viewpoint”, in Ladstätter 2015, pp. 293‑312.

Waksman 2017: Waksman S.Y., “‘Provenance studies’: Productions and compositional groups”, in A. Hunt (ed.), Oxford handbook of archaeological ceramic analysis, Oxford, 2017, pp. 148‑161.

Waksman 2018: Waksman S.Y., “Defining the main ‘Middle Byzantine Production’ (MBP): Changing perspectives in Byzantine pottery studies”, in Yenişehirlioğlu 2018, vol. 1, pp. 397‑407.

Waksman forthcoming: Waksman S.Y., “Provenance studies of Byzantine and Levantine pottery imported at Kinet Höyük”, in S. Redford (ed.), Excavations at Kinet Höyük: The medieval period, forthcoming.

Waksman & François 2004-2005: Waksman S.Y., François V., “Vers une redéfinition typologique et analytique des céramiques byzantines du type Zeuxippus Ware”, Bulletin de correspondance hellénique 128‑129/2.1, 2004-2005, pp. 629‑724.

Waksman & Roslund, forthcoming: Waksman S.Y., Roslund M., “Diffusion of Byzantine and Islamic ceramics into Scandinavia: Laboratory investigations of samples from Sigtuna, Sweden”, forthcoming.

Waksman & von Wartburg 2006: Waksman S.Y., von Wartburg M.‑L., “‘Fine-sgraffito ware’, ‘Aegean ware’, and other wares: New evidence for a major production of Byzantine ceramics”, Report of the Department of Antiquities, Cyprus, 2006, pp. 369‑388.

Waksman et al. 2005: Waksman S.Y., Reynolds P., Bien S., Tréglia J.‑C., “A major production of Late Roman ‘Levantine’ and ‘Cypriot’ common wares”, in J.M. Gurt i Esparraguera, J. Buxeda i Garrigós, M.A. Cau Ontiveros (ed.), LRCW I: Late Roman coarse wares, cooking wares and amphorae in the Mediterranean. Archaeology and archaeometry, BAR International series 1340, Oxford, 2005, pp. 311‑325.

Waksman et al. 2014: Waksman S.Y., Kontogiannis Ν.D., Skartsis S.S., Vaxevanis G., “The main ‘Middle Byzantine Production’ and pottery manufacture in Thebes and Chalcis”, Annual of the British School at Athens 109, 2014, pp. 379‑422.

Waksman et al. 2017: Waksman S.Y., Burlot J., Böhlendorf-Arslan B., Vroom J., “Moulded wares production in the Early Turkish/Beylik period in western Anatolia: A case study from Ephesus and Miletus”, Journal of archaeological science: Reports 16, 2017, pp. 665‑675 (doi.org/10.1016/j.jasrep.2015.11.015, accessed 11/04/2019).

Waksman et al. 2018a: Waksman S.Y., Skartsis S.S., Kontogiannis N.D., Todorova E.P., Vaxevanis G., “Investigating the origins of two main types of Middle and Late Byzantine amphorae”, Journal of archaeological science: Reports 21, pp. 1111‑1121 (doi.org/10.1016/j.jasrep.2016.12.008, accessed 11/04/2019).

Waksman et al. 2018b: Waksman S.Y., Koutsouflakis G., Burlot J., Courbe L., “Archaeometric investigations of the tableware cargo of the Kavalliani shipwreck (Greece) and into the role of the harbour of Chalcis in the Byzantine and Frankish periods”, Journal of archaeological science: Reports 21, pp. 1122‑1129 (doi.org/10.1016/j.jasrep.2018.06.027, last accessed 11/04/2019).

White et al. 2006: White H.E., Jackson C.M., Sanders G.D.R., “Byzantine glazed ceramics from Corinth: Testing provenance assumptions”, 36th International Symposium on Archaeometry (ISA 2006, Quebec, Canada), unpublished poster, www.academia.edu/410324/_Byzantine_Glazed_Ceramics_from_Corinth_Testing_Provenance_Assumptions (accessed 28/11/2017).

Williams 2003: Williams C.K. II, “Frankish Corinth: An overview”, in C.K. Williams II, N. Bookidis (ed.), Corinth, vol. XX, Corinth: The centenary (1896-1996), Princeton, 2003, pp. 423‑434.

Woolgar 2016: Woolgar C.M., The culture of food in England (1200-1500), New Haven, 2016.

Woolgar et al. 2006: Woolgar C.M., Serjeantson D., Waldron T. (ed.), Food in medieval England: Diet and nutrition, Oxford, 2006.

Yakobson 1979: Якобсон А.Л. [= Yakobson A.L.], Керамика и керамическое производства средневековой Таврики [= Pottery and pottery production in medieval Taurica], Leningrad, 1979.

Yehuda, in this volume: Yehuda L., “Between oven and Tannur: ‘Frankish’ and ‘indigenous’ kitchens in the Holy Land in the Crusader period”, in Waksman 2020, pp. 147‑162.

Yenişehirlioğlu 2018: Yenişehirlioğlu F. (ed.), Proceedings of the XIth Congress AIECM3 on Medieval and Modern Period Mediterranean Ceramics (Antalya, 19‑24 October 2015), 2 vol., Ankara, 2018.

Yenişehirlioğlu, in this volume: Yenişehirlioğlu F., “Ottoman period sources for the study of food and pottery (15th-18th centuries)”, in Waksman 2020, pp. 385‑398.

Yerasimos 2001: Yerasimos S., À la table du Grand Turc, Arles, 2001.

Zelenko 2008: Зеленко С.М. [= Zelenko S.M.], Подводная археология Крыма [= Underwater archeology of Crimea], Kiev, 2008.

Notes

1 I also develop this point in Vroom et al. 2017a, pp. 13‑17.

2 Not surprisingly, Guy Sanders (Corinth), Sabine Ladstätter (Ephesus: Ladstätter 2015), Chris Lightfoot (Amorium) may be quoted again, together with Beate Böhlendorf-Arslan (Assos), Scott Redford (Gritille, Kinet Höyük: Redford 1998; Redford et al. 2001), Mark Waelkens and Jeroen Poblome (Sagalassos), and see Teslenko, in this volume, and Jones & Grey, in this volume.

3 It is also very significant that a series of conferences on Byzantine studies, the “International Sevgi Gönül Byzantine Studies Symposium”, has been taking place in Turkey (Istanbul) since 2007 (see e.g. Magdalino & Necipoğlu 2016).

4 Especially since the inclusion in 1999 of the Eastern Mediterranean area in those covered by the AIECM3 (“Association internationale pour l’étude des céramiques médiévales et modernes en Méditerranée”). The proceedings of the AIECM3 series of conferences constitute main sources for the discipline, see especially Bakirtzis (2003) and Yenişehirlioğlu (2018), aiecm3.com/ (accessed 28/11/2017).

5 See also Laiou & Morrisson 2007, pp. 115‑121, 184‑188; François 2017.

6 See also Reuter (in this volume) for archaeobotany, and Vroom (in this volume) for additional bibliography.

7 More adequate presentations and bibliographies by Philippe Trélat (Crusader States), Ilias Anagnostakis (Byzantine Empire) and Nicolas Trépanier (Post-Byzantine and Early Ottoman Anatolia), are available on the POMEDOR website: www.pomedor.mom.fr/fields-and-labs/historical-sources (accessed 28/11/2017).

8 And see Redford 2004; 2015.

9 A notable study concerning a neighboring region is that by Lewicka (2011) on medieval Cairo.

10 And see Koder’s contributions in Mango & Dagron 1995; Papanikola-Bakirtzi 2005; Brubaker & Linardou 2007; Anagnostakis 2011; 2013b; Magdalino & Necipoğlu 2016.

11 See the proceedings of a series of meetings they organized since the 1990s on the history of wine, oil, milk, honey, cereals… in Greece: www.pomedor.mom.fr/sites/pomedor.mom.fr/files/documents/basic%20pages/Anagnostakis_bibliography.pdf (accessed 28/11/2017). A new series of conferences on the same themes in the Mediterranean area is co-organized with Antonella Pellettieri (University of Potenza) within the framework of the MenSALe project (e.g. Anagnostakis & Pellettieri 2016).

12 Lebanon was included through previous studies, and Crimea through a French-Ukrainian DNIPRO project directed by Iryna Teslenko (Ukrainian Academy of Science) and Yona Waksman, supported in 2013-2014 by the French Ministry of National Education, the French Ministry of Higher Education and Research and the State Agency for the Problems of Science, Innovation and Informatization of Ukraine.

13 Israel Antiquities Authority.

14 University of Sydney and University of Western Australia.

15 Leiden University. Vroom’s research was carried out within the framework of the VIDI project she directed from 2010 to 2015, “Material Culture, Consumption and Social Change: New Approaches to Understanding the Eastern Mediterranean during Byzantine and Ottoman Times”, see www.universiteitleiden.nl/en/research/research-projects/archaeology/byzantine-and-ottoman-archaeology (accessed 28/11/2017).

16 Research was made possible thanks to the collaboration of many individuals and institutions (archaeologists, ceramologists, directors of excavations, curators, staff of departments of antiquities or equivalent offices, etc.), whose help is gratefully acknowledged (see infra: “Acknowledgements”).

17 A detailed presentation of sampling strategies is available for some case studies on the POMEDOR website, see for an example illustrating different levels of analysis the sampling campaign in Israel: www.pomedor.mom.fr/fields-and-labs/sampling-campaigns/content/85 (accessed 28/11/2017).

18 Laboratory studies on Tarsus could not be included in the project. Samples from Kinet Höyük and Hisn al‑Tinat were available only at the very end of the project and could only be partly included here.

19 One exception is the site of the Türbe in the Artemision in Ayasuluk/Ephesus, but unfortunately neither the nature of the site nor its process of deposition were adapted to our purpose (Ladstätter 2015).

20 For previous research see: Günsenin & Hatcher 1997; Shapiro 2012.

21 “Cité de la Céramique”, Sèvres.

22 INRAP, Éguilles.

23 Louvre Museum, Department of Islamic Art.

24 See infra, n. 76.

25 For a recent study of Byzantine collections in the Louvre museum, see François (2017), including analyses carried out by Anne Bouquillon (PSL Chimie ParisTech and C2RMF Paris).

26 Barcelona University.

27 In collaboration with Fernanda Inserra and Miguel Ángel Cau Ontiveros (Barcelona University), Nicolas Garnier (“Laboratoire Nicolas Garnier”), Simona Mileto and Richard Evershed (Bristol University), respectively.

28 Gas Chromatography Mass Spectrometry

29 Israel Antiquities Authority.

30 Wavelength-Dispersive X-Ray Fluorescence, carried out at the Ceramology analytical platform, CNRS UMR 5138, Lyon.

31 Lyon 2 University and UMR 5138.

32 Scanning Electron Microscopy – Energy Dispersive Spectroscopy, carried out at the CTμ microscopy analytical platform, Lyon 1 University. Analyses by Raman spectrometry were carried out at the MONARIS laboratory, UMR 8233, University Pierre & Marie Curie, Paris.

33 University Pierre & Marie Curie.

34 PhD thesis “Premières productions de céramiques turques en Anatolie occidentale: contextualisation et études techniques”, 2017, Lyon 2 University, directed by S.Y. Waksman & A. Desbat.

35 Bordeaux Montaigne University.

36 X-Ray Diffraction, carried out at the Ceramology analytical platform, CNRS UMR 5138, Lyon.

37 Proton Induced X-Ray Emission and Proton Induced Gamma-Ray Emission, carried out at the AGLAE facility of the C2RMF laboratory (Ministry of Culture, Paris).

38 PSL Chimie ParisTech and C2RMF Paris.

39 “Accélérateur Grand Louvre d’analyse élémentaire”.

40 University of Rouen, associate researcher.

41 National Hellenic Research Foundation, Athens.

42 University of Mississippi.

43 This document is accessible to members of the POMEDOR network through the POMEDOR collaborative platform: www.network.pomedor.mom.fr/ (accessed 28/11/2017).

44 Leiden University, within the framework of J. Vroom VIDI’s project.

45 www.pomedor.mom.fr/ (accessed 28/11/2017). The POMEDOR website and platform are hosted by the servers of the “Maison de l’Orient et de la Méditerranée” (CNRS FR 3747, Lyon). They were created by Caroline Castonguay-Boisvert, as part of her internship as an undergraduate student in the IT department (Lyon 1 University), with the help of Céline Brun (CNRS UMR 5138, Lyon) for the conception of the graphic design.

46 Within the framework of the “Séminaires de céramologie” of the “Archéologie et Archéométrie” laboratory (CNRS UMR 5138, Lyon), co-organized with Cécile Batigne Vallet.

47 Co-organized with Emmanuelle Vila (CNRS UMR 5133, Lyon) and Sabine Fourrier (CNRS UMR 5189, Lyon) within the framework of the common theme “Dietary practices, diachronic approaches in the Mediterranean” of the “Maison de l’Orient et de la Méditerranée”, pralim.hypotheses.org/ (accessed 28/11/2017).

48 In collaboration with Andrea Berlin (Boston University, LCP project, see infra).

49 In collaboration with Joanita Vroom and Roos von Oosten (Leiden University).

50 For a discussion of the terminology of “classes” and “types”, we refer to van Doorninck (forthcoming), and still use the term “type” here. Examples of types Günsenin II‑III and XX were also included.

51 However, the role of transshipment and of reuse of amphorae containers, which cannot be evaluated at this stage, should be taken into account (Jacoby 2004, p. 149; van Doorninck 1989; forthcoming). We would like to thank F. van Doorninck for sharing with us as yet unpublished information on medieval legal texts concerning the control of amphorae reuse.

52 See also François 2015; Vroom 2016.

53 Koutsouflakis reminds us not to over-interpret such evidence, p. 450.

54 This terminology refers to the chronological framework, as it is usually accepted, and not to Byzantine or Frankish rule; about this question raised by S. Redford during the POMEDOR conference in Lyon, see Waksman (2018, n. 2).

55 See also Koutsouflakis (in this volume, fig. 2).

56 Poster presented at the POMEDOR conference: A. Bouquillon, J. Burlot, S.Y. Waksman, L. Tilliard, C. Maury, “Byzantine and Early Turkish Table Wares in Sèvres and the Louvre Museum: Investigations by PIXE into Provenance and Technology”.

57 See Koutsouflakis (in this volume) on the looting of Byzantine shipwrecks.

58 Poster presented at the POMEDOR conference: L. Courbe, S.Y. Waksman, “Identifying the Byzantine and Ottoman Pottery Productions of Athens”. The archaeological study of this material is carried out by J. Vroom and her team.

59 As yet unpublished chemical analyses carried out at Lyon of examples of “Aegean Ware” found at Kinet Höyük confirm their attribution to Chalcis (Waksman, forthcoming).

60 See also Jacoby 2014; Fleet 1999, p. 75, for connections between Negroponte, Anaia and Acre, based on documents concerning wine, grain and silk.

61 A.H.S. Megaw, who directed the excavations at Saranda Kolones from 1957 to 1989, was also a pioneer in the involvement of archaeological sciences in the study of Byzantine pottery. In his seminal study with Richard Jones (Megaw & Jones 1983), he mentions these Levantine cooking wares, then thought to have been imported from Acre.

62 But were still present farther north in Kinet Höyük up to the early 14th century. We would like to thank Scott Redford for this information, provided before the final publication of the excavations he directed at medieval Kinet Höyük. Chemical analyses carried out at Lyon confirm the presence of Beirut buff wares on the site (Waksman, forthcoming).

63 A fairly similar question is associated with the wide distribution of the Late Roman/Early Byzantine sliced-rim casseroles from “Workshop X”, although this case differs significantly due to the large number of workshops which manufactured the same form (Waksman et al. 2005).

64 It was unfortunately not possible to find enough samples suitable for residue analysis in the Fatimid material, to carry out a comparative study of organic residues in Fatimid and Crusader cooking pots.

65 Communication “Pratiques et cultures alimentaires à Chypre à l’époque latine (1191-1570). Identités et échanges” at the PRALIM study day “Géographie de l’alimentation”, Maison de l’Orient et de la Méditerranée, Lyon; abstract and podcast: pralim.hypotheses.org/nos-activites/geographie-de-lalimentation-aires-et-limites-de-diffusion-de-produits-et-techniques/pratiques-et-cultures-alimentaires-a-chypre-a-l’epoque-latine-1191-1570-identites-et-echanges (accessed 28/11/2017).

66 Within the framework of the VIDI project directed by Vroom and of the PhD thesis of Bağcı (Bağcı 2017). Poster presented at the POMEDOR conference: Y. Bağcı, “Colours of the Caliphs, Shades of the Thughur al-Sham: Revisiting the medieval ceramics of the 1935-1948 Gözlükule Excavations in Tarsus (south Turkey)”.

67 The dinner took place during the POMEDOR final conference on 19th May 2016, at the Vivier Castle, Paul Bocuse Institute (Écully): www.pomedor.mom.fr/ongoing/content/136 (accessed 28/11/2017).

68 www.regismarcon.fr/ (accessed 28/11/2017).

69 www.pomedor.mom.fr/ongoing/content/169 (accessed 11/02/2020).

70 These recipes are included in the present volume: pp. 14‑15, 58‑59, 208‑209, 400‑401.

71 Maxime Michaud, Alain Dauvergne and Jean Philippon, together with Philippe Rispal who was in charge of operations, and thanks to the Director of the Bocuse Institute, Dominique Giraudier; www.institutpaulbocuse.com/ (accessed 28/11/2017).

72 poteriedeschals.free.fr/poteriedeschals.html (accessed 28/11/2017).

73 The one-week training course “Archaeological and Archaeometric Approaches to Ceramics. Byzantine World and Medieval Eastern Mediterranean” (labeled “National Training Action” by the CNRS in 2017) has been organized in Lyon since 2014: www.pomedor.mom.fr/ongoing/content/144 (accessed 28/11/2017).

74 Members of the research team “Archaeological ceramics: materials, markets, societies” of the UMR 5138, directed by myself, then by Cécile Batigne Vallet.

75 The IT interns Bryan Boni and Gabriel Coutu (Lyon 1 University) participated in these endeavors, by building new interfaces and integrating 3D files.

76 Within the frameworks of the POMEDOR and CERAM.3D projects (ipem.univ-st-etienne.fr/wordpress/?page_id=181, accessed 28/11/2017).

77 Lyon 2 University and CNRS UMR 5133.

78 For an example of a 3D model of Günsenin III, displayed online as part of an article, see: www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352409X16308185, Appendix B. Supplementary data (example kept at the Ephorate of Byzantine Antiquities of Chalkida, in Waksman et al. 2018a, accessed 28/11/2017).

79 Levantine Ceramics Project, directed by Andrea Berlin (Boston University), www.levantineceramics.org/ (accessed 28/11/2017).

80 PhD thesis “Design, implementation and analysis of a description model for complex archaeological objects”, 2018, Lyon 2 University, co-directed by S. Lallich, J. Darmont and S.Y. Waksman.

81 I also develop this point in Vroom et al. 2017a, p. 17.

Table des illustrations

Titre Fig. 1 – Map showing the location of the sites investigated within the framework of the POMEDOR project (red dots: terrestrial sites; red circles: shipwrecks; sites not named on the map, in Greece: Aliveri, Akraifnion, Orchomenos; in Israel: el-Kabri, Horbat ‘Uza, Horbat Bet Zeneta, Horbat Manot) (base map O. Barge, MOM Lyon, map S.Y. Waksman).
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/10119/img-1.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 316k
Titre Fig. 2 – Examples of amphorae, common wares (above) and MBP table wares (below) manufactured in Chalcis/Chalkida, dating from the 11th to the 13th or beginning of the 14th century, depending on the type. Most of these types were widely exported and are found as cargo in shipwrecks.
Légende From excavations of the 23rd Ephorate of Byzantine Antiquities in Chalkida, Thebes and Akraifnion (Greece); from underwater excavations of Kiev National Taras Shevchenko University in Novy Svet (Crimea), and of the Ephorate of Underwater Antiquities in Kavalliani (Greece); at the “Cité de la Céramique”, Sèvres (analyzed examples, Lyon laboratory id. numbers or Sèvres inventory numbers are indicated; photos S.Y. Waksman, except BZY600, BZY606: Kiev National Taras Shevchenko University, CAD J. Burlot and S.Y. Waksman; after Waksman et al. 2014; 2018a; 2018b; Waksman 2018; Morozova et al., in this volume; Kontogiannis et al., in this volume).
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/10119/img-2.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 2,0M
Titre Fig. 3 – Location of medieval shipwrecks, containing significant cargoes of table wares, which appear as the best identified for the 11th-13th century. Cargoes shown (Kavalliani) or expected to correspond to the MBP from Chalcis are dominant (in red; after Waksman et al. 2014; 2018b; Waksman 2018; base map O. Barge MOM Lyon, map S.Y. Waksman).
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/10119/img-3.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 380k
Titre Fig. 4 – Selection of pottery manufactured in Beirut (a-e) and in the area of Acre (f-j) in the Fatimid (a-b, d-e, i-j) and Crusader (c, e, f-h) periods: buff wares in the Islamic tradition, made of calcareous clays (a, f); with a clear surface resulting from the use of sea water (g-h); wares similar to Italian productions (g); widely exported types of table and cooking wares (a-e); sugar mold (i) and molasses jar (j).
Légende From excavations of the Israel Antiquities Authority in Acre and el-Kabri, and of Solidere in Beirut (analyzed examples or representative of analyzed examples, Lyon laboratory id. numbers are indicated; photos S.Y. Waksman, CAD J. Burlot and S.Y. Waksman; after Waksman 2011; 2017; Stern et al., in this volume; Shapiro et al., in this volume).
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/10119/img-4.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 741k
Titre Fig. 5 – New wares and techniques introduced into western Anatolia at the beginning of the Turkish period: (a) new style; (b) new forming technique; (c) new glaze recipe; (d) new pigments and synthetic slip.
Légende From excavations of the Austrian Archaeological Institute in Ephesus, and of the German Archaeological Institute in Miletus (analyzed examples, Lyon laboratory id. numbers are indicated; photos S.Y. Waksman, CAD J. Burlot and S.Y. Waksman; after Waksman 2014; 2015; Burlot 2017; Burlot et al. 2018; in this volume).
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/10119/img-5.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 806k

Acheter

Volume papier

LCDPUleslibraires.fr
Rechercher dans OpenEdition Search

Vous allez être redirigé vers OpenEdition Search