Version classiqueVersion mobile

Multidisciplinary approaches to food and foodways in the medieval Eastern Mediterranean

 | 
Sylvie Yona Waksman

Byzantium and beyond

A pottery production for whom and for what target?

Thoughts on pottery finds from Kadıkalesi (Kuşadası) excavation

Zeynep Mercangöz

Résumé

Among the numerous ceramic finds from Kadıkalesi (Kuşadası) excavation, only a few have been identified as used wares related to medieval daily life at the site. However, data were obtained which show pottery production in the Late Byzantine period. In comparison to glazed ceramics, unglazed ceramics make up the majority, in which amphorae in different types and sizes are prevalent. Although we are aware of overseas trade of some glazed ceramics, no chemical analyses concerning amphorae have yet been carried out, and we lack information on their geographical distribution. Based on only one document, it is known that wine was sold in Anaia. Besides these cargo vessels, a group of glazed chalices/goblets was included in trade related to wine. It is also possible to suggest that some cooking pots and service wares were produced for trade.
In this paper, following a brief presentation of the Kadıkalesi excavation and its ceramic production, information concerning onsite production sectors is provided; the markets and commercial actors in this trade are discussed.

Texte intégral

Introduction

  • 1 Regarding the harbor castle, although many underwater investigations along the shores of Kadıkales (...)
  • 2 An inscription in which the name Anaia can be read, found in the northern part of the wall built o (...)

1Excavations carried out at the fortress south of Kuşadası on the west coast of Turkey have provided Aegean archaeology with rich data from prehistory to the end of the Middle Ages. This defensive edifice, which must be a harbor castle, possessing massive cylindrical bastions and rising above a mound by the sea, is dated to the Lascarid period (1204-1261 AD) based on the original masonry style of its walls (Mercangöz 2010a; 2010b).1 We accept the views of art historians and historians who have identified this site with Anaia and believe that this fortress was closely connected with the historical fact that Anaia was an emporio and kommerkio in that period.2 Architectural data revealed during excavations show that the mound was an acropolis during Antiquity and became an Early Christian religious center where a monumental basilica was built in the 5th-6th centuries which was then altered with some additions and interventions in the 11th-13th centuries but retained its splendor. It appears that the fortress enclosed this church-monastery complex. It is a somewhat sad sight today; endless summer houses fill the shoreline that was once occupied by the ancient and the Early Byzantine settlements. Archaeological site preservation laws are barely able to protect the fortress and the mound on which it resides.

  • 3 An exhibition during the First International Sevgi Gönül Byzantine Studies Symposium, which had be (...)

2This paper concerns the Byzantine ceramics of the Kadıkalesi excavations, not all the finds, but in particular the glazed and unglazed ceramics from local productions of the Late Byzantine period. We have already mentioned these ceramics and commercial production on the site in previous publications (Mercangöz & Doğer 2009; Doğer 2011; Mercangöz 2013a).3 The Kadıkalesi/Anaia glazed ceramics, which we have evaluated from the point of view of form and decoration as would any art historian, have been discussed in three different archaeometric studies (Kırmızı 2013; Budak-Ünaler et al. 2013; Waksman 2013). Among these, the research of Yona Waksman, especially on Zeuxippus-related Wares, is of importance for presenting the overseas trade of Anaia productions, which we initially defined through visual comparison. Here in this paper, my approach will not be typological and descriptive in regard to the ceramics, rather I will focus on the clues provided by the finds through a general presentation of the sectors of production in which they were found. In any case, I prefer to review the glazed and unglazed ceramics briefly.

Excavated sectors where evidence of pottery production was found

  • 4 The basilica had three naves in the Early Byzantine period, but was transformed into a building wi (...)

3From the very beginning the excavations have generously provided data on glazed and unglazed ceramics and their productions. The first clues were gathered from the sectors situated just in front of the entrance to the fortress and in the south of the basilica, of which the western part was unearthed in 2009 and the eastern part in 2011 (Mercangöz 2013a, p. 18, fig. A‑4).4 No kiln has been found, which may be due to destruction during a later use of the site; however, tripods and other kiln furniture with ash remains indicate that the firing process took place here. Many mortars that were probably used for grinding pigments, biscuit-fired vessels, many sherds and waste from faulty production were found, which also indicate that the production sector was in this area. Moreover, these finds were not found at deep levels, and 10 pithoi unearthed in this area that were used to stock water by potters also provide important evidence.

4It is important that the wasters of Zeuxippus-related Ware found in the 2001-2009 excavations came from around the southern chapel (fig. 1a: area 1) as well as from the area between bastions no. 4 and 5 and the area south of it (fig. 1a: area 2). Every location appears to provide its own specific vessels. For example, a plate with an inscription and a lion decoration (Mercangöz 2010b, pp. 186‑187, fig. 11; Mercangöz 2013a, p. 205, cat. 19) came from a waste area (area 1); intact or almost intact smaller cups (or goblets) with a semi-cylindrical body and a lower base came from a southern slope outside the walls (fig. 1a: area 3). This suggests that the pottery waste was dumped in the nearest waste area. This would also indicate the existence of ceramic workshops, of which there were more than one.

Fig. 1.

Fig. 1.

Fig. 1a – Aerial view of the castle of Kadıkalesi/Anaia (2009), with indications of the sectors where pottery wasters were found (1 to 5). Zeuxippus-related sherds were found in sectors 1 to 3.
Fig. 1b-p – Various sgraffito ceramics of Zeuxippus-related type found at the excavations: (b) tondos with concentric circles; (c) tondos with some sgraffito motifs in concentric circles; (d) faulty glazed plate with sgraffito concentric circles (Rim D. 30 cm, Base D. 9 cm, H. 7 cm); (e) deep plate with sgraffito concentric circles and radiating decoration (Rim D. 18.4 cm, Base D. 7 cm, H. 5 cm); (f) bowl with sgraffito concentric circles (Rim D. 19 cm, Base D. 6 cm, H. 9.2 cm); (g) bowl with sgraffito spirals around concentric circles; (h) bowl with sgraffito spiral (?) decoration around concentric circles, with a degraded glaze due to poor firing (Rim D. 14.8 cm, Base D. 5.8 cm, H. 9.5 cm); (i) fragments of some of the small bowls with convex rims and spherical bodies, the imported ones are indicated; (j) fragment of the imported small green bowl with incised cross decorations on the rim; (k) goblet with concentric circles (Base D. 2 cm, H. 6.3 cm); (l) goblet with touches of purple brown (Base D. 2.2 cm, H. 4 cm); (m) goblet with flaring body and base (Rim D. 5 cm, Base D. 2 cm, H. 7.2 cm); (n) bowl with sgraffito monogram which has a low round base, a spherical body and a large convex rim (Rim D. 10 cm, Base D. 4.2 cm, H. 4.5 cm); (n1) sgraffito of its monogram (possibly Gabriel); (o) bowl with sgraffito coat of arms which has a low round base, a spherical body and a large convex rim (Rim D. 14.8 cm, Base D. 5.5 cm, H. 6 cm); (o1) sgraffito of its coat of arms decoration; (p) bowl with low round base, spherical body and large convex rim (Rim D. 9.3 cm, Base D. 4.2 cm, H. 4.3 cm).

  • 5 For more details about Anaia Zeuxippus-related Wares, see Mercangöz 2013b, pp. 32‑37; İnanan 2013. (...)

5The Zeuxippus-related ceramics are in various forms, including plates, bowls and cups decorated mostly with sgraffito-incised concentric circles (fig. 1b). They present plain circles on tondos and rims, while in some cases independent motifs cover the entire surface of the plates or lie within the concentric circles on tondos (fig. 1c, e, g, h).5 Whatever the form or motif, Anaia Zeuxippus-related Wares are characterized mainly by the fact that they are fine well-fired wares and possess a transparent glaze over the slip that covers the inside completely and the outside partly. The lead glaze is so thick that it makes thin-walled pottery resemble glass and it is possible to obtain glass timbre from ceramic pieces. Some other cups of the same period and possibly from different workshops inside the castle stand out with their higher ring bases and angular bodies (fig. 1f, h). They are lighter in color and in some cases one or two other colors were applied (fig. 1g). From all sectors the Zeuxippus-related Wares presented many complete and nearly complete vessels as well as thousands of base, rim and body fragments.

Pottery found in other sectors

Table wares

6We also found many base and body sherds of these wares during the cleaning carried out in the eastern part of the walls in 2013 (215 rims, 169 bases, 341 body sherds). I must underline that here, unlike in other places, the sherds of Aegean Ware were more numerous (384 rims, 161 bases and 606 body sherds) in comparison to the Zeuxippus-related Ware. Let me add that obviously some of the most intensive jobs on the excavation have been cleaning, drawing, photographing and restoration of the ceramic finds, and this since the beginning of the excavation.

  • 6 For the sample see in Mercangöz 2013a, p. 199, cat. no. 10, and for other examples pp. 32‑37, pp.  (...)
  • 7 For the Islamic imports see Mercangöz 2013b, pp. 166‑168. The imports from Islamic lands to Kadıka (...)
  • 8 For a brief discussion of the Protomaiolica imports at Kadıkalesi see Mercangöz 2013b, pp. 169‑170 (...)

7A cistern (fig. 2a) found in the 2007 season at the southwestern corner of a church, which we started to excavate without knowing what it was, provided us with many more ceramic finds. What is interesting is that in the upper layers we found only a single Zeuxippus-related vessel, which possesses a different kind of decoration compared to the others.6 We also unearthed imported glazed ceramics from Islamic lands (fig. 2b, c, d, f)7 and Protomaiolica pottery from Italy (fig. 2g, h, i, j, k, l, m, n, o, p).8 Those in the first group are frit wares decorated in different techniques, while the others have a sandy cream or pinkish paste with blue, black, brown and sometimes yellow and pink paintings on a white slip.

Fig. 2 – Glazed vessels from the cisterns at the southwestern corner of the main church: Some Islamic and Protomaiolica imports.

Fig. 2 – Glazed vessels from the cisterns at the southwestern corner of the main church: Some Islamic and Protomaiolica imports.

(a) View of the interior of the cistern during the 2009 season: arches and the column with its ionic-impost capital are seen partly. The cistern was filled with unglazed and glazed Byzantine ceramics, Islamic and Italian imported ceramics, many fragments of glass, some metal pieces and a few other finds; (b) an import from Islamic lands: fragments of a frit plate with molded decoration and turquoise glaze from Syria or Egypt, late 12th and 13th century; (c) sherd of an albarello, “Silhouette Ware” from Iran, probably Kashan (late 12th century), frit body with a carved-through black slip under a turquoise glaze decoration; (d) Egyptian sherds of a small bowl with frit body and underglaze painting in blue and black (13th or 14th century); (e) plate fragments with frit body and molded and blue splash decorations under transparent glaze, from Iran (perhaps Kashan) or Syria (late 12th and 13th century); (f) an albarello from Islamic lands; (g) tondo fragments of “Grid-Iron” and “Grid-Iron” variant Protomaiolica Ware (late 13th century); (h) sherd of a “Grid-Iron” bowl in Protomaiolica Ware (late 13th century); (i) sherd of a “RMR” (Ramina Manganese Rosso) bowl, Protomaiolica Ware (late 13th century); (j) sherd of a “Grid-Iron” variant bowl, Protomaiolica Ware (late 13th century); (k) sherd of a “Grid-Iron” variant bowl, Protomaiolica Ware (late 13th century); (l) sherd of a “Grid-Iron” bowl, Protomaiolica Ware (late 13th century); (m) sherd of a bowl, Protomaiolica Ware (late 13th century); (n) Protomaiolica sherd, motif of painted arrow and bow with a human hand, probably from a closed vessel; (o) base of a Protomaiolica jug; (p) handles of Protomaiolica jugs.

  • 9 Budak-Ünaler et al. (2012; 2013) present the first archaeometric work on a small group of Aegean W (...)
  • 10 Just for some of the Aegean Wares from the excavations, surveys and museums in Turkey see Bilici 1 (...)
  • 11 For a short bibliography see for Greece: Ioannidaki-Dostoglou 1989; Megaw 1975; Morgan 1942; Papan (...)
  • 12 For samples in one of the earlier issues see Redford et al. 2001, fig. 11, 12, 13.
  • 13 The Kadıkalesi finds of Aegean Ware are similar to those from the Kastellorizo shipwreck, vessels (...)

8In the 2009 excavation campaign, the cistern provided us with many sherds of Aegean Ware, a very important collection of glazed ceramics from this fortress. The cups, some of which were restored, present a wide range of forms in regard to size as well as a wide range of decoration such as incised sgraffito (fig. 3a, d, e, f, g), champlevé (fig. 3b, j, k) and fine sgraffito (fig. 3c, h, l, m). A minor quantity of these vessels could have come from the kitchen of the monastery contemporary to the last period of use of the church. As for the numerous fragments from various series and some unglazed ceramics, most of them were thought to be local productions of Kadıkalesi/Anaia. The first archaeometric research carried out in Anaia showed that they belong to a single production.9 Such ceramics are presented in museums as underwater finds, also coming from sites alongside the shoreline of Anatolia, as well as from Constantinople.10 They have also been found in excavations in Greece and in the Balkans and are plentiful in museum collections in the United States, the United Kingdom, European countries and others.11 It is possible to see them in the Eastern Mediterranean.12 But after the Corinth excavations (Morgan 1942), Kadıkalesi/Anaia may be the first site to provide so many sherds of Aegean Ware, which differ visually from those found at Corinth (for more details see Mercangöz 2013b, pp. 38‑54).13

Fig. 3 – Aegean Wares from the cisterns at the southwestern corner of the main church.

Fig. 3 – Aegean Wares from the cisterns at the southwestern corner of the main church.

(a) A group of Aegean Ware fragments with various sgraffito and incised decoration excavated from the cistern in the 2007 season; (b) a group of Aegean ware fragments decorated with animals in champlevé; (c) bowl with bird and floral decoration in sgraffito (Rim D. 25 cm, Base D. 10.5 cm, H. 8.5 cm); (d) bowl with heron or glossy ibis and seaweed in sgraffito (Rim D. 25 cm, Base D. 10.5 cm, H. 8.5 cm); (e) deep plate with abstract seaweed in sgraffito (Rim D. 22.8 cm, Base D. 10 cm, H. 5.5 cm); (f) small bowl with heron or glossy ibis and knot-filled circles in sgraffito (Rim D. 12.3 cm, Base D. 5.1 cm, H. 6.3 cm); (g) bowl with fox head and wheat or seaweed motives (Rim D. 25 cm, Base D. 10.5 cm, H. 9 cm); (h, h1) fragmentary plate decorated with fish and floral composition in fine sgraffito and its drawing; (i) fragmentary plate decorated with an animal in champlevé and its drawing; (j) plate with three animals in champlevé (Rim D. 21.8 cm, Base D. 9.4 cm, H. 4.4 cm); (k) fragmentary plate with fish and floral composition in fine sgraffito; (l) fragmentary plate with composition in fine sgraffito.

Amphorae and cooking wares

9Unglazed ceramics, especially fragments of amphorae from the cistern, were the most numerous finds from the Kadıkalesi excavations. Once the cistern was cleaned down to the floor, we began work in the adjoining cistern that was connected through a small opening (fig. 4a). This cistern differed from the other one; the finds here were only of amphorae. Wine containers, of which 32 were unearthed intact from the upper layers, appear to be potters’ waste (fig. 4b). We preferred to display some of the amphorae and unglazed pottery on the site, the rest remaining in the depot (fig. 4c, d, e). They are small pear-shaped amphorae, classified according to whether the bottom is pointed or round. What is interesting is that we have not seen this type of amphorae anywhere else on the site, only in the cistern.

Fig. 4 – Unglazed vessels from the cisterns at the southwestern corner of the main church.

Fig. 4 – Unglazed vessels from the cisterns at the southwestern corner of the main church.

(a) The aerial view from the cistern and annexed cistern; (b) the numerous sherds belonging to the local production which included wasters of amphorae from the annexed cistern; (c) amphora from the cistern: Anaia type 2 (Rim D. 5.2 cm, H. 31 cm, Cap. 2.18 l); (d) amphorae from the cistern: Anaia type 1 (Rim D. 5.2‑5.4 cm, H. 29.5‑32 cm, Cap. ca 2.18‑2.54 l); (e) amphora from the cistern: Anaia type 2 (Rim D. 6 cm, H. 28 cm, Cap. 2.65 l); (f) drawings of seventeen double-handled cooking and service vessels from the cisterns, decorated with incised wavy bands on the rims and bodies (Rim D. 14‑48 cm, H. 20‑35 cm); (g, g1, g2) one of the three quadruple-handled cooking and service vessels with incised wavy lines (Rim D. 32 cm, H. 21 cm).

  • 14 The distinguished imported amphorae are limited to one LR 3, one Ganos, two Günsenin 3, one Günsen (...)
  • 15 For one of the latest publications on the amphorae see Klontza-Jaklová 2014.
  • 16 For the typology, see Günsenin 1989.

10Amphorae of different sizes that are striking because of their globular bodies were found in another unglazed vessel deposit in the northeastern part of the fortress (fig. 5a). As the excavations proceeded we also found variations of them in many sizes (fig. 5b, c, d, e, f). There are also imported amphorae among the finds, although not many.14 The examples that are generally dated to the 11th-13th centuries appear to have provided inspiration for the local productions.15 Two of the local amphorae are important in that their body shapes are similar to LR 13 (fig. 5c, d). A Günsenin 4 type amphora with its Latin coat-of-arms graffiti is a reflection of trade in the Late Byzantine period, e.g. 13th century commercial “wine” transported to Kadıkalesi/Anaia (fig. 5g, g1).16

Fig. 5 – Globular amphorae and various types of pithoi from the Kadıkalesi excavation.

Fig. 5 – Globular amphorae and various types of pithoi from the Kadıkalesi excavation.

(a) A group of globular amphorae in a round basin in the northwestern corner of the castle; (b) drawings of the globular amphorae produced at Kadıkalesi/Anaia; (c) the largest amphora found in the local production of Kadıkalesi/Anaia which resembles LR 13 (Rim D. 10 cm, H. 54 cm); (d) Anaia amphora which resembles LR 13 (Rim D. 7.8 cm, H. 48 cm); (e) globular amphora, Anaia type 4 (Rim D. 6.2 cm, H. 33.5 cm, Cap. 11.64 l); (f) Anaia type 4 amphora (Rim D. 5.8 cm, H. 35 cm, Cap. 11.64 l); (g) upper part of an imported amphora, Günsenin type 4; (g1) graffiti of a coat of arms on Günsenin type 4; (h) mark where some globular amphorae were found in the northwestern corner of the castle, 2013 aerial view of Kadıkalesi; (i) marks where pithoi were found in situ, aerial view of the excavation at the end of the 2015 season; (j) some types of pithoi in situ at Kadıkalesi: P-1 Rim D. 66 cm, H. 172 cm; P-2 Rim D. 68 cm, H. 158 cm; P-3 Rim D. 68 cm, H. 135 cm; P-4 Rim D. 72 cm, H. 135 cm; P-5 Rim D. 66 cm, H. 104 cm; P-6 Rim D. 38 cm, H. 82 cm.

  • 17 For the types, see Mimaroğlu 2013, pp. 114‑116 (Anaia amphorae type 1), pp. 116‑117 (Anaia amphora (...)
  • 18 In Tafel & Thomas 1857, p. 159: from Makri (Fethiye) and Ania (Anaia), wine-producing areas in the (...)

11As the excavations proceed, new examples have been unearthed that belong to the Anaia amphorae, which according to Mimaroğlu are classified into three main types and sub-groups (Mimaroğlu 2013).17 The vessels, which were not subjected to archaeometric studies yet, are providing archaeological data for the Anaia wine that the Italians transported in the 1270s with permission from the Byzantine authorities (Mercangöz 2013b).18

12The fragments of cooking and service wares that are among the unglazed ceramics from the cistern are remarkable for their rich incised wavy-line decorations and their double or quadruple handles placed horizontally and vertically (fig. 4f, g, g1, g2). Most probably these vessels possessed an added value in medieval trade, but we have no information as to where they were marketed.

13It is possible to trace the history of the production sector through the upper layers of the chapel at the north of the church. It is understood that the potters settled on the debris of the chapel, or possibly on the Christian burials carried out right after the destruction. The Lascarid tombs unearthed at the western part of the nave on the southern side provide a terminus post quem for commercial production in Kadıkalesi. While no production is in question for this part, the little basins formed by vertically placed stones in the eastern side of the nave are striking. In particular, numerous pieces of glass were found here.

14Archaeological data show that the central nave of the church, which was demolished by an earthquake, was never used after it collapsed. Discoveries related to pottery production in the northern aisle, as in the southern aisle, give rise to the possibility of pottery workshops beginning here and then extending outside the church. Pithoi and semi-circular clay pools are the first among them. But no kiln was found here or elsewhere. On the other hand, we found numerous fragments of pithoi and unglazed vessels, which we gathered close to where they were excavated.

Pithoi

  • 19 These graffiti will be presented in a forthcoming paper.

15So far we have unearthed 36 pithoi in situ and found many pithoi fragments as well. It is possible to see some of these (fig. 5i). Their importance lies in the variety of these larger vessels, dating from prehistory to the Late Byzantine period, with different types of bottom and mouth; we try to exhibit them on the site. There is one example with incised lines showing that this piece was used as a game board. There is another example with zoomorphic decoration on which a mountain goat and two panthers are depicted. Incised patterns on pithoi observed by Faruk Fidancı will be evaluated comparatively together with nearly 10 graffiti recorded by Sinan Mimaroğlu.19

  • 20 Drawings by F. Fidancı.
  • 21 For a wine thief from Djadovo, see Fol et al. 1989, fig. 269; another from Hierapolis Turkish exca (...)

16F. Fidancı has been studying life in the fortress through examination of the pithoi, recording them and investigating their relation to the locations (fig. 5j).20 Six pithoi in the northern part of the church courtyard appear to belong to the wine cellar of the monastery. Except for those, we have found wine residue in only one pithos, the deepest one on the site, over 2 m tall. Could it have been used in daily life during the Late Byzantine period? It is not easy to find the answer to this today, but the wine may have been sampled from this deepest pithos with a wine thief, which may have been lowered into it by ropes.21 Also we have the fragments of such vessels at Kadıkalesi and they came from different trenches. The other pithoi were probably water reservoirs for potters. It may thus be concluded that the amphorae produced inside the fortress were filled with wine outside the walls, probably in the wine houses close to the vineyards, before they were taken to the harbor for transport by ship.

For whom and for what target?

  • 22 This ceramic bowl will be discussed by M. Kahyaoğlu and me in another article.

17While the Latin coat-of-arms on one of the vessels (fig. 1n, n1) is related to the Italians and/or the Crusaders, the monogram (fig. 1o, o1) seen on another ceramic vessel together with almost 20 other monograms on Zeuxippus-related Ware suggest that these vessels were intended for a Byzantine client. Another cup with a similar form presents a long inscription in Latin on the rim and another inscription in Greek on the inner surface, which is important evidence.22 We have come across such interesting inscriptions before on Kadıkalesi Byzantine ceramics. Of these, one with depictions of the tree of life and the Anatolian leopard retains its mystery (Mercangöz 2010b, pp. 186‑187, fig. 11; Mercangöz 2013a, p. 205, cat. 19). Again, we could not read the inscription on the outer side of the rim of a smaller cup. Can these inscriptions answer the question “for whom”, for which we seek the answer in this paper? In other words, did productions for specific clients exist as well as mass productions for general sale?

18Whatever production they belonged to, these glazed ceramics with their careful craftsmanship and decoration would have appealed to quite a number of people as objects of luxury with high economic value, subject to large demand in overseas trade. “For money/profit” may be considered the answer to another question we pose in this paper, “for what market”? The pottery was produced and shipped to different destinations, as may be seen in the numerous examples in museums of finds from shipwrecks. Were the amphorae produced in high quantity in order to ship Anaia wine? We lack adequate information.

  • 23 Graffiti on a piece of limestone among the Kadıkalesi finds is important in that it shows a cultur (...)

19I also think that glazed goblets or chalices are related in ceramic production to trade in wine. In fact there is a variety of these vessels among the finds. The production of a unique type that imitates a metal goblet appears to have ceased due to technical difficulties (fig. 1k, l, m, n, o, p; Mercangöz 2012, p. 190, fig. 18, 19). But finds of cups with a wide rim, a cylindrical body and a low base (fig. 1i, n, o, p), also quite popular for larger vessels, are quite numerous. For example, a vessel initially thought to have been imported (fig. 1i, j), which has a form seen from Al Mina in south-eastern Turkey (with the Port St Simeon Ware) to Italy (with the Protomaiolica), was I think brought to Anaia by Italians where it was manufactured as a variety of Zeuxippus Ware.23

  • 24 As published in Mercangöz 2013c, pp. 173‑174: “Finally, although we do not have any document on th (...)

20In conclusion, the archaeological data from Kadıkalesi provides evidence for ceramic productions that offer us a wide range of glazed ceramics, Zeuxippus and Aegean Wares, as well as unglazed ceramics including examples of service vessels, and amphorae that were containers for shipping wine; this evidence covers a period from the last quarter of the 13th century up to the early years of the 14th century. In this respect, although archeometric data is not yet sufficient, I avoid using the term Middle Byzantine Production as in the case of the Chalcis production (Waksman et al. 2014). For Anaia we may discuss a ceramic production that appears to have started with the Italians in the last days of Byzantine dominance at the site.24

21Comparative studies of the Kadıkalesi/Anaia Byzantine ceramics are needed: with Ephesos (Vroom 2005), Magnesia am Meander (Böhlendorf-Arslan 2004), Miletus (Böhlendorf-Arslan 2004), Sardis (Scott & Kamilli 1976), Pergamon (Spieser 1996; Waksman 1995; Waksman & Spieser 1997) Smyrna (Doğer 2005), from both stylistic and archaeometric viewpoints.

Acknowledgements

22I would like to thank Yona Waksman for her contribution to the study on Kadıkalesi/Anaia ceramics and for her invitation to join the fruitful POMEDOR conference. I also thank Mehmet Kahyaoğlu for his translation into English, and Ersin Serçek and Faruk Fidancı for the drawings.

Bibliographie

Barnea 1989: Barnea I., “La céramique byzantine de Dobroudja (xe-xiie siècles)”, in V. Déroche, J.‑M. Spieser (ed.), Recherches sur la céramique byzantine, Bulletin de correspondance hellénique supplément 18, Athens, 1989, pp. 131‑142.

Bilici 1998: Bilici S., “Antalya ve Bodrum Müzeleri’ndeki Champlevé dekorlu Bizans Seramikleri”, Adalya 2, 1998, pp. 221‑234.

Bilici 1999-2000: Bilici S., “Anadolu’dan Ege Tipinde Sualtı Buluntusu Bir Grup Bizans Seramiği”, Adalya 4, 1999-2000, pp. 259‑280.

Böhlendorf-Arslan 2004: Böhlendorf-Arslan B., Glasierte byzantinische Keramik aus der Türkei, Istanbul, 2004.

Buckton 1994: Buckton D. (ed.), Byzantium: Treasures of Byzantine art and culture from British collections, London, 1994.

Budak-Ünaler 2013: Budak-Ünaler M., “Fine-Sgraffito ware”, “Aegean ware” from Anaia: An analytical approach, PhD, Izmir Institute of Technology, 2013 (unpublished).

Budak-Ünaler et al. 2012: Budak-Ünaler M., Akkurt S., Doğer L., Mercangöz Z., “Kuşadası Kadıkalesi/Anaia Kazısında Ele Geçen Orta Bizans Dönemi Seramiklerinin Karakterizasyonu”, in 15. Ulusal Kil Sempozyumu, Eylül 2012, Niğde, 2012, pp. 305‑322.

Budak-Ünaler et al. 2013: Budak-Ünaler M., Akkurt S., Doğer L., Kozékova R., “Comparison of Byzantine fine sgraffito and incised-sgraffito (coarse sgraffito) ware from Kuşadası, Kadıkalesi/Anaia excavation”, in Mercangöz 2013a, pp. 91‑100.

Cottica 2007: Cottica D., “Micaceous white painted ware from insula 104 at Hierapolis/Pamukkale, Turkey”, in B. Böhlendorf-Arslan, A.O. Uysal, J. Witte-Orr (ed.), Çanak: Late antique and medieval pottery and tiles in Mediterranean archaeological contexts, BYZAS 7, Istanbul, 2007, pp. 255‑272.

Doğan 2010: Doğan S., “Alanya’da Kızılcaşehir Kalesi ve On İkinci Yüzyılda Akdeniz”, 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. 370‑379.

Doğer 2005: Doğer L., “Byzantine ceramics: Excavations at Smyrna Agora (1997-1998 and 2002-2003)”, in B. Böhlendorf-Arslan, A.O. Uysal, J. Witte-Orr (ed.), Çanak: Late antique and medieval pottery and tiles in Mediterranean archaeological contexts, BYZAS 7, Istanbul, 2007, pp. 97‑21.

Doğer 2011: Doğer L., “Kuşadası, Kadıkalesi/Anaia Kazısı 2001-2007 Yılı Bizans ve Çağdaş Diğer Seramik Buluntular Üzerine Bazı Gözlemler”, in Sempozyum “Geçmişten Geleceğe Kuşadası” II, Kuşadası, 4‑9 Kasım 2008, Kuşadası, 2011, pp. 49‑63.

Doğer 2012: Doğer L., İzmir Arkeoloji Müzesi Örnekleriyle Kazıma Dekorlu Ege-Bizans Seramikleri, Izmir, 2012.

Doğer & Özdaş 2016: Doğer L., Özdaş H., “Adrasan: Ceramic finds from a Byzantine shipwreck”, in P. Magdalino, N. Necipoğlu (ed.), Trade in Byzantium: Papers from the Third International Sevgi Gönül Byzantine Studies Symposium (Istanbul, 24‑27 June 2013), Istanbul, 2016, pp. 445‑464.

Evans & Wixom 1997: Evans H.C., Wixom W.D.W., The glory of Byzantium, art and culture of Byzantium: Art and culture of the Middle Byzantine era, AD 843-1261, New York, 1997.

Fındık 2010: Findik E., “Myra-Demre Aziz Nikolaos Kilisesinde On İkinci ve On Ücüncü Yüzyıl Sırlı Seramikleri”, 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. 521‑528.

Fleet 1999: Fleet K., European and Islamic trade in the early Ottoman state: The merchants of Genoa and Turkey, Port Chester N.Y., 1999.

Fol et al. 1989: Fol A., Katinčarov R., Best J., De Vries N., Shoju K., Suziki H. (ed.), Djadovo, Bulgarian, Dutch, Japanese expedition, vol. 1, Medieval settlement and necropolis (11th-12th century), Tokyo, 1989.

Günsenin 1989: Günsenin N., “Recherches sur les amphores byzantines dans les musées turcs”, in V. Déroche, J.‑M. Spieser (ed.), Recherches sur la céramique byzantine, Bulletin de correspondance hellénique supplément 18, Athens, 1989, pp. 267‑276.

İnanan 2013: İnanan F., “Zeuxippus type ceramics and samples from Kadıkalesi, Kuşadası”, in Mercangöz 2013a, pp. 59‑76.

Ioannidaki-Dostoglou 1989: Ioannidaki-Dostoglou E., “Les vases de l’épave byzantine de Pélagonnèse-Halonnèse”, in V. Déroche, J.‑M. Spieser (ed.), Recherches sur la céramique byzantine, Bulletin de correspondance hellénique supplément 18, Athens, 1989, pp. 157‑171.

Kahyaoğlu 2010: Kahyaoğlu M., “12. ve 13. Yüzyıllarda Batı Anadolu Liman Kentleri”, 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. 273‑278.

Kahyaoğlu 2016: Kahyaoğlu M., “Portalan charts and harbor towns in western Asia Minor towards the end of the Byzantine Empire”, in P. Magdalino, N. Necipoğlu (ed.), Trade in Byzantium: Papers from the Third International Sevgi Gönül Byzantine Studies Symposium (Istanbul, 24‑27 June 2013), Istanbul, 2016, pp. 267‑278.

Kırmızı 2013: Kirmizi B., “Material characteristics and production technology of Zeuxippus ware type ceramics from Kuşadası, Kadıkalesi/Anaia”, in Mercangöz 2013a, pp. 77‑90.

Klontza-Jaklová 2014: Klontza-Jaklová V., “Specifics of Aegean Byzantine amphorae studies: The example of Priniatikos Pyrgos, east Crete”, Studia archaeologica Brunensia 19/2, 2014, pp. 163‑179.

Lucas 1989: Lucas I., “Les plats byzantins à glaçure inédits d’une collection privée de Bruxelles”, in V. Déroche, J.‑M. Spieser (ed.), Recherches sur la céramique byzantine, Bulletin de correspondance hellénique supplément 18, Athens, 1989, pp. 177‑183.

Megaw 1975: Megaw A.H.S., “An early 13th-century Aegean glazed ware”, in G. Robertson, G. Henderson (ed.), Studies in memory of David Talbot Rice, Edinburgh, 1975, pp. 34‑45.

Mercangöz 2010a: Mercangöz Z., “Kommerkion ve Emporion Olarak Anaia’nın Değişken Tarihsel Yazgısı”, 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. 279‑293.

Mercangöz 2010b: Mercangöz Z., “Ostentious life in a Byzantine province: Some selected pieces from the finds of the excavation in Kuşadası, Kadıkalesi/Anaia (Prov. Aydın TR)”, in F. Daim, J. Drauschke (ed.), Byzanz. Das Römerreich im Mittelalter, Teil 2. Schauplätze, Monographien des Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums 84, Mainz, 2010, vol. 2/1, pp. 181‑196.

Mercangöz 2012: Mercangöz Z., “Kuşadası, Kadıkalesi/Anaia Kazısı: Bizans Döneminden Birkaç Küçük Buluntu”, in B. Böhlendorf-Arslan, A. Ricci (ed.), Byzantine small finds in archaeological contexts, BYZAS 15, Istanbul, 2012, pp. 223‑232.

Mercangöz 2013a: Mercangöz Z., 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 & Doğer 2009: Mercangöz Z., Doğer L., “Kuşadası Kadıkalesi/Anaia Bizans Sırlı Seramikleri”, in I. ODTÜ Arkeometri Çalıştayı. Türkiye Arkeolojisi’nde Seramik ve Arkeometrik Çalışmaları Prof. Dr. Ufuk Esin Anısına (Ankara, 7‑9 Mayıs 2009), Ankara, 2009, pp. 83‑101.

Morgan 1942: Morgan C.H., Corinth, vol. XI, The Byzantine pottery, Cambridge Mass., 1942.

Mimaroğlu 2013: Mimaroğlu S., “Late Byzantine commercial amphorae in Kadıkalesi/Anaia”, in Mercangöz 2013a, pp.113‑124.

Ödekan 2007: Ödekan A. (ed.), The remnants: 12th and 13th centuries Byzantine objects in Turkey, Istanbul, 2007.

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

Parman 1989: Parman E., “The pottery from St. John’s Basilica at Ephesos”, in V. Déroche, J.‑M. Spieser (ed.), Recherches sur la céramique byzantine, Bulletin de correspondance hellénique supplément 18, Athens, 1989, pp. 227‑289.

Redford et al. 2001: Redford S., Ikram S., Parr E.M., Beach T., “Excavations at medieval Kinet, Turkey: A preliminary report”, Journal of ancient Near Eastern studies 38, 2001, pp. 59‑138.

Sanders 1987: Sanders G.D.R., “An assemblage of Frankish pottery at Corinth”, Hesperia 56, 1987, pp. 159‑195.

Sanders 1989: Sanders G.D.R., “Three Peloponnesian churches and their importance for the chronology of late 13th and early 14th century pottery in the Eastern Mediterranean”, in V. Déroche, J.‑M. Spieser (ed.), Recherches sur la céramique byzantine, Bulletin de correspondance hellénique supplément 18, Athens, 1989, pp. 189‑199.

Scott & Kamilli 1981: Scott J.A., Kamilli D.C., “Late Byzantine glazed pottery from Sardis”, in Actes du XVe Congrès international des études byzantines (Athènes, 1976), vol. 2, Athens, 1981, pp. 679‑696.

Spieser 1996: Spieser J.‑M., Die Byzantinische Keramik aus der Stadtgrabung von Pergamon, Pergamenische Forschungen 9, Berlin-New York, 1996.

Tafel & Thomas 1857: Tafel G.L.F., Thomas G.M. (ed.), Urkunden zur älteren Handels – und Staatsgeschichte der Republik Venedig: Mit besonderer Beziehung auf Byzanz und die Levante vom neunten bis zum Ausgang des fünfzehnten Jahrhunderts, vol. 3, 1256-1299, Vienna, 1857.

Vroom 2005: Vroom J., Byzantine to modern pottery in the Aegean: An introduction and field guide, Utrecht, 2005.

Waksman 1995: Waksman S.Y., Les céramiques byzantines des fouilles de Pergame. Caractérisation des productions locales et importées par analyse élémentaire par les méthodes PIXE et INAA et par pétrographie, PhD, University of Strasbourg, 1995 (unpublished).

Waksman 2013: Waksman S.Y., “Identification and diffusion of Anaia’s ceramic products: A preliminary approach using chemical analysis”, in Mercangöz 2013a, pp. 101‑112.

Waksman & Spieser 1997: Waksman S.Y., Spieser J.‑M., “Byzantine ceramics excavated in Pergamon: Archaeological classification and characterization of the local and imported productions by PIXE and INAA elemental analysis, mineralogy and petrography”, in H. Maguire (ed.), Materials analysis of Byzantine pottery, Washington DC, 1997, pp. 105‑133.

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. 1999: Waksman S.Y., Segal I., Porat N., Stern E.J., Yellin J., An analytical study of ceramics found in Crusader Acre: Levantine productions and imports from the Byzantine world, Geological survey of Israel internal reports GSI/8/99, 1999.

Waksman et al. 2014: Waksman S.Y., Kontogiannis N.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.

Watson 2004: Watson O., Ceramics from Islamic lands, Kuwait National Museum, The al‑Sabah Collection, London, 2004.

Notes

1 Regarding the harbor castle, although many underwater investigations along the shores of Kadıkalesi by Harun Özdaş have been carried out, searches in the harbor have revealed no constructions so far, probably because of sea movement along the shoreline. It appears that the sea first moved inwards towards the land then outwards. However, remnants of the Roman and the Early Byzantine towns may be seen on the beach. I believe that further research will provide us with a clearer view on this matter.

2 An inscription in which the name Anaia can be read, found in the northern part of the wall built of spolia, and the fact that the settlement of Soğucak, not far from the fortress, was called Anya in the Ottoman period are good enough evidence to confirm that this place was the Anaia of the Byzantine period. For more information see Mercangöz 2010a, pp. 291‑292, fig. 15.

3 An exhibition during the First International Sevgi Gönül Byzantine Studies Symposium, which had been suggested by Scott Redford to the advisory board, was the first opportunity to present these ceramics to the academics. It also became a publication afterwards (Mercangöz 2013a).

4 The basilica had three naves in the Early Byzantine period, but was transformed into a building with closed aisles by the addition of a double narthex to the west, later a chapel to the south, then a cistern in the southwest corner.

5 For more details about Anaia Zeuxippus-related Wares, see Mercangöz 2013b, pp. 32‑37; İnanan 2013. I would like to explain here that the Kadıkalesi excavation is proud that Yona Waksman suggested calling them “Anaia Ware” (Waksman 2013, p. 110).

6 For the sample see in Mercangöz 2013a, p. 199, cat. no. 10, and for other examples pp. 32‑37, pp. 195‑209 (catalogue).

7 For the Islamic imports see Mercangöz 2013b, pp. 166‑168. The imports from Islamic lands to Kadıkalesi are described in fig. 2, according to Watson (2004). Detailed presentation and discussion of these will soon be published in an article. They date from the earliest 12th century to the 13th and 14th centuries.

8 For a brief discussion of the Protomaiolica imports at Kadıkalesi see Mercangöz 2013b, pp. 169‑170. For the chronology and to recognize the Protomaiolica Ware found in the cisterns at Kadıkalesi see Sanders (1987; 1989). In the articles mentioned, the dating of the Protomaiolica finds at Kadıkalesi to the late 13th century is established using the archeological data provided by the excavation.

9 Budak-Ünaler et al. (2012; 2013) present the first archaeometric work on a small group of Aegean Ware found at the Kadıkalesi excavation. The results are clearer in the dissertation by Meral Budak-Ünaler (2013), in which archaeometric data on a higher number of samples (40 sherds) demonstrate the unity of the Aegean Ware fabrics found at Kadıkalesi/Anaia in sgraffito, incised, champlevé and fine sgraffito. Mrs. Budak-Ünaler concluded that “Dendrograms generated via HCA indicated three sample groups which had similar body compositions leading to the conclusion that they were probably made from the same raw material.” “Another HCA study was done to compare the data in this study with the data Waksman’s study in the literature. Dendrograms obtained showed some similarity. However, it was not possibly too strongly and conclusively says that the two sample groups were related.” On the other hand, according to the analysis of three Aegean Ware samples found in Anaia, Yona Waksman considers that they belong to the main “Middle Byzantine Production” (Waksman 2013, p. 103). To make a comparison of the archaeometry of Aegean Ware, see Waksman & von Wartburg 2006, and for Acre in general, see Waksman et al. 1999.

10 Just for some of the Aegean Wares from the excavations, surveys and museums in Turkey see Bilici 1998; 1999-2000; Doğan 2010; Doğer 2012; Doğer & Özdaş 2016; Fındık 2010; Ödekan 2007; Parman 1989; Vroom 2005. For a quick look at the samples found in Istanbul, see Böhlendorf-Arslan 2004.

11 For a short bibliography see for Greece: Ioannidaki-Dostoglou 1989; Megaw 1975; Morgan 1942; Papanikola-Bakirtzi 1999; for the Balkans: Barnea 1989 and Fol et al. 1989; for the collections: Evans & Wixom 1997; Buckton 1994; Lucas 1989.

12 For samples in one of the earlier issues see Redford et al. 2001, fig. 11, 12, 13.

13 The Kadıkalesi finds of Aegean Ware are similar to those from the Kastellorizo shipwreck, vessels at the İzmir Museum and coastal finds from Turkey as well as many examples of Aegean Ware which may be from the same but unknown shipwreck. For comparison with the Kastellorizo shipwreck see Papanikola-Bakirtzi 1999, pp. 145‑157; for marine finds from İzmir Museum see Doğer 2012.

14 The distinguished imported amphorae are limited to one LR 3, one Ganos, two Günsenin 3, one Günsenin 4 and one Crimean.

15 For one of the latest publications on the amphorae see Klontza-Jaklová 2014.

16 For the typology, see Günsenin 1989.

17 For the types, see Mimaroğlu 2013, pp. 114‑116 (Anaia amphorae type 1), pp. 116‑117 (Anaia amphorae type 2 with 37 bases, 67 handled rims and 120 body fragments), pp. 118‑119 (Anaia amphorae type 3 with 14 bases, 32 handled rims, 5 handles and a few body fragments), pp. 120‑124 (imported). It is possible to add a 4th group of amphorae which resemble LR 13 (with 21 bases, 25 rims and 6 or 7 almost complete bodies and some body fragments: see two of these in fig. 5c, d).

18 In Tafel & Thomas 1857, p. 159: from Makri (Fethiye) and Ania (Anaia), wine-producing areas in the 13th century, Venetians exported wine paying “commerchium by the emperor’s officials in Ania” (Fleet 1999, p. 75). We learn of the complaints of Nicola Dante and Filippo Bona in 1278, from the same reference, p. 239 (Fleet 1999, p. 75). Also for other commerce and especially the slave trade in the same years, see Kahyaoğlu 2010, pp. 277‑278 and Mercangöz 2010a, p. 281; for the Pisan merchants at Anaia in the years of 1269, 1300 and 1302, see Kahyaoğlu 2016, p. 272.

19 These graffiti will be presented in a forthcoming paper.

20 Drawings by F. Fidancı.

21 For a wine thief from Djadovo, see Fol et al. 1989, fig. 269; another from Hierapolis Turkish excavations now exhibited at the Denizli Museum, see Cottica 2007, fig. 8, 10a, b.

22 This ceramic bowl will be discussed by M. Kahyaoğlu and me in another article.

23 Graffiti on a piece of limestone among the Kadıkalesi finds is important in that it shows a cultural diffusion in the Late Byzantine period. See Mercangöz 2012, p. 191, fig. 21.

24 As published in Mercangöz 2013c, pp. 173‑174: “Finally, although we do not have any document on the ceramic trade by Latin merchant who we are aware of their commercial activities through the Italian notary records, as in the case of wine trade, the said production can be dated to the last quarter of the 13th century or even to the beginning of the 14th century. Local workshops should have been producing on their demands and even with materials they suggested. Therefore, comparing Anaia to important centers such as the harbor town Paphos (Cyprus) where Latins resided in the 12th-13th century and Corinth, an important ceramic production center in the 12th century, we think that the city was a production center which gained importance following those already mentioned important centers. In other words Anaia was the production center of ‘Frankish Ware’ that was available all around the Mediterranean and late examples of the Aegean Ware ceramics. As a result of this, it is not wrong to mention a universal production in which the same decoration repertoire was repeated with slight changes from 12th to 13th or even 14th century.”

Table des illustrations

Titre Fig. 1.
Légende Fig. 1a – Aerial view of the castle of Kadıkalesi/Anaia (2009), with indications of the sectors where pottery wasters were found (1 to 5). Zeuxippus-related sherds were found in sectors 1 to 3. Fig. 1b-p – Various sgraffito ceramics of Zeuxippus-related type found at the excavations: (b) tondos with concentric circles; (c) tondos with some sgraffito motifs in concentric circles; (d) faulty glazed plate with sgraffito concentric circles (Rim D. 30 cm, Base D. 9 cm, H. 7 cm); (e) deep plate with sgraffito concentric circles and radiating decoration (Rim D. 18.4 cm, Base D. 7 cm, H. 5 cm); (f) bowl with sgraffito concentric circles (Rim D. 19 cm, Base D. 6 cm, H. 9.2 cm); (g) bowl with sgraffito spirals around concentric circles; (h) bowl with sgraffito spiral (?) decoration around concentric circles, with a degraded glaze due to poor firing (Rim D. 14.8 cm, Base D. 5.8 cm, H. 9.5 cm); (i) fragments of some of the small bowls with convex rims and spherical bodies, the imported ones are indicated; (j) fragment of the imported small green bowl with incised cross decorations on the rim; (k) goblet with concentric circles (Base D. 2 cm, H. 6.3 cm); (l) goblet with touches of purple brown (Base D. 2.2 cm, H. 4 cm); (m) goblet with flaring body and base (Rim D. 5 cm, Base D. 2 cm, H. 7.2 cm); (n) bowl with sgraffito monogram which has a low round base, a spherical body and a large convex rim (Rim D. 10 cm, Base D. 4.2 cm, H. 4.5 cm); (n1) sgraffito of its monogram (possibly Gabriel); (o) bowl with sgraffito coat of arms which has a low round base, a spherical body and a large convex rim (Rim D. 14.8 cm, Base D. 5.5 cm, H. 6 cm); (o1) sgraffito of its coat of arms decoration; (p) bowl with low round base, spherical body and large convex rim (Rim D. 9.3 cm, Base D. 4.2 cm, H. 4.3 cm).
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/10219/img-1.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 3,7M
Titre Fig. 2 – Glazed vessels from the cisterns at the southwestern corner of the main church: Some Islamic and Protomaiolica imports.
Légende (a) View of the interior of the cistern during the 2009 season: arches and the column with its ionic-impost capital are seen partly. The cistern was filled with unglazed and glazed Byzantine ceramics, Islamic and Italian imported ceramics, many fragments of glass, some metal pieces and a few other finds; (b) an import from Islamic lands: fragments of a frit plate with molded decoration and turquoise glaze from Syria or Egypt, late 12th and 13th century; (c) sherd of an albarello, “Silhouette Ware” from Iran, probably Kashan (late 12th century), frit body with a carved-through black slip under a turquoise glaze decoration; (d) Egyptian sherds of a small bowl with frit body and underglaze painting in blue and black (13th or 14th century); (e) plate fragments with frit body and molded and blue splash decorations under transparent glaze, from Iran (perhaps Kashan) or Syria (late 12th and 13th century); (f) an albarello from Islamic lands; (g) tondo fragments of “Grid-Iron” and “Grid-Iron” variant Protomaiolica Ware (late 13th century); (h) sherd of a “Grid-Iron” bowl in Protomaiolica Ware (late 13th century); (i) sherd of a “RMR” (Ramina Manganese Rosso) bowl, Protomaiolica Ware (late 13th century); (j) sherd of a “Grid-Iron” variant bowl, Protomaiolica Ware (late 13th century); (k) sherd of a “Grid-Iron” variant bowl, Protomaiolica Ware (late 13th century); (l) sherd of a “Grid-Iron” bowl, Protomaiolica Ware (late 13th century); (m) sherd of a bowl, Protomaiolica Ware (late 13th century); (n) Protomaiolica sherd, motif of painted arrow and bow with a human hand, probably from a closed vessel; (o) base of a Protomaiolica jug; (p) handles of Protomaiolica jugs.
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/10219/img-2.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 2,3M
Titre Fig. 3 – Aegean Wares from the cisterns at the southwestern corner of the main church.
Légende (a) A group of Aegean Ware fragments with various sgraffito and incised decoration excavated from the cistern in the 2007 season; (b) a group of Aegean ware fragments decorated with animals in champlevé; (c) bowl with bird and floral decoration in sgraffito (Rim D. 25 cm, Base D. 10.5 cm, H. 8.5 cm); (d) bowl with heron or glossy ibis and seaweed in sgraffito (Rim D. 25 cm, Base D. 10.5 cm, H. 8.5 cm); (e) deep plate with abstract seaweed in sgraffito (Rim D. 22.8 cm, Base D. 10 cm, H. 5.5 cm); (f) small bowl with heron or glossy ibis and knot-filled circles in sgraffito (Rim D. 12.3 cm, Base D. 5.1 cm, H. 6.3 cm); (g) bowl with fox head and wheat or seaweed motives (Rim D. 25 cm, Base D. 10.5 cm, H. 9 cm); (h, h1) fragmentary plate decorated with fish and floral composition in fine sgraffito and its drawing; (i) fragmentary plate decorated with an animal in champlevé and its drawing; (j) plate with three animals in champlevé (Rim D. 21.8 cm, Base D. 9.4 cm, H. 4.4 cm); (k) fragmentary plate with fish and floral composition in fine sgraffito; (l) fragmentary plate with composition in fine sgraffito.
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/10219/img-3.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 2,7M
Titre Fig. 4 – Unglazed vessels from the cisterns at the southwestern corner of the main church.
Légende (a) The aerial view from the cistern and annexed cistern; (b) the numerous sherds belonging to the local production which included wasters of amphorae from the annexed cistern; (c) amphora from the cistern: Anaia type 2 (Rim D. 5.2 cm, H. 31 cm, Cap. 2.18 l); (d) amphorae from the cistern: Anaia type 1 (Rim D. 5.2‑5.4 cm, H. 29.5‑32 cm, Cap. ca 2.18‑2.54 l); (e) amphora from the cistern: Anaia type 2 (Rim D. 6 cm, H. 28 cm, Cap. 2.65 l); (f) drawings of seventeen double-handled cooking and service vessels from the cisterns, decorated with incised wavy bands on the rims and bodies (Rim D. 14‑48 cm, H. 20‑35 cm); (g, g1, g2) one of the three quadruple-handled cooking and service vessels with incised wavy lines (Rim D. 32 cm, H. 21 cm).
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/10219/img-4.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 2,7M
Titre Fig. 5 – Globular amphorae and various types of pithoi from the Kadıkalesi excavation.
Légende (a) A group of globular amphorae in a round basin in the northwestern corner of the castle; (b) drawings of the globular amphorae produced at Kadıkalesi/Anaia; (c) the largest amphora found in the local production of Kadıkalesi/Anaia which resembles LR 13 (Rim D. 10 cm, H. 54 cm); (d) Anaia amphora which resembles LR 13 (Rim D. 7.8 cm, H. 48 cm); (e) globular amphora, Anaia type 4 (Rim D. 6.2 cm, H. 33.5 cm, Cap. 11.64 l); (f) Anaia type 4 amphora (Rim D. 5.8 cm, H. 35 cm, Cap. 11.64 l); (g) upper part of an imported amphora, Günsenin type 4; (g1) graffiti of a coat of arms on Günsenin type 4; (h) mark where some globular amphorae were found in the northwestern corner of the castle, 2013 aerial view of Kadıkalesi; (i) marks where pithoi were found in situ, aerial view of the excavation at the end of the 2015 season; (j) some types of pithoi in situ at Kadıkalesi: P-1 Rim D. 66 cm, H. 172 cm; P-2 Rim D. 68 cm, H. 158 cm; P-3 Rim D. 68 cm, H. 135 cm; P-4 Rim D. 72 cm, H. 135 cm; P-5 Rim D. 66 cm, H. 104 cm; P-6 Rim D. 38 cm, H. 82 cm.
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/10219/img-5.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 3,3M

Auteur

Ege Üniversitesi, Bizans Sanatı Anabilim Dalı, E.Ü. Edebiyat Fakültesi, Bornova, 35100 İzmir, Turkey, zeynepmrcngz@gmail.com

Acheter

Volume papier

LCDPUleslibraires.fr
Rechercher dans OpenEdition Search

Vous allez être redirigé vers OpenEdition Search