Notes
Only two graves contained two burials each, see Sindos, p. 13 (A. Despoini).
On the settlement, see Tiverios (M.) – The Ancient Settlement in the Anchialos-Sindos Double Trapeza. Seven Years (1990-1996) of archaeological research. In : Bats (M.), D’ Agostino (B.) eds., Euboica. L’ Eubea e la presenza euboica in Calcidica e in Occidente, Atti del Convegno Internazionale di Napoli (1996), Napoli, Centre Jean Bérard/Dipartimento del mondo classico, 1998, 429 p., p. 243-253 (Coll. CJB, 16/ AION ArchStAnt- Quaderno, 12).
Sindos, p. 11 (A. Despoini) ; Moschonisiotou (S.) – Θέρμη-Σίνδος. Ανασκαφικές παρατηρήσεις στα δύο νεκροταφεία της περιοχής Θεσσαλονίκης. AEMTh, 2, 1988, p. 283-295, p. 286-288.
On grave 25, from about 545-535 B.C., see Sindos, p. 120-127 nos 181-199, 152-173 nos 243-281 (I. Vokotopoulou, A. Despoini, V. Misailidou, M. Tiverios) ; Tiverios 1985-86, p. 76-77, pl. 2a. It should be noted, however, that during the entire period of use of the site, the vast majority of graves contained one to four clay vessels and it was such graves that yielded local pottery.
Pottery found in the undisturbed grave 20, for instance, from the late 5th c. B.C., consisted of a single mass-produced Attic banded cup-skyphos, but the same grave also yielded several silver, bronze and glass vessels, as well as numerous other gold, silver, iron and ivory objects, see Sindos, p. 80-81 nos 115-116, 86-103 nos 127-156 (I. Vokotopoulou, A. Despoini, M. Tiverios).
They are not especially connected, for instance, with deceased of some particular age or gender. It is true that there were slightly more female burials with local pottery than male ones, but women outnumber men in general at the cemetery. In addition, the quantity of local pottery does not fluctuate significantly through time. It diminishes only after the mid-5th c. B.C., when the entire site gradually starts to be abandoned.
The local jug in fig. 329a, for example, comes from the undisturbed grave 66, which also yielded a Boeotian kotyle, a Corinthian exaleiptron and one of the few kraters found in the cemetery, a black-figure work from the workshop of Lydos, see Sindos, p. 224-231 nos. 359-372 (A. Despoini, M. Tiverios) ; Tiverios 1985-86, p. 77-79, pl. 2b ; Tiverios 1988, p. 299. The same grave also contained several gold and iron artifacts.
The deceased of the undisturbed grave 104, for instance, from the late 6th-early 5th c. B.C., was offered only local pottery (the exaleiptron in fig. 327e and a one-handle bowl), but also eight more artifacts made of gold, bronze, iron and glass.
Only two were isolated finds. One could add six Attic plemochoai here that come from an equivalent number of graves, only one of which also contained an exaleiptron (see below n. 11).
The undisturbed grave 117, for instance, from ca. 500 B.C, contained a local exaleiptron together with three imported clay vases, one bronze vessel, and fourteen other metal objects, see Sindos, p. 42-47 nos 52-66 (I. Vokotopoulou, A. Despoini, M. Tiverios). The roughly contemporary grave 58, on the other hand, also undisturbed, yielded only one Corinthian exaleiptron and five metal objects of no greater value than the ones in grave 117.
Only grave 121 contained both a Corinthian and a local exaleiptron, but this grave is problematic, inasmuch as some of its finds date to the late 6th and others to the second quarter of the 5th c. B.C. Consequently, it is not certain that the two exaleiptra come from the same original context. Still, it should be noted that the local exaleiptron of grave 117 was found together with an Attic plemochoe ; see above n. 10.
22 skyphoi from 21 graves (plus one isolated find), 21 cup-skyphoi from 20 graves (plus one isolated find) and 27 kotylai from 12 graves.
On these vases, see below p. 4-5, 8.
On this type, see below p. 7, 8.
Two of these lekythoi are published in Sindos, p. 18-20 nos 4-5 (M. Tiverios), where they are considered to be Corinthian (the second one not without reservations) and are dated after the mid-5th c. B.C. However, we believe that such lekythoi belong to a local type that appears sometime around the end of the first quarter of the 5th c. B.C. and does not survive long after the middle of the century. On the related Corinthian Classical type, see Corinth VII.V, p. 121-124. For a more thorough discussion of the local corinthianizing type of lekythos and its origin, see the forthcoming final publication of the cemetery.
During the 6th and for some part of the 5th c. B.C., it appears that the drinking vessel mostly imitated in Northern Greece was the Corinthian kotyle. Such imitations are known both from cemeteries and settlements, see, e.g., Panti 2008, especially p. 91-92, 133-134, 193-195, 196, pls. 28στ-ζ, 54στ-ζ,θ-κ, 84α-β,ε ; Perron 2006, p. 125-130, 253 n° 111, pl. 131 n° 111.
All published examples of the type known from Sindos come from cemeteries ; see below n. 44. However, this must be partially due to the fact that up to now it is mostly cemeteries and not settlements of Northern Greece that have been published. In fact, several fragments of this and other types of kantharos have been inventoried during the excavations at the settlement of Karabournaki, conducted by M. Tiverios.
Apart from the four vases from Sindos, there are only two more published examples, see Mieza, p. 92 n° Π1662 and Misailidou-Despotidou (V.) – Ανασκαφική έρευνα στην αρχαία Άφυτι. AEMTh, 20, 2006, p. 491-502, p. 501 fig. 10.
Another type of lekythos, of the late 6th- early 5th c. B.C., is perhaps attested in Phari of Thasos. These fragmentary vases are, unfortunately, unpublished and only briefly discussed by Perron 2006, p. 120-121, pls. 61 n° 1, 62 n° 2, who classifies them among a group of amphoriskoi.
Panti 2008, p. 21-24, 90-91, pls. 2α,η-θ, 3β-η, 4α-ε, 28α-β, δ-ε, publishes two local imitations of the Corinthian globular aryballos, one imitation of the Corinthian alabastron and some ionicizing amphoriskoi from Akanthos, and also refers to amphoriskoi known from other Northern Greek sites. An additional amphoriskos has been found in Argilos, see Perron 2006, p. 119-124, pl. 132 n° 110.
Of course, the association of small perfume vessels with the perfume trade has been put in doubt and, in any case, it seems more probable that perfumes were exported in larger vessels, such as amphorae ; see, for instance, Parko (H.) – Small Corinthian Oil-containers: Evidence of the Archaic Perfume Trade ? In : Scheffer (C.) ed., Ceramics in Context, Proceedings of the Internordic Colloquium on Ancient Pottery, Stockholm, 13-15 June 1997, Stockholm, 2001, 170 p. (Stockholm Studies in Classical Archaeology, 12), p. 55-60. Still, one cannot dismiss the possibility that at least some of the imported perfume vases were used to hold imported perfumes, perhaps of the same origin, regardless of whether they were transported together or at different times. Moreover, such vases are also quite common in Northern Greek domestic contexts, at Karabournaki, for instance, where several imported aryballoi, alabastra and lekythoi have been found.
Certainly, local perfumes, if such were produced, could be kept in containers made of perishable materials, such as leather. The existence of a large-scale local perfume production is, however, gainsaid both by the lack of related shapes in earlier local pottery and the limited imitation of imported perfume vessels. Some regional production, on the other hand, could be attested by the few local imitations, which could have also been used to falsely advertise their contents as imported.
The vast majority of known local exaleiptra come from funerary contexts, but, as it has already been pointed out, this must be partly due to the nature of published excavations. No doubt the exaleiptron held a prominent position in burial customs of the area, but the finds from Karabournaki confirm once again the presence of the shape in domestic contexts.
The cemetery of Sindos has yielded 23 Corinthian examples.
On this vase, see also Sindos, p. 256-257 n° 415 (M. Tiverios). Tiverios associated this kotyle with the “waveline” pottery of Chalkidiki, but suggested that it might come from some East Greek, perhaps Samian workshop ; nevertheless, on the basis of its fabric, it seems more likely that it was locally made, combining two different traditions: the Corinthian, with respect to the shape (which is rather uncommon among East Greek workshops), and the East Greek, with respect to its decoration.
Compare, e.g., with Corinth XIII, pl. 33 n° 224.3.
Compare, e.g., with Corinth XIII, pl. 35 n° D5a.
On this vase, see also Panti 2008, p. 218, 370 n° 679, dr. 33ν. Panti dated the kotyle to 550-520 B.C., on the basis of a Corinthian exaleiptron found in the same grave. This grave seems, however, to be disturbed (see above n. 11, on grave 121) and also yielded a pattern lekythos from the Workshop of the Beldam Painter, which dates to the mid-5th c. B.C. and is more likely to come from the same original context as the corinthianizing kotyle. A date for the latter in the third quarter of the 6th c. B.C. is, furthermore, unlikely on the basis of Corinthian parallels, since the related Corinthian group does not appear before the 5th c. B.C. ; see Corinth XIII, p. 126-127.
Compare, e.g., with Corinth XIII, pls. 37 n° 263.2, 44 n° 298.1.
On the vase of fig. 325b, see Sindos, p. 48-49 n° 67 (M. Tiverios) ; Panti 2008, p. 212, 368 n° 659, pl. 87η. On the presence of this shape in Northern Greece, see also Perron 2006, p. 67-86. For a similar East Greek example, see ClRh IV, p. 210 fig. 223, 211 n° 2.
Misailidou-Despotidou 1999, p. 777, places the beginning of its production within the first half of the 4th c. B.C.
Compare, e.g., with Agora XII, p. 296 n° 843, pl. 33 n° 843 (from about 480 B.C.).
See, for example, Kaltsas (N.E.) – Άκανθος Ι, Η ανασκαφή στο νεκροταφείο κατά το 1979, Athens, Ταμείο Αρχαιολογικών Πόρων και Απαλλοτριώσεων, 1998, 312 p., 225 pls., p. 40 n° 3, 215 n° E343, pls. 22β, 221 n° E343, for another handless bowl and an olpe, which date to the second and first quarter of the 5th c. B.C. respectively. The olpe from Akanthos is glazed only around its mouth, but is very close to similar Attic black-glazed vases.
Mieza, p. 54 n° Π1568, 86 n° Π1645, 88 n° Π1652, 101 n° Π1691, 107 n° Π1710 ; Panti 2008, p. 196, 214, 218.
Scheibler (I.) – Exaleiptra. JdI, 79, 1964, p. 72-108, p. 90 nos 25-26 (on the typology sche me), 93, 100.
Panti 2008, p. 196 with n. 1984, believes it was exactly this type that stood as a model for local production. It is true that vases of this type can be paralleled to some local exaleiptra to the extent that, just like the latter, they display a rather angular profile and narrow foot, at a time when these features do not appear in Corinthian examples. Even so, the first Ionic type is quite distinctive in its profile, high foot and lack of handle and its vases are no more similar to any known local exaleiptron than those of the second type.
Corinthian exaleiptra have a continuous presence in Northern Greece at least from the second quarter of the 6th to the mid-5th c. B.C. not only in graves, but also in domestic contexts, such as in Argilos, see Perron 2006, p. 132 and n. 645, and Karabournaki. Published Ionic exaleiptra are, on the other hand, relatively few and it appears that this shape was not very popular among East Greek workshops.
See also Tiverios 1988, p. 299, 301-302 ; Tsougaris 2005-06, p. 20.
At the cemetery two East Greek, four Corinthian, one Euboean and three Attic examples were found, the earliest from the second quarter of the 6th and the latest from the mid-5th c. B.C.
Heurtley 1939, p. 82, 91, 97, 98, 103-104. On this form, which survives well into the Classical period, see also Andronikos 1969, p. 194-201 ; Papadopoulos 2005, p. 455-456, 469-471 ; Panti 2008, mainly p. 169.
The fragments of such vases coming each year to light at Karabournaki are countless ; see, e.g., Tiverios (M.) – Έξι χρόνια πανεπιστημιακών ανασκαφών στο Καραμπουρνάκι Θεσσαλονίκης (1994-1999). Egnatia, 5, 2000, p. 297-321, p. 309, 310 fig. 8.
On the jug in fig. 329a, see also Sindos, p. 225-227 n° 361 (M. Tiverios) ; Tiverios 1985-86, p. 79, 81, pl. 2b ; Tiverios 1988, p. 299 ; Panti 2008, p. 210-211, 368 n° 661, pl. 87γ. On the one in fig. 329b, see also Tiverios 1988, p. 299, 305 fig. 8 ; Panti 2008, p. 211, 368 n° 662, pl. 87δ, dr. 33β. The third vase, which is partially preserved, is similar to the one in fig. 329a.
On the lack of uniformity among the products of different local workshops during the Archaic and Classical periods, see also Tiverios 1988, p. 300-301.
On the six examples from Sindos, see Sindos, p. 248-249 n° 404, 289-290 n° 475 (M. Tiverios) ; Tiverios 1988, p. 297-299, 300, 303 fig. 2, 304 figs. 4 and 6 ; Panti 2008, p. 213-214, 217, 368 nos 663-665, 369-370 nos 674-676, pls. 87ε-ζ, 90α-γ, drs. 33γ, ζ-η. The earliest known example comes from Aghios Athanasios and has been dated to the second quarter of the 6th c. B.C. ; see Tsimpidou-Auloniti 1992, p. 375, 382 fig. 16 (here fig. 331c). It is not certain, however, that this vase should be dated before the middle of the century. Numerous other examples are known from several sites ; see, for instance, Tsougaris 2005-06, p. 15-16 (from Thermi), 20-24 (from other sites) and 36-38 figs. 15-20. The latest known examples, dated to the first half of the 5th c. B.C., were found in Mieza, see Mieza, p. 84 n° Π1640α, 111 n° Π1718, 125 n° Π1756A (here fig. 331d). Nonetheless, neither the dating of these vases into the 5th c. B.C. is secure. Misailidou-Despotidou 1999, p. 778, 785 pl. 37, also adds a kantharos from the mid-4th c. B.C., but this vase belongs to a different type.
Tsougaris 2005-06, p. 18-20. See also Stefani (L.) – Συστάδα αρχαϊκών τάφων στη Βέροια και νέα στοιχεία για τις πρώιμες φάσεις κατοίκησης στην πόλη. AEMTh, 18, 2004, p. 485-494, p. 488-489, who, nonetheless, does not exclude the possibility of a parallel influence of earlier local tradition.
Compare, for example, with Coldstream 1968, pl. 2e (Attic Early Geometric).
Coldstream 1968, p. 23. Tsougaris 2005-06, p. 19-20, believes that this type continues into the Archaic period, in the form of the so-called “Elian kantharoi”, as well as in that of another type of kantharos from Corinth ; however, neither of these two types comes from the Geometric low-handled kantharos and, most importantly, they do not present similarities with the local 6th-century type. On the Elian and Corinthian types, see Gauer (W.) – Die Tongefässe den Brunnen unterm Stadion-Nordwall und im Südost-Gebiet, Berlin, Deutsches Archäologisches Institut, 1975, 254 p., 42 pls. (Olympische Forschungen, VIII), p. 164-172 and Corinth VII.V, p. 127-131.
On this type, see mainly Papadopoulos 2005, p. 473-475, where two types are distinguished: “Type 1” with plain handles and “Type 2” with handles surmounted by a disk knob. See also Andronikos 1969, p. 202-204, for vases that belong to Torone’s “Type 2”, but are further classified into those with plain rim and those with well-distinguished rim. The latter (e.g. here fig. 331a-b) are those closer to the 6th-century wheelmade type. Of course, kantharoi of the wheelmade type present lower handles, with no disk knob, but at least one (early ?) example has high-swung handles. Unfortunately this kantharos, from the cemetery at Archontiko, near Pella, is unpublished and was only briefly shown by A. and P. Chrysostomou, during their annual report of the excavation, at the AEMTh of 2007.
See also Panti 2008, p. 213, who points out the connection of this type with earlier local ones, but believes that it has parallels in many areas of the ancient Greek world. A more detailed discussion of this type of kantharos and its associations with kantharoi from other areas is included in the final publication of the cemetery.
Heurtley 1939, p. 106-107 ; Cuttle (W.L.) – Report on Excavation at the Toumba and Tables of Vardaroftsa, Macedonia, 1925, 1926 II. BSA, 28, 1926-27, p. 201-242, pls. 15-16, p. 211, 233-235; Koukouli-Chrysanthaki (Ch.) – Πρωτοϊστορική Θάσος. Τα νεκροταφεία του οικισμού Καστρί, Α-Γ, Athens, 1992, 835 p., 368 pls., 9 drs. (Δημοσιεύματα του Αρχαιολογικού Δελτίου, 45) p. 442-443 ; Papadopoulos 2005, p. 465-466.
Almost all known kantharoi of this type are fired grey or brown and decorated with scraped lines, which is another indication that the workshops in which they were produced were well familiar with local tradition. The use of paint for their decoration is only attested in Sindos (fig. 330b) and in one scraped grey kantharos from Mieza, which displays white triangles on the interior of its rim, see Mieza, p. 111 n° Π1718.
On the bowl in fig. 326b, see also Panti 2008, p. 216, 369 n°673, pl. 89στ, dr. 33μ. Panti dated this vase to the late 6th c. B.C., believing that it was an offering to the dead of grave 83, which dates from that period. The bowl was found, however, in the filling created after the plundering of this grave, which also yielded a 4th-century coin. In fact, a dating of the bowl to the second half of the 4th c. B.C. is also supported by Attic parallels; see Agora XII, p. 296 n° 840-842, pl. 33 n° 840-842.
On the use of this method in Macedonia, see Misailidou-Despotidou 1999, p. 776-777, who notices that it becomes very popular from the late 4th c. B.C.
On this type of pottery, see more recently Perron 2006 and Panti 2008, mainly p. 52-55 (with earlier literature).
See for instance, ClRh IV, p. 94 n° 2, 96 fig. 81 (for an Ionic example) and Gardner (E.A.), Casson (S.) – Macedonia. II- Antiquities Found in the British Zone, 1915-1919. BSA, 23, 1918-19, p. 10-43, pls. 1-13, p. 23, pl. 5 n° 2 (for a local ionicizing example). The decoration of the three exaleiptra from Sindos is attributed to Ionic influence also by Panti 2008, p. 214.
The relatively few known Ionic exaleiptra from the second half of the 6th c. B.C. all display this feature. For such an example, see CVA München 6, p. 48-49 n° 7, fig. 33, pl. 303 n° 7 (E. Walter-Karydi). See also above, n. 55. Still, one cannot dismiss the possibility that this is a coincidence that occurred independently in each case, but for the same practical reasons.
Plain bands decorate, for instance, a local column krater from the cemetery, which is associated with East Greek models, see Panti 2008, p. 211-212, 368 n° 658, pl. 87α. At the same time, they appear on the jug with cut-away neck of fig. 329b and the kantharos of fig. 330b.
That is certainly true of the “waveline” pottery of Chalkidiki, see above n. 54.
The banded 5th-century lekythoi (see above p. 3), for instance, seem to reproduce the decorating scheme of the related Corinthian lekythoi.
See, for example, Savvopoulou (Th.) – Η περιοχή του Αξιού στην Πρώιμη Εποχή του Σιδήρου. In : Stampolidis (N.H.), Giannikouri (A.) eds., Το Αιγαίο στην Πρώιμη Εποχή του Σιδήρου, Πρακτικά του Διεθνούς Συμποσίου, Ρόδος, 1-4 Νοεμβρίου 2002, Athens, 2004, 542 p., p. 307-316, p. 314.