Version classiqueVersion mobile
OpenEdition Books

Grecs et indigènes de la Catalogne à la mer Noire

 | 
Henri Tréziny

Chapitre 3. Les céramiques : fabrication, formes, décors, échanges

2. Local and Imported Pottery from the Cemetery of Sindos (Macedonia) : Interrelations and Divergences

Vasiliki Saripanidi

Résumé

L’objet de cette recherche consiste à examiner la présence des céramiques locales de Macédoine, en relation avec les céramiques d’importation, dans la nécropole archaïque-classique de Sindos. On constate dans un premier temps que l’utilisation des productions locales comme mobilier funéraire, relativement restreinte elle-même, n’est pas limitée qu’aux tombes d’un groupe spécifique d’individus. Nous procéderons, par la suite, à l’exploration des influences exercées par les pratiques funéraires sur la production des ateliers régionaux. En dernière partie, nous brosserons le portrait des influences provenant de Grèce du sud et de l’est ayant marqué les céramiques locales des VIe et Ve siècles av. J.-C., au niveau des formes et des techniques du décor. On remarquera que les céramiques de Macédoine ont su s’inspirer des modèles importés avec une assez grande liberté, conservant en parallèle plusieurs traits associés aux premières traditions locales.

This paper examines the presence of local Northern Greek pottery in relation to imported wares in the Archaic-Classical cemetery of Sindos. In the first part, we stress that the relatively limited use of locally made wares is not confined to burials of some specific group of the population ; then we attempt to define the extent to which local workshops were affected by the demands of funerary practices. The second part focuses on the influence exerted on local wares of the VIth and Vth c. B.C. by the ceramic products of South and East Greece, in terms of shapes and decoration. We notice here that potters of the Thracomacedonian area were rather flexible in assimilating their imported models, maintaining, at the same time and to a considerable degree, elements of earlier local tradition.

Note de l’éditeur

This paper is based on the overall study of the pottery from the cemetery, by the present author, which is included in the forthcoming final publication of the site by the Honorary Ephor of Antiquities A. Despoini. Parts of this material have already been presented in Sindos (M. Tiverios), Tiverios 1985-86, Tiverios 1988 and Panti 2008. All photographs used here were made by M. Stefanidis, unless otherwise stated. For her permission to publish this material, I owe special thanks to Dr. A. Despoini. For valuable observations on the present paper and for guiding me, in general, through the study of pottery, I am indebted to Prof. M. Tiverios. Finally, I would like to thank the PhD candidates J. Rosenberg and M. Perron, the former for proofreading the English text and the latter for translating the abstract into French.

To the memory of my father

Texte intégral

  • 1 Only two graves contained two burials each, see Sindos, p. 13 (A. Despoini).
  • 2 On the settlement, see Tiverios (M.) – The Ancient Settlement in the Anchialos-Sindos Double Trapez (...)
  • 3 Sindos, p. 11 (A. Despoini) ; Moschonisiotou (S.) – Θέρμη-Σίνδος. Ανασκαφικές παρατηρήσεις στα δύο (...)

1The Archaic-Classical cemetery of modern Sindos is located in the Second Industrial Zone of Thessaloniki, some 23 kms to the northwest of the city (Sindos, p. 8-13 [A. Despoini]). It was accidentally discovered in 1980 and its excavation, conducted by Dr. A. Despoini from 1980 to 1982, brought to light 121 graves, each containing a single burial with very few exceptions1. The cemetery is linked with the nearby settlement of the so-called “Anchialos-Sindos Double Trapeza”, which expanded to the north, and is in all likelihood the site of ancient Sindos2. More precisely, it served the settlement’s needs from the second quarter of the 6th to the late 5th c. B.C., with a limited number of graves dating into the 4th c., by which time other cemeteries had been established in the wider area3. In spite of the fact that almost half of the graves of the Archaic-Classical cemetery had already been plundered in antiquity (Sindos, p. 13 [A. Despoini]), for the most part they preserved their ceramic finds, among which number 262 mostly intact vases coming from 99 graves. Another 13 fully preserved vases were found scattered throughout the area, but some of them must have originally been associated with burials. Out of this total of 275 vases, 128 are Attic, 87 Corinthian, 14 East Greek, 3 probably Euboean and 1 Boeotian, while 42 are of local provenance – that is, produced by several workshops that were active in the Thraco-macedonian area. The scope of this paper is first to make some observations on the use of local pottery with respect to funerary practices attested in the cemetery of Sindos, and then to examine the relations of this pottery to the prevalent ceramic productions of the 6th and 5th c. B.C., in terms of shapes and decoration.

  • 4 On grave 25, from about 545-535 B.C., see Sindos, p. 120-127 nos 181-199, 152-173 nos 243-281 (I. V (...)
  • 5 Pottery found in the undisturbed grave 20, for instance, from the late 5th c. B.C., consisted of a (...)
  • 6 They are not especially connected, for instance, with deceased of some particular age or gender. It (...)
  • 7 The local jug in fig. 329a, for example, comes from the undisturbed grave 66, which also yielded a (...)
  • 8 The deceased of the undisturbed grave 104, for instance, from the late 6th-early 5th c. B.C., was o (...)

2We should first note that although local wares come third in quantity among pottery from the cemetery, they were present only in 27 out of the 99 graves. It is no surprise that when it comes to burial offerings, the inhabitants of the settlement appear to have had a conspicuous predilection for imported vases. Interestingly enough, local wares were completely absent from the most lavishly furnished graves that remained undisturbed, such as grave 25, which contained twelve vases from East Greece, Corinth and Attica, along with two faience vessels and numerous other valuable objects4. Perhaps the lack of local pottery from such graves could be interpreted as an indication of (real or claimed) higher socio-economic status ; but to what extent does pottery actually relay differentiations among the deceased of Sindos ? A close examination of those graves that have not been despoiled reveals that neither is pottery in itself indicative of the wealth of a grave, and nor does the latter necessarily entail the presence or absence of specific types of vases5. With regard to local vases, in particular, their distribution among graves does not seem to follow any consistent pattern6 and, contrary to what one might expect, it testifies against their association with more modest burials. In most cases, they were offered together with imported wares, which were of no inferior quality than those found in the rest of the graves7, while even the few burials that contained exclusively local pottery were not always deprived of other precious finds8. Consequently, if the use of local pottery in the cemetery is relatively scarce, this should be understood as reflecting not some distinctive minority of the population, but rather mortuary practices that did not favor the offering of such vases.

  • 9 Only two were isolated finds. One could add six Attic plemochoai here that come from an equivalent (...)
  • 10 The undisturbed grave 117, for instance, from ca. 500 B.C, contained a local exaleiptron together w (...)
  • 11 Only grave 121 contained both a Corinthian and a local exaleiptron, but this grave is problematic, (...)

3Let us now examine the presence of Northern Greek pottery in relation to those shapes that were mostly preferred for funerary use according to the evidence from Sindos. The shape most often used here among grave-goods is the exaleiptron (fig. 323), with one or two examples offered to the deceased in 52 graves. The total number of exaleiptra found both in burials and the surrounding area is 579, among which 44 are Corinthian (see e.g. fig. 327a-c) and date from the second quarter of the 6th to the mid-5th c. B.C. Regarding the rest of the exaleiptra, two of them, from the first half of the 5th c. B.C., come from Attica, where the shape had not been much in vogue, while the remaining eleven are local (see e.g. figs. 327d-f, 328). Most of those date from the second half of the 6th and the first half of the 5th c. B.C., but two exaleiptra come from the late 5th c. B.C., postdating all imported examples. Given the generally limited use of local pottery in the cemetery, the number of local exaleiptra is not negligible and one should note that they appear in equally or sometimes even more richly furnished burials than the Corinthian ones10, without ever coexisting in the same graves with the latter11.

  • 12 22 skyphoi from 21 graves (plus one isolated find), 21 cup-skyphoi from 20 graves (plus one isolate (...)
  • 13 On these vases, see below p. 4-5, 8.
  • 14 On this type, see below p. 7, 8.

4Another very popular shape that comes after the exaleiptron is that of the cup (fig. 323), with 33 examples from 26 graves. Five cups come from East Greek workshops that were active during the second and third quarters of the 6th c. B.C., while the rest of the cups belong to several types produced in Attica, between the second quarter of the 6th and the end of the 5th c. B.C. It is noteworthy that if one also takes into account the numbers of skyphoi, cup-skyphoi and kotylai found in the cemetery12, it turns out that the burial customs of the area largely involved the use of drinking vessels. This group includes a very limited number of local wares, only three kotylai (fig. 324) and one « Bolsal » (fig. 326c), after Corinthian and Attic models13. Nevertheless, alongside those vases one should consider six more local products, which represent a distinctive type of kantharos (see e.g. fig. 330), basically of Northern Greek inspiration14. These kantharoi date to the last quarter of the 6th c. B.C. and half of them were found together with imported drinking vessels.

Fig. 324. a- Sindos, Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki inv. n° 7880, about mid-5th c. B.C. (ht. 7,4 cm)
b- Sindos, Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki inv. n° 8351, 510-490 B.C. (ht. 13,3 cm) c- Sindos, Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki inv. n° 8381, second quarter of 5th c. B.C. (ht. 6,3 cm).

Fig. 324. a- Sindos, Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki inv. n° 7880, about mid-5th c. B.C. (ht. 7,4 cm)b- Sindos, Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki inv. n° 8351, 510-490 B.C. (ht. 13,3 cm) c- Sindos, Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki inv. n° 8381, second quarter of 5th c. B.C. (ht. 6,3 cm).
  • 15 Two of these lekythoi are published in Sindos, p. 18-20 nos 4-5 (M. Tiverios), where they are consi (...)

5The third most common shape found in graves is the lekythos (fig. 323), with 40 examples found in 25 graves and three more vases that were isolated finds. 36 lekythoi are of Attic origin and their dating spans a long period, from the mid-6th to the late 5th c. B.C. Corinth and probably Euboea are each represented by one example, dating from the third quarter of the 5th and the second half of the 6th c. B.C. respectively. Finally, four banded lekythoi from the second quarter of the 5th c. B.C. seem to derive inspiration from the Corinthian Classical type of ovoid lekythos, but must be Northern Greek15, and so must a globular lekythos from the first half of the 4th c. B.C., which was a chance find.

  • 16 During the 6th and for some part of the 5th c. B.C., it appears that the drinking vessel mostly imi (...)
  • 17 All published examples of the type known from Sindos come from cemeteries ; see below n. 44. Howeve (...)
  • 18 Apart from the four vases from Sindos, there are only two more published examples, see Mieza, p. 92 (...)
  • 19 Another type of lekythos, of the late 6th- early 5th c. B.C., is perhaps attested in Phari of Thaso (...)
  • 20 Panti 2008, p. 21-24, 90-91, pls. 2α,η-θ, 3β-η, 4α-ε, 28α-β, δ-ε, publishes two local imitations of (...)
  • 21 Of course, the association of small perfume vessels with the perfume trade has been put in doubt an (...)
  • 22 Certainly, local perfumes, if such were produced, could be kept in containers made of perishable ma (...)
  • 23 The vast majority of known local exaleiptra come from funerary contexts, but, as it has already bee (...)

6Apart from exaleiptra, cups and lekythoi, the graves of Sindos yielded numerous other shapes, which appear at various rates (fig. 323). Some of these shapes are represented only by imported vases, few of them only by local ones, while several others include both local and imported examples. As it has already been pointed out, funerary purposes were served mainly by imports, and thus especially by products of Corinthian and Attic workshops. No doubt this would have been due to the higher status of imported vases, but perhaps a further – even if not irrelevant – factor is to be sought in the relation between the demands of funerary practices and the repertoire of local workshops. Among the three most common groups of pottery in the cemetery, drinking vessels were the only ones with a well-established local tradition, inasmuch as they had always been essential to daily life. Of course, Northern Greek types varied from imported ones and even though the latter were occasionally imitated16, local kantharoi persisted both in domestic and funerary contexts17. The exaleiptron and the lekythos, on the other hand, were purely imported shapes with no local antecedents, but although both were highly popular grave offerings, only the former was widely taken up by local potters. In fact, apart from the aforementioned corinthianizing banded lekythos of the 5th c. B.C., itself known from only a few examples18, we barely know of any other type of local lekythos until the late 5th c. B.C., when vases of this form begin to appear on a more regular basis19. How should we then explain the different attitude of local workshops toward these two shapes ? Perhaps the key to the answer is intertwined with their function. To be more precise, it is rather striking that potters of the Thraco-macedonian area seem to have been uninterested not only in lekythoi, but generally in perfume containers. In spite of the fact that aryballoi, alabastra and amphoriskoi were being continuously imported into Northern Greece from various production centers, at least from the second quarter of the 6th c. B.C., neither did any of these shapes find their way to the local repertoire, with relatively few exceptions20. On the basis of this observation and in as far as no shape of similar function is known among earlier local pottery, it seems quite plausible that such vases were not widely produced, because such vases were not widely needed. In other words, it seems quite likely that in this period the Northern Greek market was dominated by imported scented oils, which came together with imported containers21 and left little space for the development of a local perfume industry22. If this was indeed the case, then maybe it would not be too hazardous to assume that local potters were not keen on imitating shapes that were not in demand among the living. Certainly, the needs of funerary practices would not have left them completely unaffected and the popularity of the exaleiptron as a grave gift must have served as an additional stimulus to its local production23. Even so, it seems probable that Northern Greek workshops would not take the risk of widely producing shapes primarily aimed at the funerary market, where competition with imported wares would have been much greater.

  • 24 The cemetery of Sindos has yielded 23 Corinthian examples.
  • 25 On this vase, see also Sindos, p. 256-257 n° 415 (M. Tiverios). Tiverios associated this kotyle wit (...)
  • 26 Compare, e.g., with Corinth XIII, pl. 33 n° 224.3.
  • 27 Compare, e.g., with Corinth XIII, pl. 35 n° D5a.
  • 28 On this vase, see also Panti 2008, p. 218, 370 n° 679, dr. 33ν. Panti dated the kotyle to 550-520 B (...)
  • 29 Compare, e.g., with Corinth XIII, pls. 37 n° 263.2, 44 n° 298.1.

7In the second part of this paper, we shall be concerned with the relationship between the ceramic products of Northern Greece from the 6th and 5th c. B.C. and those of other areas of the ancient Greek world, on the evidence of the finds from Sindos. In terms of form, some of the local wares found here more or less closely depend on imported models. A typical example is set by the three local kotylai, following the Corinthian shape, which is widely distributed in the area24. A comparison of those vases with contemporary Corinthian ones reveals that similarities are stronger than diversities. The first example (fig. 324a), from the mid-6th c. B.C.25, displays the same proportions as kotylai from Corinth26, but deviates from them in its flat foot and handles of semi-circular section. The second vase (fig. 324b), from about 510-490 B.C., is somewhat squatter than Corinthian examples27, whereas the third one (fig. 324c), from the second quarter of the 5th c. B.C.28, could be easily mistaken for Corinthian29, were it not for the different quality of its clay and glaze.

  • 30 On the vase of fig. 325b, see Sindos, p. 48-49 n° 67 (M. Tiverios) ; Panti 2008, p. 212, 368 n° 659 (...)
  • 31 Misailidou-Despotidou 1999, p. 777, places the beginning of its production within the first half of (...)
  • 32 Compare, e.g., with Agora XII, p. 296 n° 843, pl. 33 n° 843 (from about 480 B.C.).
  • 33 See, for example, Kaltsas (N.E.) – Άκανθος Ι, Η ανασκαφή στο νεκροταφείο κατά το 1979, Athens, Ταμε (...)

8In other cases influence was drawn from other traditions. The two stamnoid pyxides from Sindos (fig. 325), from the first half of the 5th c. B.C., are strongly reminiscent of similar East Greek vases30. It is noteworthy that although Attic imports were already competing with Corinthian ones in Northern Greece in the second half of the 6th and finally prevailed during the 5th c. B.C., it was Corinthian and East Greek pottery that seems to have had a greater impact on local production of this period. The 5th century was marked, of course, by the appearance of local black-glazed atticizing vases (see e.g. fig. 326), but these did not rise much in popularity until the end of the 5th and especially the 4th c. B.C. It should be stressed, however, that contrary to what is sometimes believed, this group of pottery already appears in the first half of the 5th c. B.C.31 and this is not surprising, since the related Attic wares were being imported here at least from the end of the previous century. A local handless bowl found in the cemetery (fig. 326a) actually dates to the early 5th c. B.C.32 and so do other black-glazed atticizing wares33, belying the view that local imitations should be dated much later than their models.

Fig. 325. a- Sindos, Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki inv. n° 7863, 490-470 B.C. (ht. 21,6 cm)

b- Sindos, Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki inv. n° 8322, 470-450 B.C. (ht. 30,4 cm).

b- Sindos, Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki inv. n° 8322, 470-450 B.C. (ht. 30,4 cm).

Fig. 326. a- Sindos, Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki inv. n° 8784, ca. 480 B.C. (ht. 3,2 cm)
b- Sindos, Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki inv. n° 8365, second half of 4th c. B.C. (ht. 4,9 cm)
c- Sindos, Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki inv. n° 8367, probably second quarter of 4th c. B.C. (ht. 4,4 cm).

Fig. 326. a- Sindos, Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki inv. n° 8784, ca. 480 B.C. (ht. 3,2 cm)b- Sindos, Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki inv. n° 8365, second half of 4th c. B.C. (ht. 4,9 cm)c- Sindos, Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki inv. n° 8367, probably second quarter of 4th c. B.C. (ht. 4,4 cm).

Fig. 327. a- Sindos, Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki inv. n° 7851, 550-530 B.C. (ht. 5,7 cm)
b- Sindos, Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki inv. n° 8375, 510-490 B.C. (ht. 5,2 cm)
c- Sindos, Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki inv. n° 7828, 480-460 B.C. (ht. 5,4 cm)
d- Sindos, Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki inv. n° 7888, 550-530 B.C. (ht. 6 cm)
e- Sindos, Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki inv. n° 8370, late 6th-early 5th c. B.C. (ht. 6,5 cm)
f- Sindos, Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki inv. n° 8318, 480-460 B.C. (ht. 5,7 cm).

Fig. 327. a- Sindos, Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki inv. n° 7851, 550-530 B.C. (ht. 5,7 cm)b- Sindos, Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki inv. n° 8375, 510-490 B.C. (ht. 5,2 cm)c- Sindos, Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki inv. n° 7828, 480-460 B.C. (ht. 5,4 cm)d- Sindos, Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki inv. n° 7888, 550-530 B.C. (ht. 6 cm)e- Sindos, Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki inv. n° 8370, late 6th-early 5th c. B.C. (ht. 6,5 cm)f- Sindos, Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki inv. n° 8318, 480-460 B.C. (ht. 5,7 cm).
  • 34 Mieza, p. 54 n° Π1568, 86 n° Π1645, 88 n° Π1652, 101 n° Π1691, 107 n° Π1710 ; Panti 2008, p. 196, 2 (...)
  • 35 Scheibler (I.) – Exaleiptra. JdI, 79, 1964, p. 72-108, p. 90 nos 25-26 (on the typology sche me), 9 (...)
  • 36 Panti 2008, p. 196 with n. 1984, believes it was exactly this type that stood as a model for local (...)
  • 37 Corinthian exaleiptra have a continuous presence in Northern Greece at least from the second quarte (...)
  • 38 See also Tiverios 1988, p. 299, 301-302 ; Tsougaris 2005-06, p. 20.

9So far we have seen local pottery imitating rather faithfully Corinthian, East Greek and Attic shapes ; nevertheless, potters of the Thraco-macedonian area did not always remain consistent in their source of influence and sometimes took up shapes that they treated with great freedom. In the case of the exaleiptron, for example, which is Corinthian par excellence, a comparison of local vases with contemporary Corinthian ones shows that they do not have much in common (fig. 327). This divergence, presumably in combination with the Ionic influences often detected in the decoration of local examples, has led some scholars to connect several Northern Greek exaleiptra not with a Corinthian, but with some Ionic type34. Exaleiptra made in Ionia are classified into two types, both examined by I. Scheibler35. The first of those can hardly be compared to any local example and does not seem to have enjoyed a great popularity or long life-span, since it was completely abandoned by the mid-6th c. B.C., probably before the beginning of the related local production36. All known Ionic examples from the third quarter of the century belong to the second type, which in its turn is closely tied to the Corinthian type with reflex handle. Therefore, among the available data there is no evidence of some Ionic type that could have influenced exaleiptra made in Northern Greece, which, we should not forget, bristles with Corinthian examples37. We are inclined, thus, to believe that inspiration for local exaleiptra came from Corinth38, but local potters did not confine themselves to faithfully reproducing their Corinthian models. What is more, the strong variation among known local examples indicates that local workshops must have kept coming up with different versions of the shape, without ever settling on conformity to one or more standard Northern Greek types. Apparently, this never hindered the diffusion of their products in the market, which is a further indication that their main interest in adopting a new shape must have been related to its function.

  • 39 At the cemetery two East Greek, four Corinthian, one Euboean and three Attic examples were found, t (...)
  • 40 Heurtley 1939, p. 82, 91, 97, 98, 103-104. On this form, which survives well into the Classical per (...)
  • 41 The fragments of such vases coming each year to light at Karabournaki are countless ; see, e.g., Ti (...)
  • 42 On the jug in fig. 329a, see also Sindos, p. 225-227 n° 361 (M. Tiverios) ; Tiverios 1985-86, p. 79 (...)
  • 43 On the lack of uniformity among the products of different local workshops during the Archaic and Cl (...)

10In this respect, it is very telling that in the case of shapes that were being imported but already existed in the local repertoire, local tradition was not put aside. Oinochoai, for example, of different provenances and types were being imported here from an early period39, without, however, displacing the local jug with cut-away neck, whose presence in the area goes back as far as the Early Bronze Age40. This type prevailed throughout the Archaic period and, although essentially for domestic use41, it was not considered to be inappropriate as a grave gift. In Sindos three burials from the second half of the 6th c. B.C. contained such vases (fig. 329)42, which represent two different versions of the shape. Several more are known from other sites, sometimes reflecting different periods, but also different local workshops43.

  • 44 On the six examples from Sindos, see Sindos, p. 248-249 n° 404, 289-290 n° 475 (M. Tiverios) ; Tive (...)
  • 45 Tsougaris 2005-06, p. 18-20. See also Stefani (L.) – Συστάδα αρχαϊκών τάφων στη Βέροια και νέα στοι (...)
  • 46 Compare, for example, with Coldstream 1968, pl. 2e (Attic Early Geometric).
  • 47 Coldstream 1968, p. 23. Tsougaris 2005-06, p. 19-20, believes that this type continues into the Arc (...)
  • 48 On this type, see mainly Papadopoulos 2005, p. 473-475, where two types are distinguished: “Type 1” (...)
  • 49 See also Panti 2008, p. 213, who points out the connection of this type with earlier local ones, bu (...)

11It appears then that during the Archaic and much of the Classical period, ceramic products of the Thraco-macedonian area maintained to a considerable degree their local character, in spite of competition from more prestigious imports. In fact, it seems that during this period local tradition was sometimes even further elaborated. This must have been the case with the type of kantharos mentioned above, among the drinking vessels, which seems to appear around the mid-6th c. B.C. and probably goes on to the first half of the 5th c. (figs. 330, 331c-d)44. Recently it has been argued that this type must have derived from the Geometric low-handled kantharos of Southern Greece, which would have reached the North through the mediation of Corinth45. The similarities between the two types cannot be questioned46, but the assumption that the first one had a continuous presence which eventually led to the second one is hardly based on any archaeological data. Even with regard to the South, the Geometric type does not seem to have actually survived the Middle Geometric period47, while there is no evidence that by that time it had reached Northern Greece and was integrated into local production. A similar type of kantharos appears, on the other hand, among local handmade pottery of the Iron Age (fig. 331a-b)48, in which kantharoi in general hold a salient position. Since this particular handmade type, which has even earlier local predecessors, continues well into the Archaic period and perhaps even later, it seems quite likely that the 6th-century wheelmade type was the result of an attempt to adjust known types to more refined techniques that would lead to more attractive products49.

Fig. 328. a-b. Sindos, Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki inv. n° 8372, ca. 500 B.C. (ht. 5,6 cm)
c-d. Sindos, Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki inv. n° 8316, 480-460 B.C. (ht. 5,9 cm)
e-f. Sindos, Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki inv. n° 8368, 490-470 B.C. (ht. 5,85 cm) (Photos by K. Filis).

Fig. 328. a-b. Sindos, Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki inv. n° 8372, ca. 500 B.C. (ht. 5,6 cm)c-d. Sindos, Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki inv. n° 8316, 480-460 B.C. (ht. 5,9 cm)e-f. Sindos, Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki inv. n° 8368, 490-470 B.C. (ht. 5,85 cm) (Photos by K. Filis).

Fig. 329. a- Sindos, Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki inv. n° 8329, 550-530 B.C. (ht. 15 cm)
b- Sindos, Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki inv. n° 7864, 540-520 B.C. (ht. 22,5 cm).

Fig. 329. a- Sindos, Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki inv. n° 8329, 550-530 B.C. (ht. 15 cm)b- Sindos, Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki inv. n° 7864, 540-520 B.C. (ht. 22,5 cm).

Fig. 330. a- Sindos, Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki inv. n° 8355, last quarter of 6th c. B.C. (ht. 11,1 cm)
b- Sindos, Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki inv. n° 8374, 510-500 B.C. (ht. 11 cm).

Fig. 330. a- Sindos, Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki inv. n° 8355, last quarter of 6th c. B.C. (ht. 11,1 cm)b- Sindos, Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki inv. n° 8374, 510-500 B.C. (ht. 11 cm).
  • 50 Heurtley 1939, p. 106-107 ; Cuttle (W.L.) – Report on Excavation at the Toumba and Tables of Vardar (...)
  • 51 Almost all known kantharoi of this type are fired grey or brown and decorated with scraped lines, w (...)

12Elements of local tradition also survive in pottery of the Archaic period with respect to decoration. The surface of several vases from the cemetery has been scraped in a vertical and/or horizontal direction and one of them is further decorated with a scraped zig-zag line. Burnished wares appear in Northern Greece from an early period, though this specific type of scraping is typical of the Iron Age and seems to have been widely used also in the Archaic period50. Among pottery from Sindos, it has been applied to grey wares, kantharoi (see e.g. fig. 330a)51 and exaleiptra (fig. 327d-e), as well as to two jugs with cut-away neck, made of reddish clay and partly glazed (fig. 329a). All these vases date to the second half of the 6th c. B.C. and attest the use of an old technique for the decoration of both local and imported shapes.

  • 52 On the bowl in fig. 326b, see also Panti 2008, p. 216, 369 n°673, pl. 89στ, dr. 33μ. Panti dated th (...)
  • 53 On the use of this method in Macedonia, see Misailidou-Despotidou 1999, p. 776-777, who notices tha (...)

13Quite often, of course, local workshops imitated imported shapes maintaining their established scheme of decoration. This holds true of the two kotylai (fig. 324b-c), as well as of the two handless bowls (fig. 326a-b)52 and the « Bolsal » (fig. 326c), which take after Corinthian and Attic glazed wares ; nonetheless, local potters usually preferred for such wares the technique of dipping them into glaze, which was therefore irregularly distributed over their surface. This glazing method has been used for the kotyle and the bowl from the first half of the 5th c. B.C. (figs. 324c, 326a) and also for the two 4th-century local glazed wares (figs. 326b-c)53.

Fig. 331.

a- Vergina, Iron Age (ht. 11,5 cm) (after Andronikos 1969, pl. 65 n° 41)
b- Vergina, Iron Age (ht. 9,5 cm) (after Andronikos 1969, pl. 44 n° 27)
c- Aghios Athanasios, second quarter of 6
th c. B.C. (?) (after Tsimpidou-Auloniti 1992, p. 382 fig. 16)
d- Mieza, first half of the 5
th c. B.C. (?) (ht. 8,5 cm) (after Mieza, p. 125 n° Π1756A).

a- Vergina, Iron Age (ht. 11,5 cm) (after Andronikos 1969, pl. 65 n° 41)b- Vergina, Iron Age (ht. 9,5 cm) (after Andronikos 1969, pl. 44 n° 27)c- Aghios Athanasios, second quarter of 6th c. B.C. (?) (after Tsimpidou-Auloniti 1992, p. 382 fig. 16)d- Mieza, first half of the 5th c. B.C. (?) (ht. 8,5 cm) (after Mieza, p. 125 n° Π1756A).
  • 54 On this type of pottery, see more recently Perron 2006 and Panti 2008, mainly p. 52-55 (with earlie (...)
  • 55 See for instance, ClRh IV, p. 94 n° 2, 96 fig. 81 (for an Ionic example) and Gardner (E.A.), Casson (...)
  • 56 The relatively few known Ionic exaleiptra from the second half of the 6th c. B.C. all display this (...)

14The case of local painted wares is somewhat more complicated. Here the models are not always easy to pin down, since the decoration is usually limited to horizontal plain or wavy lines, combined occasionally with bands of rectilinear or floral patterns. The patterns decorating the two stamnoid pyxides from Sindos (fig. 325) classify them among the so-called “pre-Persian” or “waveline” pottery of Chalkidiki, a purely ionicizing group, which appears around the mid-6th c. B.C. and probably reflects the presence in the area of Ionian potters54. More problematic is the origin of the oblique, sloppily rendered strokes present on the shoulder of three local exaleiptra from the cemetery (figs. 327f, 328a-d). Perhaps this is a careless imitation of the rows of dots or, more likely, of the degenerated version of the tongue pattern that so often decorates exaleiptra from Corinth. All the same, these strokes could be a debased version of patterns that are common in Ionic and ionicizing pottery55, as seems particularly likely with respect to the decoration of a fourth exaleiptron from Sindos (fig. 328e-f). Whatever the case, it should be stressed that in all these four vases, the lower part of their interior is fully glazed, which is a rather standard feature of exaleiptra from Ionia56.

  • 57 Plain bands decorate, for instance, a local column krater from the cemetery, which is associated wi (...)
  • 58 That is certainly true of the “waveline” pottery of Chalkidiki, see above n. 54.
  • 59 The banded 5th-century lekythoi (see above p. 3), for instance, seem to reproduce the decorating sc (...)
  • 60 See, for example, Savvopoulou (Th.) – Η περιοχή του Αξιού στην Πρώιμη Εποχή του Σιδήρου. In : Stamp (...)

15The source of influence for the plain banded decoration, which appears on both imported and local shapes57, is also quite unclear. To be sure, this simple type of decoration was very common throughout the ancient Greek world in the Archaic and Classical periods, but its presence on some local wares must have occurred under the influence of East Greek models58. Still, that is not to say that all local banded wares should be understood as “ionicizing”59 and one should bear in mind that banded pottery was produced in Northern Greece at least from the late Iron Age60.

16In order to sum up briefly, we should point out that, although locally made vases would have played a primary role in the daily life of the settlement in Sindos during the 6th and 5th c. B.C., they were only occasionally offered as grave gifts ; however, whenever they were, they were not chosen as representative of some particular group of the population or necessarily as inferior substitutes for imported vases. The predilection for the latter in burial offerings would have restricted the activities of local pottery workshops in the funerary market and was not, perhaps, irrelevant to their choice not to imitate specific shapes. The process through which these workshops took up elements from the South and East Greek ceramic traditions does not seem to have been bound to strict rules, inasmuch as they produced a wide range of imitations, combining different shapes with different types of decoration. At the same time, earlier local tradition was preserved to a considerable degree, especially with respect to shapes and, to a lesser extent, in terms of decoration. Perhaps the field of decoration offered more opportunities for “modernization”, though most local wares, or at least the ones from the cemetery, are simply, if not poorly, decorated. Still, even if their aesthetic value is not as high as that of imported vases, their contribution to our knowledge of Greek settlements to the North can be immense and calls for more thorough and systematic studies.

Bibliographie

AEMTh : Το Αρχαιολογικό Έργο στη Μακεδονία και στη Θράκη.

Andronikos 1969 : ANDRONIKOS (M.) – Βεργίνα Ι. Το νεκροταφείο των τύμβων. Athens, 1969, 298 p., 135 pls. (Βιβλιοθήκη της εν Αθήναις Αρχαιολογικής Εταιρείας, 62).

Agora XII : SPARKES (B.A.), TALCOTT (L.) – Black and Plain Pottery of the 6th, 5th and 4th centuries B.C. Princeton, 1970, 472 p. (The Athenian Agora, XII, 1 and 2).

ClRh IV : Jacopi (G.) – Esplorazione archeologica di Camiro I. Scavi nelle necropoli camiresi 1929-1930. Rhodes, Istituto Storico-Archeologico di Rodi, 1931, 399 p. (Clara Rhodos, IV).

Coldstream 1968  : COLDSTREAM (J.N.) – Greek Geometric Pottery. London, 1968, 465 p.

Corinth VII.V : RISSER (M.K.) – Corinthian Conventionalizing Pottery. Princeton, 2001, 209 p., 45 pls. (Corinth, VII.V).

Corinth XIII : BLEGEN (C.W.), PALMER (H.), YOUNG (R.S.) – The North Cemetery. Princeton, 1964, 344 p., 124 pls., 2 plans (Corinth, XIII).

Egnatia : Εγνατία. Αριστοτέλειο Πανεπιστήμιο Θεσσαλονίκης. Επιστημονική Επετηρίδα της Φιλοσοφικής Σχολής. Τεύχος Τμήματος Ιστορίας και Αρχαιολογίας.

Heurtley 1939 : HEURTLEY (W.A.) – Prehistoric Macedonia. An Archaeological Reconnaissance of Greek Macedonia (West of the Struma) in the Neolithic, Bronze, and Early Iron Ages. Cambridge University Press, 1939, 275 p.

Makedonika : Μακεδονικά. Σύγγραμμα περιοδικόν της Εταιρείας Μακεδονικών Σπουδών Θεσσαλονίκης.

Mieza : ΡΩΜΙΟΠΟΥΛΟΥ (Κ.), ΖΑΦΕΙΡΟΠΟΥΛΟΥ (Ν.), ΤΟΥΡΑ-ΤΣΟΓΛΟΥ (Γ.) – Μίεζα. Νεκροταφείο υστεροαρχαϊκώνπρώιμων ελληνιστικών χρόνων. Athens, Ταμείο Αρχαιολογικών Πόρων και Απαλλοτριώσεων, 2002, 136 p., 14 pls.

Misailidou-Despotidou 1999 : MISAILIDOU-DESPOTIDOU (V.) – Χρονολογικά στοιχεία από ταφικά σύνολα του 4ου αι. π.Χ. από τη Ν. Φιλαδέλφεια. In : Ancient Macedonia VI, Proceedings of the Sixth International Symposium, Thessaloniki, 15-19 October 1996. Thessaloniki, Institute for Balkan Studies, 1999, 1397 p., p. 771-785.

Panti 2008 : PANTI (A.) – Τοπική κεραμική από τη Χαλκιδική και το μυχό του Θερμαϊκού κόλπου (Άκανθος, Καραμπουρνάκι, Σίνδος). Thessaloniki, 2008, 514 p.

Papadopoulos 2005 : PAPADOPOULOS (J.K.) – The Early iron Age Cemetery at Torone 1-2. Los Angeles, Cotsen Institute of Archaeology at UCLA, 2005, 1279 p. (Monumenta Archaeologica, 24).

Perron 2006 : PERRON (M.) – Argilos : La céramique peinte de Chalcidique des VIe et V e siècles av. J.-C., unpublished MA thesis, University of Montreal, 257 p., 136 pls., 18 figs.

Sindos : VOKOTOPOULOU (I.), DESPOINI (A.), MISAILIDOU (V.), TIVERIOS (M.) – Σίνδος. Κατάλογος της έκθεσης, Αρχαιολογικό Μουσείο Θεσσαλονίκης. Athens, Ταμείο Αρχαιολογικών Πόρων και Απαλλοτριώσεων, 1985, 312 p.

Tiverios 1985-86 : TIVERIOS (M.) – Archaische Keramik aus Sindos. Makedonika, 25, 1985-86, p. 70-87, pls. 1-2.

Tiverios 1988 : TIVERIOS (M.) – Εγχώρια κεραμική του 6ου και 5ου αι. π.Χ. από τη Σίνδο. AEMTh, 2, 1988, p. 297-306.

Tsimpidou-Auloniti 1992 : TSIMPIDOU-AULONITI (M.) – Ταφικός τύμβος στον Αγ. Αθανάσιο Θεσσαλονίκης: νέα ανασκαφικά στοιχεία. AEMTh, 6, 1992, p. 369-382.

Tsougaris 2005-06 : TSOUGARIS (CH.) – Κανθαροειδείς κοτύλες και εξάλειπτρα από το αρχαίο νεκροταφείο Θέρμης νομού Θεσσαλονίκης. Συμβολή στη μελέτη της γκρίζας αρχαϊκής κεραμικής του Θερμαϊκού κόλπου. Makedonika, 35, 2005-06, p. 1-38.

Notes

1 Only two graves contained two burials each, see Sindos, p. 13 (A. Despoini).

2 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).

3 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.

4 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.

5 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).

6 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.

7 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.

8 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.

9 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).

10 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.

11 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.

12 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.

13 On these vases, see below p. 4-5, 8.

14 On this type, see below p. 7, 8.

15 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.

16 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.

17 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.

18 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.

19 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.

20 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.

21 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.

22 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.

23 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.

24 The cemetery of Sindos has yielded 23 Corinthian examples.

25 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.

26 Compare, e.g., with Corinth XIII, pl. 33 n° 224.3.

27 Compare, e.g., with Corinth XIII, pl. 35 n° D5a.

28 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.

29 Compare, e.g., with Corinth XIII, pls. 37 n° 263.2, 44 n° 298.1.

30 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.

31 Misailidou-Despotidou 1999, p. 777, places the beginning of its production within the first half of the 4th c. B.C.

32 Compare, e.g., with Agora XII, p. 296 n° 843, pl. 33 n° 843 (from about 480 B.C.).

33 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.

34 Mieza, p. 54 n° Π1568, 86 n° Π1645, 88 n° Π1652, 101 n° Π1691, 107 n° Π1710 ; Panti 2008, p. 196, 214, 218.

35 Scheibler (I.) – Exaleiptra. JdI, 79, 1964, p. 72-108, p. 90 nos 25-26 (on the typology sche me), 93, 100.

36 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.

37 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.

38 See also Tiverios 1988, p. 299, 301-302 ; Tsougaris 2005-06, p. 20.

39 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.

40 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.

41 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.

42 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.

43 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.

44 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.

45 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.

46 Compare, for example, with Coldstream 1968, pl. 2e (Attic Early Geometric).

47 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.

48 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.

49 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.

50 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.

51 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.

52 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.

53 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.

54 On this type of pottery, see more recently Perron 2006 and Panti 2008, mainly p. 52-55 (with earlier literature).

55 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.

56 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.

57 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.

58 That is certainly true of the “waveline” pottery of Chalkidiki, see above n. 54.

59 The banded 5th-century lekythoi (see above p. 3), for instance, seem to reproduce the decorating scheme of the related Corinthian lekythoi.

60 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.

Table des illustrations

Titre Fig. 323
URL http://books.openedition.org/pccj/docannexe/image/717/img-1.png
Fichier image/png, 244k
Titre Fig. 324. a- Sindos, Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki inv. n° 7880, about mid-5th c. B.C. (ht. 7,4 cm)b- Sindos, Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki inv. n° 8351, 510-490 B.C. (ht. 13,3 cm) c- Sindos, Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki inv. n° 8381, second quarter of 5th c. B.C. (ht. 6,3 cm).
URL http://books.openedition.org/pccj/docannexe/image/717/img-2.png
Fichier image/png, 238k
Titre b- Sindos, Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki inv. n° 8322, 470-450 B.C. (ht. 30,4 cm).
URL http://books.openedition.org/pccj/docannexe/image/717/img-3.png
Fichier image/png, 483k
Titre Fig. 326. a- Sindos, Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki inv. n° 8784, ca. 480 B.C. (ht. 3,2 cm)b- Sindos, Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki inv. n° 8365, second half of 4th c. B.C. (ht. 4,9 cm)c- Sindos, Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki inv. n° 8367, probably second quarter of 4th c. B.C. (ht. 4,4 cm).
URL http://books.openedition.org/pccj/docannexe/image/717/img-4.png
Fichier image/png, 172k
Titre Fig. 327. a- Sindos, Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki inv. n° 7851, 550-530 B.C. (ht. 5,7 cm)b- Sindos, Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki inv. n° 8375, 510-490 B.C. (ht. 5,2 cm)c- Sindos, Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki inv. n° 7828, 480-460 B.C. (ht. 5,4 cm)d- Sindos, Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki inv. n° 7888, 550-530 B.C. (ht. 6 cm)e- Sindos, Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki inv. n° 8370, late 6th-early 5th c. B.C. (ht. 6,5 cm)f- Sindos, Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki inv. n° 8318, 480-460 B.C. (ht. 5,7 cm).
URL http://books.openedition.org/pccj/docannexe/image/717/img-5.png
Fichier image/png, 448k
Titre Fig. 328. a-b. Sindos, Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki inv. n° 8372, ca. 500 B.C. (ht. 5,6 cm)c-d. Sindos, Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki inv. n° 8316, 480-460 B.C. (ht. 5,9 cm)e-f. Sindos, Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki inv. n° 8368, 490-470 B.C. (ht. 5,85 cm) (Photos by K. Filis).
URL http://books.openedition.org/pccj/docannexe/image/717/img-6.png
Fichier image/png, 579k
Titre Fig. 329. a- Sindos, Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki inv. n° 8329, 550-530 B.C. (ht. 15 cm)b- Sindos, Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki inv. n° 7864, 540-520 B.C. (ht. 22,5 cm).
URL http://books.openedition.org/pccj/docannexe/image/717/img-7.png
Fichier image/png, 235k
Titre Fig. 330. a- Sindos, Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki inv. n° 8355, last quarter of 6th c. B.C. (ht. 11,1 cm)b- Sindos, Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki inv. n° 8374, 510-500 B.C. (ht. 11 cm).
URL http://books.openedition.org/pccj/docannexe/image/717/img-8.png
Fichier image/png, 306k
Titre a- Vergina, Iron Age (ht. 11,5 cm) (after Andronikos 1969, pl. 65 n° 41)b- Vergina, Iron Age (ht. 9,5 cm) (after Andronikos 1969, pl. 44 n° 27)c- Aghios Athanasios, second quarter of 6th c. B.C. (?) (after Tsimpidou-Auloniti 1992, p. 382 fig. 16)d- Mieza, first half of the 5th c. B.C. (?) (ht. 8,5 cm) (after Mieza, p. 125 n° Π1756A).
URL http://books.openedition.org/pccj/docannexe/image/717/img-9.png
Fichier image/png, 504k

Auteur

Université Aristote de Thessalonique, Faculté des Lettres, Département d’Histoire et Archéologie, Salle 311, GR – 54124 Thessalonique <vivi.saripanidi@gmail.com>

© Publications du Centre Camille Jullian, 2010

Conditions d’utilisation : http://www.openedition.org/6540

Lire

Open access