KERAMOS CERAMICS: A CULTURAL APPROACH

KERAMOS CERAMICS: A CULTURAL APPROACH

Proceedings of the First International Conference at Ege University

May 9-13, 2011 İzmir Edited by

R. Gül Gürtekin-Demir, Hüseyin Cevizoğlu, Yasemin Polat and Gürcan Polat with the collaboration of Janine Elaine Su

BİLGİN

KÜLTÜR SANAT YAYINLARI

KERAMOS CERAMICS: A CULTURAL APPROACH

Proceedings of the First International Conference at Ege University

May 9-13, 2011 İzmir

Edited by

R. Gül Gürtekin-Demir, Hüseyin Cevizoğlu, Yasemin Polat and Gürcan Polat

with the collaboration of Janine Elaine Su

Muharrem Kayhan

BİLGİN

KÜLTÜR SANAT YAYINLARI

KERAMOS CERAMICS: A CULTURAL APPROACH Edited by R. Gül Gürtekin-Demir, Hüseyin Cevizoğlu, Yasemin Polat and Gürcan Polat

ISBN: 978-605-85730-4-8 All rights reserved. No part of this book may be used or reproduced in any manner without written permission from the publisher except in the context of reviews.

Book Design by Mustafa Horuş Edition 2015

Bilgin Kültür Sanat Yayınları Satış/Proje: Selanik 2 cad no: 68/10 Kızılay-Ankara Telefon: 0(312) 419 85 67 Web: www.bilginkultursanat.com e-mail: [email protected]

FOREWORD / VORWORT Im Rahmen der Lehre und Forschung an der Edebiyat Fakültesi der Ege Üniversitesi belegt die antike Keramikforschung seit Jahrzehnten einen hervorragenden Platz. Mit Güven und Tomris Bakir sowie deren Kollegen und Schülern entstand ein Studienzentrum zur Erforschung antiker Keramik mit sichtbarer Breitenwirkung. Daraus erfolgte nicht zuletzt die Idee, 2011 in İzmir einen Kongress zu organisieren, der vornehmlich der Keramikforschung Kleinasiens und dessen strukturellem Umfeld gewidmet sein sollte: „Keramos. Ceramics: A Cultural Approach“. Ein guter Teil der Beiträge, die im Rahmen dieses Symposiums vorgetragen wurden, findet nun einen würdigen Platz in dieser Publikation. Wenn auch bereits zahlreiche Veröffentlichungen zur Keramik antiker Städte der westlichen Kleinasiatischen Küste von Troja bis zur Halikarnass-Halbinsel vorliegen, bot diese Veranstaltung die Chance, verschiedene Aspekte der Keramik-Forschung in Kleinasien punktuell auf den neuesten Stand zu bringen, und bisher unbekanntes Material aus den in den letzten Jahren an vielen neuen Orten der Türkei durchgeführten Ausgrabungen kennen zu lernen. So konnten lokale Eigenheiten aus verschiedenen Problemperspektiven erörtert werden, ob von kleinasiatischen Fundplätzen oder von vorgelagerten Inseln (Lemnos). In dieser Veröffentlichung werden spät-und subgeometrisches Gefäße aus karischem Gebiet (Mengefe-Region/Milas) vorgelegt, Herstellungszentren von archaischem Luxusgeschirr (insbesondere Karien/ Bozburun Halbinsel)) nachgegangen, Essgewohnheiten und Ernährung anhand von lokalem Tafel-und Kochgeschirr behandelt (Gordion), unterschiedliche Fundkeramik aus neuen Grabungsplätzen Westkleinasiens (Panayırdağ/Ephesos) präsentiert. In bedeutenden ionischen Zentren werden ungewöhnliche Bestattungskonzepte beobachtet, und zur Schärfung zeitlicher Abfolgen, Fundvergesellschaftungen bearbeitet (Klazomenai). Archaische Keramiktraditionen weniger bekannter, inländischer Fundorte (z.B. Tabae) werden auf die lokale Bevölkerungsstruktur zurückgeführt, während spätklassische bis frühhellenistische, lokale Produktionen und deren attische Beeinflussung behandelt werden (Iasos, Priene). Bei archaischer und hellenistischer Keramik aus Kalabrien und Sizilien werden strukturelle Fragen aufgeworfen, die für das Verständnis kleinasiatischer Waren hilfreich sein dürften. So ist die Auswertung kultureller Interaktionselemente von Bedeutung: auf welcher Weise sich z.B. Bildformen der Keramik der frühen griechischen Kolonisten auf die Produktionen der inländisch-sikulischen Werkstätten auswirkten. Ferner ergeben die Vergleiche, die bei der frühen „grauen Keramik“ über unteritalisch-sizilische Fundkomplexe zu ziehen sind, dass enge Beziehungen, via Euböa, zu Kleinasien bestanden. Für die in mittelhellenistischer Epoche weit exportierte sog. Magenta Ware wird Syrakus als eines der Produktionszentren vermutet, während für die Erforschung von Ernährung und Essgewohnheiten in Campanien des 3.-5. Jh. n.Chr., Form-Typologie, Waren-Verteilung, technische Eigenheiten und Fundvergesellschaftungen als stellvertretende Indizien zur Bewertung hinzugezogen werden. Was die Spätantike betrifft, so wird die Herkunftsproblematik der in kilikischen Fundplätzen stark vertretenen spätrömischen C-Ware (sog. phokäische Ware) ebenso behandelt wie die Bandbreite der spätantiken Keramik von Kyme und ihre Aussage für Handel und Rang. Die Beitragsvielfalt schließt mit Untersuchungen zur attischen Keramik und deren Exporten ab. Es sei hierbei auf einen Beitrag zu einem überlegenswerten ikonographischen Wandel von der spätprotoattischen zur früharchaischen, attischen Keramik und deren sozio-historischen Bedeutung hingewiesen, ferner auf die Töpfer-und Malerhände sowie die Organisation in der Werkstatt des Jenaer Malers und schließlich auf eine Neubetrachtung der rotfigurigen Keramik aus Fundplätzen des Bosporanischen Reichs. Obgleich ein Teil der beim Kongress gehaltenen Vorträge für die Publikation nicht berücksichtigt werden konnten, bietet die vorliegende Veröffentlichung eine bunte Palette wichtiger Beiträge, für deren umsichtige Vorlage den Herausgebern bestens gedankt sei. Andreas E. Furtwängler

TABULA GRATULATORIA • Rosa Maria Albanese

• Rosina Leone

• Paul Arthur

• Kathleen Lynch

• Carolyn Aslan

• Sarrah Morris

• Andrea M. Berlin

• Yasemin Polat

• Iulian Bîrzescu

• Marcus Rautman

• Beate Boehlendorf-Arslan

• G. Kenneth Sams

• Andreas E. Furtwängler

• Gerald Schaus

• John H. Oakley

• Udo Schlotzhauer

• Sarah Japp

• Grazia Semeraro

• Ivonne Kaiser

• Evangelia Simantoni-Bournia

• Michael Kerschner

• Kaan Şenol

• Lori Khatchadourian

• Alexandra Villing

Contents GİRİŞ________________________________________________________________________________ 7 INTRODUCTION ___________________________________________________________________  8 APPROACHING EARLY ARCHAIC ATTICA: A CONTEXTUAL STUDY OF ITS EARLY BLACK-FIGURE POTTERY PRODUCTION___  11 Alexandra Alexandridou FOURTH-CENTURY BC BLACK AND RED GLOSS POTTERY FROM IASOS: A TECHNOLOGICAL APPROACH____________________________________________________  25 Silvia Amicone COOKING AND DINING IN LATE PHRYGIAN GORDION__________________________  40 Galya D. Bacheva “Sikelo-geometric” pottery between indigenous tr adition and Greek influences______________________________________________________________  50 Marco Camera KLAZOMENIAN SARCOPHAGUS OR BATHTUB? THE USE OF BATHTUBS IN BURIAL CONTEXTS ____________________________________  61 Hüseyin Cevizoğlu LATE ROMAN C WARE/PHOCAEAN RED SLIP POTTERY FROM THE CILICIA SURVEY PROJECT (MISIS), TURKEY_____________________________  73 Jane E. Francis GREY WARE IN SICILY, BETWEEN EAST AND WEST_________________________________  83 Massimo Frasca ROMAN AND BYZANTINE POTTERY FROM THE NORTH-EAST AREA AGOR A AT KYME (ALİAĞA, TURKEY). A QUANTITATIVE APPROACH________________________  92 Vincenzo Di Giovanni MAGENTA WARE FROM SICILIAN FUNER ARY CONTEXTS__________________________  104 Alessandra Granata BETWEEN LYDIA AND CARIA: IRON AGE POTTERY FROM K ALE-I TAVAS, ANCIENT TABAE______________________________________________  115 R. Gül Gürtekin-Demir, Yasemin Polat

Between adoption and persistence: Two regional types of pottery from late classical and early Hellenistic Priene_______________________________  137 Lars Heinze G 2-3 WARE COSMETIC VASES RECONSIDERED: BETWEEN MYCENAEAN AND ARCHAIC GREECE IN THE NECROPOLIS OF HEPHAISTIA ON LEMNOS _____  146 Petya Ilieva POTTERY WORKSHOP ORGANIZATION AND TR ANSFORMATION AT THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE OF TIMPONE DELLA MOTTA BETWEEN 800 AND 650 BC: A CASE STUDY FROM NORTHERN CALABRIA, SOUTHERN ITALY__________________  158 Jan Kindberg Jacobsen, Carmelo Colelli, Gloria Mittica, Søren Handberg THE JENA DEPOSIT UNDER GLASS: INVESTIGATING THE PRODUCTION OF A CER AMIC WORKSHOP IN LATE CLASSICAL ATHENS_________________________  166 Kleopatra Kathariou SOME REMARKS ON NEWLY DISCOVERED GR AVES AT KLAZOMENAI____________  173 Seval Konak Tarakçı Archaic Pottery from PanayIrdağ, Ephesos: new evidence and first results___   184 Alexandra Ch. J. von Miller ARCHAIC POTTERY OF COASTAL CARIA: FINDS FROM A CREMATION BURIAL AT BYBASSOS________________________________  197 Bekir Özer A Cultur al approach to the study of Late Athenian red-figure pottery from the Bospor an kingdom: advantages and disadvantages_________________  208 Anna Petrakova Pottery as A proxy indicator for diet change in Late Antique Campania____  218 Girolamo F. De Simone, Caterina Serena Martucci, Gaetana Boemio and Serena D’Italia A GROUP OF BAND DECOR ATED CER AMICS FROM THE MENGEFE DISTRICT IN THE CARIA REGION_____________________________________________________________  229 Ahmet Adil Tırpan, Zafer Korkmaz, Makbule Ekici LATE ROMAN CER AMICS OF THE DELİ HALİL SETTLEMENT IN THE EAST CILICIA PLAIN________________________________________________________  238 Füsun TÜLEK EAST GREEK KOTYLAI FROM KLAROS______________________________________________  243 Onur Zunal Figures______________________________________________________________________________  255

GİRİŞ Ege Üniversitesi Arkeoloji Bölümü, kurucu öğretim üyeleri ve onların yetiştirdiği akademisyenlerin, diğer alanlardaki çalışmalarının yanı sıra seramik konusunda yürüttüğü araştırmalarıyla da tanınmaktadır. Seramik konusunda üstlenilen bu misyonu, geleneğe dönüşmesini ümit ettiğimiz bir sempozyum ile gelecek nesillere aktarmayı hedefledik. Sempozyumun ismi önemliydi ve amaca uygun bir başlık olmalıydı. Çok düşündük... Sonunda “çömlekçi kili” anlamına gelen ve aynı zamanda “çömlekçilik sanatının kurucusunun ismi olan “KERAMOS”, bu görevi üstlendi. 9-13 Mayıs 2011 tarihleri arasında Ege Üniversitesi’nde gerçekleşen ilk sempozyuma, “KERAMOS Seramik: Kültürel Yaklaşım” adı altında genel içerikli bir başlık koyarak, hem sempozyumun geniş bir bilim adamı kitlesine ulaşmasının, hem de beş gün boyunca farklı konuların tartışılmasının önünü açtık. Sempozyumda Türkiye, İngiltere, İtalya, Romanya, Almanya, Avusturya, Avusturalya, Amerika, Kanada, Yunanistan, Rusya, Bulgaristan, Hollanda, Fransa ve Ukrayna gibi dünyanın dört bir yanından gelen farklı uluslara mensup bilim insanları tarafından sunulan 43 sözlü, 15 poster bildiri, sempozyumun amacına ulaştığının en önemli göstergesi olmuştur. Sempozyumda yer alan antik dünyanın çok kültürlü yapısının incelendiği sunumlar ve tartışmalar, bu tip uluslararası sempozyumların bilim dünyası için ne derece önemli ve gereksinim olduğunu bir kez daha ortaya koymuştur. Konunun duayenleri ile genç bilim insanlarının bir araya getirilerek deneyimlerin, yeni araştırmaların ve yeni görüşlerin paylaşılmasına olanak tanıyan “KERAMOS”, seramik konusunda çalışan ve çalışacak olan yeni neslin ufkunu genişletmeyi görev edinmiştir. Özellikle benzer konularda çalışan, her birisi olaya farklı yaklaşım ve bakış açısı kazandıran bilim insanlarının aynı çatı altında bulunmaları, konunun derinlemesine tartışılmasını ve yeni görüşlerin ortaya çıkmasını beraberinde getirmiş ve getirecektir. Sempozyuma gösterilen ilgi ve olumlu geri dönüşler, arkeoloji dünyasındaki bu gereksinime bir kez daha tanıklık etmiş ve “KERAMOS” sempozyumunun sürekliliğini kaçınılmaz hale getirmiştir. Bu kapsamda 4 yılda bir İzmir Ege Üniversitesi ev sahipliğinde yapılması planlanan “KERAMOS” sempozyumunun, seramik konusunda daha özel konuları başlık olarak belirleyerek, arkeoloji dünyasına daha fazla katkı yaparak sürdürülmesi amaçlamaktadır. R. Gül Gürtekin-Demir Gürcan Polat Yasemin Polat Hüseyin Cevizoğlu

INTRODUCTION The Department of Archaeology at Ege University is renowned for its research in various areas, especially for its expertise in ceramic studies. Originally these studies were carried out by the founders of the department and are presently continued by their students, who are now members of the academic staff. We therefore decided to support this tradition of encouraging the next generation of research with the organization of an international conference. The conference name was important and needed to serve our intentions. We thought carefully about this for a period of time … Finally, the title “KERAMOS,” which was a constant, was designated to fulfill our mission, and will be retained for future conferences. The Greek word “Keramos” is derived from its meaning, “potter’s clay,” and was also the name of the founder of ceramic art. The international conference “KERAMOS. Ceramics: A Cultural Approach,” held between May 9–13, 2011 at Ege University, gathered scholars studying ceramics either within the field of Classical Archaeology or in related research areas, and gave them the opportunity to share ideas in a variety of arenas. Participating scholars represented various countries, including Australia, Austria, Bulgaria, Canada, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, the Netherlands, Romania, Russia, Turkey, Ukraine, the United Kingdom and the United States. 43 oral and 15 poster presentations were featured. The discussions and contributions during the conference, which analyzed the multicultural structure of the ancient world, have once again proven how essential this type of international conference is for the scientific world. “KERAMOS” hopes to help extend the horizons of young scholars studying or planning to study ancient ceramics by bringing them together with established scholars to share experiences, recent research and new perspectives. Due to the great interest in, positive feedback on and professional dialogue resulting from the first Keramos Conference, we have all realized how imperative such institutionalized opportunities are to the world of archaeology. Therefore, we aim to promote this type of institution with a quadrennial Keramos Conference, to be housed at Ege University under diverse themes and topics, in order to promote ceramic studies.

R. Gül Gürtekin-Demir Gürcan Polat Yasemin Polat Hüseyin Cevizoğlu

Acknowledgements It would hardly have been possible to realise the conference and the production of the present proceedings without the support, cooperation and help of many individuals, colleagues and institutions. During the preparations of this organisation and this book, we have very much enjoyed working with them, and we would like to take opportunity to thank them for their efforts and contributions. Andreas Furtwängler, Mehmet Gökdemir, Muharrem Kayhan, Ayşegül Selçuki, Özcan Atalay, Nuran Şahin, Recep Meriç, Akın Ersoy, Şakir Çakmak, Kamil Okyay Sındır, Archaeological Museum of İzmir, Ümit Yolcu, Stefan Schneider, Nesrin Çetiner, Onur Kınalıbaş and “Güral Porselen”, Umut Devrim Eryarar, Mehmet Soydan, Yavuz Tatış, Kahraman Yağız, Seçil Çokoğullu, Ümit Güngör, Ergün Karaca, Onur Zunal, Ayşe Çelebi, Deniz Arkan, Rabia Aktaş Çıldır, Evren Açar, Ece Sezgin, Gencay Öztürk, Beste Tomay, Hamde Cesur, Melis Çobanoğlu, Uğur Candar, Ece Şentürk, Ertuğrul Kıraç, Sinem Çakır, Hazal Falay, Özer Erdin, Sena Yılmaz, Dilan Koşarsoy, Deniz Irmak, Nimet Kaya, Buse Acar, Nihan Aydoğmuş and the staff members of Faculty of Letters of Ege University are thanked for much-valued assistance, support and their kind efforts during the organisation of the conference. We thank the members of the scientific committee and reviewers for their scholarly expertise and professional advice, which helped us to improve the content of the present volume.

İzmir / Smyrna Agora / May 13, 2011

KERAMOS

CERAMICS: A CULTURAL APPROACH

COOKING AND DINING IN LATE PHRYGIAN GORDION

Galya D. Bacheva Sofia, Bulgaria [email protected]

Abstract: This study addresses food-related daily routines in Gordion during the Late Phrygian period (ca. 540–330 BC). The analysis focuses on the locally produced ceramic shapes and the types of meals cooked. Cooking installations, kitchen arrangements, storage facilities and methods of food service are discussed based on evidence from the Late Phrygian period and earlier. The number and types of imported vessels and their local imitations are used to determine the city’s relations with the outside world. The majority of Late Phrygian local vessels are monochrome, following the shapes but not the decoration of their Early Phrygian predecessors. Predominant are bowls, trefoil jugs and storage jars with offset rims. Local imitations of Greek and western Anatolian shapes and decoration were also used. Achaemenid examples are very few. The results point to continuity in diet, cooking and dining customs, and to clear affiliations with the western cultural sphere. Gordion was the capital city of Phrygia during the so-called Early Phrygian period, a time associated with the famous King Midas of the golden touch.1 Ongoing excavation and study seasons over the last 1



I would like to thank Gordion project directors Kenneth Sams and Brian Rose for allowing me to work with this very interesting material, and for their involvement in the process of analyzing it. I am deeply indebted to Andrea Berlin for her devotion to helping me carry out this project, and for her valuable advice over the years. I also thank Kathleen Lynch and Shannan Stewart for the wonderful and very productive discussions on Gordion ceramics. Hüseyin Cevizoğlu, Alexandra von Miller, Lars Heinze and Ilkan Hasdağlı have offered much-appreciated insights on red-dotted decoration in western Anatolia. I thank Samuel Holzman for preparing illustrations during the 2011 season at Gordion. I am also grateful to the Gordion Archaeological Project for their financial aid during the 2010 season, and to the Gerda Henkel Foundation for kindly supporting my participation in the Keramos symposium and my work at Gordion in 2011. 40

Cooking and Dining in Late Phrygian Gordion 60 years have revealed stunning architecture and other material remains at the site. Especially well preserved is a stratum demarcated by an intense conflagration, which is believed to have occurred unexpectedly ca. 800 BC, thus preserving the remains of daily city life in that moment.2 This preservation of the details of Early Phrygian life at Gordion has been a focus of attention and also of publications, including ceramic studies like K. Sams’ pioneer work on Early Phrygian (EP) pottery.3 The ceramics of the subsequent Middle Phrygian (MP) and Late Phrygian (LP) periods have also been discussed in a series of articles by Sams, K. DeVries, and R. Henrickson.4 Of particular interest to the current paper is the Late Phrygian period, which coincides with the period of Achaemenid rule in the Near East. Historically, this is believed to have started with the conquests of Cyrus the Great and ended with the eastward march of Alexander the Great. For Gordion, I will hereby date the period to between ca. 540 BC and 330 BC.5 This analysis is based on a first-hand examination of locally produced LP vessels. With a few exceptions, the preserved samples are generally fragmentary. Of about 3000 counted diagnostics, a little over 1% (about 40 vessels) are complete or nearly complete. It must be stressed that the non-inventoried ceramics, saved in context bags, have been preserved according to excavators’ judgment based on the part (diagnostics) and appearance (decoration) of the vessel. The percentage of preserved and discarded fragments is usually not mentioned in the excavators’ notes. The pottery examined here comes from contexts associated with specific buildings in the eastern part of the City Mound. Such are the so-called Buildings E, G, and M, the Painted House, the Stone Workshop, the Room with Columns and Floor S House, all of which have yielded ceramics from the fifth century BC, as well as Building A, the NCT Building, Room A-B over Building M, the Paved Unit over Building E, and a Foundry over the Painted House where pottery from the fourth century BC has been found. After an initial stage of defining the main shapes of vessels, they were typologized in order to allow comparisons with the pottery of earlier periods at Gordion.6 The results reveal a strong continuity in the ceramic shapes and dining habits of the population. Such continuity is also attested in both clay sources and clay processing, as all of the sources used in the MP were also in use during the LP, and a significant number of new sources were added in the LP.7 Persistent burnishing and application of washes and thick slips from the EP to the LP also testifies to continuity. On the other hand, an abrupt change is seen in terms of decoration. While during the EP a large number of jugs and amphorae were lavishly decorated, LP vessels were almost exclusively plain. The most common LP open vessel was the carinated bowl (making up about a quarter of all open shapes), which displays a variety of profiles. This shape speaks especially to continuity, as it had also 2 3



5 6 7 4

DeVries et al. 2003; DeVries et al. 2005; DeVries 2007; DeVries 2008, 31–2; Voigt 2009; Rose and Darbyshire 2011. Cf. Muscarella 2003. Sams 1994. Sams 1979; Henrickson 1993; 1994; 1997 and 2001; Henrickson and Blackman 1996; DeVries 1980 and 1997. Voigt 2009, 221, Table 1. Toteva 2007, 2009. Grave et al. 2009, 2169. 41

Galya D. Bacheva been predominant during the EP.8 Often the surfaces of the bowls have been burnished, or sometimes polished. Larger bowls are self-washed or mica-washed. A common element from the LP is pattern burnishing: usually a wavy line runs horizontally under the rim on the exterior (Fig. 1), or radial lines and motifs run toward the center of the vessel on its interior. Other bowl shapes feature incurved, upright, flaring, ledge and thickened rims,9 which also appear as early as the ninth century BC at Gordion, although in much smaller numbers. Special attention needs to be paid to the so-called banded bowls, which are among the new forms that appeared in the Late Phrygian ceramic assemblage (Fig. 2). They have upright rims, tall ring feet, and painted decoration in shades ranging from red to brown, consisting of a band along the rim and concentric bands (sometimes with a central dot) on the interior surface of the bowl. These vessels usually come in a specific fine, soft, orange fabric with peculiar tiny round voids, although some vessels have been fired darker. The paint is normally sintered. The same, at least based on visual comparison, are the fabric and paints used to decorate the closed vessels that Gordion scholars have come to call “Dotted Triangle Ware.”10 These are usually column kraters and dinoi decorated with series of motifs including triangles, lozenges or circles filled with dots, nested triangles, running “SSS” shapes, as well as chevrons, dots, and series of lines or “SSS” shapes along the rims (Fig. 3). There are also floral motifs and usually stylized wreaths, as well as animals—quadrupeds or birds—all very schematic. Usually the lower bodies of the vessels are not decorated, so far as we can judge from the preserved examples. Both the banded bowls and the “Dotted Triangle Ware” closed vessels seem to belong to the fourth century BC and were perhaps related to other western Anatolian traditions.11 Their use might have started as early as the fifth century BC, but reliable data for their point of inception is yet lacking. Trefoil-rim jugs were the leading pouring shape in the LP, comprising almost half of all identified jugs. Their state of preservation is very poor, with a few exceptions, but the documented examples show that the shape is an evolutionary development from EP trefoil jugs.12 The second most common LP pouring shape was the everted-rim jug ,13 which accounts for about a quarter of all preserved jugs and seems to have pushed away EP sidespouted and round-mouthed jugs. Sometimes the pouring vessels are made of a very fine grey fabric, with thin walls and black surfaces polished to a metallic effect. It looks as though they were the “fine china” on the table. Such vessels might be residual in some cases, but there are contexts with multiple and well-preserved examples, implying that they were probably still in use at least in some buildings.14 8 9



10



11

12

14 13

Toteva 2009, fig. 1a–d, cf. Sams 1994, figs. 6–15. Toteva 2009, fig. 1e–l. For previous discussions on this ware, see Stewart 2010, 53–54 and notes. The presence of such decoration from mid-fourth-century BC Priene, mainly on kraters, was reported by Larz Heinze during this symposium. Alexandra von Miller also reported a red-dotted fragment from Panayırdağ, Ephesos. It has no clear chronological context, but she interprets it as an archaic example related to “North Ionian” traditions in terms of decoration (personal e-mail). Hüseyin Cevizoğlu and Ilkan Hasdağlı have shared with me that red-dotted decoration is found on fifth- and fourth-century BC pottery from Klazomenai, Larisa and Smyrna (personal communication). See also Stewart 2010, 53–54. This decoration is not clearly understood yet, but it is apparently found in western Anatolian ceramic traditions contemporary to and earlier than the examples found at Gordion. Toteva 2009, fig. 2a, cf. Sams 1994, fig. 26, no. 745. Toteva 2009, fig. 2b. Such a context was found over the clay floor of Building M. At least four well-preserved black-polished jugs were found, some with almost complete diameters and large sections of profile. Therefore they probably belong to this primary context. 42

Cooking and Dining in Late Phrygian Gordion Sometimes such black-polished vessels are related either or both to the earlier Phrygian tradition and to Greek shapes. For example, incurved bowls find parallels among earlier Phrygian ceramics, but in some fourth-century BC contexts they have the specific thickening of the rim seen in Greek incurved bowls. A number of clearly direct black-polished imitations of Greek shapes or motifs, such as fishplates, cups and stamped palmettes, are also found, testifying that black-polished vessels cannot be simply considered residual from earlier periods. The predominant Late Phrygian storage shape was the large offset-rim jar with a wide, tall neck.15 It was probably covered with a lid, and some examples retained a handle. This shape comprises half of the jars and about 30% of the preserved closed vessels of the LP. It follows very closely what Sams calls storage jars and amphorae for the EP assemblage.16 The main LP cooking shape (85% of all cooking ware) was the deep pot with a simple everted rim, a short neck and a handle starting at the shoulder and ending at the widest point on the body.17 The same basic shape is predominant as early as the ninth century BC, albeit with a handle starting at the mouth.18 The imported vessels in Late Phrygian Gordion come mainly from the Greek world. They attest to increasing trade relations opened up by the Persian Empire, yet comprise only about 5% of all preserved diagnostics. Some imitations of Greek shapes are attested as well, e.g. lekythoi, amphoriskoi, and drinking cups. Achaemenid shapes, almost exclusively represented by the so-called Achaemenid bowls, form an insignificant part of the assemblage. Original Achaemenid bowls were normally produced out of precious metals, but here the versions found are clay. There are only about 30 such vessels that can securely be associated with LP contexts (about 1% of all diagnostics). A relatively large number19 of jugs and jars were decorated in the spirit of western Anatolian traditions, e.g. marbling and wavy lines, executed in orange-to-brown paint on buff vessels; these are apparently borrowed from the Lydian tradition. Among the popular Lydianizing shapes are lydions, Lydian skyphoi, Lydian lekythoi and fruit stands.20 Horizontal bands on closed vessels seem to follow other western Anatolian traditions but are generally difficult to define. Most examples are local imitations rather than true imports. These local versions are very much in the Phrygian tradition, covered with thin slips or self-washed and burnished. The fruit stands in particular are a typical example—they are made in a completely Phrygian manner, usually of grey or ashy buff local clay, thick-walled and burnished. The “Phrygian touch” is also seen in the fact that only certain shapes were chosen—for example there are no complete Greek sympotic sets. Apparently the Phrygians borrowed the objects but did not necessarily follow the manner of their use. The Late Phrygian ceramic corpus attests to steady continuity in the cooking and dining habits of Gordion’s population, although some clearly identifiable novelties appeared after the middle of the 15

17 18 19

Toteva 2009, fig. 2e, f. Sams 1994, fig. 34, nos. 306, 307. Toteva 2009, fig. 2g, h. Sams 1994, fig. 31, no. 49. Since, in context bags, they are very often represented by body fragments that sometimes seem to belong to the same vessel but cannot be securely joined together, the percentage of these jugs and jars of the total vessel count is highly speculative. Rough estimates indicate that they make up about 5% of all preserved vessels. 20 For a more detailed discussion of the Lydianizing pottery at Gordion, see Gürtekin-Demir 2007, 62–63 with notes. 16

43

Galya D. Bacheva sixth century BC. Certainly each of the old shapes also changed, which is not surprising given the number of centuries that elapsed between the EP and LP. These changes, however, do not seem to imply a functional shift for the vessels. The new shapes and types of decoration were persistently adjusted to local tastes and tradition. The apparent continuity in ceramic tradition logically implies continuity in terms of vessel functions and diet. This is where the data from the well-preserved EP Destruction Level is helpful. Findings published in the Gordion preliminary reports show that the functions of ceramic vessels varied greatly and were sometimes quite unexpected. For example, bowls and jugs (including trefoil jugs known to have been used for pouring wine in the Greek world) have been found full of various foods (wheat, barley, lentils, chickpeas, hazelnuts)21 and other items (shells, needles, spindle whorls, gaming pieces, chaff, straw or grass).22 Basins were used as containers for smaller vessels.23 Sometimes small bowls were found in large, deep vessels and presumably served as scoops or dippers.24 Although we have no such degree of preservation from the LP levels, we can project that some of the vessels were used as containers for similar foods and items. In other words, ceramic vessels were often used for purposes other than food and drink consumption. New archaeobotanical data from Gordion, recently published by Naomi Miller and John Marston, help us analyze the dishes that were prepared and served. The studies show that cereals, pulses and domesticated animals were used in consistent proportions for over a millennium.25 The primary cereals farmed at Gordion were wheat and barley. These were followed by pulses such as bitter vetch and lentils, while bovids and suids (cattle, sheep, goats and pigs) made up the primary domesticates.26 Indeed, carbonized wheat, barley and lentils have been found in contexts from the EP Destruction Level.27 Chemical analysis of the organic contents of vessels from the royal tomb under Tumulus MM has shown that a spicy stew of sheep or goat and pulses was eaten at the funerary feast.28 This data is supported by the deep, closed cooking pots used at Gordion from the EP through the LP, which indicate that liquid dishes such as stews or soups were typical of the Phrygian table. The shapes of table vessels (plates, bowls, and jugs) also help determine what people put on their tables. We can expect that plates were used for solid dishes (bread, cheese, meat), while bowls were for the consumption of soups and various stews. They could also have been used for drinking, especially when we find jugs but few cups among the preserved vessels. The high percentages of bowls and deep cooking pots complement the above data and imply that Phrygians consumed mainly liquid meals such as soups and stews. 21

Young 1956, 22; Young 1974, 32; DeVries 1980, 36. Young 1957, 321; Sams 1994, 44. 23 Young 1960, 239 reports such an example from Megaron 3. Sams 1994, 44 mentions a basin from CC2 which held a collection of miniature jugs. 24 Sams 1994, 44. 25 Miller et al. 2009; Miller 2010; Marston 2010. 26 Marston 2010, 357–363. 27 Young 1956, 22; Young 1957, 321–2; Young 1964, 285; Young 1966, 270; Young 1974, 32. 28 McGovern 2000, 26–27. 22

44

Cooking and Dining in Late Phrygian Gordion Both chemical analysis of drinking vessels from Tumulus MM and analysis of vessel shapes show that in the EP barley was brewed into beer. Analysis of Tumulus MM indicates that an alcoholic mixture of barley beer, honey mead, and grape wine was drunk as part of funerary rites for kings.29 In addition, two types of jugs (one with a spout and another with a built-in ceramic straw, both usually sieved) attest that some of the beverages needed straining.30 Such shapes, however, are rarely found in the LP level, and even when they are they are so fragmentary that one is inclined to interpret them as residuals. This might be taken as evidence that beer was consumed by Phrygian elites in the EP, and after the Persian conquest it lost popularity. In addition, one may consider that the habit of drinking wine took over as trade relations with Greece were maintained after the EP. The appearance of Greek fine wares and transport amphoraе in the MP, which greatly increased in number during the LP, indeed suggests a possible shift towards wine consumption.31 Here we must make a note of other materials that could have been used for the production of food and drink containers. The wonderful preservation of the 800 BC destruction allows a glimpse into this aspect of Phrygian households. In the undisturbed debris of the so-called South Phrygian House were found wicker basket fragments,32 sometimes with ceramic bowls stacked inside them; wicker baskets were also found in the Terrace Building.33 In the EP Megaron 3 and in Tumulus P (ca. 760 BC) were found wooden utensils including spoons and bowls.34 Therefore, we must take those materials into account along with ceramics when we think of the Phrygian table. Unlike vessels of glass, faience and especially bronze (bronze being abundant in the prosperous EP and MP city),35 wooden vessels and basketry are very likely to have been common in the much more humble Late Phrygian period. Stone dishes are also mentioned in some LP contexts.36 The number and sizes of dining vessels beg the question How did people dine? Did each diner have their own personal dish, or did they share larger servings? Preliminary estimates suggest individual servings. Counts of vessels large enough for measurement of the diameter with a minimal margin of error show that 70% of the LP bowls were small enough for individual use, with diameters no larger than 23 cm (Chart 1). Ceramic vessels would have been stored in shelves or galleries along the walls, as suggested by evidence from Early Phrygian Gordion and parallels in Lydian Sardis. In the sixth and eighth rooms of the EP Terrace Building were found large deposits of pottery along the walls, presumably vessels fallen from galleries.37 Such deposits were found against the walls of Megaron 3 as well, also suggesting galleries or shelves for the storage of vessels.38 At Sardis, against the northern wall of the so-called Southern House 29

31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 30

McGovern et al. 1999; McGovern 2000, 24. Young 1964, 289; Young 1968, 235; Sams 1977. DeVries 1990, 399. Cf. Young 1956a, 263 on the lack of Greek imports in the earlier Destruction Level; Lawall 2010, 160. Young 1957, pl. 90, fig. 13. Young 1966, 270. Young 1957, 326; Young 1957a, 17; DeVries 2008, 41, fig. 33. E.g. Young 1957, 326 and 328; Young 1960, 230. Gordion Field Notebook 74, 85 mentions half a stone dish found in Building M (5420 ST 364). Young 1964, 285–6; Young 1966, 270; Young 1968, 238–9. Young 1960, 239. 45

Galya D. Bacheva

50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Series1

16 cm or smaller

17-23 cm

24-30 cm

31 cm or larger

23%

47%

18%

12%

Chart 1: Preliminary estimates based on rim diameter showing that ca. 70% of the bowls were suitable for individual use

were found two overlapping groups of vessels, where the upper group had apparently fallen over onto the lower group after having been placed on a shelf.39 In addition, the EP level at Gordion has yielded evidence regarding the cooking installations used in the city. In the so-called Megaron 7 were found an oven facing a U-shaped mud-brick construction, the latter probably serving as the stand for a large cooking tray.40 The antechambers of the Terrace Building, which functioned as kitchens, contained domed ovens, round hearths and U-shaped installations.41 The round hearths are thought by the excavators to have been used for heating, boiling and for making embers, the U-shaped hearths were grills, and the closed ovens were for baking.42 Such installations have been found in both the EP Destruction and Early Hellenistic Levels.43 This similarity between Early Phrygian and Hellenistic period-type cooking installations reveals a continuity that also implies the use of similar installations during the Late Phrygian period in between. A glimpse into a real sixth-century BC kitchen is provided by what was probably a farmhouse under Tumulus E (dated by a black-polished jug).44 In that kitchen were found two oval ovens believed to be for baking bread; beside them was a square brick bin for grain storage, and a low raised platform hollowed on top and covered with clay, which according to Rodney Young was used as a trough for kneading bread. Analysis of the Late Phrygian ceramics at Gordion has established steady continuity in terms of vessel shapes since the Early Phrygian period. Open shapes represent about half of the pottery, and are made 39

41 42 43 44 40

Cahill 2000, 180. DeVries 1990, 375. Young 1966, 270; Sams 1995, 1152, Sams 1997, 242. Young 1960, 242; Young 1962, 165; Young 1968, 238. DeVries 1990, 375. Young 1953, 30, and fig. 23. 46

Cooking and Dining in Late Phrygian Gordion up predominantly of bowls; among the most popular closed shapes were trefoil and everted rim jugs, which were used both for serving liquids and as containers for different foods and household items. The main storage shape was the large jar with an offset rim, which probably held a lid. Among the new trends in LP ceramics were pattern burnishing, red banding, red-painted motifs on Dotted Triangle Ware, and various imitations of elements belonging to western Anatolian ceramic traditions. Perhaps as a result of their connections with the Greek world, Gordionites seem to have drunk more wine than beer in the LP. Yet based on continuity of vessel shapes, cooking installations and archaeobotanical data, there is no evidence of considerable changes in diet. Meals, predominantly soups and stews, were cooked in deep one-handled cooking pots. Probably meat was additionally grilled on spits and bread was baked in ovens. It seems that despite all the political changes and cultural interactions in the LP, on the level of everyday life the Phrygians followed long-standing traditions. Only a small numbers of foreign shapes penetrated the Gordion market; these were rivaled by local imitations of these shapes and adapted to Phrygian dining traditions and tastes.

BIBLIOGRAPHY Cahill, N. 2000 “Lydian Houses, Domestic Assemblages, and Household Size”, in: D. Hopkins (ed.), Across the Anatolian Plateau: Readings of the Archaeology of Ancient Turkey, Annual of the American Schools of Oriental Research 57, 173–185. DeVries, K. 1980 “Greeks and Phrygians in the Early Iron Age”, in: K. DeVries (ed.), From Athens to Gordion. Papers of a Memorial Symposium for Rodney S. Young. The University Museum: University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, 33–49. 1990 “The Gordion Excavation Seasons of 1969–1973 and Subsequent Research”, American Journal of Archaeology 94, 3, 371–406. 1997 “The Attic Pottery from Gordion”, in: J. Oakley, W. Coulson and O. Palagia (eds.), Athenian Potters and Painters, Oxbow Monograph 67, 447–455. 2007 “The Date of the Destruction Level at Gordion: Imports and the Local Sequence”, in: A. Çilingiroğlu and A. Sagona (eds.), Anatolian Iron Ages 6: Proceedings of the Sixth Anatolian Iron Ages Colloquium held at Eskişehir, 16–20 August 2004, 79–101. 2008 “The Age of Midas at Gordion and Beyond”, Ancient Near Eastern Studies 45, 30–64. DeVries, K., Kuniholm, P. I., Sams, G. K. and Voigt, M. 2003 “New Dates for Iron Age Gordion”, Antiquity 77, 296, http://www.antiquity.ac.uk/ant/077/296/default.htm DeVries, K., Sams, G .K. and Voigt, M. 2005 “Gordion re-dating”, in: A. Çilingiroğlu and G. Darbyshire (eds.), Anatolian Iron Ages 5: Proceedings of the Fifth Anatolian Iron Ages Colloquium held at Van, 6–10 August 2001, British Institute at Ankara, Monograph 31, London, 45-6. Gordion Field Notebook 74 1958 Unpublished. Grave, P., Kealhofer, L., Marsh, B., Sams, G. K., Voigt, M. and DeVries, K. 2009 “Ceramic Production and Provenience at Gordion, Central Anatolia”, Journal of Archaeological Science 36, 2162–2176. 47

Galya D. Bacheva Gürtekin-Demir, G. 2007 “Provincial Production of Lydian Painted Pottery”, in: A. Çilingiroğlu and A. Sagona (eds.), Anatolian Iron Ages 6: Proceedings of the Sixth Anatolian Iron Ages Colloquium held at Eskişehir, 16–20 August 2004, 47–77. Henrickson, R. 1993 “Politics, Economics, and Ceramic Continuity at Gordion in the Late Second and First Millennia B.C.”, in: Social and Cultural Contexts of New Ceramic Technologies. Ceramics and Civilization 6, 89–176. 1994 “Continuity and Discontinuity in the Ceramic Tradition of Gordion During the Iron Age”, in: Proceedings of the Third Anatolian Iron Ages Colloquium. An International Colloquium at Van, 6–12 August 1990. Ankara, British Institute of Archaeology, 95–129. 1997 “Major Trends in the Ceramic Industries at Gordion during YHSS 5–2”, Anatolica 23, 14–19. 2001 “The Craft of the Early Phrygian Potter”, Türk Arkeoloji ve Etnografya Dergisi, 2, 35–46. Henrickson, R. and Blackman, M. J. 1996 “Large-scale Production of Pottery at Gordion: Comparison of the Late Bronze and Early Phrygian Industries”, Paléorient 22, 1, 67–87. Lawall, M. 2010 “Pontic, Aegean and Levantine Amphoras at Gordion”, in: D. KAssap Tezgöre and N. Inaishvili, PATABS I. Production and Trade of Amphorae in the Black Sea, Actes de la Tabla Ronde international de Batoumi et Trabzon, 27-29 Avril 2006 (Vaira Anatolica 21), İstanbul, 159-165. Marston, J. 2010 Evaluating Risk, Sustainability, and Decision Making in Agricultural and Land-Use Strategies at Ancient Gordion (unpublished PhD dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles). McGovern, P. 2000 “The Funerary Banquet of “King Midas”, Expedition 42, 1, 21–29. McGovern, P., Glusker, D., Moreau, R., Nuñez, A., Beck, C., Simpson, E., Butrym, E., Exner, L. and Stout, E. 1999 “A Funerary Feast Fit for King Midas”, Nature 402, 863–864. Miller, N. 2010 Botanical Aspects of Environment and Economy at Gordion, Turkey. Gordion Special Studies 5, Museum Monograph 131. University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology, Philadelphia. Miller, N., Zeder, M. and Arter, S. 2009 “From Food and Fuel to Farms and Flocks”, Current Anthropology 50, 6, 915–924. Muscarella, O. 2003 “The Date of the Destruction of the Early Phrygian Period at Gordion”, Ancient West and East 2, 225–252. Rose, B. and Darbyshire, G. (eds.) 2011 The New Chronology of Iron Age Gordion. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology. Sams, G. K. 1977 “Beer in the city of Midas”, Archaeology 30, 108–115. 1979 “Imports at Gordion: Lydian and Persian Periods”, Expedition, 21, 6–17. 1994 The Gordion Excavations, 1950–1973: Final Reports Volume 4: The Early Phrygian Pottery, Philadelphia. 1995 “Midas of Gordion and the Anatolian Kingdom of Phrygia”, in: J. Sasson (ed.), Civilizations of the Ancient Near East, Volume 2, 1147–1159. 1997 “Gordion and the Kingdom of Phrygia”, in: Frigi e Frigio, Atti del 1o Simposio Internazionale Roma, 16–17 ottobre 1995, 239–248. 48

Cooking and Dining in Late Phrygian Gordion Stewart, S. 2010 Gordion After the Knot: Hellenistic Pottery and Culture (unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati). Toteva, G. D. 2007 Local Cultures of Late Achaemenid Anatolia (unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis). 2009 “Phrygian Gordion in Achaemenid Context”, BAR International Series 1900, 380–386. Voigt, M. 2009 “The Chronology of Phrygian Gordion”, in: Tree-rings, Kings and Old World Archaeology and Environment: Papers Presented in Honor of Peter Ian Kuniholm, 219–237. Young, R. 1953 “Progress at Gordion, 1951–1952”, University Museum Bulletin 17, 4, 3–39. 1956 “Summary of Archaeological Work in Turkey in 1955. Gordion”, Anatolian Studies 6, 17–23. 1956a “The Campaign of 1955 at Gordion: Preliminary Report”, American Journal of Archaeology 60, 249–66. 1957 “Gordion 1956: Preliminary Report”, American Journal of Archaeology 61, 4, 319–331. 1957a “Summary of Archaeological Work in Turkey in 1956. Gordion”, Anatolian Studies 7, 15–18. 1960 “The Gordion Campaign of 1959: Preliminary Report”, American Journal of Archaeology 64, no. 3, 227– 243. 1962 “The 1961 Campaign at Gordion”, American Journal of Archaeology 66, 2, 153–168. 1964 “The 1963 Campaign at Gordion”, American Journal of Archaeology 68, 3, 279–292. 1966 “The Gordion Campaign of 1965”, American Journal of Archaeology 70, 3, 267–278. 1968 “The Gordion Campaign of 1967”, American Journal of Archaeology 72, 3, 231–241. 1974 “Gordion 1973”, Anatolian Studies 24, 31–32.

49

Cooking and Dining in Late Phrygian Gordion Galya D. Bacheva

Fig. 1: Carinated bowl with pattern burnishing, d = 20 cm. Trench NCT-A3, context bag 1b. Foundry. Drawing by Samuel Holzman.

263

Galya D. Bacheva

Fig. 2: Banded bowl, d = 17 cm. Trench ETC-2, context bag 7. Building E. Drawing by Samuel Holzman.

Fig. 3: Dinos, d = 22 cm. Dotted Triangle Ware.Gordion Museum, 12392 P 5512. Drawing by author.

264