(Eleni Hasaki) CeCeramic Kilns in Ancient Greece: Technology and Organization of Ceramic Workshopsramic Kilns of Ancient Greece
(Eleni Hasaki) CeCeramic Kilns in Ancient Greece: Technology and Organization of Ceramic Workshopsramic Kilns of Ancient Greece
(Eleni Hasaki) CeCeramic Kilns in Ancient Greece: Technology and Organization of Ceramic Workshopsramic Kilns of Ancient Greece
I,
Eleni Hasaki
hereby submit this as part of the requirements for the degree of:
Classics
It is entitled:
Approved by:
Diane Harris-Cline
Charles Brian Rose
Jack L. Davis
Barbara Burrell
Panos Valavanis
Committee Chair:
Outside Reader:
ABSTRACT
The present study constitutes a literary, iconographical, technological, and typological
analysis of ceramic kilns in ancient Greece. More than four hundred and fifty kilns dating from
Early Bronze Age to the Byzantine times from the modern state of Greece have been surveyed
and categorized.
(krivbano"), and fou'rno" (terms connected primarily with bread ovens) as synonyms to
kavmino". The iconographical reexamination of the representations of kilns on the Archaic
Penteskoufia plaques suggested that their use as test pieces might account for the irregularities in
the structure and execution level of their scenes.
Chapter II presents all the structural parts (fixed and movable) of a standard, twochambered, updraft Greek kiln. The firing process and it fuel requirements are estimated using
ethnographic and experimental data. An Excursus on various pyrotechnological structures such
as the baking oven, the metallurgical furnace, or the lime kiln, highlights the similarities and
differences in the construction and performance of these structures. A comparative approach not
only spells away the prolongued confusion about their operative mechanisms, but also
emphasizes the pyrotechnological interdependence of the practicioners of these crafts. Ceramic
workshops tend to develop in industrial quarters along other crafts. Their presence in sanctuaries
is very limited, and their association with cemeteries should be viewed as a coincidence rather
than as a conscious choice.
In the typological chapter (III), the kilns are distinguished according to the shape of the
combustion chamber (circular and rectangular) and into nine subtypes according to the
arrangement of the support of the perforated floor. A central circular or rectangular support of
the perforated floor is the commonest type. Other types are attested mainly, but not exclusively
in certain periods and areas of Greece. The larger rectangular kilns, although fewer, point to
more specialized production, able to afford their costly operation.
The earliest updraft kilns with an intermediate perforated floor appear in the Middle
Bronze Age. Their design remains stable throughout antiquity. In the historical periods, the
comparisons among periods from Geometric to Byzantine are based on typology, size, and
ii
density of types. Overall, there is a slow progression towards more and slightly bigger kilns in
every period within each workshop.
The size of the kiln is also used as a yardstick to estimate the volume of ceramic
production. Medium workshops with one to two kilns and with a full-time crew of four to six
persons can be reconstructed based on a potters daily production and the capacity of a kiln
operating full-time. Such workshops correspond to the workshop industry of craft
specialization categories.
iii
iv
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The completion of a dissertation is an interesting combination of personal dedication
together with communal effort of many people who graciously have contributed to its
formation and have knowingly or unknowingly affected its development.
At the University of Athens, I thank Profs. A. Lemos, O. Palagia, and E. SimantoniBournia for instilling in me the love for archaeology and their dedication to teaching young
students. Later on at the University of Cincinnati, in the Burnam Classics Library (also known
as the Home) my professors A. Christopherson, G. Cohen, K. Gutzwiller, A. Michelini, H. Parker,
and G. Walberg introduced me to many unknown areas and broadened my horizons which
made the longer stay a definitely beneficial experience. The continuous support of the Fulbright
Fellowship, the Taft Graduate Fellowship and the summer grants of C. Boulter and M. Rawson as
well as the University Research Summer Grant enabled me to carry out my research in Greece.
During the years 1998-2000 I had the honor to participate in the ASCSA program as a
Virginia Grace and H. A. Thompson Fellow and to conduct my research in the perfect
environment. The Director of the School Prof. J. Muhly, Profs. R. Stroud, M. Langdon,
Stephen Tracey, and B. Burke, R. Bridges, M. Pilali, and T. Elemam facilitated immensely
my research through encouragement, scholarly input, and practical advice. While in Athens
I had the privilege to develop fruitful discussions with Ian Whitbread, Director of the
Fitch Laboratory of the British School at Athens. Prof. V. Kilikoglou, at the Demokritos
Institute was always willing to read the sections on archaeological sciences and exchange
ideas.
In terms of library assistance, one could not hope for a better combination: since my
first year in Cincinnati I was fortunate to work with the extraordinary librarians J.
Wellington and M. Braunlin as well as their equally conscientious assistants. At the ASCSA
N. Winter combined in one person the helpful librarian and the academic mentor
regarding production issues of architectural terracottas. A. Ziskowski, M. Raftopoulou, and
P. Kyriakopoulou offered me valuable help when needed.
Outside the nurturing environment of academia, and when faced with 500 cases of
kilns, mainly unpublished, I was extremely fortunate to have a wonderful collaboration with
the archaeologists of the local ephorates in Greece, who, despite their hectic schedules, still
found time to consult old notebooks and provide generously the information I was interested
in. Many warm thanks to E. Baziotopoulou-Valavani, Kaza-Papageorgiou, K. PrekaAlexandri (G v Ephorate), A. Doulgeri-Intzesiloglou, V. Adrimi-Sismani (ID v Ephorate);
M. Petropoulos, L. Papakosta, and M. Sotiropoulou (ST v Ephorate); X. Arapoyianni,
O. Karagiorga (Z v Ephorate); S. Spyropoulos (E v Ephorate); E. Pappa, E. Psarra (D v
Ephorate); E. Grammatikaki, A. Lebessi (Herakleion Ephorate); Y. Tsakos, Y.
Kourayos (KA v Ephorate); D. Skorda (I v Ephorate); F. Dakoronia, T. Bougia (IG
Ephorate) and E. Sapouna-Sakellaraki (IA' Ephorate); D. Kourkoumelis (Enalion
Ephorate). The following people kindly shared with me unpublished results of their research:
B. Demierre, V. Cracolici, H. Elton, W. Loomis, A. McLoughlin, A. Penttinen, P. Petridis,
E. Psarra, D. Skorda, and C. Zerner.
The directors of excavations of the foreign archaeological schools also facilitated my
access to notebooks, photographic material and plans of the kilns. I thank Profs. H. Kyrieleis,
U. Sinn and A. Martin (for Olympia); S. Schmidt (for Eretria); G. Rizza (for Prinias);
Prof. J. Jameson for the excavation of the modern kiln at Porto-Cheli by F. Matson.
And especially Prof. Stephen Miller for the kilns at Nemea.
I feel deeply obliged to the staff of the Corinth Excavations, Director G. Sanders
and Asst. Director N. Bookidis, not only for their warm hospitality, but also for answering
my numerous questions about the Tile Works and other kilns at ancient Corinth. The
Emeritus Director C.K. Williams, II, believed in my project from our first meeting and
has generously offered his comments and advice since then. M. Roebuck and G.S.
Merker supplied me with additional information about the Tile Works. The excavation team
at Kommos directed by Profs. J. Shaw and M. Shaw together with the pottery analyst A.
Van Den Moortel presented to me the manuscript of the Kommos monograph before its
publication (see now Shaw et al. 2001).
Once the material was collected, it fell upon long-standing friends and colleagues to
point out obscure references, accompany me to kilns (some of not so early in date!!) keep my
head off water when I thought I was drowning, go for long coffees where the topic of
conservation was of little importance. It is my honor to return inadequate thanks for
valuable advice to the following professors and colleagues A. Ajootian, E. Athanassopoulou,
F. Blond, S. Klinger, O. Kouka, T. Kozelj, E. Landridge, M. Lawall, Y. Lolos, W. Loomis,
vi
vii
In the last semester of completing this study in my new position at the University
of Arizona at Tucson, faculty and staff gave me the necessary support for the last stretch. Special
thanks to my Head Prof. Mary Voyatzis for creating an unobstructed environment and for
her steadfast belief in me. Profs. D. Killick and F. Romer, Eleni Saltourides and Hale
Thomas saved the day in critical moments. A vibrant friend, the artist Paulus Lucky
Musters, proved to be an excellent host in the new town. His enthusiasm about kilns and
furnaces was always welcome. Kianoosh Haghighi just made everything happen with his
smile and kindness.
The long standing friends, Costas Voyatzis and Karam Chatha, have been
treasuries to have during my entire stay in the United States. A discrete thank you to a
valuable friend, V. Tzerpos for his encouragement and support at the very beginning of it
all back in 1992-93. An unusual, but highly necessary eucaristw v, to a team of highly
skilled and devoted medical doctors, V. Georgoulis, Th. Kanaghinis, N. Dovas, and
especially to K. Karlaftis who literally held my hand at many difficult times. They know
why.
Finally my warmest thanks to my dissertation committee: my chair, Diane HarrisCline; although we were in different states or continents for most of my dissertation, she was
always there with her infallible support, sound advice, and enthusiasm. Her teaching and
scholarly achievements have set a high standard for me and I am so glad that our paths
crossed even for a short period of time. Sincere thanks to Jack Davis, for his great impact on
my graduate career as a graduate advisor. I thank him for pushing to the limits my thinking in
his seminars; the reassuring sound of his boots walking down the corridor was always a sign
that things will go well. He followed this dissertation with continuous interest and
constructive criticisms. I cannot thank enough Brian Rose with his outstanding lectures and
his inspiring academic and personal talents. He generously provided unlimited help when it
was most needed. Barbara Burrell smoothly steered this project through the final
bureaucratic Scyllas and I am thankful to her. My gratitude to the outside reader, Prof. Panos
Valavanis who, with his ethics and deep understanding of ceramic workshops, stood by this
dissertation a solid pillar of encouragement and inspiration.
viii
And of course, a wink and a smile to my best friend, Irene Thanassoulia, for her
interest in movies and pupper theaters which kept me sane all these years. She stood by me
as the sister I never had, but I wished I had. Her company in operation rooms, in traditional
kilns, and at noisy brick factories are only a sample of all the times she was there with love,
understanding, and support.
This work is dedicated to my parents, Maria and Tzonako, the two people without
whom nothing would have happened. Although they will not be able to understand what I
have written, I hope they can understand how much I respect and love them.
ix
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Abstract.............................................................................................................................................i
Acknowledgments ...........................................................................................................................iv
List of Tables ...................................................................................................................................xi
List of Plates ....................................................................................................................................xiii
Introduction......................................................................................................................................1
Chapter I
The Ceramic Kiln in Ancient Art and Literature ..................................................................29
Artistic Representations ........................................................................................................31
Uncertain Representations of Kilns ......................................................................................51
Literary Terms.......................................................................................................................54
Chapter II
The Ceramic Kiln: Its Architecture and Function.................................................................70
Building a Kiln ......................................................................................................................71
The Structural Parts of a Ceramic Kiln................................................................................77
Firing a Kiln..........................................................................................................................102
Excursus
Alike Yet Different: Ceramic Kilns vs. Other Pyrotechnological Structures .............112
The Baking Oven...................................................................................................................115
The Lime Kiln........................................................................................................................121
The Bath Furnace..................................................................................................................125
The Glass Furnace ................................................................................................................127
The Metallurgical Furnace ...................................................................................................129
Minor Firing Structures........................................................................................................134
Chapter III
Typological Classification of Greek Kilns...............................................................................139
Old and New Typologies .......................................................................................................142
Circular and Pear-shaped Kilns .............................................. ..........................................152
Rectangular Kilns ...............................................................................................................165
General Typological Observations ......................................................................................177
Chapter IV
The Predecessors of Historical Kilns: Neolithic Ovens to Late Bronze Age Kilns ............186
Neolithic Ovens .....................................................................................................................189
Early Bronze Age Kilns.........................................................................................................195
Middle Bronze Age Kilns ......................................................................................................199
Late Bronze Age Kilns...........................................................................................................201
Chapter V
The Historical Kilns: Geometric Through Byzantine Periods..............................................219
Submycenaean and Geometric Kilns ....................................................................................220
Archaic Kilns.........................................................................................................................225
Classical Kilns ......................................................................................................................230
Hellenistic to Byzantine Kilns...............................................................................................234
Undated Kilns .......................................................................................................................246
General Chronological Survey .............................................................................................247
Chapter VI
The Kiln, The Ceramic Workshop, and The Ancient City....................................................251
Defining a Workshop ...........................................................................................................252
Identifying a Workshop .........................................................................................................257
Categorizing a Workshop: Specialization of Production ....................................................264
The Ceramic Workshop in the Ancient City .........................................................................285
Epilogue ...........................................................................................................................................296
Catalogue of Geometric through Classical Kilns..........................................................................319
References .........................................................................................................................................362
Appendix I: List of Bronze Age and Hellenistic through Byzantine Kilns.................................408
Appendix II: Concordance to Seifert's (1993) List of Ancient Greek Kilns...............................429
Appendix III: Penteskoufia Plaques depicting Kilns....................................................................434
Plates .................................................................................................................................................453
xi
LIST OF TABLES
Table Intro.1
Table Intro.2
Table I.1
Table II.1
Table II.2
Table II.3
Table Exc.1
Table III.1
Table III.2
Table III.3
Table III.4
Table III.5
Table III.6
Table III.7
Table III.8
Table III.9
Table III.10
Table III.11
Table III.12
Table III.13
Table III.14
Table III.15
Table IV.1
Table IV.2
Table V.1
xii
Table V.2
Table VI.1
Table VI.2
Table VI.3
Table VI.4
Table VI.5
Table VI.6
Table VI.7
Time schedule to prepare and fire the roof of a treasury building at the East
kiln (65) at Tile Works at ancient Corinth.
Table VI.8
Table VI.9
Table Epil.1
Table Epil.2
Table Epil.3
Table Epil.4
xiii
LIST OF PLATES
Plate I.1
Plate I.2
Plate I.3
Plate I.4
Plate I.5
Plate 1.6
Plate I.7
Plate I.8
Plate I.9
Plate I.10
Plate I.11
Representations of kilns.
a. Terracotta model from the Potters Quarter at ancient Corinth (KN 131);
b. Hydria attributed to the Leagros Group (Munich, Staatliche
Antikensammlungen 1717).
Plate I.12
Plate II.1
xiv
Plate II.2
Different methods for firing pottery a. pit firing (after Rice 1986); b.
horizontal kiln firing (after Rye 1981); c-d. so-called horizontal kilns from
ancient Palestine (after Wood 1990). Scale applies only to d.
Plate II.3
Plate II.4
Plate II.5
Plate II.6
Two reconstructions of the Penteskoufia plaque F893 [after Noble 1988, fig.
238 (top) and after Jena Painter 1996, fig. 11].
Plate II.7
Plate II.8
Plate II.9
Plate II.10
Roman kiln at Gortys, Arcadia (337) preserving the perforated floor and the
system of supporting arms.
Plate II.11
Plate II.12
Different types of stacking supports. Part I. a-b. from the Athenian Agora
(after Papadopoulos J. 1992); c. Tripods from ancient Corinth and the
Athenian Agora; d-e. Types of supports from ancient Corinth (drawings by
author). Reconstructions A (after Kalogeropoulou 1970) and B (after
Papanikola-Bakirtzi 1987) of their use inside the kiln.
Plate II.13
xv
Plate II.14
Plate II.15
Plate II.16
Plate II.17
Plate Exc.1
Plate Exc.2
Plate Exc.3
Fifth century B.C. model of oven from Boeotia (Berlin, Staatliche Museen
31644) (after Sparkes and Talcott 1958).
Plate Exc.4
Plate Exc.5
Plate Exc.6
Plate Exc.7
Plate Exc.8
a. Glass furnaces at Tell El Amarna, ca. 1400 B.C. (after Jackson et al.
1998); b. Late Roman glass workshop in Rome (after Sagui 2000).
Plate Exc.9
Plate Exc.10
xvi
Plate Exc.11
Plate Exc.12
Plate Exc.13
Plate Exc.14
Plate Exc.15
Plate III.1
Plate III.2
Plate III.3
Plate III.4
Plate III.5
Kilns with a central wall from ancient Syria and Palestine (after Delcroix
and Huot 1972).
Plate III.6
Archaic circular kiln at Prinias with two parallel walls (36) (after Rizza et al.
1992).
Plate III.7
Circular kilns with benches: Dodona (10), Achladia (146), Palaikastro (150).
Plate III.8
Plate III.9
Plate III.10
Plate III.11
Plate III.12
Traditional rectangular kilns from Cos (above) and Chios (after Psaropoulou
1986).
xvii
Plate III.13
Plate III.14
Plate III.15
Plate III.16
Plate III.17
Plate IV.1
Plate IV.2
Plate IV.3
Middle Helladic kilns: Lerna (96), Sparta (101-102), Kirrha (104-106). The
scale applies only to the plans.
Plate IV.4
Plate IV.5
Kiln sites on Crete (with the addition of the later production center,
Thrapsano).
Plate IV.6
Plate IV.7
Plans and sections of the Late Minoan IB kiln at Agia Triadha (143).
Plate IV.8
Plate IV.9
Late Minoan IIIA Potters' Quarter at Gouves, Herakleion (after HatziVallianou 1996).
Plate IV.10
Plate IV.11
Plate IV.12
xvii
Plate IV.13
Sizes of Prehistoric kilns (all in the same scale). a. Agia Triadha (143); b.
Dimini (116); c. Achladia (148).
Plate IV.14
Plate IV.15
Mycenaean kilns: Aigeira (108), Berbati (111), Dimini (116), Pylos (114),
Thebes (115), Velestino (117).
Plate IV.16
Plate IV.17
Plate V.1
Plans of Geometric kilns (all in the same scale): Amorgos (13), Athens (01),
Dodona (10), Phaistos (12), Torone (11).
Plate V.2
Plate V.3
Plate V.4
Plans of Archaic kilns. Aigion (18), Knossos (27), Lato (28-30), Phari (2526), Prinias (31-36).
Plate V.5
Plate V.6
Plate V.7
Plate V.8
Plate V.9
The sanctuary of Zeus at Nemea. Plan of the kilns area in relationship to the
Xenon and the Basilica (composite plan by the author on Millers 1975 site
plan).
Plate V.10
Plate V.11
Plate V.12
Plate V.13
Plate V.14
xix
Plate V.15
Plate V.16
Plate V.17
Plate V.18
Plate V.19
Plate VI.1
Plate VI.2
Site plan of the Tile Works, ancient Corinth (64-65). Courtesy of the
American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Corinth Excavations.
Plate VI.3
Section plans of the East kiln at the Tile Works, ancient Corinth (64-65).
Courtesy of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Corinth
Excavations.
Plate VI.4
The East kiln at the Tile Works, ancient Corinth (65). Courtesy of the
American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Corinth Excavations.
Plate VI.5
Plate VI.6
Estimations of time requirements for the East kiln at the Tile Works to fire
roofs of buildings of various sizes.
Plate VI.7
Plate VI.8
Plate VI.9
Plate VI.10
Plate VI.11
xx
Plate VI.12
Plate VI.13
Plate VI.14
Plate VI.15
xxi
INTRODUCTION
_____________________________________________
INTRODUCTION
INTRODUCTION
_____________________________________________
forming techniques, decoration, distribution, and consumption), the study of the ceramic
kilns as structures and as sources of information about ceramic production has managed to
"fall through the cracks."1 The main purpose of this dissertation is to investigate the Greek
ceramic kilns as a group of technological structures and to analyze the technological,
economic, and social aspects of a ceramic kiln and its surrounding workshop.
The present study focuses on the third major stage of ceramic production (following
clay collection and pot-forming), the firing, and its physical center, the ceramic kiln. Not
only is the kiln one of the four major fields of ancient ceramic technology (i.e. raw materials,
tools, techniques, facilities), but also all the technological choices made in the other fields
aim at the best performance of the pot inside the kiln during the firing (Table Intro. 1).
RAW
MATERIAL
TOOLS
TECHNIQUES
FORMING
DECORATING (glazes)
FIRING
FACILITIES
SETTLING BASINS
KILNS
For ceramic ecology, see Rice (ed.) 1984; for forming a vessel, see Schreiber 1999 with
earlier bibliography; Stissi 1999a on issues of production and distribution of Archaic and
Classical pottery.
INTRODUCTION
_____________________________________________
Ceramic kilns" has been chosen deliberately as a term over the more familiar term
"pottery kilns" in order to highlight the fact that other types of terracotta objects, such as roof
tiles, bathtubs, water pipes, well rings2, and funeral sarcophagi, also required a kiln to be
fired. These objects tend to be forgotten as the result of the prolonged emphasis by
archaeologists on ancient decorated fine pottery.
This dissertation aims to accomplish three main goals:
a. To provide a detailed description of a ceramic kiln, the kavmino", as understood
from the iconographical and literary sources (Ch. I: "The Ceramic Kiln in Ancient Art
and Literature"), as well as from the archaeological and technological points of view, in
order to explain more clearly the kilns function, its economic impact, and the time
requirements for the potting process (Ch. II: "The Ceramic Kiln: Its Architecture and
Function"). An excursus ("Alike, Yet Different: The Ceramic Kiln vs. Other
Pyrotechnological Structures") serves both as a reminder of how often ceramic kilns are
mistaken for other structures and as a guide for correct identification of the
archaeological remains. This shared pyrotechnological knowledge which accounts for
this confusion also highlights the interdependence of the practitioners of such crafts
centered around the use of fire.
For a good example of well-rings, see 46-50, Patreos St. in Patras [ADelt 32 (1977) 89, pl.
63c].
INTRODUCTION
_____________________________________________
IV: "The Predecessors of Historical Kilns: Neolithic Ovens to Late Bronze Age Kilns";
Ch. V: "The Historical Kilns: Geometric through Byzantine Periods", Catalogue, and
Appendix I). Moving one step beyond the logical assumption that kilns are everywhere
in Greece, the present study sets out to substantiate this assumption with specific
examples, to show in which regions of Greece kilns existed, and to single out areas with
strong concentrations of kilns.
Based on this extensive body of material, a typology can be built for the Greek kilns
for the first time on a comprehensive scale, so that the excavation of new kilns can be
incorporated into this system of types (Ch. III: "Typological Classification of Greek
Kilns"). Through this typological arrangement certain regional preferences become
noticeable. In addition, coordination of the Greek typology with existing classification
systems from other Mediterranean countries (e.g. France, Italy, Britain), offers the
potential of exploring not only regional, but also cultural preferences in types of kilns.
For the potter's wheel, see Rieth 1960; Cuomo Di Caprio 1995; Hadji-Vallianou 1997;
Triantaphyllidis 2000a. Brodie (1997, 69) encourages the researchers of chemical clay
compositions to improve their results by checking them against geological and
archaeological data.
INTRODUCTION
_____________________________________________
Finally, archaeologists will be able to compare unprovenanced material with that from a
secure local provenance of excavated or detected kilns and to attribute a more reliable
geographical provenance to their pottery assemblages. The degree of similarity or
difference between kilns from various periods and areas of Greece can indicate that
imitations and/or exchange of technological knowledge occurred not only in vessel shape
and decoration, but also in kiln construction.4
Second, the kiln constitutes one of the most secure criteria for identifying a ceramic
workshop and can function as a reliable measurement unit of intensity of production (Ch.
VI: "The Kiln, the Workshop, and the Ancient City"). The standard time required for
each firing (ca. 10-12 hours) and cooling-off (one to two days), the kiln's capacity, and
its restricted operational season (during the potting season from April to October) enable
us to estimate the volume of production in an ancient ceramic workshop. Such
estimations set severe limits on the reconstructed sizes for large-scale ancient Greek
pottery workshops that have been previously suggested and point instead to medium size
workshops with one or three kilns. Finally, identification of local pottery through study
of material from kiln sites will enable archaeologists to distinguish it from imported
pottery, assess better the strength of the economy of the ancient Greek cities, and gain a
more realistic understanding of the extent of imports and the presumed trade
relationships.
Broekmans et al. (1999) note that wares, which were classified in the art-historical record
as "imitations", were sometimes proved in scientific analyses to require the same, if not more
advanced, technological skills as those involved in the manufacture of the originals.
INTRODUCTION
_____________________________________________
The focus of the scholarship on ancient Greek pottery production has developed in a
reverse order compared to the order in the manufacturing process: first on the final products
(the ceramics), on their destinations (trade) and last on the workshops themselves, whereas
during manufacture everything starts from and at the workshops. Greek pottery, especially
the glazed fine wares, has been one of the best-studied fields in Classical archaeology.5 The
standard books by J. Beazley on the Attic black-figure (ABV) and red-figure vase-painters
(ARV) and extensive museum catalogues (Corpus Vasorum Antiquorum-CVA) have
categorized the enormous volume of ancient vases.6 Beazley, merely by looking at pots in
museums, reconstructed a vivid Athenian Kerameikos with many potters, including
"masters" and "followers" who set the trends in pottery production in Attica and across
ancient Greece.7 Attic pottery in turn has been used as the reference criterion for the study
This overview highlights only the main trends in the literature of ancient Greek pottery
studies. Relevant works (with detailed discussions and extensive bibliography) are cited in
the footnotes in chronological order.
6
Crielaard et al. (1999) dedicated several overview chapters to the history of pottery studies
in the Mediterranean and the remaining unsolved issues. See especially Stissi's contribution
(Stissi 1999a) on the Archaic and Classical periods.
7 Robertson (1982) has attempted posthumously to define Beazley's reconstructed
relationships between master painters and followers and the related terms. Kurtz 1985a,
1985b, von Bothmer 1987, and Oakley 1999 offer a historical account of the study of vase
painting and a critical assessment of Beazley's contribution. Recently Rouet 2001 discussed
the contribution of Beazley and Pottier to the study of ancient Greek vase-painting.
INTRODUCTION
_____________________________________________
of the remaining Greek and related pottery from other sites. Theories on the function of
ancient pottery workshops, their structure, organization of labor, and volume of production
have been formulated based on these catalogues.8
Studying pottery for its artistic merits dominated the scholarship during most of the
20th century. Scholars looked only to pots to find the answers to all the questions involving
the entire process of pottery production, and generally did not investigate the excavated
physical remains of pottery workshops in their urban contexts. Until the 1980s, even the
term "workshop" referred to a group of ceramic materials that shared common stylistic
characteristics, overlooking any references to architectural remains of a manufacturing site.
The introductory books on Greek pottery dedicate only a few paragraphs to the
manufacturing technique for ancient vases. Whereas the chemical effects during the
different stages of firing on Athenian glaze have been extensively studied, scholars
continued to rely solely on the evidence from the Penteskoufia plaques in restoring an
ancient Greek kiln, even as recently as 1997.9
Our information on kilns themselves derives from three main sources:
archaeological investigation of ancient kilns, scientific studies conducted on kilns or on
material from kilns, and ethnographic research on modern-day pottery workshops. It was the
conscious detachment from the style-based study of pots that truly advanced our knowledge
of ancient kilns and prompted the excavation of actual workshops, the loci of production.
Noble 1988; Sparkes 1991, 21-6, fig. II.7; Cook 1997, 231-7, fig. 235; Scheibler (1995, fig.
93), does, however, include a photograph of an actual ceramic kiln from Classical Olympia.
For a discussion on the composition of Athenian black glaze and previous theories, see
Noble 1988, 79-98.
INTRODUCTION
_____________________________________________
During the late 1970s and 1980s, scientific methods were used increasingly to determine the
sources of raw material, qualities of various tempering agents, and firing temperatures.
Scientific and ethnographic research, conducted on the pottery itself for an understanding of
the forming of the pots, triggered this interest in excavating ancient workshops. In the late
1980s the pottery analysts, recovering from the Beazley attribution approach, started
considering issues of personnel, production, and specialization.10 In the past two decades
(1980-2000), all four types of pottery studies (stylistic, scientific, archaeological, and
ethnographic) have been combined in order to achieve a fuller appreciation of ancient pottery
production.
In the following pages, I will first discuss the ethnographic literature, then the
scientific advancements, and finally the archaeological research, which forms the core of this
dissertation. Since all three fields of investigation largely overlap in their development and
have exercised mutual influences, the adopted way of presentation moves us gradually
backwards in time, from modern times to antiquity.
a. Ethnography-Ethnoarchaeology
The field of ethnoarchaeology, the study of contemporary societies that resemble
ancient ones with a view to answering questions about the latter, was established only in the
10
INTRODUCTION
_____________________________________________
beginning of the 20th century, as an offshoot of ethnography.11 Yet it did not acquire
branches until the middle of the century, and the works of Hampe and Winter belong to this
revived interest in traditional societies.
Systematic ethnographic work on modern pottery workshops in Greece and on
Cyprus was carried out in the 1960s by R. Hampe and A. Winter (1962, 1965).12 Even then,
researchers only recorded the activities of traditional potters in the form of a travelers
journal, without attempting to relate them to ancient ceramic production, or to perform any
quantitative or technological analysis. They were mainly interested in how pots were formed
and in family relationships, probably having been influenced by Beazley's reconstruction of
families of potters.
Not until the early 1980s did scholars take an active interest in the few remaining
craftsmen communities in Greece and Cyprus, aware that these craftsmen were threatened
with complete extinction because of the approaching industrialization. Their work
encompassed forming techniques, modes of production, and trade patterns. H. Blitzer (1990)
recorded the production and distribution of pithoi (Koroneika jars) at Messenia in the
southwest Peloponnese, after she had studied, in 1984, the Kentri community in central Crete
in a comparative ethnoarchaeological project exploring the prehistoric East Cretan White-on-
11
London 2000a. Walter Fewkes, who studied the pottery production in the American
Southwest in the early 1900s, is credited (Longacre 1991, 1) as the pioneer in ceramic
ethnoarchaeology; Skibo 1992.
12
Smaller scale ethnographic research (and of a very general character) was carried out by
Casson (1938, 1951) on the Aegean islands (Crete, Euboea, Siphnos, Skyros), on Cyprus,
and at anakkale in Turkey and by Birmingham (1967) on Amorgos. For a brief overview of
ethnographic literature, see Peacock 1982, 12-51, Ch. 3: "The ethnography of pottery
production in Europe and the Mediterranean area."
INTRODUCTION
_____________________________________________
Dark Ware.13 The itinerant potters also entered the ethnographic record through the studies
of M. Voyatzoglou on the pithos makers, known as the bandema groups, from Thrapsano
in central Crete, and the study of G. London on itinerant potters on Cyprus.14 P. Valavanis
and his team. (1990) documented the workings and spatial arrangement of a modern
workshop at Marousi, in northern Attica from where ancient potters also used to extract their
clay.15 The studies have exceeded in size the length of small articles, and recently an entire
monograph by S. Papadopoulos was dedicated to the study of traditional pottery workshops
on the northern island of Thasos.16 The studies of P. Betancourt on Crete and G. London on
Cyprus have resulted in the production of two video documentaries on these communities,
whose populations are rapidly dwindling.17
13
Blitzer 1984.
14
Voyatzoglou 1974, 1984; London 1987a, 1987b, 1989a, 1989b, 1991a, 1991b, 2000b. Day
(1989) combines ethnographic with petrographic studies for prehistoric ceramics on Crete.
Longacre (1991) and London (2000a) advocated for the need that ethnoarchaeologists record
the activities of the community under study at regular intervals, every five to ten years, to
obtain valuable, diachronic, comparative data. Biken-Tekkk (2000) presented recently an
ethnographic study on the potting community of Akky in Turkey, located south of Troy.
15
Kardulias (2000) gives a similar account of a modern potters workshop at Ermioni in the
Argolid.
16
Papadopoulos S. 1999a, 1999b. On Thasos, see also Giannopoulou 1999; Gratsia 1999;
Giannopoulou and Demesticha 1998 on the traditional potters and their workshops on
Lesbos.
17
Betancourt 1999; London 2000c. The present author (Hasaki 2001) has completed a
documentary on the traditional potting communities at Moknine in Tunisia, where pottery
production extends back in the Roman period, but which are also threatened with rapid
decline in their number.
10
INTRODUCTION
_____________________________________________
b. Scientific Studies
Archaeometric studies are the other major field where kilns have appeared
prominently as data.19 Small-scale archaeometrical tests were applied to Greek pottery in
18
19
Andreadaki-Chronaki 1999.
In this section I mention only works which either are directly relevant to Greek ceramics
or refer to ceramic kilns regardless of geographical area. For brief explanations of the
various scientific methods applied on ceramics in Greece, see Jones R. 1986a, 15-22, 82136; Rice 1987, 415-35. A recent account of the contribution of scientific methods to
ceramics can be found in Jones R. 1993. For in-depth provenance studies on sherds and
samples of clay from modern sources in Greece and Cyprus, see Jones R. 1986a. The
literature on the scientific applications in archaeology is vast and covers all areas of the
world: The journals Archaeometry [1 (1958)-present], the Journal for Archaeological
Sciences [1 (1974)-present] and the proceedings of the international Symposia on
Archaeometry (e.g. Olin and Blackman 1986, Maniatis (ed.) 1989, Archaeometry 1994,
Archaeological Science), present results of the ongoing investigations.
11
INTRODUCTION
_____________________________________________
the States in the late 1950s, but for the subsequent decades the epicenter of research was
located in England with the work of M. Tite at Oxford University.20 In Greece the first
systematic efforts to apply scientific methods to pottery studies must be credited to the
activities of the Fitch Scientific Laboratory at the British School in Athens, under the
directorship of R.E. Jones (1974-1992), I. Whitbread (1992-2001) and E. Kyriatzi (2001present).
At the beginning of the 1980s the British projects soon were joined by the newly
established archaeometry laboratory at the National Center for Scientific Research
"Demokritos" in Athens, which began its official function in 1986, although a program in
archaeometry was established a decade earlier, in 1975. During the last twenty years, the
researchers from the archaeometry laboratory have conducted analyses on the entire range of
pottery, from Neolithic to Byzantine. Similar archaeometry labs were later established in
Thessaloniki and on Rhodes in association with local universities.21
New scientific methods had been developed and refined in order to extract as much
accurate information as possible from ancient kilns and to concentrate on four major areas:
a. to detect firing (and fired) structures beneath the modern surface;
b. to use the kiln as a dating tool;
c. to determine ancient firing temperatures inside the kiln; and
20
Sayre and Dodson 1957 for neutron activation studies on samples from the Mediterranean
(Asia Minor, Greece, and Italy), four of which came from Greece.
21
The Wiener Laboratory at the American School of Classical Studies at Athens was
established in 1992 and, in its policy not to replicate research undertaken in other institutes
in Greece, concentrated less on ceramics. Exceptions are the work of S. Vaughan on
Prehistoric pottery from the Argolid, the Cyclades, and Crete, M. Moore's petrographic
analyses on coarsewares from Epirus, and G. Kakandes' study on clay resources from Attica.
12
INTRODUCTION
_____________________________________________
22
Quite early, Belsch et al. (1963) sampled forty-two fired structures from Greece (ovens,
hearths, kilns, foundries) dating from the Bronze Age through the Byzantine period, and
attempted to date them independently from pottery on which they were previously dated. See
also Archaeometric Studies of Ancient Greek and Cretan Kilns 1977 for samples taken from
the kilns on Crete (Agia Triadha, Kalo Chorio, Phaistos, Stylos, Zakros) and from Thessaly
(Dimini, Sesklo). For the geophysical prospection conducted at a workshop site at Vamvouri,
Ammoudia, on Thasos (226), see Jones R. 1986b. Many excavations of kiln sites were
prompted by magnetic prospection [e.g. the kiln at Phari on Thasos (25)]. For uses of ground
radar survey of kiln sites in Japan, see Goodman et al. 1994.
23
24
13
INTRODUCTION
_____________________________________________
their electromagnetic properties. In other words, an oven for bread used over a long period
of time can give higher readings than the normal readings for an oven and therefore can be
mistaken for a pottery kiln or a metallurgical furnace.
The kiln itself can be used as a dating tool based on the principle of
archaeomagnetism.25 When clay structures are fired over 670oC, they lose their original
geological magnetism, and adopt the magnetism of the earth at the time of firing. In other
words, time is imprinted on the walls of the kiln. Samples from kilns which were securely
dated with other criteria have served to establish a magnetic reference curve for different
regions in antiquity.26 One can use this curve in turn to date other kilns which cannot be
dated by pottery or other internal evidence. Conversely, one can learn the provenance of a
pot if its archaeomagnetic measurement (its archaeointensity) is known.27
25
This method was introduced by Thellier and Thellier (1959) and its dating accuracy is
quite high, 25 years. Thellier (1981) established the Terrestrial Magnetic Field (TMF) for
the last two millennia in France. For archaeomagnetic studies in Greece, see Liritzis and
Thomas 1980; Thomas 1981; Liritzis 1984; Aitken et al. 1989; Kovacheva et al. 2000;
Spatharas et al. 2000; cf. Barbetti and Hein 1989 for similar work conducted in ceramic kilns
in Thailand.
26
Thomas 1981; Evans and Mareschal 1989a, 1989b; Kovacheva 1989 (for Bulgaria).
Moving beyond the implications for ceramic studies, with this method one can also
determine the position of the magnetic North at various periods in antiquity elucidating thus
issues of ancient cartography and maritime travel.
27
14
INTRODUCTION
_____________________________________________
Archaeomagnetism can be applied to pottery sherds as well, if one knows their original
orientation. Kilns are preferred to pottery sherds, however, because they are permanent
structures with a fixed orientation.
Any type of permanent, undisturbed, and undisplaced fired structures can be tested
by using this method. These include architectural structures such as ovens, furnaces, burnt
houses, fired or burnt floors, furnaces of hypocaust installation, and funeral pyres. Not all
fired structures, however, are equally suitable for an archaeomagnetic study: thermal baths
and low fires are more problematic because they were fired at low temperatures.28 In
addition, samples should be taken from parts of the kilns which are still in situ, not from
collapsed walls of the kiln, because the original orientation during the time of the last firing
should be maintained.29 An eloquent proof of the versatility of the archaeomagnetic
intensity is provided by an extensive study of Gallo-Roman kilns and associated rooftiles and
other terracotta building materials: Goulpeau and Langouet (1980) were able not only to date
the tile kilns, but also to establish that the tiles were mostly fired in an upright position, and
prove that the tiles under study were fired in three different kilns.30
28
29
Harold 1960.
30 Valladas (1977) used thermoluminescence dating on a Medieval kiln for firing stoneware
at 1000C (or 1300 F). The quartz grain samples taken from the walls and floor of a kiln,
when fired, have a different ferromagnetism than the quartz contaminating the structure after
its use. The measurements, thus, refer to the very last firing inside the kiln.
15
INTRODUCTION
_____________________________________________
The underlying theory in all these methods is that clay undergoes microstructural,
mineralogical, and mechanical transformations at certain temperatures, which can be
detected by the methods above.34
31
From fresh cuts examined under the scanning electron microscope, one can establish
whether pots were fired up to initial vitrification (SEM). The only drawback to this method is
the assumption that the pots were fired until initial vitrification.
32
33
16
17
INTRODUCTION
_____________________________________________
PERIOD
TEMPERATURE
750-800
>800
NEOLITHIC
LOCATION
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Mandalo, Pella
(northern Greece)
Youni 1996
Meroussis and
Ioannidou 1999
BRONZE AGE
850> <1000C
Mandalo, Pella
>950
Mandalo, Pella
<880C
Myrtos, Crete
Warren 1972
EMIII-MMI
WHITE-ONDARK WARE
1050-1100C
Crete
MacGillivray 1987
MBA
950-1100C
IRON AGE
>900C
Deirmentepe
Trkmenolu 1996
GEOMETRIC
850-1100C
Naxos
CLASSICAL
900-1000C
Attica
Noble 1988
EBA
EM
34
For example, in the DTA the clay first decreases in size because of the evaporation of
water, but then it expands as it is heated. The temperature reached when it stops expanding is
the original firing temperature.
INTRODUCTION
_____________________________________________
18
The original temperatures can be detected with an accuracy of 20C. The temperature,
however, refers to the maximum temperature in the kiln, even if this was a short-lived peak,
and not to the temperature sustained for the longest period in the kiln while the pots were
fired (Table Intro.2).35
iv. Conducting chemical and petrographic analyses on raw clay and pottery
In the past, these two types of analyses had been conducted on pottery sherds alone.
Ultimately, however, these results are of limited use, since measurements on raw clay and on
fired finished products can differ substantially. This discrepancy is the result of the various
alterations that the clay has undergone, either through purification, addition of temper, firing, or
burial.36 Archaeometric studies on fired material from an excavated kiln provide a much
more reliable indicator of local production. Provenance studies conducted on pottery from a
specific kiln enable the archaeologist to identify and study patterns of diffusion of an
archaeologically defined ware. One should not study only wasters from a kiln or production site
35
For example, the study by Maniatis and Fakorellis (1998) recorded high temperatures
(550-660C) for the low-firing prehistoric ovens at Arhontiko Giannitson, which are much
higher than the ones required for cooking (200-400C) and they are due probably to the
initial firing of the structure, or to an event unrelated to their function as ovens. See infra
Excursus, 111-5.
36
Kilikoglou et al. (1988) showed that the properties of locally manufactured fired tiles did
not match the properties of local raw clays until the latter were purified and fired.
INTRODUCTION
_____________________________________________
because their overfired condition skews any qualitative and quantitative results regarding the
compositional elements of the clay.
Most of the scientific studies in the past tried to establish local reference pottery
groups. To do this, they employed Mssbauer Spectroscopy (MS), which takes
measurements of the content of iron in clay in different temperatures and under different
conditions, which influences the color. By refiring clay samples, one observes the
qualitative transformations of iron oxide in the clay lattice.
The best-known method for provenance studies is Instrumental Neutron Activation
Analysis (INAA) which has replaced the less accurate Optical Emission Spectroscopy
(OES).37 INAA is a multi-element analysis capable of measuring a large number of elements
with a high degree of accuracy to establish the chemical composition (also known as
composition profile or chemical fingerprint) of pottery fired in a kiln and to establish kiln
site reference groups. Such data collected from production sites can then be used to assign
provenance to ceramics found at a distance from the original production sites.38 This
method of establishing the provenance of a type of pottery is more reliable than the study of
clay beds, because it has been scientifically proven that production centers used a variety of
37
First used to detect the Greek origin of Mycenaean pottery on Cyprus (Jones R. 1986a,
49). For another early application of the method on the pottery from Corinth and its colony
Corfu, see Farnsworth et al. 1977. At the same period Attas (1977, 1983) conducted NAA on
Early Bronze Age pottery from the Argolid and the Corinthia.
38
From the available data on Tunisian kilns, Taylor et al. (1992) were able to attribute the
amphora cargo of a shipwreck off the coast of Sardinia to specific Tunisian kiln sites with
enough probability, while excluding other possibilities with certainty. The kiln (or presumed
kiln sites) samples from northern, coastal sites at Tunisia (El Mahrine, Pheradi, Oudna) share
many similarities while being quite distinct from those of the inland kiln site at El Ala.
19
INTRODUCTION
_____________________________________________
clays in the production of their pottery.39 Elemental analysis techniques (e.g. Atomic
Absorption Spectroscopy) combined with Thin Section Microscopy can be used for detecting
the mineral composition of the pottery.
Recently research has focused on determining the degree of purification and the
range of specific elements in the clay matrix of a pottery group. The ratio of concentration
of each element in the purified and in the natural clay was measured. Only when these
relationships are established can we hope to obtain an accurate chemical fingerprint of the
local pottery.40 This can lead to further inquiries into time investment, specialization, and
high degrees of organization. The scientific analysis of wasters from kiln sites and of sherds
of vessels used in nearby settlements helps to answer questions about the extent to which
these kilns supplied neighboring communities with pottery.41
A very sensitive technique is thermal extraction, which uses a thermodesorption
system with gas chromatograph/mass spectometer (TDS-GC-MS). The chromatograph
spectometer has been used so far in dietetic research for detecting organic remains to
determine eating habits. Through this technique it is possible to identify what type of fuel
was used in the firing because different types of fuel, once burned, affect the chemical
39
40
Fabbri 1996.
41
See e.g. the experiments in pottery from the Roman kilns in Mareotis and Alexandria and
from nearby settlements discussed by Rodziewicz 1998.
20
INTRODUCTION
_____________________________________________
fingerprints of the clay vessels.42 Finally, less frequently used methods are Differential
Thermogravimetry (DTG) and Thermogravimetry (TG), which are employed to characterize
the thermal properties of raw material and fired pottery.43
c. Archaeological Research
For the larger part of the 20th century, ceramic kilns were mentioned only in passing
in short reports in the Archaeologikon Deltion. Even excavators devoted little attention to
their proper excavation and the preservation of kiln sites. In the late 1930s the German
excavators at Olympia summarily recorded six Classical kilns under the South Stoa and kept
very little associated material, architectural or other (67-72) (Plate VI.8). A welcome
surprise is the excellent preservation of a large tile kiln at the Tile Works at ancient Corinth,
excavated in 1940, which is protected and still visible under a permanent roof (65).
The workshops of craftsmen were previously studied only through their appearance
in vase-painting and in literature.44 A few sociological works focused on the social status of
42
Schram and Wolf (1999) used an experimental kiln (built according to medieval
prototypes) and fired a brick with Lawson cypress and another one with lime/hazel as fuel.
These two fired bricks had completely different chemical fingerprints due to the organic
material of the fuel embedded in their clays during the firing.
43
The potential of this method for estimating ancient firing temperatures was first realized in
the early 1960s (cf. Roberts 1963), but began to be used as a method in 1969. See especially
the table of color changes and Mssbauer spectra in Hess and Perlman 1974.
44
For representations of craftsmen and their workshops, see Burford 1972; Ziomecki 1975;
Hadjidimitriou 1997. For craftsmen in ancient literature and inscriptions, see Blmner 187577; Philipp 1968; Mller 1974.
21
INTRODUCTION
_____________________________________________
craftsmen in ancient society and the payments they received.45 Only recently has there been
increasing interest in excavating and studying the physical remains of ancient pottery
workshops, although kilns are the most secure criterion for identifying a ceramic workshop
(infra Ch. VI). The beginning of this new scholarly trend can be placed in the early 1980s
when most articles on ceramic workshops were published by scholars who had excavated
ceramic workshops or kiln sites themselves and compiled preliminary lists of kilns in a
relatively comprehensive manner.46 These occasional lists were later replaced by more
systematic collections of kilns, either regionally or throughout Greece. In 1971 the
pioneering study of N. Cuomo Di Caprio introduced the shape of the kiln and the type of
support for the perforated floor as deciding criteria for typological classification. Despite its
outdated character and its shortcomings, this work is still a valuable reference study and her
system was adopted widely by later scholars (including the present study).47 More recently,
Cuomo Di Caprio (1993) published an updated catalogue of ceramic kilns in Sicily.
Publications of individual kilns or of regional examples of kilns have also been published for
Italy, England, and France (see below).
Cook in 1961 was the first to collect kiln sites (from the Geometric to the Byzantine
period). Second came the prehistoric kilns: Davaras and Momigliano have presented some
preliminary lists of Bronze Age kilns in Greece and recently Evely (2000) categorized the
45
46
Despoini 1982 (on the Classical kilns at Sindos) (86-89); Papadopoulos J. 1989 (on a
Geometric kiln from Torone) (11); Baziotopoulou-Valavani 1994 (on Athenian Archaic and
Classical workshops) (51-53); Niemeier 1997 (on the Prehistoric kilns in Miletus).
47
For a critical review of catalogues of kilns and their typologies, see infra Ch. III.
22
INTRODUCTION
_____________________________________________
48
Davaras 1973b, 1980; Momigliano 1986; Michaelidis 1993; Evely 2000; A. Streilys ongoing dissertation on Bronze Age kilns at the Universities of Mannheim and Heidelberg
(cited in Niemeier 1997, n. 15).
49
Seifert (1993) included 144 entries in her study with 212 kilns from 132 sites. Twelve
sites do not preserve kilns. She also considered ceramic kilns from western Turkey in her
study, which she does not include in her article. See also other lists in Mingazzini 1954. A
cross-reference list between Seifert's entries and mine is found in Appendix II.
50
The same year McLoughlin (1993) wrote an honors thesis at the University of Sydney on
ancient Greek kilns.
51
23
INTRODUCTION
_____________________________________________
Lenormant Ave. in Athens (51-53), and the Kerameikos of Figaretto on Corfu (197-209).52
At the same time many individual pottery workshops began to be published
comprehensively; they included sections not only on architecture of the kilns and associated
pottery, but also on scientific analyses of samples from pottery and from the kilns to gain a
better understanding on the date of kilns and the technological characteristics of the pottery
produced.53 The extensive workshop complex with six kilns at Prinias on Crete (31-36) was
published as a monograph in 1992 with the kilns themselves.54 The same balance among
archaeological, typological, and archaeometric aspects are also to be found in the
publications of the Geometric kiln at Torone (11)55 and the kilns at Knossos.56 The
extremely well-preserved Late Minoan IA channel-kiln from Kommos (147) appeared as a
Hesperia supplement and includes a technological section on the kiln written by P.V. Day
and V. Kilikoglou.57 C.C. Monaco (2000) recently published a group of ceramic workshops
from Attica, identified on the basis of kilns and pottery deposits.
52
53
Cuomo Di Caprio 1979a; 1979b; 1981; 1982. The publication of the Hellenistic kilns at
Morgantina by Cuomo Di Caprio (1992b) adopts a similar presentation of the material.
54
55
56
Tomlinson and Kilikoglou 1998 for the Orientalizing kiln at Knossos (27); Tarling and
Downey 1989 for the Late Minoan kilns at Knossos (139-141).
57
24
INTRODUCTION
_____________________________________________
58
The proceedings of these two French colloquia were published in Topoi 8 (1998) and 9
(1999).
59
See articles in the proceedings on Hellenistic pottery: A v EllKer 1989, B v EllKer 1990,
G v EllKer 1994, D v EllKer 1997, E v EllKer 2000.
60
Rice (ed.) 1997. Vitelli's article in that volume (Vitelli 1997) on Neolithic kilns was an
attempt to reconstruct the appearance of Neolithic kilns (see infra Ch. IV).
25
INTRODUCTION
_____________________________________________
those from Syria and Palestine.61 In the 1960s and 1970s many Roman kilns were excavated
in western Europe, mainly in England, France, and Germany. French archaeologists took the
lead in the next two decades in the publications of Gallo-Roman workshops.62 Kilns in more
remote areas of the world (North Africa, China) have also fared well.63 The 1980s witnessed
the publication of many ethnographic studies on contemporary workshops in North Africa
(Egypt, Tunisia).64 Western European scholars, however, still lament the absence of a large
number of individual fully published pottery workshops, rather than merely compilations of
kilns.
The intense study of ancient kilns in the Roman provinces in Europe spurred
archaeologists to replicate ancient kilns and fire them in order to understand more clearly
their construction and operation. In this field of experimental archaeology the British are
undoubtedly the leaders. The excellent state of preservation of some of the Roman-British
kilns allowed the reconstruction of 1:1 replicas, where archaeologist tested the rise of
temperatures, fuel consumption, and breakage rates.65 The results of experimental firings
61
In chronological order, the regional surveys are as follows: Delcroix and Huot 1972
(Syria); Duhamel 1973, Le Ny 1988 (France); Duhamel 1978/9 (western Europe); Swan
1984 (Britain); Anderson 1987 (Phoenician Sarepta); Killebrew 1996 (Israel).
62
For an exemplary publication of a Gallo-Roman workshop, see Dufy et al. 1997 (with
extensive bibliography).
63
64
For Tunisia, Balfet 1965, 1973. Ethnographic work on Egypt has been conducted by
Lacovara 1985; Nicholson and Patterson 1985, 1989.
65
Mayes 1961; 1962; Bryant 1978/9 (with earlier bibliography on experimental firings).
Cook (1984) reports on an experimental firing of a kiln at Calke Wood in England.
26
INTRODUCTION
_____________________________________________
were then compared with those reported in the ethnographic data. 66 At Sardis an
experimental project produced the rooftiles for an Archaic roof on the site.67 The
experimental interest in ceramic kilns extended to include other pyrotechnological structures
such as the experimental glass furnaces built next to the ancient furnaces excavated at Tell El
Amarna.68
In Greece I know of only one attempt to rebuild a traditional, two chambered, kiln;
this took place at Kompoi in Messenia in 1993, and was overseen by a team of researchers
from the Center for the Study of Traditional Pottery.69 The kiln, which was built by one of
the oldest potters still living in the area, was used to fire the Koroneika, the traditional large
jars in the area. Construction of experimental ovens similar to Neolithic excavated examples
has been undertaken three times, by Vitelli, the French team at Dikili-Tash, and by Voulgari
at Dispilio in northern Greece.70 In the late 1970s Rostoker and Gebhard built a rectangular
66
See infra Ch. II, Table II.2 for combined results from these two sources.
67
68
69
Archives at the Center for the Study of Traditional Pottery (no inventory number
available). The entire process of digging the pit, preparing, and drying the bricks for lining
the walls of the pit, the construction of the six arches (combined with smaller ones, which
connect the arches to each other) made of the same bricks as the ones for the support of the
floor, and constructing the floor itself is recorded with photos. This project formed part of a
general attempt to reproduce the Koroneika jars, which are no longer mass-produced. See
Giannopoulou 1996-7 and her ongoing dissertation at the University of Thessaloniki in
Greece.
70
Vitelli 1994; Voulgari et al. 1997, 17, fig. 11. The example at Dispilio was made after the
model of oven from Sitagroi, discussed infra Excursus, "The Baking Oven".
27
INTRODUCTION
_____________________________________________
28
kiln at Isthmia using traditional materials to fire a few replicas of composite tiles similar to
those used to roof the Archaic temple of Poseidon.71
The richness of information which may be presented in the publication of an ancient
ceramic workshop should not overshadow the difficulty and time consumption involved in
processing the large quantities of pottery recovered from a production site. In Athens the
excavation of the Classical workshop at Lenormant Ave. (51-53) and the twenty-seven
Roman kilns at Kotzia Square in Athens (274-300) exemplify in the best way the
overwhelming quantities of pottery. An alternative method for coping with such quantities,
while still being able to investigate an entire workshop area is to conduct a sectional
excavation of a kiln.72
Building and expanding upon the literature presented above, this study places at its
center the ceramic kiln of the ancient Greek workshops. Our approach is carried out on four
levels: the philological, the iconographical, the architectural, and the economic. The fuel of
this dissertation is the geographical and chronological distribution of ceramic kilns in ancient
Greece (within the limits of the modern state of Greece) and their typological classification.
71
In building this kiln (Rostoker and Gebhard 1981) the workers were more concerned with
the efficiency of the structure. Therefore they did not attempt to replicate the structural
characteristics of an Archaic kiln, but instead chose a feature of Roman kilns, the arch, as the
safest method to support the perforated floor.
72
For sectional excavations of some of the Roman kilns at Leptiminus, see Stone et al. 1998;
Stirling and Lazreg 1999. Kiln 3005: 1.85m, 2.10m deep; kiln 4012: 3.20m, 3.50m deep; kiln 9008:
4.50m; kiln 9010: 4.90m.
CHAPTER I
In the history of the field of Classical archaeology, knowledge of Greek kilns has
derived mainly from their numerous representations on the Archaic terracotta plaques from
Penteskoufia at Corinth (see infra). As soon as the structures depicted were correctly
identified as ceramic kilns and not as metallurgical furnaces, they became the standard
reference in every study of ancient ceramic production in Greece. Originally these plaques
were thought to be a votive deposit from a sanctuary dedicated to Poseidon. An alternative
interpretation put forward in this study regards some of the plaques as trial or apprentice
29
pieces discarded from one or more ceramic workshops in the vicinity. This explanation
might account better for several oddities associated with the composition of the scenes.
Aside from the Penteskoufia plaques, in the two-dimensional art, there is only one
other iconographical representation of a ceramic kiln, on the shoulder of hydria 1717 in
Munich dated to the 520s B.C. Finally, a miniature terracotta model recovered from the
Corinthian Potters Quarter exhausts the list of secure depictions of these pyrotechnological
structures.1 In addition, some peculiar conical structures on a black-figure skyphos, the
Robinson skyphos, have been (mis)interpreted as pottery kilns. Two engraved gems, now
lost and of uncertain authenticity, complete the corpus of representations of kilns familiar to
students of ancient Greek pottery production.2
In the second part of this chapter I survey the meaning of the ancient terms usually
associated with a kiln. I begin with the most common, kavmino", and proceed to its
synonyms, which admittedly appear less often in our sources, such as ajnqravkion, skarfwvn,
thvgano", pnigeuv", and bau'no". In connection with these terms I also analyze the words
primarily chosen for domestic or industrial ovens: ijpnov", klivbano" or krivbano", and
fou'rno", since all these words are used interchangeably for kavmino" by the later
lexicographers. The ambiguity among these terms and the inconsistency in their use by
Duhamel (1978/9, 51, fig. 1e) is the only one who mentions a graffito on a Greek vase
depicting a person near a kiln (in the Bibliothque des Arts Dcoratifs, Paris), without
providing any further reference to it. Due to a current renovation of the Bibliothque des
Arts Dcoratifs, my efforts to locate it were not successful.
2
For the entire Roman period, there is only one representation of a furnace on a Roman lamp
found in Pouzzoles, but its identification (Duhamel 1978/9, fig. 1g) as a ceramic kiln lies on
weak grounds.
30
I. ARTISTIC REPRESENTATIONS
The site is not commonly indicated on maps. For the general location, see Wiseman 1978,
figs. 1, 39, 105, 107. Fig. 105 is especially informative about the findspot of the plaques.
Salmon 1984, 4, fig. 2; Whitbread 1995, figs. 4.28, 5.3, 5.33.
31
Museum). Some are still at the archaeological museum at ancient Corinth.4 In a three-day
sondage conducted by the American School of Classical Studies at Athens in 1904, 350 more
fragments were found in the same spot, as well as few Protocorinthian and Early-Corinthian
pots.5 No architectural remains were recorded, and the mention of some fragmentary
Archaic "terra-cottas" refer most likely to terracotta figurines rather than to architectural
rooftiles.
Many of the plaque fragments join and so far more than 1,000 plaques have been
restored. Three quarters of this group have decoration on only one side; the remainder are
decorated on both sides (I will call them two-sided), usually with a different orientation of
the scene on each side. The most popular iconographical themes of the plaques are Poseidon
alone or with Amphitrite, Poseidon and Amphitrite riding in a cart, horseback riders,
marching hoplites, ships, animals, and potters at work. These themes show Poseidon in his
various aspects, as protector of the sea, the earth, and horses.6 Their sizes, as we can gather
4 For a catalogue of the plaques with kiln representations, see Appendix III. For the primary
catalogue entries, see Furtwngler 1885. Pernice (1897) inventoried more fragments, added
joins to the existing ones, and offered correct reinterpretations of the scenes. For
illustrations, Antike Denkmler I, 1886, pls. 7-8; II, 1893-1894, pls. 23-24; 1895-1898, pls.
29-30; 1899-1901, pls. 39-40. The plaques in the Louvre are discussed in Rayet 1880. Also
see von Raits 1964 and Geagan 1970 (same person) for a discussion of the pieces with
mythological themes. For discussion and illustrations, see Richter 1923, 76-8; Ziomecki
1958; Boardman 1954, 1956; Marwitz 1960; Duhamel 1978/9; Zimmer 1982; Cuomo Di
Caprio 1984 (who was mainly interested in the process of firing, with little emphasis on the
plaques themselves); Hadjidimitriou 1997, 60-4, 67-71; for the Penteskoufia plaques as
craftsmen's dedications, see Verfenstein 2001.
5 Washburn 1906. For excerpts from Ancient Corinth Excavation Notebook 18, see von Raits
1964, 2-4.
6
Cf. the adjectives in the Homeric poems: gaihvoco" (e.g. Il. 9.183; 13.59, 125, 377),
ejnnosivcqwn (Il. 8.303), ejnnosivgaio" (Il. 9.183, 362). For more references, RE and LIMC s.v.
Poseidon; von Raits 1964, ch. IV, 26-8.
32
from the complete examples, can be as small as 0.075m (F619+826) to 0.11m (F76, F414,
F867) in width, and as large as 0.14 x 0.20m (F623).7 The presence of Poseidon and
Amphitrite on many of these plaques as well as accompanying dedicatory inscriptions have
prompted archaeologists to interpret this assemblage as a votive deposit of a nearby
sanctuary where Poseidon, probably together with his wife, Amphitrite, were worshipped.8
On seventy of these plaques, kilns are certainly depicted (Appendix III and Plates
I.1-5). On thirteen more, depictions of kilns have been suggested, thus bringing the total
number to eighty-three plaques. Sixteen additional fragments borrow their themes from
pottery-making activities, such as digging for clay, throwing vessels on the potter's wheel, or
showing shelves stacked with pottery.9 They are dated stylistically to the last three quarters
For other examples which preserve full dimensions: F367 (0.28 x 0.165m), F485 (0.14 x
0.208m), F474 (0.078 x 0.068m), F539 (0.093 x 0.136m).
8
In Furtwnglers (1885) detailed catalogue of the pieces, 240 out of 508 plaques (or 48%)
have Poseidon depicted on them. For the inscriptions, see Lorber 1979 and a more recent
discussion and review of previous literature is provided in Amyx 1988.
9
F638-645, F813, F815, F868-871, F884, F886. Some plaques were wrongly identified as
kiln scenes: F630+539 (Poseidon shown holding a trident on a two-horse chariot), F621+n.n.
(the addition of an extra piece does not leave room for a kiln next to the horseback rider),
F828+n.n. (initially thought to be a kiln, it is actually a horse depicted from the front which
turns its head to the right; its lower legs are missing. In front of the horse a man with his
right hand raised faces right). (n.n. refers to not-inventoried fragments).
10
33
of the sixth century B.C., or the Transitional to Late Corinthian II periods in the Corinthian
vase-painting chronology.10
Although the structures depicted on the Penteskoufia plaques are undoubtedly
ceramic kilns, in the earliest literature they were interpreted as smelting furnaces.11 The
main arguments identifying them as metallurgical furnaces were as follows:
a. The structures were thought to be too large to be ceramic kilns;
b. The long stick held by a man on many plaques was believed to be more closely
associated with the metallurgical furnace; and
c. If these structures were furnaces, then the plaques merely reflected a blooming
metallurgical activity in the Corinthia. The dipinto SODRIS (SADRIS), interpreted as
SIDHROS on the plaque MNB2858 in the Louvre (Plate I.4), was taken to corroborate
epigraphically this connection to the metal industry.
The absence of a large number of excavated and published kilns in the early days of
Classical archaeology enabled these arguments to last longer than they should have. As
recently as 1960, Ziomecki devoted an entire article to dismiss this interpretation. After an
adequate number of kilns had been excavated and published, Ziomecki could easily provide
evidence that many ancient ceramic kilns were large enough to require the use of the stoking
rod, and he was able to refute the first two arguments outlined above. One can also easily
argue that Corinthian pottery industry of the Archaic period was very prominent, whereas
metal-working in a scale that would justify such an iconographical zeal of representations of
"furnaces" is still to be discovered in Corinthia.12 Most important, however, is the fact that
11
12
Salmon (1984, 128) emphasizes that "There were no mines of any kind in the Corinthia."
34
smelting furnaces tended not to be larger than 1.00m in diameter in antiquity, especially in
the period of the Penteskoufia plaques.13 The assumption, therefore, that pottery kilns are
smaller than metallurgical furnaces is also proved incorrect.
The composition of the kiln scenes is quite standardized.14 A circular kiln is shown
from the side, and a man, often in the company of others, is depicted either stoking the fire
with a long stick or picking up trial pieces from the top of the kiln to check the firing
progress (e.g. F608, F618) (Plates I.2, I.4).15 The entire kiln is depicted above ground,
unlike most archaeological examples which are constructed partly subterranean.16 The firing
chamber is depicted with its loading door, usually at a 90o angle from the stoking channel.
Blazing flames come out from the chimney and occasionally from the stoking channel. The
stoking channel varies in length. The large size of the kiln is inferred because the men
always stand on top of the stoking channel to reach the chimney; sometimes even a ladder is
required (F802). F893 stands apart iconographically because it shows a vertical section of
the interior of a kiln with its load consisting of hydriae and other large vessels.17 On
13
14
Verfenstein (2001) notes that most plaques depict specifically the crucial moment in the
transition from oxidizing to reducing atmospheres during the firing.
15
The long rod made of wood or iron is a standard piece of equipment for kiln workers. On
Cyprus (Hampe and Winter 1962, 76) they call the wooden stoking rod to kontavri, and the
metal rod to sivdero.
16
Ziomecki (1960, 157) believes that this false depiction is due to artistic conventions and
for a better understanding of the structure.
17
For a detailed discussion of this particular plaque and its misconception in earlier
literature, see infra Ch. II, "Stoking Channel and Stoking Pit".
35
36
THEME
Poseidon
Poseidon and Amphitrite
Amphitrite
Horseback riders
Unidentified males
Birds
Workshop related scenes
Bulls and men
Design
TOTAL of two-sided plaques
17
3?
3
9
9
4
1
2
1
49
34
8
8
19
15
8
4
4
100%
Dedicatory dipinti on some of the plaques depicting kilns indicate that some plaques
were aimed to be votive dedications to Poseidon.19 On one of them (F511+MNC212), which
18
19
20
For an illustration of the joint fragments of this plaque, see Geagan 1970, 34, fig. 2. The
plaque depicts Poseidon riding in a chariot. Lorber 1979, nos. 40, 41, 83, 114 lists the
signatures of three painters from Corinth (Charis, Milonidas, and Timonidas).
does not depict a kiln, the dedicator is also the painter of the plaque: MILONIDAS EGRAYE
KANEQEKEN.20
In the group of plaques with kiln scenes Poseidon and Amphitrite, either alone or
together, decorate the reverse of almost half (23/49) of those plaques that are painted on both
sides (Table I.1). The prominence of Poseidon's cult in the Corinthia and the importance of
maritime trade to the Corinthian potters and craftsmen would explain their devotion to
Poseidon. But Poseidon does not appear elsewhere in Greece as protector of the artisans'
community, as Hephaistos or Athena Ergane generally do. The remaining half carry
representations mainly of horseback riders, unidentified males, and birds. Only in two cases
the topics on both sides of the plaque may be related to ceramic production (F889, F892).
As I have mentioned, from the first moment of their discovery, these plaques as a
whole were thought to belong to a votive deposit from a sanctuary or a shrine to Poseidon
(and Amphitrite) in the vicinity. I would suggest, however, that due to the low quality of the
draftsmanship, the different orientation of the scenes on the plaques that are decorated on
both sides, and the location of the site next to an area where ceramic production is attested in
later periods, it might be more prudent to regard some of these plaques, including a number
of those which depict kilns, as apprentices' test pieces or trial pieces for the firing. These
suggestions can accommodate, rather than exclude, the existence of a religious site near the
workshop area.
iii. The findspot of the Penteskoufia plaques: near a sanctuary or near a workshop?
37
that all the plaques were dedications (and those depicting kilns were specifically dedications
of potters), or that all the plaques (regardless of their theme) were craftsmens dedications.21
Although one of them (F511+MNC212) is clearly a vase-painters dedication, as the
inscription MILONIDAS EGRAYE KANEQEKEN strongly states, it is a considerable leap to
assume that all the plaques with kilns or phases of ceramic production were dedications of
potters. It might be better to see them as a ceramic workshop's debris, which included many
apprentices' pieces.22 The few different stylistic hands of the Penteskoufia plaques make it
likely that these plaques were painted in one large, or some small-scale, workshops whose
production included votive plaques to be dedicated to Poseidon.23
Architectural context: Starting from the find context of these plaques, it should be
emphasized that no architectural remains contemporary with the plaques have come to light
in the area.24 Nor were there any other traces of religious activity nearby, such as a bothros
deposit. Therefore, the alleged sanctuary of Poseidon has never been located
archaeologically.
21
In this section I use evidence from the entire corpus of the plaques, not only the ones
which depict kilns. I should emphasize that only 20% of the published plaques are
illustrated. The final publication of the entire corpus is pending.
22
As early as 1880, the association with a workshop was offered as plausible. Rayet (1880,
102-3) lists a series of possible provenances for the plaques: a necropolis, a neighboring
temple, ancient pottery kilns, or the area outside one of the gates of Acrocorinth.
Surprisingly enough, Rayet discards the possibility that pottery kilns could have existed near
Penteskoufia without any discussion.
23
In the identification of individual artists or styles, I have used the following as preliminary
criteria: renderings of facial traits, anatomical details of animals, clothing details, depiction
of chariot wheels, filling ornament, and use of color.
24
Remains of a later aqueduct are present. See Wiseman 1978, fig. 105.
38
If there had been a sanctuary to Poseidon in the vicinity, was it short-lived? The
answer must be "yes"; otherwise one would expect a wider variety of styles, representing not
only individual hands, but also different periods. The consistency of the styles in the
Penteskoufia deposit speak for a narrow range of dates (second to fourth quarter of the sixth
century B.C.). In addition, the Corinthian potters would have continued asking for support
from Poseidon in the following centuries as well. The deposit, although clearly containing
the work of more than one artist, seems to have been formed as the result of a one-time
depositional process, as one can gather from the presence of many joining fragments.
Potters and Poseidon: The second assumption stemming from the characterization
of the deposit as votive is that they were dedications of potters and painters to Poseidon. Let
us look more closely at this group of plaques. Eighty-three of about one thousand plaques
show kilns, and these constitute only 8% of the entire assemblage.25 In other words, the
potters chose to depict their profession for which they were asking protection from Poseidon,
only on very few plaques. Second, of these eighty-three kiln-scenes, twenty-six appear on
one-sided plaques (ca. 30%), forty-nine (or 59%) are placed on one side of the plaques with
decoration on both sides, and for the remaining eight plaques (11%) it is unclear if they had
decoration on one side or on both sides. If they were asking for protection from Poseidon,
they cared to depict the god on only twenty plaques out of the eighty-three, (ca. 25%), and in
25
Even the addition of the sixteen plaques which depict various stages of the pottery
production does not alter the general picture (see supra n. 9).
39
all cases he is placed on the reverse of two-sided plaques (20/48 or 42%) (Table I.1).26 One
would expect that the invoked god would appear more often.
Stylistic homogeneity: Germane to the question of craftsmen's dedication is the fact
that the kiln-depicting plaques represent very few styles. According to my analysis, most of
the plaques which depict pottery-making phases can be easily attributed to just a few hands,
who were obviously interested in depicting the inner workings of their profession.
Especially for the kiln-depicting plaques, the best example is the hand that painted five
plaques: F356+609, F608, F618, F637+819, and F867 (Plate I.2). Therefore this preference
for kiln depictions was very short-lived.27
If these plaques had been used as votive dedications, it was probably a very local and
personal custom of only a few painters/potters (probably from the same workshop), which
lasted only for a generation or two. It may have been the case that Poseidon, in his capacity
as protector of the earth (gaihvoco", seisivcqo"), was connected with the earth's product, the
clay, which is the raw material for the potters.28 Its restricted local character would then
explain why we find no parallels of such potters' dedications anywhere else at Corinth or in
26
The figure on plaque F846, which has been suggested that Poseidon (or an elderly person,
perhaps the owner of the workshop) oversees the fire, is interpreted in this study as the
original composition of the painter who later changed his mind and painted a kiln covering
partially the earlier figure.
27
Between fifty and one hundred years if we accept the wider chronological range suggested
by Payne 1931. For other discernible hands, see the following groups: a. F616, MNB2856
(Plate I.1), b. F810, F816 (Plate I.3), c. F632+887, F843, F909, MNB2858 (Plate I.4), d.
F866+546, F889, e. F639, F789, F865, F871, F893 (Plate I.6). Even Payne (1931, 112)
proposed a single artist for the plaques F349 and F367+372+398+399.
28
40
the Greek world.29 In addition, nothing comparable was uncovered in the excavations of
sanctuaries of Poseidon or of other deities in the Corinthia. And during the same period,
only one crater bears an inscription to Poseidon.30
To corroborate the workshop association, it suffices to say that overall the area to the
west and southwest of Acrocorinth has strong indications for pottery production. In the
Byzantine period, a ceramic workshop was operating in the wider vicinity. The unusually
large number of vitrified wasters still seen on the ground is a reliable indicator of the
presence of this late kiln.31 Finally, the area of Penteskoufia is less than a kilometer away
from the Potters' Quarter of ancient Corinth.32
Different orientation of scenes on the two-sided plaques: The different orientation of
scenes on many two-sided plaques (F632+887, F802, F810, F811, F816, F889, F913) may
add supporting evidence for refuting the sanctuary scenario. If we assume that both sides
were visible when they were hung from trees (as the frequently-preserved holes indicate),
29
30
A crater at Bari from Monte Samnace, Early red-ground style (Payne 1931, no. 1459). For
statistical considerations, Paynes list of inscribed vases includes seventy-five examples. In
addition to this inscribed pot, one oenochoe depicts Poseidon (Louvre A 438; Payne 1931,
no. 1124) and possibly one alabastron (Bonn 591; Payne 1931, no. 374).
31
This site has been identified by Dr. G. Sanders and discussed in his dissertation (Sanders
1995, 226-33; for its geographical location, see map on p. 234).
32
41
42
this factor would cause one side to be illegible, because it would have been hung upside
down.33
The issue of different orientation brings us to the second major consideration
regarding these plaques: the inequality of drawing skills. The two-sided plaques which have
the same orientation are painted mostly by the same hand, and they usually display high
artistic skill (e.g. F521+796+876, F595, F797, F848, F849, F855, F860, F894, F910, F921,
F929) (Plate I.7). In cases of different orientation, the scenes on each side can be painted
either by the same artist (F889) or by different artists (F863), usually with unequal skill.34 In
other words, an apprentice would be entrusted to work only on the "back" side of a clay
plaque, which (for whatever reason) could be spared.35
Apprentices pieces: Also suggesting that these are workshop pieces rather than
finished votives is the fact that this assemblage includes a large number of apprentices
pieces (their quick sketches).36 Even Furtwngler (1885), in his preliminary presentation of this
corpus a century ago, noticed that the style of many plaques was "primitiv." If one interprets
33
It should be noted, however, that such considerations would not have been important to
the gods, if they were the recipients of these tablets.
34
In the cases of two-sided plaques, one should examine whether the plaques were fired at
two different times, or whether there was a single firing. One should prefer one firing,
because a double firing would cause the second decoration to adhere less well on the fired
clay and to chip off easily.
35
The possibility that these plaques were reused at a later date as votives cannot be sustained
with the currently available evidence.
36
von Raits (1964, 19) also comments on the poor quality of draftsmanship. The
bibliography on apprentices' pieces or preliminary sketches is quite sparse; for general
information, see Richter 1923, 38-9, fig. 44; Noble 1988, 104-7; for preliminary sketches on
red-figured vases, see Corbett 1965; Boss 1997.
biva (from the inscription of Timonidas TIMONIDAS EGRAFSEN BIA on the reverse of
F846, whose other side depicts a kiln scene) as "haste" or "rush", the interpretation of the
plaques as hastily drawn pieces is strengthened.37
The carelessness of the scene's composition offers the first clue towards this
interpretation. Strikingly low artistic skill is detected in the wrongly rendered proportions of
body parts (F671, F722), in drawing male figures in outline (F395), in drawings in unusual
scale (F839), and in some other figures painted in a grotesque style (F621). We also have
examples of what should be considered studies of foreshortening, especially difficult
positions of horses or men (F668, F769, F828, F873) (Plate I.9).38 The discrepancy of
talents becomes apparent when one contrasts the many, well-drawn instances of Poseidon
with the Poseidon on F357, whose sketchy appearance confirms the presence of less
competent artists in the workshop(s).
Some scenes have no structural composition, but are compilations of figures and
objects with no relationship to each other: for example some plaques have multiple sketches
on one side (F846, F83539, F460, F555, F899). Especially plaques F835, 460, F899, and
F900 are representative examples of the case in which the artist changed his mind about the
37
The other meaning of biva is "by force". So, were these painters slaves, or were they
simply forced by the advanced potters to practice intensively in order to improve their skills?
It is worth noting that this dipinto is painted in the middle of the scene in a hasty manner,
whereas the dedicatory inscription to Poseidon is written orderly on the border of the plaque.
38
Boardman (1954, 191, n. 87) mentions one plaque from the Acropolis, which preserves a
sketch of Athena on its reverse side; the front side, painted in white ground technique,
depicts Athena.
39
Cf. F833.
43
composition of the scene: F835 preserves the preliminary drawing of the lower legs of a man
facing right, whereas the final composition shows a ship moving to the left; the plaque F899
had been used once for Poseidon (as his trident suggests) and was later turned upside down
and decorated with a striding male. There are also cases with numerous identical
inscriptions on one plaque [F368: the word Poseidon appears twice, once as a dipinto and
again inscribed after the firing (Plate I.8)].
If we accept that these plaques are mostly trial pieces, then the scenes of kilns or
pottery workshops, otherwise an unusual theme for craftsmens dedications and a minor
percentage of the collection (8%), as well as the entire assemblage are open to other
explanations. It might be that the apprentices practiced their skills at freehand draftsmanship
in their free time while watching the pottery being fired.40 They may have sat to the side in
the workshop and painted what they saw. The firing stage is the only time in the potterymaking process which is less demanding for the workers before the next batch of pottery
starts. Half of the kiln scenes are painted on the reverse of Poseidon plaques, which might
have been rejected in the workshop before being fired.
Although the question might sound redundant, one should ask "why were trial
sketches necessary?" It is conceivable that the apprentices were practicing on such plaques
before they were entrusted with painting vases. The flat surfaces of the plaques would pose
fewer challenges to beginners than the curved surfaces of the vases. TIMONIDAS has
signed both a pinax (F846, which also depicts a kiln on the other side) and a vase with a
Troilos scene (NM 277). The composition and rendering of the scene on the vase parallel
40
Hampe and Winter (1962, 5, fig. 4) illustrated a crude miniature model of a kiln, made by
the children of the potters from one workshop at Thrapsano on Crete.
44
exactly the style of the plaque (Plate I.10).41 The successfully painted plaques could have
been sold later as votive dedications.
Figural iconography: It is also quite interesting that the plaques depict so many
figures, when figural scenes are strikingly few on the Corinthian pottery of the same period.
Payne had argued that Corinthian potters ceased painting human figural scenes when
Athenian pottery gained dominance of the markets.42 Because figural scenes tend to appear
on larger vases, the painters might have preferred to compose the scene first in another
medium before transferring it to the large vase.43 In addition, since these large craters do not
seem to have been produced massively (and since it was the par excellence Corinthian
shape), it is highly likely that the potters wanted to make sure that no mistake would occur.44
The size of most plaques coincides with the field available to the potter on a vase: the height
of the plaque corresponds to the decorative panel on a small vase, or one band of the
41
For a drawing of the jug with the Troilos scene, see Lorber 1979, pl. 10 (Pl. I.10).
42
Payne 1931; Campbell (1946) points out that there were more instances of figural scenes,
although the total was far fewer than for animal friezes.
43
Isocrates scorn (De permut. 2) of the makers of terracotta pinakes as opposed to vasepainters is often cited in connection with these plaques (von Raits 1964).
44
For a selection of craters whose themes correspond closely to those depicted on the
plaques, see Louvre E 632 and London 1867.8-5.860 by Ophelandrus Painter; Berlin F 1147
and Corinth CP 2034 by Memnon Painter; Basel BS 451 and London 1836.2-24.248 by
Athana Painter; Toronto 919.5.144 by Hippolytus Painter; and Florence 4198 by Sphortos
Painter. For relevant bibliography on these craters, see Amyx 1988, 261-9. Amyx (1983)
discusses and refutes the possibility that these craters copy contemporary mural paintings.
45
multibanded larger Corinthian shapes, such as craters. Thus the painters were practicing on
the same scale as on the Corinthian pottery they would paint later in their careers.
Size and quality of the offering: Given the prominence of the Corinthian pottery and
the esteem that the Corinthian potters received from their society as Herodotus informs us
(2.167), it is hardly imaginable that a Corinthian painter/potter would choose such a small
pinax and decorate it so hastily to offer it as a dedication to Poseidon.45 For example, the
plaque F482+627+943+n.n., which preserves the KAMINOS inscription, is no wider than
0.09m and perhaps not much taller than 0.10-0.13m. A well-painted vase of larger
dimensions, or even an offering in a different medium, such as the marble and bronze votives
reliefs by potters on the Athenian Acropolis, would seem more appropriate as a votive
dedication.46 The quality of the draftsmanship (which is inconsistent in the Penteskoufia
plaques) is still more important than the actual size of the pieces, since no one can deny that
some potters might have been too poor to afford a larger dedication, but surely no potter
would wish to offer shabby work for such a purpose.
A counterargument to the use of the plaques as testing pieces is that the Corinthian
apprentices were not practicing mainly animal friezes, which they would be expected to paint
for the rest of their careers. Very few plaques represent any animals at all, other than the
horseback rider scenes (e.g. F921-F929). Also, the cases of poor craftsmanship are
45
It is still an open question whether these plaques were dedications by the potters
themselves or by the workshop owners, if they were different persons.
46
For votive dedications of craftsmen, see Raubitschek 1949; Scheibler 1979. For the
Penteskoufia plaques Scheibler believes (p. 17) that they were votives for each firing.
46
relatively few, and probably could have been purchased and dedicated by poor worshippers.
Moreover, there is no other evidence (architecture, tools, or misfired pieces) pointing to a
workshop nearby. Future excavation of the site is a high priority and will resolve many of
issues presented above. The quantitative analysis will not give priority to any arguments
until a complete, systematic study of the material is undertaken. Such a study might show
that the examples of low craftsmanship discussed above were not the exception, but the rule.
In sum, despite the varying weights of the arguments presented above, I believe that
the different orientations of the scenes, the poor quality of the drawing, the use of both sides
and their small size, reinforce a preliminary character of these pieces. I tend therefore to
consider some of these plaques primarily as test pieces, products of a workshop which was
also producing votive plaques for a local sanctuary of Poseidon and Amphitrite (the distance
of this sanctuary cannot be determined at present). The long use of the general area by
potters easily accommodates the placement of a workshop (or more) on the site. Admittedly,
this explanation does not account for all the evidence, but neither does the votive-deposit
interpretation. For the moment, one must acknowledge that both interpretations are
inherently weak, and that neither can be refuted convincingly.
A third, compromising, solution is that a ceramic workshop and an open-air
sanctuary to Poseidon (leaving few architectural remains) coexisted in the area in the second
half of the sixth century B.C. This sanctuary could well have been a dedication of the potters
themselves, who might have set up this sanctuary to thank Poseidon for providing such good
raw materials to them and, at the same time, demarcating and protecting this source of
material, which was so vital to their success.
47
ABV 362.36; Beazley 1971, 161; for earlier bibliography, Carpenter 1989, 96; for
depictions of pot-making activities, see Beazley 1946; Ziomecki 1975; Hadjidimitriou 1997.
48
49
For the interpretation of the Dionysiac mask as an apotropaic device, see infra, 57.
The argument for why this is a furnace and not a kiln is presented in Oddy and Swaddling
1985, where all the known examples of representations of furnaces on ancient vases (seven
secure and three inferred) are collected (Plate Exc.11). Ziomecki 1975; Roebuck (ed.) 1969;
Richter 1923;
48
cannot be a shaft furnace. First, a furnace has no stoking channel; such a channel, albeit
short, is certainly depicted here. Second, the stoking rod, which the figure holds, is
unnecessary in furnaces, where the draft is caused by blow-pipes (tuyres). Third, the
presence of the potter's wheel places the scene securely in a pottery workshop, because
metal workers have no need of a wheel to perform their craft. It would have been absurd for
an ancient artist to paint activities characteristic of a pottery workshop and insert a
metallurgical furnace at the end. The structure at the far right-hand end of the scene is
undoubtedly a pottery kiln, with its stoking channel summarily rendered.
The main scene on the body of the hydria is the mythical subject of Aeneas and
Anchises. The placement of the pottery scene on the shoulder of the vase as subsidiary
decoration should be emphasized since it is not immediately apparent in the numerous
illustrations of the scene in studies on ancient pottery.50 By reserving a secondary place for
the depiction of his craft, this potter continues a well-established tradition whereby potters
were reluctant to depict on their product the banausic aspect of their craft; they preferred to
emphasize its artistic aspect. It is no coincidence that the vast majority of potters'
representations on vessels depict a painter while he/she is painting a vase.51
50
51
For representations of potters, see Burford 1972; Mller 1974; Ziomecki 1975;
Hadjidimitriou 1997. For female painters, see the workshop scene on the Caputi hydria,
Torno Collection no. 278 in Milan (ARV2 571.73) from ca. 460 B.C., attributed to the
Leningrad Painter. Discussed by Kehrberg 1982. See also full illustration in Bron and
Lissarangue 1984, fig. 1.
49
c. Kiln Model (KN 181). From the Potters' Quarter at Ancient Corinth
A miniature model of a kiln-like structure was excavated in the Potters' Quarter
(Plate I.11a).52 It preserves the stoking channel, the combustion chamber, and the entire
perforated floor. The firing chamber does not survive. The whole structure stands on a thin,
rectangular plinth. Stillwell believed that the model is faulty because "the second door on
the side for putting in the vases, which appears on the pinakes is not represented here." The
representation is correct, however, since only the lower, combustion chamber is preserved on
the model; and the loading door belongs to the firing chamber, which is not preserved in this
terracotta model. There is no interior support under the perforated floor. A fragmentary
perforated plaque excavated from the Potters' Quarter might belong to a second model of a
kiln, but its precise function remains uncertain.53
52
Stillwell 1952, 208-9, cat. no. 33.7, pl. 45. On display at the archaeological museum at
ancient Corinth. Dim. H. 0.032m, L. 0.055m, W. 0.048m; L. of the stoking channel: 0.030m.
For a section of this terracotta model, see Duhamel 1978/9, fig. 3. For other models thought
to represent Neolithic kilns, see infra Excursus, "The Baking Oven".
53
KN 165: Stillwell 1952, 282, cat. no. 72, pl. 59. Large perforated plaque from the Potters'
Quarter at Corinth. The plaque is almost completely preserved; roughly rectangular. Dim. L.
0.151m, W. 018m, Th. 0.014m. Five rows of holes; total number of holes: 23 (an additional
one is partially preserved). The reconstructed shape of the plaque is tongue-like; on one end
the two corners are recessed, so the main body creates a protruding tongue. The absence of
any traces of burning on the underside of the plaque shows that it was never used for actual
firing. It might have been part of a model (such as KN 181, described above), but the
protruding part seems quite intentional and unnecessary if the plaque is a perforated floor.
Other uses, such as a stopper in a drain or in a bathtub (where it could be inserted), or a
strainer make the object slightly more intelligible.
50
a. Engraved Gems
Two depictions of kilns are preserved on engraved gems, now lost and of dubious
authenticity (Plate I.12b-c).54 In one, the man is painting the handles of a small amphora
while a jug and a kylix are placed on the top of a small, rounded structure with an opening in
the front. In the second gem, a potter with the aid of two sticks is placing a hydria on top of
a dome-like structure described as a kiln with an opening in the front. The so-called kiln is
extremely small, even considering the artist's freedom regarding correctness of scale. There
are archaeological examples, however, which confirm the existence of such small kilns in a
pottery workshop, often coexisting with large kilns in the same workshop, such as the
Geometric kiln at Torone in Chalkidike (0.80m in diameter) (11), the Hellenistic kilns at
Paroikia, Paros, with a diameter of 0.75m (232-233), or the Hellenistic kiln at Pherai in the
Stamouli-Bolia Plot (192) with a diameter of 0.65m.
Such small kilns may also have been used for firing a small order (for example,
small skyphoi or lamps) in cases where the normal production of the workshop might have
54
51
been larger wares. In such a case, a small kiln fires pots much faster and requires
considerably less fuel.55
55
It is possible that these small kilns were intended to fire pots which would have served as
samples of the final desired product, to be reproduced in larger quantities, such as the
competition samples for the Panathenaic amphoras. For the personnel organization and
production of Panathenaic amphora workshops, see Valavanis 1997. For small-size kilns see
infra Ch. III.
56
Robinson D. 1938, 11-12, pl. I. See also Eisman and Turnball 1978 for comparing this
scene with a traditional workshop operating in Maroussi in northern Attica.
52
53
record. The characteristic feature of the stoking channel, which always appears on kiln
representations, is absent. The structure is very small compared to the figures, whereas all
other scenes show the kilns at a much larger scale than the persons. Their size would not
allow the firing of large amphoras inside it, so the link to the representation of amphoras in
these scenes is very weak. The presence of a basket that the man carries is difficult to
explain if the structure is a kiln. The interpretation of the scene as depicting the construction
of a kiln cannot be sustained because the structural characteristics of a kiln are very different.
The closest parallel to a firing structure would be bonfires. Another suggestion is that this
conical arrangement represents a pile of clay anchoring thus the scene, again, in a ceramic
workshop. Similar tall piles of stored clay can be seen on Crete, Cyprus, and Tunisia.57 On
Crete and Cyprus, however, the clay is stored inside a room in order to keep its moisture,
whereas the scene on the "Robinson" skyphos is clearly placed outdoors.
The activities on the skyphos can also be explained as olive-processing and
transferring of oil into large amphoras.58 The trapezoidal structures, then, probably represent
gathering areas where olives are pressed. By viewing this scene as one that occurs in the
countryside, one could explain the presence of the branches which frame the composition.
Alternatively, one can interpret the scene as wine harvesting, with wine being stored in the
amphoras.
57
In Jena Painter (1996, 18), they are interpreted as scenes of preparation of clay. The way that
traditional potters in Tunisia wedge the clay outdoors is reminiscent of the structures on the
"Robinson" skyphos (Hasaki, in preparation). Vallianos and Padouva 1986, 84, fig. 20;
London 2000c; E. Gratsia (pers. comm.) also offers a similar interpretation. Other
ethnographic practices show, however, that whenever clay is wedged, the pile is quite low
(hardly taller than 0.30m) whereas the piles on the skyphos have a considerable height.
58
Scheibler 1986.
A cursory overview of the ancient terms for kilns, ovens, and furnaces shows two
contradictory attitudes of the ancient Greek authors: on one hand they would use
inconsistently a pool of similar terms to refer to the same structures; on the other hand, very
specific words would differentiate one structure from another, or would distinguish various
versions within one type of structure.
It is a pity that no one in antiquity wrote a manual on how to fire pottery or, more
specifically, how to build a kiln. Such a manual would have preserved much of the
terminology for the kiln, its parts, and perhaps for other tools used in a pottery workshop. In
the ancient Greek sources, the words related to kilns or ovens appear mainly in the texts of
medical authors, who evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of the different types of
food (mainly bread) baked in various structures.
Our familiarization with these words becomes especially important because there is
no consistency in the terminology of ancient kilns used in modern Greek publications where
ceramic kilns are called kavmino" or klivbano" indistinguishably.59 The term employed in
antiquity for an industrial kiln (that is, not a domestic bread oven) is kavmino" or bau'no".
59
Cf. the following titles of Greek publication where two different terms refer to the same
type of structure: Davaras 1973b:"Minwikhv kerameikhv kavmino" eij" Stuvlon Canivw n." and
Karagiorga 1971: "Kerameikov" klivbano" ejn jHlivdi."
54
Klivbano", which survived in modern Greek as the standard term for kiln, is reserved in the
ancient writings only for the domestic oven, where food-preparing activities were performed.
In the fifth century B.C. the words used for a kiln, or a kiln-shaped structure, are
ijpnov", kavmino", klivbano", and pnigeuv". The word ijpnov" is the one most frequently used in
pre-Christian times and also the oldest. Its predecessor in Linear B is i-po-no, which appears
on the tablet Kn 233 (the reverse of Uc 160).60 Its early association with fire probably
accounts for its later use in reference to domestic hearths.
Although bau'no", kavmino", klivbano", and pnigeuv" are used already in the fifth
century B.C. with a relatively strict sense, starting in the second century A.D., the
lexicographers blur the boundaries between the meanings of these words, and most of the
terms are used as synonyms for each other.61 Herodian in the second century A.D. lists
60
See Chadwick 1973, 324, 331-4; for an overview of all the suggested translations of the
word, see Jorro and Adrados 1985, s.v. From its context it becomes clear that i-po-no refers
to a type of vessel translated by modern scholars as "dutch ovens," "cooking bowls," "a
shallow open dish," or "earthenware bowls used for baking on a hearth."
The tablet Kn 233 reads as follows:
l.1
?[
a-pi-po-re-we 3
l.2
i-po-no
l.3
14
l.4
[u]-do-ro
17
[ 3 amphoras
[ 14 cooking bowls
[ 17 water jars
The reverse side (Uc 160) records wine and other measured commodities.
61
55
ijpnov", fou'rno", and kavmino" as synonyms.62 In the fifth century A.D., the list of synonyms
increases: Hesychios (I 774) uses ijpnov", kavmino", fou'rno", and bau'no". In the Suda in the
10th century A.D. almost all the words appear as synonyms in each entry.
a. kavmino"
The ancient Greek word for the ceramic kiln was kavmino" (h )J .63 Kavmino" must
have been the generic word for any structure serving as kiln or furnace since it serves as a
synonym for all the other terms. Its general character acquires specific meaning depending
on the context or on the accompanying adjectives, such as kamineutikh;, ojpthvteira, or
63 Plut. Publ. 13.2 (Etruscan terracotta statue of a quadriga fired in a kavmino"); Septuaginta,
Eccles. 27.5; Suda P 3231. A different spelling, kavmeino", appears in the papyri from Egypt
from the third century B.C. onwards.
64
kavmino" kerameikh;: Dsc. De materia medica 5.75.14 (for herbs baked inside a pot which
is placed inside a kiln) and Orib. 13. P2 (again for myrtle leaves baked inside a pot which is
turn is fired inside a kiln); Hsch. aujthv kavmino". ejpi; tw'n ta; paraplhvsia prassovntwn
eijrhmevnh. ajpo; ga;r tou' kerameikou' trocou' hJ metaforav. Bricks are also fired in a kavmino"
in Olymp. In Mete., p. 332 (referring to the pots losing their water content inside the kiln).
See also Clem. Rom. Ad Corinthios 8.2; Ath. 1.50; Did. Caecus fr. 185; a fournoeidh;"
kavmino" is mentioned in Zos. Alch. p. 173B.
56
identifies the structure shown on the plaque. The Penteskoufia plaques, as discussed earlier
in this chapter, are dated to ca. 575-500 B.C.
A century later, in Herodotus, we read about amphoras and bricks being fired in a
kavmino".65 In the fragment of Critias given below (fifth century B.C.), Athens is described
as the birthplace of the pottery wheel and the kiln. This statement interests us not for its
historical accuracy (the author has exaggerated somewhat to account for the high quality of
the Attic pottery), but for the use of the word kavmino".
65
Hdt. 1.179: firing bricks in kilns for building the fortification wall around Babylon; Hdt.
4.16: Arcesilaus, the ruler of Cyrene, was given a Delphic oracle: "If you find the kiln full of
amphoras do not fire them, but send them away downwind." The oracle referred to his
political opponents, who found refuge inside a tower in the town. Arcesilaus set the tower on
fire and burned them. Hdt. 4.164: Arcesilaus realized that he had misunderstood the oracle.
57
terms used for the kiln and the various names of the kiln demons who personify the
casualties, likely to occur during the firing.66
Homer is approaching a ceramic workshop while a kiln-firing of fine wares was in
progress. The potters asked Homer to recite for them the poem called Kavmino". The kiln
is called kavmino" throughout the poem, which should speak for the prominence of this term
for a ceramic kiln. The firing chamber is called puraivqousan, whereas the other areas of the
kiln are summarily described as chambers (dwvmata).
66
Suidas quotes it entirely and Poll. Onom. 10.85 quotes line 3. For a more recent
translation, see Humphrey et al. 1998, 372, passage 9.75; A detailed commentary on the
poem can be found in Noble 1988, 186-96; See also Richter 1923, 94-5; von WilamowitzMoellendorff 1929, 17-8; Cook 1948; Cook 1951.
58
v sbeto", it is
As for the names Suvntriy, Sabavkth",67 jWmovdamo", Smavrago", and A
noteworthy that the names of the demons are hapax legomena in the Greek literature,
although the destructive actions of these demons were all too familiar to the potters.68
67
[ makto" to Sabavkth". A
[ makto" would then represent the
Cook (1948) prefers A
insufficiently kneaded clay, which would cause cracks in the final terracotta product.
68
The word daivmone" does not appear in the defixiones until Roman times. For other names
of demons of metallurgy, see Blakely-Westover 1998.
59
60
In their attempt to harness these demons, the ancient potters placed apotropaic
figures on their kilns, usually satyr masks or ithyphallic figures. On the Penteskoufia plaque
F683+757+829+822 the kiln has a small ithyphallic figure in front of it (Plate I.3). A
similar device appears on the sixth century B.C. hydria 1717 from the Staatliche
Antikensammlungen in Munich, where a theatrical mask has been hung on the kiln to
express a similar potters' concern (Plate I.11b).69 In the fill of a kiln excavated in Europos,
Kilkis in northern Greece (363), two terracotta figurines with grotesque features were
excavated and interpreted by the excavator as apotropaic devices.70 Aristophanes also
speaks of a baskavnion ejpikavminon, in the form of a bronze statue of a man.71 Baskavnia
were also placed on metallurgical furnaces for the same reasons.72
It is interesting to note that, despite the fierce competition among potters that Hesiod
(Erga 25-26) warns us about, the competitors did not resort to the use of cursive tablets that
69
Ziomecki 1975; Roebuck (ed.) 1969; Richter 1923; the argument for why this is a furnace
and not a kiln is presented in Oddy and Swaddling 1985, where all the known examples of
representations of furnaces on ancient vases (seven secure and three inferred) are collected
(Plate Exc.11).
70
See also Forbes R. 1964. A relief depicting a sizeable phallus has been excavated next to
the stoking channel of a Hellenistic kiln at Metapontum at the site Pizzica (Carter 1983).
Even the traditional Greek potters make a cross with their fingers on the loading door, while
the clay is still wet (Hampe and Winter 1962, 23, 114; Blitzer 1990, 697). For divine protectors
of fire, see Korres 1971.
71
72 Poll. Onom. 7.108: Pro; de; tw'n kamivnwn toi'" calkeu'sin e[qo" h\n geloi'av tina katarta'n,
h[ ejpiplavttein, ejpi; fqovnou ajpotroph'/. ejkalei'to de; baskavnia.
are all too common for metal workshops, but are yet to be found in a ceramic workshop
context.73
The references of kavmino" to ceramic kilns were comparatively few when contrasted
to the numerous instances of kavmino", which was used mainly for the description of furnaces
employed for smelting metals, such as bronze, iron, silver, and gold.74 The furnaces in the
Laurion mines were always called kavminoi in the leases.75 Generally, the furnaces were
under the protection of Hephaistos since he himself operated furnaces, the kavminoi
jHfaivstou. These are attested in Callimachus, Lucian, and Nonnus, in reference to the
furnaces of the god of bronzesmiths, whose birthplace was Lemnos.76 In the medical
treatises, kavminoi are used to prepare medicines.
73
For cursive tablets in workshops and in general "agonistic" contexts, see Faraone 1991. A
metal worker is mentioned in a cursive tablet from the Athenian Agora (Young 1951, 222-3;
new reading of the text of the tablet in Curbera and Jordan 1998); Jordan 2000.
74
General about kavmino": Ar. fr. 39; Arist. fr. 259; Callim. Hymn, 3.60 (bronze, iron); idem
fr. 115; (with Hephaistos); Nic. Ther. 924 (iron), Alex. 51 (gold, silver) Diod. Sic. Bibl. Hist.
5.27.2; Dsc. 5.75; Gal. 12.185-186 (gold, silver, iron); Lucianus Ddeor. 8.4; DMar. 10.2 (the
kavminoi of Hephaistos); Clem. Alex. Strom. 2.18.91; Eust. Il. 2.182 (bronze); Anacreonta fr.
28 (iron for arrows); Pallas, Anth. Gr. 6.61; 14.50 [a silversmith (ajrguropoiov") is working at
a furnace for coins]; Gal. 12.208; Nonnus, Dion. 29.349 (reference to Hephaistos). For gold
(usually associated with firing of silver), see Posidonius in FGrH 2a.87.F116; schol. Thuc.
Hist. 4.100.2; Str. 3.2.8; 5.2.6; 5.4.6.
75
See e.g. IG II2 1370, l. 2750, records the boundaries of the furnace (kavmino") and of the
grounds around it. Generally on the leases from Laurion see Crosby 1950, 1957. See also the
reference to kavminoi in the poletaiv records (P5, P20, P28, P38, P43) found in the Agora
(Lalonde et al. 1991).
76
61
The working of the furnace was a very demanding craft and required trained
personnel: we hear of a kamineuthv", a kamineuv", and a kamineuvtrian (or kaminwv), a woman
in charge of the furnace, especially that of a bath.77 Two inscriptions recovered from
Laurion from the mid-fourth century B.C. mention Ianibelos, the ajrcikamineuthv", who must
have been employed in the local mines.78 Another inscription, a mortgage boundary stone
from the same area, mentions the salary given to a furnace worker called Simon from
Paeania.
toi'" metav E
j pitevlou" ejk Keramevw n
kai; ajpevrgastra kamivnwi th'i Sivmou Paianievw
kai; toi'" ejranistai'" toi'" metav Neoptolevmou Melitevw ".79
Kavmino" also refers to the hypocausts of baths.80 Different types of rocks, such as
flint (puritovliqo"), were fired inside a kavmino", which thus became a lime kiln.81 The word
changes slightly to to; kamivnion, (plural tav kamivnia), in the Byzantine author Constantinus
77 Kamineuthv" (Luc. De sacrificiis 6.6; Greg. Nyss. Contra Eun. 1.1.38); kamineuv" (Diod.
Sic. 20.63.5); kamineuvtria and kaminwv are mentioned as synonyms in Herodian (quoted in
Eust. 2.165); kaminwv (Apol. Lex. Hom. s.v.).
78
IG II2 11697: jIanivbhle ajrcikamineuta; cai're and SEG 13.207 restored as jIanivbhlo" /
ajrcikamin / euthv".
79
SEG 32.236, found at the Asklepiakon mine at Soureza and dated to ca. 350 B.C.
80
Schol. Ar. Plut. 535, 951; Ar. fr. 720; Asterius 3.12.2; Gal. 12.438.
81
Gal. 12.219; Orib. 13.d1, where purivth" livqo" (chert) was burnt in a kavmino"; At. 15.15
(lime kilns are similar to the bronze-smelting furnaces); Epiph. 1.347 (lime kilns operating
away from the city).
62
kavmino"). It is probably a portable oven, much like the ones found in the Athenian Agora (P
14165) or the oven represented in a Boeotian terracotta scene.87 Anqravkion was also a term
used for a cooking stand.88 Herodian offers thvgano" as another synonym for kavmino", and
82
83
84
85
Aspasius, schol. Eth. Nic. 104; Eust. 1.184; Anonymi in Arist. 184; Ael. 3, 2. p. 174;
bauvnh (Hsch. s.v.).
86
87
Both examples, among others, are illustrated in Sparkes and Talcott 1958.
88
Hadjidakis 2000, pl. 67b, for a cooking stand from Rheneia and for a vocabulary of terms
for cooking pots.
89
Hdn. Epim., p. 133; Hsch. S 874. For thvgano" (tavghnon) as frying pan or saucepan see
Eup. 346 and Ar. Eq. 429.
63
Aristophanes uses extensively the word pnigeuv" and some derivative adjectives.90
His scholiasts always equate pnigeuv" to kavmino", specifically the kavmino" operating with
charcoal.91 A pnigeuv" was also dedicated as a votive offering in an Athenian sanctuary.92
c. bau'no"
This word forms the root of the derogatory term bavnausoi. It was used for all
craftsmen (bavnausoi) who did much of their work in the unpleasant environment of a
furnace. Such craftsmen appear in Aristotles Nicomachean Ethics (1107b 17-20; 1122 a 3032; 1123 a 19-20) and Politics (e.g. 1317b 41). It must be one of the oldest words since it is
the constituent part of the word krivbano" or klivbano", which is attested already in the fifth
century B.C. In all instances it is linked to the working of metal or to the baking of bread.
In no case do we hear of a ceramic bau'no". The standard synonym is kavmino". Other words
close in meaning are cutrovpou", cwneuthvrion, and occasionally eJstiva.
90
Suda P 1832; schol. Ar. Av. 1001; schol. Ar. Ran. 122; schol. Ar. Nub. 96a, c; Sparkes
1962.
91
Suda P 1832: pnigei' tw'/ crovnw/ to; scoinivon kai; to; qranivon. As a synonym to krivbanon
operating with charcoal, see Suda P 380 and P 629.
92
64
93
94 Hdt. 5.92; Hippoc. Epid. 4.20: ajpov tou' keramevou ijpnou' (cf. Hippoc. Morb. 2.47); Antiph.
176.4; Archestr. fr. 46. In inscriptions, IG II2 147, l. 287a (spelled as ijpnwvn); Inscr. Cret.
4.73.A9 from Gortyna (fifth century B.C.).
95
Erot. s.v. ijpnov"; Hsch. s.v. ijpnov" (I 774); Suda I 550, I 552.
96
97
In Lex. Tim. a synonym of ijpnoplavqh" is fournoplavsth" (potter); Poll. Onom. 7.163; cf.
koroplavqo"; Harp. s.v. ijpnov" 101.8; Gal. 5.890.6. See also ijpnoplavqein, ijpnopoiov"; Lucian
Prom. Es 21; Them. Or. 21.256d.
65
ijpnoplavsth" can also refer to a terracotta-figurine maker.98 The soot from an ijpnov" was
called i[pnia (kaqavrmata ijpnou').99
e. klivbano"-krivbano"
The word which came to be used for a ceramic kiln in modern Greek is the Attic
klivbano", or its Doric version of krivbano".100 The Attic word preserves the constituent
parts formed by kri, meaning grain, and bau'no", which means oven or kiln. Krivbano" is the
98
99
Suda I 550.
100
Hdt. 2.92.10; Eust. 1.184; Suda K 1800; K 2413; schol. Ar. Acharn. 86a, 86c; for
occurrences of the word in the Egyptian papyri, see Battaglia 1989.
101
102 For a cursory selection of excavated domestic ovens, see infra Excursus, "The Baking
Oven", esp. n. 11 and 12.
66
kavmino", besides being smaller, had a chimney-like appearance because it was used mostly
for smelting metal. The association with the domestic sphere and cooking is preserved even
in modern Greece: in the vocabulary of the Aegean islands, klivbanon denotes a vessel for
baking pies.103 In the late Roman period in the provinces the furnaces of the imperial baths
in Palestine were referred to as klivbanoi in the inscriptions.104
f. fou'rno"
The earliest use of this word is in the works of Hero in the second century B.C.,
where an oven 2.00m in diameter is given as a starting point for a mathematical problem.105
Its Latin equivalent is furnus.106 Its casual use in an exercise in Heros works suggests that it
was already in the Hellenistic period a well-known word. It must have denoted primarily an
oven, since it is the main synonym for ijpnov", but also for pnigeuv", krivbanon,107 and
103
104 SEG 30.1687 dated to A.D. 662; SEG 32.1502 dated to A.D. 455; SEG 47.1990 dated to
the sixth century A.D. All inscriptions come from the Roman baths at Gadara.
105
Hero Stereom. 1.76.1 and Geep. 202. For derivatives, see Anon. Alch. 321.9 a, b
(fournevllon for oven, furnace), 367. 15, 17, 19 (fournavkion for a small oven).
106
Mau 1910.
107
Cf. supra n. 61 for the interchangeability of words in the entries of the lexicographers.
67
kavmino".108 The fou'rno" also produces its own kind of bread, fournivkio", which has a light
dough like klibanivkio".
In the Hippocratean corpus the bread baked in an ijpnov", called the ijpnivth", is
compared to other types of bread. The medical authors, starting with Hippocrates and
continuing with Dioscorides (first century A.D.), Galenus (second century A.D.), Oribasius
(fourth century A.D.), and Atius (sixth century A.D.), dedicated long discussions to the
various types of bread which are distinguished by their baking method as ejgkrufiva",
108
Ath. 3.115e.
111
Ath. 3.83.22.
68
The study of the linguistic range of words applying to kilns reveals our human
tendency not to be specific or absolute with terms referring to objects or structures that form
an integral part of our everyday lives. After this survey of the iconographical and
philological evidence about kilns, let us turn now to the archaeological remains.
69
70
______________________________________________
.
CHAPTER II
THE CERAMIC KILN
ITS ARCHITECTURE AND FUNCTION
This chapter is divided into two parts, as its title indicates. In the first part I examine
the individual parts of a kiln as known from the archaeological examples and from
iconographical sources such as the Penteskoufia plaques (see supra Ch. I). The purpose of
this section is to present the standard form of each part, the range of its variation, its
function, and, wherever possible, to detect any development in the construction techniques.
The principal parts of ceramic kilns remained largely unchanged throughout
antiquity. For the parts that are not well represented archaeologically in Classical contexts, I
will use comparative evidence from kilns that date to later times (Hellenistic to Byzantine)
71
______________________________________________
I. BUILDING A KILN
The channel kilns of the Middle Minoan and Late Minoan periods on Crete have been
reconstructed as cross-draft (Shaw et al. 2001). But they bear little resemblance to other
horizontal kilns from the Mediterranean basin, such as those in Israel (Delcroix and Huot
1972; Wood 1990, fig. 10).
______________________________________________
axis. The draft that allows the heat to move upward is caused by an opening at the bottom
(the stoking channel) and an opening at the top (the chimney).2
The choice of the kiln technology in a specific place is shaped by environmental,
social, and economical factors. A potters choice of a vertical kiln within the entire range of
firing structures is based primarily on cultural and technological reasons and less on its
often-cited advantages (high and even temperatures, better control, and lower breakage rate),
which are, after all, shared by the rudimentary bonfire or the pit firing (the permanent
version of a bonfire) (Plate II.2).3 The real advantages of a vertical kiln is better heat
insulation, economical consumption of fuel, and larger capacity. Other cultures exhibit
additional types of kilns, the most common being the horizontal kiln (also known as
cross-draft or downdraft). There the heat follows an imaginary horizontal axis across the
firing chamber and it moves downward before it exits through a tall chimney at the end of
the firing chamber, opposite the stoking area.4
The vertical kiln offers a limited range of attainable temperatures (not more than
1100-1150oC); the horizontal kiln can reach temperatures of 1300oC and more, and is ideal
2 A traditional workshop at Phini on Cyprus in 1960 used a kiln in which the burning of the
fuel and the firing of the pottery took place in the same chamber (Hampe and Winter 1962,
69, figs. 40-41). This isolated example was a hybrid structure ( 3.10-3.27m, H. 2.77m)
which combined elements of the bonfire (no separation between combustion and firing
chambers) and of an updraft kiln (permanent structure, loading/stoking door, and chimney).
The pots were arranged around the walls, leaving the central area open. The larger pithoi
were placed at the back of the kiln, and the smaller closer to the entrance.
3
Rice 1987. Bonfires can also reach high temperatures and they have a similarly low waster
rate (5%). Sillar 2000.
4
For a brief discussion of other types of kilns, see Rhodes 1968; Kingery 1997; Rice 1997a.
72
______________________________________________
for the firing of Chinese porcelain. The properties of the Mediterranean clays, which are
highly calcareous and vitrify above a temperature of 1100oC, deterred the Greek potters from
investigating types other than the vertical kiln. The vertical kiln is, therefore, a good example
of the effects and the accompanying limitations that one part of the chane operatoire of potmaking can place on another part.5
For extensive discussions on the cultural, social, and economic restrictions on the choices
of technological possibilities, see Lemonnier (ed.) 1993.
6
For a list of archaeological criteria for the location of pottery workshops, see infra Ch. VI.
Also Peacock 1982.
73
______________________________________________
Very often the kilns are surrounded by walls; since in many other cases this feature
is absent, we cannot say that the walls would have been used for structural reasons. It seems
that the kilns, being the most sensitive and crucial of all the equipment of a pottery
workshop, were somehow walled off and difficult to reach, to prevent the uninitiated from
purposefully or incidentally intervening with the firing process.
74
75
______________________________________________
Overall, the construction does not last more than a week, even for large kilns. And most
potters agree that the most laborious phase is digging out the soil for the subterranean
combustion chamber. In ethnographic examples, when a new kiln is built, it is first fired
empty to solidify the perforated floor and its supporting system. Then pottery is fired inside.
We know even less about the lifetime of a kiln. Generally kilns tend to last longer
than one would have expected, although they exact a heavy toll in the form of frequent repair
work.7 Papousek (1989) in his study of kilns in Mesoamerica estimated that their lifetime
averages 20-30 years.8
SITE
DIAMETER
CREW
TIME
COMMENTS
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Isthmia
1.50x1.50x2.00m
3 weeks
local workmen,
experimental
local materials
Rostoker and
Gebhard 1981
Boston,
LinksEngland
4ft
3 days
3-7 days
Moknine
Tunisia
Mayes 1961
Kiln specialist
with three
assistants
Hasaki, in
preparation
7 Hampe and Winter (1962, 21-2) recorded the repair of a kiln at Asomatos on Crete which
lasted only one day and where five persons were involved.
8 The rectangular kiln of K. Chrysogelos on Thasos was used from 1912 to 1970 (Gratsia
1999, 360). Blitzer (1990) reports that at Korone, Messenia, a kiln built in 1890 was still in
use in 1975.
9
______________________________________________
The range of the pottery from some sites, where newer kilns clearly replaced previous ones,
indicates that kilns could last for a quarter of a century, but for some construction defect they
were either abandoned or completely torn down and rebuilt. Also, careful analysis of the
microstratigraphy of ash layers found inside a kiln can allow one to estimate how many
firings occured, as has been done in the Roman pottery workshop in La Boissire-cole in
Gaul.9 It is safe to say that ancient potters (and modern potters as well) would wish to build
kilns to last, since a kiln was a considerable economic investment. In addition, successful
firings are directly correlated not only with a potter's general experience, but also with the
number of times this potter has fired this particular, specific, kiln. On the other hand, a
defective kiln would cause constant high waste rates and losses of profit; in such a case, the
building of a new kiln would seem to be the most economically viable option.
76
______________________________________________
a. Combustion Chamber
In the combustion chamber the gases from the fuel are concentrated. It is not
common to burn the fuel in this chamber. Instead, the fuel is initially burnt at the entrance of
the stoking chamber, and only gradually is it stoked along the stoking chamber towards the
combustion chamber. This is the most commonly preserved part of a kiln. It is usually dug
in bedrock so that the walls of the kiln can withstand the high temperatures without
collapsing. Its shape is oval, circular, or rectangular. Most typological studies rely on the
shape of the combustion chamber as the main criterion for classification (see infra Ch. III on
typology).11
The dimensions of the combustion chamber are slightly larger than those of the main
firing chamber. The walls, which are usually made of stones or slabs [Prinias (31-36)], are
covered with one or more layers of clay. Another example of additional heat insulation is
the case of the Hellenistic rectangular kiln at Chalkis (349), where Corinthian-style pan-tiles
10
For terminology in Italian dialects, see Cuomo Di Caprio 1971/2; for terms in Greek and
other languages, see Davaras 1980. A multi-lingual dictionary of the different parts of the
kiln is provided in Plates II.1, 3.
11
Kilns, originally designed as circular, can shrink to a pear shape after the first firing
(Mayes 1962).
77
______________________________________________
were used to cover the sidewalls of the combustion chamber (Plate II.4).12 In cases when
the combustion chamber is dug into virgin soil, the walls are omitted and the soil is plastered
with clay.13 The intense heat developed here produces strongly vitrified walls with a
greenish color. The floor of the combustion chamber is simply plastered over with clay
mortar. In later times the floor was made of tiles.14 It usually preserves a thin layer of ash,
but more ash can be found in the stoking channel.
12
Cf. the Roman kiln at Aktaiou-Eptahalkou-and Hephaisteion Sts. (252) where the walls
were lined with fired clay plaques.
13
14
In Roman kilns in France, the tile-covered floors of the combustion chamber also have
drainage to keep moisture away from the kiln so that no fuel is wasted in drying the kiln
before the actual firing (Le Ny 1988). In contrast to the Gallo-Roman tile kilns, no drainage
is preserved in the combustion chamber to drain away any rainwater.
15
In Roman Gaul and Britain some kilns have two stoking channels at two opposite ends. A
comparable example in Katochi (448) seems to have resulted from two phases or uses of the
kiln and not of a single design.
78
______________________________________________
corridors) only on one side of the kiln.15 It can be covered with an arched roof made of
sherds and clay mortar. A rare example, where this arched cover of the stoking channel is
preserved, is the small Hellenistic kiln at Pherai (192). Alternatively, the stoking channel
can simply be a depression in the floor (the stoking pit) resulting from the continuous use of
this space. The stoker gradually pushes the ash further down the channel and adds more fuel
at the entrance. Because of the constant presence of strong heat, the walls of the stoking
chamber (when present) show much stronger vitrification than the walls of the combustion
chamber, and the layer of ash is thicker. The length can range from a few centimeters (in
such cases it coincides with the entrance, described below) to more than one meter.16 Some
of the kilns depicted on the Penteskoufia plaques have remarkably long stoking chambers.17
In the Greek examples it is usually a single chamber, but occasional examples with two
separate stoking channels exist in large rectangular kilns [e.g. Kato Vassiliki (402)].18
16
See infra "Overall conception of the kilns design" for possible correlation between the
size of the combustion chamber and that of the stoking channel.
17
18
An unpublished kiln at Metropoli, Karditsa has a similar arrangement (pers. comm. with
C. Intzesiloglou). In the Italian typology of kilns, type IId is reserved for a rectangular kiln
with two stoking corridors and double stoking channels (Plate III.1).
19
For an ethnographic example of a pithos kiln in Kliru on Cyprus, see Hampe and Winter
(1962, 83) (Plate III.4). The two entrances are much commoner in lime kilns, where one
entrance serves for raking out the fast-accumulating ash (see infra Excursus, "The Lime
Kiln").
79
______________________________________________
Some traditional kilns have two stoking entrances, one at each end. This
symmetrical placement creates a stronger draft.19 An ancient kiln at Katochi (448) preserves
two entrances, but the second was a replacement of the first; they were not used
simultaneously.20 Sometimes the stoking channel is destroyed immediately after the
completion of firing in order to save space in the workshop. As I was able to observe at the
traditional pottery center of Margarites near Rethymno on Crete, the kilns presently stand
perfectly preserved, but there is no visible sign of a stoking channel.
The fire was stoked with long rods as depicted on the corpus of the Penteskoufia
plaques.21 At the end of the channel which is farthest away from the kiln, where the kiln
worker usually stands to stoke the fire, a depression is gradually formed, called the stoking
pit. This pit often collects the ash of the burnt fuel. In the few cases of adjacent kilns, a
common stoking pit serves the double purpose of saving space in the workshop and
facilitating the stoking of both kilns at the same time if necessary.22 The kilns retained their
individual stoking chambers.
In early publications the stoking channel, was confused with the long corridors
created by the presence of a dividing wall inside the combustion chamber [e.g. East kiln at
Tile Works, at Corinth (65)]. The myth of such double stoking channels derives from the
Penteskoufia plaque F893 (Plate II.6), which was incorrectly oriented in some early
20
21
See supra Ch. I. One metal stoking rod, measuring 2.00m in length, has survived from a
19th century A.D. kiln in Porto Cheli, excavated by F. Matson (Jameson 1969; Halieis
excavation notebook no. 500).
22
See e.g. the kilns at Sindos (86-89). For examples outside Greece, see Marzabotto (plan in
Nijboer 1998, fig. 42), Morgantina, Policoro in Italy, and Colchester in England.
80
______________________________________________
c. Entrance
The so-called entrance of the kiln is basically the juncture between the stoking
channel and the side of the kiln.
It has been suggested that all Greek kilns had their entrance placed towards the
prevailing winds, but Davaras, examining all the Minoan kilns, rejects this statement.25 The
same conclusion seems to be valid for the historical kilns as well, because no uniformity in
the direction of the entrance can be noted. What the builders did take into consideration
23
The section is certainly a vertical cross-section showing the central support of the
perforated floor, the perforated floor, the firing chamber with its load, and the opening at the
top. Wrong interpretations appeared as early as in 1911 (Perrot and Chippiez 1911, 348, fig.
185) and persisted as recently as 1978 (Duhamel 1978/9, fig. 1d); Marwitz (1960), by
placing the plaque sideways clockwise, interpreted it as a combination of a horizontal section
of the pit (the right-hand half) and a vertical section of the firing chamber (the left-hand half)
seeing in it a double stoking channel. See also Winter A. 1957, 1959.
24
25
Cf. Faure 1973, 217 (cited in Davaras 1980); Cook (1961, 65) notes that sheltered
situations are common in the Roman British kilns, and further notes that an open situation
may well be a disadvantage. The orientation of the entrance has been disassociated from the
direction of the wind in the case of the Roman-British kilns as well (Corder 1957).
81
82
______________________________________________
when constructing a kiln was the slope of the ground. The entrance usually follows that
slope.26
Two Archaic examples, from Lato and the Kerameikos, further support Davaras'
statement (Plate II.5a-b): in Lato, Kiln 1 and Kiln 2 (28-29), located only one meter away
from each other and probably contemporary, have different orientations with Kiln 1 facing
to the west and kiln 2 to the north. In the Athenian Kerameikos, two superimposed kilns found
under the museum display exactly the same shape and construction technique, but face in
different directions (40-41). In a traditional pottery workshop at Moknine, Tunisia, where
there are four kilns, only two have an entrance with the same orientation.27
26
For the exception to this rule, see the Prinias kilns (31-36), where the axis of some kilns is
perpendicular to the axis of the slope.
27
28
Hasaki, in preparation.
Although this solid perforated floor is a standardized feature of most Mediterranean kilns,
updraft kilns in other cultures use instead a system of interlocking arms upon which the pots
stand (Papousek 1989).
______________________________________________
reach the firing chamber, but the permanent or semi-permanent character of the upper
compartment provides a better insulation and preserves the heat efficiently. In firing
structures without a perforated floor and without any walls, as in a pit fire, the heat is easily
lost. Given the resemblance between a honeycomb and this perforated floor, it is likely that
Hesychios refers to the kiln's perforated floor when he names a part of the furnace kuyevlai
or kuyelivde".29
The eschara is a typical and essential feature of all updraft kilns, and it appears
without exception in all Greek kilns of the historical periods. The earliest excavated kilns
which preserve their eschara (in situ or in fragments) are the Middle Helladic kiln from
Kirrha, near Delphi (106) (Plate IV.16), the kilns at the Menelaion at Sparta (101-102) and
the kiln at the Kadmeion at Thebes (113). Another example can be added if we accept the
Middle Helladic date for the kiln from the Agora at Eretria, now exhibited in the
archaeological museum at Eretria (103) (Plate IV.4).30
The thickness of the floor ranges from 0.10 to 0.20m. The diameter of the holes
varies between 0.06 and 0.10m;31 usually they are uniformly spread throughout the surface
of the eschara. The Prinias kilns from ca. 700 B.C. (31-36) have also provided many
fragments (0.07m thick) from the eschara, and some ventholes measuring 0.03-0.06m in
29
Hsch. K 4757. For a different interpretation, see Sparkes 1975, 134. Perhaps the term
meant the spherical vessel which was placed on top of the metallurgical shaft furnaces
(Hadjidimitriou 1997, 127).
30
31
Cf. escharai from some kilns at Figaretto, Corfu (197-209) of holes: 0.10m, and in
Classical Sindos in Macedonia (89: of holes ca. 0.12m; thickness of the eschara ca.
0.10m).
83
______________________________________________
diameter (Plate II.7). The distance between the holes is at least 0.10m. In the Kavousi kiln
on Crete (151), the holes are located only around the perimeter of the eschara.
An average kiln 1.30m in diameter would have a floor perforated with thirty to fifty
ventholes, so about 20-30% of the surface of the floor would have been pierced.32 The
ventholes on the perimeter are normally larger than the average-sized holes in the middle.
The ventholes are arranged in loosely concentric circles in the case of circular kilns and in
rows for the rectangular kilns.33 The uniformity of dimensions of the ventholes in the
perforated floor and the ethnographic parallels, suggest that wooden sticks were used to
pierce the wet clay of the floor to create the holes.34 This arrangement, although quite
random, reflects cultural preferences; and therefore, Hellenistic kilns in Alexandria look
quite different from a Hellenistic kiln on the Greek mainland (Plate II.8).
The perforated floor is rarely found in situ, but its presence is attested by excavated
blocks of fired clay which bear ventholes.35 A telling example of the confusion that these
32
The same number holds true for traditional kilns: calculations were conducted on a
traditional kiln of K. Chrysogelos on Thasos (Gratsia 1999) which measures 2.10 x 2.80m
and has thirty square ventholes (0.20m each side). Therefore, 1.20m2/5.88m2 (or 20%) of the
surface is pierced.
33
It would be interesting to see whether the diameter of the holes in the eschara has any
effect on the firing, or whether it can offer us indirect clues for the type of pots fired (large or
small) and how much heat reaches the firing chamber.
34
35
On Asomatos, Crete the sticks are made of plane trees (Hampe and Winter 1962, 25).
In traditional modern Greek pottery workshops at Asomatos the ventholes are called
ajfanoiv (Hampe and Winter 1962, 25). Rhomaios (1916), while describing the kiln at
Thermon (75), provides some interesting ethnographic information about the words referring
to the parts of the kiln: the workmen called the supporting wall of the perforated floor
pappav", and the ventholes of the perforated floor, ntoufevkia. Around the kiln many small
rectangular clay supports, called sapouvnia by the local workmen, were found (see also infra
"Kiln Furniture").
84
______________________________________________
fragments can cause comes from the Archaic kiln at Lato (28) where three joining pieces of
clay, showing on the underside the imprints of perishable material (probably branches) were
excavated. They form a hole, 0.15m in diameter. It was thought by the excavators that it
formed the chimney of the kiln despite its small diameter, whereas it is clearly a venthole.36
At Lefkandi, fragments of two perforated plaques of ca. 0.90m in diameter were found (07)
(Plate II.7b). They could have belonged to a small kiln (although they bear no trace of
firing); it is not entirely clear how they could have been used in a kiln.37
A supporting system of variable complexity ensures that this comparatively thin
floor would not collapse. The support (or supports) is placed centrally, or along the long
axis of the kiln, or along the short axis of the kiln. The commonest supporting system is
usually a simple column made of a combination of stones, broken sherds, tiles, and mortar,
which in turn supports the overlying perforated floor (eschara). Its position is roughly at the
center of the combustion chamber. For a kiln with an interior diameter of ca 1.00-1.30m, the
support has a diameter of 0.30-0.33m. Exceptionally large, in proportional terms, is the
central pillar in the Archaic kiln at Phari on Thasos ( 1.00m), whose combustion chamber
is 2.00m wide (25).38 In some early examples, such as the Protoarchaic kilns at Prinias (3136), the pillar is placed quite off center, apparently intentionally.
36
Duckrey and Picard 1969, 803. See Seifert (1993, n. 30) who accepts the chimney
interpretation.
37
A miniature perforated plaque from Corinth [see supra Ch. I, "Kiln Model (KN 181).
From the Potters' Quarter at Ancient Corinth"] presents an equally puzzling problem
concerning its use, if it is actually connected with a kiln; for rectangular perforated plaques
used as a floor in a Late Roman-Early Christian cist burial in Patras, 22-24 Charalambi St.,
see ADelt 31 (1976) 89, pl. 74a.
38
The pillar has been relined in a second phase increasing thus its diameter.
85
______________________________________________
Other, more complicated systems of supporting the floor of the eschara are adopted
for rectangular kilns. A central wall is either built or dug inside the bedrock [Corinth, Tile
Works (65)] and from this wall spring arches which rest on the side walls (Type IIb). A
different conception is the arrangement of pairs of cross-walls upon which rest the ends of
arches which in turn support the eschara (Type IIc).39 Sometimes there is a small ledge (ca.
0.10-0.12m wide), running on the upper part of the combustion chamber, upon which the
eschara would have rested.40 This ledge should not be confused with the wider bench (see
infra) that ran around the interior of the combustion chamber at a lower height and whose
function is still debatable.
An elaborate system of clay arms would then connect the central pillar to the side
walls and provide the substructure upon which the perforated floor would rest. The Late
Classical kiln at ancient Elis (66), and the Roman kilns at Gortys in Arcadia (335), at
Epitalion in Elis (346), and at Istrona (Kalo Chorio Mirabellou) on Crete (385) (Plates II.1011) preserve the entire supporting web-like system, or a large part thereof.41 In the majority
of cases, the arms are formed out of clay. In places with abundant stone, however, the arms
are made of long stones shaped appropriately, such as the schist plaques in the Hellenistic
workshops at Paros (228-233) and at Vamvouri Ammoudia (226).
39
See infra Ch. III, where all the types of supporting the perforated floor are discussed in
detail.
40
For a later example of such a ledge, see the Roman kilns at Sihaina in Patras (334-336).
Unpublished. Information kindly provided by M. Sotiropoulou, ST v Ephorate of Prehistoric
and Classical Antiquities in Patras.
41
Misleedingly, Karagiorga (1971) calls these arms "ajeragwgoiv", although they are solid of
baked clay and they were never intended to convey air.
86
______________________________________________
Archaeological remains of these arms are very rare [e.g. the Classical kilns from
Sindos (86-89)]. They have survived more often in Roman kilns, such as those at Berbati
(340), at Metropoli, Karditsa (353), and in a Medieval/Byzantine kiln in Nemea (Plate
II.11).42 The clay arms at Berbati have a semicircular section, and measure ca. 0.70m (L.) x
0.20m (W.) x 0.11m (H.). Three supporting arms in Metropoli at Karditsa are Y-shaped with
a long stem. The orientation of the support inside the kiln is still unclear. Most of these
arms have rows of fingertip impressions on their underside.
Because of the vital role of the support in the function of the kiln, potters are
reluctant to experiment with its construction. Consequently, the kilns tend to be fairly
homogeneous in form, resulting in few types. The enduring chronologically (and to some
extent culturally) character of the supporting system, has often been used to establish
typologies of kilns (see supra Ch. III).
42
Davaras 1980. The bench at Palaikastro measures 0.40m (H.) x 0.34m (W.). Outside
Greece a Minoan kiln with a bench was found at Miletus (Niemeier 1997).
87
______________________________________________
which runs around the walls of the combustion chamber (Plate III.7).43 It has been argued
that the function of the perforated floor was partially substituted with this bench. The pots
would have been placed on the bench and would have been in direct contact with the fire.
A number of factors speak against this interpretation.44 The small width of the
bench would accommodate very few pots and of a small size. For example, the Late Minoan
kiln (LM IIIB) at Palaikastro could have only fired between thirty and one hundred cups and
a handful of larger vessels. It is highly unlikely that the potters would have invested the
time-consuming effort needed to build a permanent structure with such a limited firing
capacity. In addition, the effects of the immediate contact of the pots with the fire would
have been as disastrous as if the bench had never existed. In other words, the structure
would have been an elaborate version of a primitive bonfire, while retaining all the
shortcomings of the bonfire.
Because the bench appears on more than one occasion, and cannot be considered the
result of a local and limited experimentation, it must have served a function.45 One case
which is of course unique, but deserves to be mentioned, supports the hypothesis that the
shelf was used to place pottery to be fired. A traditional kiln on Patmos had a shelf built
inside the combustion chamber where the potters intentionally placed large pithoi and
44
45
See supra Ch. III, "If. Circular kiln with internal bench" for discussion of the type If and
listed examples. The type includes historical kilns as well.
88
______________________________________________
lekanes which required a long firing.46 Since the fire itself and the ashes were drawn
upwards with the draft the large size vessels were not affected. It was unclear by the account
whether the presence of these pithoi (by necessity not more than two or three could fit in the
chamber and still leave space for the fire to burn) would have obstructed the firing of the
fuel. Alternatively, the shelf could have been a support for the arms springing out of a
supporting pillar.47 In such cases, however, it is built much higher in the combustion
chamber, closer to the perforated floor, and it is very narrow.
e. Firing Chamber
Pots and other ceramic objects were placed and fired in this chamber. Very seldom
is the firing chamber preserved in the archaeological record. Usually only the lowest part of
the chamber above the eschara is preserved [Pythagoreion, Samos (14), Pherai-Velestino,
Stamouli-Bolia Plot (192)]. This lower part is permanently built with bricks or sherds
plastered with clay. Its upper parts, as well as the dome (see infra), had to be rebuilt before
each new firing. Sometimes the potters were reusing pithoi, after removing the narrow lower
part, as walls for the firing chamber [e.g. the Hellenistic workshop at Paros (228-233)]. The
46
Psaropoulou 1984, 98. The bench was 0.50m high. No information is available about its
width.
47
See e.g. the late Classical kiln at ancient Elis (66), the Roman kiln at Patras Sihaina (334336).
89
______________________________________________
pithos, having already been fired, was ideal in this place, because of its shape and its
capability to provide heat insulation.
Sometimes the firing chamber has a loading door that facilitates the placing of the
pots to be fired in the lower parts of the kiln. The loading door is closed off with bricks and
plastered over with clay for better retention of heat. The loading door can be omitted in
small circular kilns, which can be loaded directly from the top. The representations of kilns
on the Penteskoufia plaques show that the loading entrance was usually constructed at 90 or
180 angles from the direction of the stoking channel, and understandably on the same level
as the eschara.48 Traditional kilns, as preserved in ethnographic studies, retain the same
arrangement.
The firing chamber of ancient kilns must have had some larger holes (besides the
chimney) in order to vent the fumes and a few smaller holes to allow the potter to
periodically check on the progress of the firing (the so-called peer-holes). Some of these
peer-holes are depicted on the Penteskoufia plaques. At the traditional kilns on Cyprus they
were called to; mavtin (eye), an additional optical aid to the potter.49
When the firing chamber was large, reaching its top must have required the use of a
ladder, as the Penteskoufia plaques depict (F802). In other cases a stepped access was built.
Fortunately, in a few cases, as at Pherai (190-192), remains of steps are still visible.
48
The loading door of the kiln is indicated either with a painted (e.g. plaques F616, F846) or
with an incised outline (F827).
49
Hampe and Winter 1962, 76. Other names that traditional potters use for these peer-holes
are fanouvria, afanoiv, movstre".
90
______________________________________________
f. Kiln Furniture
To stabilize the terracotta products inside the kiln, to keep them apart, and to stack
them, a variety of internal kiln supports (known in the literature as kiln props or stilts) were
used (Plates II.12-17).50 At least seven different types of vessel separators have been
identified in the archaeological record:
a. teardrop-shaped;
b. tripods;
c. trapezoidal;
d. L-shaped;
e. clay rings or clay cylinders;
f. pyramidal (loomweights); and
g. any potsherd.
The teardrop-shaped supports are the most common. These are used primarily in
pottery kilns and are found in abundance at production sites.51 Their earliest appearance is
in the Classical period, but they continued until the Byzantine period. Sometimes they were
even inscribed.52 In early excavation reports they were not immediately recognized as kiln
50
For kiln furniture in Italian kilns of Geometric through late Hellenistic periods, see
Cracolici 1998.
51
Kalogeropoulou 1970; Karagiorga 1971; Themelis 1975, 40-1, pl. 18b, for Eretria;
Papadopoulos J. 1992. Byzantine ones are published in Papanikola-Bakirtzi 1989 (fuller
bibliography in Papadopoulos J. 1992, 208, n. 22). They are also found at the Acropolis at
Vergina (Faklaris 1997), where there were workshops from the second century B.C. to the
first century A.D. and at Delphi (Perdrizet 1908, 199, fig. 889). Also from 7-9, Kekropos St. in
Athens (258) to name a few examples.
52
For a stamped piece of support with the name of a lampmaker PREIMIOU, who also
appears on a tile stamp from Corinth, see Biers 1971.
91
______________________________________________
53
Dakaris (1960) interpreted them as theater tickets to the western parodos of the theater at
Dodoni (Dim. 0.03-0.06 x 0.025-0.05m); see Coleman 1986 for a misinterpreted kiln support
as a worn handle from Pylos in Elis.
54
For a similar reconstruction, see Kalogeropoulou 1970, fig. 10. This arrangement better
explains the orientation of the stamp on the support from Corinth (see supra n. 52);
Keramopoulos 1911, 261, fig. 7.
55
Cf. the tripod supports (see infra), the bronze tripods for the large bowls, or the clay
tripods for the prehistoric cooking vessels.
56
Nemea Archaeological Museum, inv. nos. TC 14, TC 22. Fragments of the tripods were
also found in the context N17:26.
92
93
______________________________________________
0.04, total H: 0.03m), and much more standardized.57 They were mold made and used to
separate the Byzantine glazed vessels, and often their footprints are still seen on the tondos
of the vessels.58
Inside the Tile-Works kilns at Corinth (64-65) another type of kiln support has been
found: small, thin trapezoidal ones measuring 0.03-0.07 (L.) x 0.035-0.075 (H.) x 0.02m (W.).59
The same site supplied numerous examples of a peculiar form, the L-shaped supports. The
interior corner is not a right, but an obtuse angle. These supports are highly standardized in
size (L: 0.08m, Max. H: 0.06m) which implies the use of a mold in their preparation. The
vitrified long arm of one of these supports suggests that they stood on the horizontal arm of
the L. Although their exact position inside the kiln is unclear, it is plausible that they were
placed below the undercuts of the Corinthian pantiles (Plate II.14). Their size and their
concentration in a tile-manufacturing area is indicative of their exclusive use for tiles or
other large terracotta objects. A smaller version appears in the Hellenistic period, as in
57
Papanikola-Bakirtzi 1987. Morgan (1942) had expressed the view that the Byzantine
tripods had been imported as an idea from China. Given the long tradition of tripods used as
vessel separators in the ancient Greek ceramic technology, such a distant loan seems
somewhat far-fetched, unless we assume that the prior technological knowledge had relapsed
in Greece for some centuries.
58
59
See Nemea Archaeological Museum, inv. nos. TC 15, TC 21, TC 23. Cf. the supports from
the Archaic kilns at Phari, Thasos (25-26), AAA 18 (1985) figs. 3-4.
60
In Atalante, Lokris this type was found together with examples of the teardrop-shaped
variety and of a peculiar upside down T-shaped type of support. Similar unpublished
examples from Arkitsa were displayed during the exhibition in the National Road
Excavations in Lamia Archaeological Museum.
______________________________________________
Atalante in Lokris (185-186) and in Arkitsa.60 Their chronological range so far is limited to
the Classical and Hellenistic periods.
Clay rings were quite numerous, especially in the Athenian workshops. Excavated
examples come from the Classical workshops at the Lenormant Ave. in Athens, from various
contexts in the Athenian Agora, from Sindos (86-89) and from the Hellenistic kilns at 37,
Pallinaion St. (160-161).61 The rings are wheel-made. The average dimensions of the
examples from Lenormant Ave. are 0.20-23m in exterior diameter, 0.14m in interior
diameter and 0.005m thick. They were produced in standardized diameters apparently
corresponding to pots of different sizes, like the clay rings of 0.22m in diameter from the
Classical workshops in Lenormant Ave. (Plate II.15).62 The clay rings from the Lenormant
Ave. workshops are also inscribed with letters or names.63 The rings are very finely made
and appear only in large production centers for decorated or glazed pottery. Thus they are a
highly specialized type of the movable equipment of a workshop. At their size, they could
not have supported very heavy vessels. In addition, they have a high breakage rate because
of their thinness, which explains their frequent presence in workshop dumps.
61
For the Lenormant Ave. workshops, see Baziotopoulou-Valavani 1993 and Monaco 2000
(with extensive illustrations); for the Athenian Agora, see Papadopoulos J. 1992.
62
For an example of a clay ring from the Pnyx, see Rotroff 1982, 87, pl. 50. For a
reconstruction of the stacking system employing these rings, see p. 89, fig. 3; Rotroff et al.
1997, 93.
63
Many examples from Lenormant Ave. preserve the letter N, or NAY[ It is not clear
whether they refer to owners of the workshops or to specific potters employed there
(Baziotopoulou-Valavani 1993). This may suggest that several potters shared one kiln. For
detailed catalogue entries of them, see Monaco 2000, 217-31.
94
______________________________________________
The clay cylinders are a larger and taller version of the more fragile clay rings,
discussed above. They resemble necks, but have finished edges on the upper and lower ends
(Plate II.12).64 They can easily be misinterpreted for necks if only fragments survive. Their
average dimensions (Diam. 0.15m, H. 0.10-0.15m) make them more suitable to support
heavier pots, such as amphoras inside the kiln or even during the drying period. Their
considerable height is enough to separate the lower level of pots from direct contact with the
perforated floor, thus reducing the breakage rate. The excavations at the Byzantine site of
Mikro Pisto in eastern Macedonia yielded an interesting variety of such cylinders, but in this
case they were wheelmade and much smaller.65 Their shape resembles a cut-off base of a
cup and bears a central hole.
Besides the more specialized types of pot supports which have been described above,
the potters had access to a large variety of the workshops products that could be used as kiln
props either because of some defect or because there were many in stock. Pyramidal
loomweights belong to this category. Their use as kiln supports, however, must have been
secondary to their primary use for weaving. In Chalkis, for example, a Hellenistic
rectangular kiln yielded a large quantity of loomweights (349). Their presence inside an
abandoned kiln supports their secondary use as kiln supports rather than the interpretation of
64 The supports at the Classical kilns in Sindos (86-89) Despoini 1982, 67, fig. 5, pl. 2st. as
well as the examples from the Stamouli-Bolia kiln at ancient Pherai (190-192), have pierced
walls.
65
Zikos 1998.
66 For similar rectangular supports, called ntakavkia, used for pithoi in modern Korone, see
Blitzer 1990, 696, pl. 109f. At Thermon in the beginning of the 20th century, the thin
rectangular supports were called sapouvnia (Rhomaios 1916). Identical examples pierced in
their upper part (Laubenheimer et al. 1978/9) were found on the perforated floor of a
collapsed Roman kiln in Narbonne, France, leaving no doubt of their function inside the kiln.
95
______________________________________________
the excavator that this was a kiln firing exclusively loomweights (although it is possible that
the loomweights had been fired in this kiln).66
The final category of kiln supports, completely undistinguishable in the
archaeological record, consists of the sherds that the potter places among the pots so that
their sides do not touch. The ethnographic evidence documents their use mainly in
workshops for coarse pottery.67
Stacking techniques
Virtually nothing is known from antiquity about the techniques that the potters used
for stacking the vessels inside the kiln. It is unfortunate that no ancient kiln was excavated
with its content intact. In 1888 an ancient kiln on Chios was reported to have been found
with its load of hydriae.68
The stacking of the pots inside the kiln is crucial to their successful firing. An
unbalanced load of pots would produce many wasters. Other causes for wasters are defects
in the vessel walls resulting from insufficient drying or from faults in the composition of the
67
Hampe and Winter 1962, 1965; Hasaki, in preparation. On Paros in the Skiada Plot (228233) a large number of curved stops have been found. It is unclear at present whether they
were used as props or as devices to help form the handles of large vases (Plate II.16a).
68
Lemos (1997) identifies a group of Chiotic hydriae found in a cemetery as coming from
this kiln. The kiln is not visible any longer and nothing further is known about it.
96
______________________________________________
clay and abrupt changes in temperature. In modern times it is generally the most
experienced potter in the workshop, usually the owner, who loads the lowest, most important,
layers with pots.69
It is likely that each potter used a number of different techniques, according to the
size and the surface treatment of the vessels fired. Glimpses of ancient ways of stacking can
be found in completely unexpected places, or from potters' jokes (or mistakes): a LM I
kernos from Gortyna depicts a number of conical cups stacked on top of a large base and
crowned by the model of a hut (Plate II.16b). 70 It is only natural to assume that the potter
of this plastic vase would have stacked the cups in the same manner as he was accustomed to
stack them inside the kiln. The ethnographic record is less informative, because most of the
traditional workshops produce coarse vessels which the potters stack in a less orderly way.
Another example of stacked pottery is a peculiar synthesis of three small twohandled cups, which are stacked one on top of the other and were recovered from the
cemetery at Merenda (ancient Myrrhinous) in northeastern Attica (Plate II.17). Most of the
69
Hasaki, in preparation: at Moknine, the loading of the large kiln reflects the hierarchy at
the workshop: the oldest potter (and the workshop owner) stacks the first three or four layers;
an experienced, but younger person stacks the middle layers; and teenaged, part-time
assistants stack the upper layers. In an experimental firing of a modern kiln in Britain, onethird of the fired pots (62/182) were wasters as a result of bad stacking (Mayes, 1961). This
percentage, while demonstrating the inexperience of the crew, also indicates the long-term
benefits of a specialized pottery workshop whose breakage rates would have been much
lower.
70
Hgg 1990. Herakleion Archaeological Museum, inv. no. 60.54.679. More examples of
similar kernoi come from the Daedalic temple at Gortyna, built over the LM III settlement
(Herakleion Archaeological Museum, inv. nos. 60.54.690, 60.54.680, 60.54.696). They are
also discussed in the study of Minoan kernoi, see Karayianni 1984, pl. 2 where they are
presented as parallels of her type II.4, best exemplified by the kernos at the Herakleion
Archaeological Museum, inv. no. 60.54.698.
97
______________________________________________
examples of such stacked towers are minimally decorated with stripes or bands, with the sole
exception of an Athenian black-figure cup.71 The interesting feature of the Merenda
example is that the handles of the middle cup are placed at a horizontal, 90 angle, whereas the
top and the bottom cups are placed in the exact same position.
g. Dome
The Penteskoufia terracotta plaques invariably show a domed roof for the kilns.72 It
was probably made of pot sherds joined together with clay mortar. To prevent the kiln from
exploding as a result of the high temperature, there is a chimney-hole on top of the domed
roofs. The ancient term for this opening is kanqov" or kapnodovch (Hsch. s.v.). The dome
71
Brijder (1997, fig. 6) provides more examples of such superimposed cups from
Subgeometric Samos, dated to 675-650 B.C. On p. 13, n. 4 he lists eight more examples, and
he considers them as forerunners of the Siana cups. The "tower-cups" from the Heraion at
Samos come from either west of the South Stoa (three in number, all five-stacked) and the
six-stacked ones come from cisterns inside the sanctuary. The height of a five-stacked tower
is 0.145m, and of a six-stacked one 0.245m. The handles of the tower-cups from Samos are
all aligned one on top of the other. Even if they were ritual objects [AM 72 (1957) 48], this
does not refute the possibility that the inspiration of the stacking must have come from the
common experience of the potter. The ritual association is further weakened since only one
other example comes from a ritual context, namely from the sanctuary of Zeus on Mt.
Hymettos.
72
For a mistaken reconstruction of a chimney, see the Archaic kilns at Lato (28-30). The
fragments clearly form a venthole from the perforated floor of the kiln; cf. Duckrey and
Picard 1969, 803; Seifert (1993, n.30) accepts this reconstruction.
98
______________________________________________
can also be only a loose arrangement of broken sherds or tiles. A kiln can have either type of
covering, depending on the kiln load and the pace of production.
On Crete the traditional potters placed broken pieces of pottery or sheets of tin over
large pithoi-firing kilns.73 In the experimental kiln made at Isthmia, archaeologists used
defective tiles as the covering of the kiln; the roof was not completely sealed in order to
allow the kiln to "breathe."74 A similar arrangement can be suggested for the large kilns,
usually for tiles: for example, the East Kiln at the Tile Works at Corinth, which measures
7.50 x 5.00m (65).
It still remains to be investigated whether the firing chamber must be of a minimum
height so that the circulation of heat is not impeded during the firing of the pots. One should
also not discount the possibility that there may have been more than one chimney, especially
in the larger kilns, to ensure that the heat reaches equally all parts of the kiln. More than one
chimney would have been welcome at the larger rectangular kilns of type IIb.75
So far no kiln has provided any traces of a permanent protective roof over the kiln,
like those excavated in the Gallo-Roman kiln at Franche Compte at the workshop of
Offemont.76
73
74
75
Multiple openings on the perimeter of the dome, placed at standard intervals, are to
be seen on thetraditional kilns at Moknine, Tunisia (Hasaki, in preparation).
76
Le Ny 1988. The necessity for such roofs as well as the presence of drainage facilities,
may be explained by the more frequent rains encountered in the French climate.
99
______________________________________________
It has been suggested that when just one of the above features is excavated, an
approximate size for the entire kiln can be reconstructed. At Prinias (31-36) the excavators,
through careful measurement of all the constituent parts of the kilns, postulated that all the
dimensions used in their construction could be converted into multiples or dividers of two
interrelated units of measurements, unit P (ca. 0.315m) and unit M (ca. 0.5233m).77 The P
was used for minor structural elements such as the diameter of the columnar support (1 P)
and the thickness of the perforated floor (1/3 P). On the other hand, the M was used for
larger dimensions, such as the interior dimensions of the combustion chamber. For example,
the combustion chamber of the "North kiln" is 6M (ca. 3.14m), or the combustion chamber of
Kiln 1 equals 2M (1.04m). The two units are connected by the formula M=12/3P.
The calculations, however, are too complicated and too numerous to be believable
and/or useful. Correlations such as 42/3 P or 12/3 P could conceivably have been used by
architects of major public buildings, but it is unlikely that the potters at Prinias had the time,
77
100
______________________________________________
the knowledge, or even the desire to make such elaborate calculations for a ceramic kiln.
Instead they probably used an intuitive system of building to scale and of recognizing
proportional relationships between parts.
Kilns 3 and 4 at Prinias were left unconsidered by Rizza and his colleagues because
these kilns did not fit their criteria; therefore, the units seem to have been made to fit their
argument. Moreover, two different systems, albeit interconnected, were used for two kilns
which are similar in shape and of approximately the same date. A stronger case for a
standardized unit of measurement could have been made if only one unit and a small number
of its basic multiples or fractions had been used for the construction of all kilns. Otherwise,
almost any number can be converted into another, but this speaks more for a haphazard
system of construction than for a well-planned scheme.
I believe that these interrelationships would have been more empirical and more
finely tuned over the years, rather than being minutely calculated, as the excavators of the
Protoarchaic complex at Prinias have attempted, quite attractively, to demonstrate. The
dimensions of some basic structural parts of the kiln probably fell within a narrow range of
proportional possibilities, rather than adhering strictly to a set numerical unit of
measurement.
101
102
______________________________________________
a. Fuel
The major types of fuel used in ancient Greek kilns were wood, olive pits, and
several types of plants gathered from the countryside, such as vine cuttings, straw, pistachio
shells, almond shells, or prickly shrubs.78 Potters usually combined these types, depending
on the local flora and the season during which they were firing.79
The ancient sources are not very helpful about ancient fuel. From Romanus
Melodus we learn that pivssa and klimativde" (vine branches) were used as fuel for
furnaces.80 Carbonized remains of olive pits have often been found in excavated kilns and
78
Tsoumis 1999.
79
For general information on fuel, see Rice 1987, 162-3, 174-6; for deforestation in
antiquity, see Hughes 1983 (literary references to deforestation); Wertime 1983 (practical
estimations).
80
Romanus Melodus, Cantica, Hymn 8.15-16. Ethnographic comparanda from the pithoi
potters at Korone in Blitzer 1990, 696. For an estimate of the quantity of fuel required for the
Roman baths and its cost, see Blyth 1999.
______________________________________________
were used throughout antiquity to modern times (e.g. Bronze Age kilns at Mochlos (148149), Hellenistic kiln at Amorgos (227), Roman kilns at Kotzia Square in Athens (274-300).
The carbonized pieces of wood recovered in kilns are usually too small for analysis, and
most have turned to ash. Thick trunks from large trees, such as pines or cypresses, were
used at the beginning of the firing for a slow, gradual increase in temperature. The small
branches and olive pits, which caused rapid increases in temperature and produced much
smoke, were used to maintain the high temperature. As a rule, dry wood fires better than wet
wood, which is one more reason why the potting season is centered in the dry months of
spring and summer. It is not likely that the ancient Greek potters used charcoal
extensively.81 The admittedly superior firing qualities of charcoal would have been
counterbalanced by the longer processing time and the higher costs for the large quantities of
charcoal needed by the potters. On the other hand, charcoal was ideal and necessary for the
high temperatures required by bronzesmiths, and for the ancient Greek oven or fireplace,
where a rapid increase in temperature was desired.82
81
Olson 1991 (with a rich, non-archaeological bibliography on traditional charcoalproducing methods practiced in various countries). The only extensive information in texts
regarding the use of charcoal is found in the Hellenistic papyri (PMich II.123r, col. XXII.18)
referring to bronzesmiths' workshops: Burkhalter 1990). For a traditional method of making
charcoal by stacking large tree trunks and firing them for many days, still used in northern
Greece, see Tsenoglou 1991.
82
A
] nqrake" as well as firewood were used for the casting of Pheidias bronze Athena as
the epistatai account informs us (IG I2.338 and IG I3.1). See also Dinsmoor 1921 and Merritt
1936. Theophrastus Lap. 16, 48 for bronze workers in Olympia using charcoal for their
furnaces; Theophrastus HP 3.8.7, 5.9.3 emphasizes that charcoal is useful only to
bronze smiths.
103
______________________________________________
Mayes and Scott (1984, 27) report that the shift to use of coal instead of wood caused the
Medieval potters in England to construct kilns with multiple stoking channels for even
distribution of heat, since the flame of the coal is less intense than that of the wood. For
example, a kiln of 2.13m. in diameter (K12B in their catalogue) had to have four flues built
around its perimeter.
84
85
Hasaki, in preparation.
86
Sillar 2000.
87
104
______________________________________________
105
______________________________________________
The firing properties of the local fuel can, therefore, define the pace and range of
development of the local pottery technology. A method for detecting the fuel used to fire a
terracotta product has now been developed in Switzerland.87 Based on the principle of
thermal extraction, the combustion fuel infiltrates the porous ceramic, thereby leaving a
distinctive chemical fingerprint on the organic composition of the fired object. In other
words, a brick fired with pine will have a different organic composition after its firing, than a
brick fired with cypress. By analyzing ancient terracottas and observing their organic
composition, we will be able to learn what fuel was used for firing as well as what type of
firing atmosphere developed.
Access to fuel sources for firing the kilns is a major consideration for potters. Due
to the large quantities of fuel required for the kilns of a full-time workshop, fuel availability
and proximity to fuel sources were among the most important criteria for establishing a
workshop, even more important than their proximity to raw material.88
Quantitative data on the fuel requirements are recorded in the experimental
archaeological and ethnographical corpora.89 One should not expect that the quantity of fuel
consumed will fluctuate considerably since fuel consumption is relevant to the kiln design.
Given the almost stagnant character of kiln's design in antiquity (see infra Ch. III), no
dramatic savings in fuel consumption are to be expected.
For the first hours of firing at low temperatures, the quantities of fuel are smaller. At
the higher temperatures, however, the burning of a large volume of fuel results in a small
increase in the temperature. On average, a cubic meter of firing chamber requires one ton of
88
Rice 1987.
89
For quantitative data on fuel consumption of a lime kiln, see Excursus, Table Exc.1.
106
______________________________________________
wood. The ratio of kiln size to fuel consumption is not directly proportional: a circular kiln
of 3.00m consumes less fuel than the fuel burnt by three kilns, each 1.00m in diameter.90 A
traditional circular kiln at Moknine, Tunisia (2.00m in diameter) uses one ton of olive pits, a
quantity which is produced by processing ca. 1300 kg of olives.91 Because an olive tree
provides on average 120 kg of olives, one firing is equal to the crops of ten to twenty olive
trees.92
90
A kiln for producing 1,500 kiln bricks uses less than twice as much fuel as a kiln that fires
only 300 bricks. See Stevens 1992.
91
Quantitative data on maximum and minimum outputs of Roman olive presses are given by
Mattingly 1988; further elaborated argumentation in Mattingly 1993 (both with earlier
bibliography); especially for Greece Forbes H. 1992, 1993; Forbes and Foxhall 1978;
Foxhall 1993.
92
107
______________________________________________
At Asomatos on Crete, 350 batches of straw were used for firing of pithoi, which
lasted six to seven hours.93
Contrary to standard expectations, only small amounts of ash were recovered from
the combustion chambers. This is due to the firing behavior of the fuel, which leaves very
little ash, and to the further use of ash as medication and cleanser.
93
94
At Kliru, Cyprus (Hampe and Winter 1962, 84) the prefiring lasted six hours as long as the
firing.
108
______________________________________________
easier for the potter to pull them out and look at them.95 In the case of glazed pottery, they
brush a sherd with many strokes of glaze so that they can see the change of color.
In general, the prefiring lasts almost as long as the firing itself, and the cooling
period lasts as long as the prefiring and the firing together.96 The cooling-off period is a
very important phase of the firing, and equally crucial to the safe firing of the kiln load.
Therefore it is difficult to imagine how the potters of Vasilike ware (Early Minoan period)
could have taken out the pots in the last phase of firing, smudge them, and put them back in
the kiln to undergo the last phase of firing, as Betancourt has suggested.97
95
For illustrations of test pieces, see Papadopoulos et al. 1998; Farnsworth 1960; Webster
1968; Phari Thasos (25-26) [AAA 18 (1985) 32, fig. 5].
96
At Isthmia (Rostoker-Gerbard 1981) the prefiring lasted eight hours (at 150C); in the next
six hours they increased the temperature gradually by 40C to 300C and then by 100C to
675C. At Korone (Blitzer 1990) the prefiring lasts five hours and the firing itself can last
from three to five hours.
97
98
109
110
______________________________________________
a rough idea of the total capacity of their kilns. For ancient kilns, an average capacity can be
estimated based on the principle that kiln loads tend to consist of vessels of the same, or
similar, shape. One should not overlook though the common practice of stacking smaller
ceramics (such as lamps, figurines, or miniature pots) inside larger pots.98
SITE
DIAMETER
Korone, Greece
Cyprus, Agios
Dimitrios
2.00
Djerba, Tunisia
2.50
H. 4.00
Boston Links
France
1.20
1.00x1.00x1.00
n. of pots
495 pots
(120 large+170
medium+205
small)
100 pots
(35 large+65 small)
160
(large olive jars)
188
mostly jars and
some plant pots
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Blitzer 1990
Hampe and Winter
1962, 76
Waster rate: 23%
(9 out of 39)
Peacock 1982, 42
______________________________________________
Pottery workshops usually have a 5-10% failure rate.99 These failures are commonly
called wasters. Waster is a general term for a vessel which shows some defects that render it
useless and therefore worthless in the market. A pot is characterized as a waster when it is
overfired or melted together with another pot, or when it sustains serious cracks.
The wasters resulting from the firing have the most serious impact on the economy
of the workshop. Many pots show defects during the forming and drying phases, but the
potter can then squash the clay and reuse it for another vessel. The fired waster translates
into a waste of raw material, labor, and fuel. The 10% breakage rate is the maximum limit
that a specialized pottery workshop can afford. Stark (1985) correctly observed that only
such a low breakage rate can qualify a pottery establishment as a specialized unit of
production.100 One should also take into consideration some additional breakage during
post-firing, handling, and transportation.101
99
Blitzer (1990) reports a 3% rate (twelve to fifteen wasters out of five-hundred vessels) in
Korone, Greece. Under very unfortunate conditions the rate can be as high as 40%, but these
circumstances are very rare. The rate of rejects remains the same (8% or 2,400 tons of bricks
out of the annual 30,000 brick production) even in highly industrialized brickmaking plants
(Stevens 1992).
100
Stark (1985) reports a 10% breakage rate in Mexico and Guatemala, but the rate changes
to 20% in Coyotepec, Oaxaca.
101
Hasaki, in preparation.
111
112
EXCURSUS
ALIKE, YET DIFFERENT:
CERAMIC KILNS VS. OTHER PYROTECHNOLOGICAL
STRUCTURES
Ceramic kilns form only a small group of firing structures, whose evolution depends
on the pyrotechnology available and attainable in each culture and period. In
pyrotechnology the fire is the main element in the structure which transforms the initial
state of the material placed in it. Metals, glass, rocks, and pitch, to name a few, need a firing
structure for their processing. Because the common element in all these procedures is the
transforming power of the fire, these structures tend to leave similar traces in the
archaeological record, namely vitrified clay pieces and layers of ash. A closer examination
of the specifics of each structure individually will make it clear that they are all alike, yet
different.
Becauce pyrotechnology in pre-industrial societies was largely an empirical type of
technology, its evolutionary pace was remarkably slow. As a result only a limited body of
information was handed down each time to the following generation. In contrast to artillery
or irrigation techniques, there are no ancient treatises on how to build successfully a pottery
kiln or a metallurgical furnace. Ancient authors refer only in passing to these humble
structures.1
The term "pyrotechnology" was coined by the Italian Vannocio Biringuccio (14801538), who compiled an epitome of the pyrotechnological knowledge available in his time,
titled Pirotechnia.2 In the same period Georgius Agricola produced his famous book on
metals, De re metallica, first published in Basel in 1556.3 The woodcut illustrations of these
Hero Stereom. 1.76.1 (for an oven); Cato De Agric. 38, 44 (for a lime kiln); Pliny NH
34.156-159 (lead furnaces); 36.190-194 (glass furnaces). See also Humphrey et al. 1988,
passages 5.40, 6.14.
2
Biringuccio 1977.
Agricola 1912.
113
See Forbes R. 1972 for the arguments about placing the invention of metallurgical furnaces
before or after pottery kilns.
114
These shared features can determine whether or not some structures can fulfill
two functions and what alterations are necessary to fire a different type of material (as in the
case of a pottery kiln and a lime kiln). By gaining a firm grasp on the functional
characteristics, we are better equipped to decipher the possibly complicated history of a
seemingly simple pyrotechnological structure. The linguistic evidence testifies to this
technological affiliation of the structures, as the word kavmino" is employed to refer to a
ceramic kiln, a metallurgical furnace, or a lime kiln (see supra Ch. I).
This discussion is summarized at the end in a check list of archaeologically
identifiable criteria suitable for correct identification of a structure (Plate Exc.15). It should
be emphasized that the primary criteria in any identification process are the general context
and the associated material that accompanies a pyrotechnological structure. Such a list is
needed in cases when it is not possible to excavate a large area of the workshop and when
one is faced with a fired clay structure with little or no associated material, as is commonly
the case with many salvage excavations.
115
(Philippoi).5 Better preserved ovens were also excavated in the Neolithic settlement at
Arhontiko Giannitson where they are securely associated with houses (Plate Exc. 4).6
Sizable terracotta models of structures interpreted as ovens were found in Sitagroi at
Neolithic levels.7 Another Neolithic clay model from Plateia Magoula Zarkou in Trikala,
shows a small oven constructed directly on the ground, with a domed roof, but it has a much
bigger opening than the Sitagroi oven models (Plate Exc.1).8 Finally, a completely
different impression of a portable oven is given by the Late Helladic IIIC clay oven from
Kastelli at Chania. Its height is approximately 0.20m, and its diameter is ca. 0.20m.
The scientific analysis of these ovens has demonstrated that temperatures up to 300500C were reached.9 This made them ideal for baking and cooking, but inefficient for a
See preliminary reports with rich illustrations of ovens in BCH 116 (1992) 715-9 and BCH
118 (1994) 437-45.
6
Drama Archaeological Museum, inv. no. D 725 (from Neolithic Sitagroi, square MM27);
Renfrew et al. 1986, SF 813, fig. 8.20, pl. 40.2 a-b; the small example [Dim. 0.025 (H.),
0.05m (L.)] shows a long oven with its saddle roof and a small opening in the front;
Papathanassopoulos 1996, 329, cat. no. 267.
8
Larissa Archaeological Museum, inv. no. ML PMZ 619. [Dim. 0.17 (L.), 0.15 (W.), 0.052
(H.)]; Renfrew et al. 1986, 216, fig. 8.20, pl. XL.1a-d; BCH 114 (1990) 780, fig. 110.
Papathanassopoulos 1996, 329, cat. no. 266. For a reconstruction of a Neolithic hut and an
oven, see Plate Exc.2.
9 As Maniatis and Fakorellis (1998) note, measuring the temperatures attained in the
Neolithic ovens at Arhontiko informs us only of the highest temperature achieved, 550650C (probably due to external fire) rather than the temperatures normally developed inside
these structures while cooking or baking food.
10
116
pottery kiln since clay becomes terracotta, only if fired above 450-500C. Current
archaeometric studies focus on establishing methods to detect firing temperatures in lowfired clay structures, where temperatures were under 750C.10
Historical examples of ovens have been excavated on numerous occasions, inside
rooms or in courtyards.11 Ovens were used for processing food as well as for baking. The
following check list for criteria can be divided into two broad categories: context and
structural characteristics. Analytically,
a. General context: Clay structures excavated in a clearly domestic context are more
likely to be ovens than kilns.12
b. Associated finds such as food residues and specialized cookware pottery.13
11
For historical terracotta models of ovens and representations of ovens in Greek vasepaintings, see Sparkes 1962 (Plate Exc.3). A few examples of excavated ovens: a sizeable
Late Classical (fourth century B.C.) oven in Treis Gremoi on Thasos [ADelt 50 (1995) 6226]; a Hellenistic ijpno;" at Argos near Classical and later tombs, ADelt 18 (1963), plan 2, pl.
73a. Dim. 1.35 x 0.60m. Its floor was made of plinths measuring 0.30 x 0.25m. For a
possible bread oven at Messene, see PAE 1988, pl. 35. Another kiln in Hellenistic Rhodes
(Gregoriadou 1999).
12
At Dikili-Tash all excavated ovens are at the far side of the room opposite the entrance. At
Sitagroi ovens 1 and 2 are found in the so-called kitchen area of the Burnt House surrounded
by cooking vessels and a grinding stone. See Renfrew et al. 1986, 190-1. fig. 8.11; [Dim. of
oven 1: 0.90m (max.W.), 0.73m (frontal W.), 1.10m (total L.)]. For various phases of a
single oven, see Dikili-Tash, in PAE 1987, pl. 121. A nice example of an oven from DikiliTash is illustrated in PAE 1993, pls. 83a, b. Inside the Neolithic cave of Alepotrypa at Diros
three clay circular plaques (max. 0.65m) were interpreted as ijpnoiv (Papathanassopoulos
1971, figs. 6-7).
13 A cup with lentil seeds was found inside an oven in Dikili-Tash (PAE 1989, 235, pl. 162b)
confirming its domestic character.
117
c. Size: Ovens tend to be smaller, usually under one meter in diameter. The
earliest examples of ovens and kilns, however, from the Neolithic and Early Bronze Age, are
very difficult to distinguish from household ovens because they are similar in size and
construction.14 Both can fulfill the same purpose, however, and it is more likely that
household-produced pottery (especially in the Neolithic period) was fired in bread ovens.
Size cannot be used alone to establish a clear-cut distinction because there are quite large
ovens and quite small kilns.15
d. Low temperatures, below 750, which is the cut-off point for the melting of most
materials.16
These ovens usually consist of only one chamber, where the fuel burns and the food
is placed. Occasionally ovens with two stories, with a separating floor, have been excavated,
such as the Late Bronze Age, horseshoe-shaped oven in Anchialos-Sindos in northern Greece
(Plate Exc.4).17
More substantial in size than the household ovens are the ovens of bakeries. Such
ovens are not known yet archaeologically in Greece, although they must have existed. On
the other hand, numerous examples have been found in Roman Pompeii and Ostia (Plate
14
15
See e.g. Torone (11), Paros (232-233), and Pherai (192) for examples of small kilns.
16
17
Tiverios 1995, 1998. Dated to the 12th-11th centuries B.C. on the basis of pottery.
118
Exc.4).18 Also, although bread baking and supply has been the subject of many
economic and social studies of the Roman world, the study of the ovens themselves as
architectural structures lags considerably behind.
The limited available evidence from the Roman side presents a rectangular podium
made of bricks. On top of this rectangular base, a dome is built, in which the fuel is burnt
first and later the bread is placed. This is a single compartment and consequently no
perforated floor to facilitate the circulation of the heat from the lower to the upper level. The
inside diameter of the dome is in the range of 3.50-4.50m.19 The cupola is built out of tufa
blocks, and the floor of the oven is covered with bricks. Therefore, if an archaeologist finds
fragments of eschara, then he/she deals securely with a ceramic kiln and not with an oven.
The dome has an arched opening in which fuel and bread are inserted. The opening is
blocked with a removable cover, probably made of metal, as may be seen today in domestic
ovens in Greek villages. The structure also had one or more chimneys. The unused fuel can
be stored in a niche in the front part of the podium, below the oven. Such large ovens are to
18
For the most recent treatment of Roman bakeries, see Bakker 1999. In the case of a
Roman oven, associated structures such as kneading machines and millstones help with its
identification as a bakery oven. A sizeable oven is depicted on the funeral monument of
Eurysaces in Rome (Rosetto 1973, table 31.2; Frayn 1978; Kleiner 1986; Kleiner 1992, 1089, fig. 94).
19
Oven at Caseggiato del Balcone Ligneo in Ostia (Bakker 1999, 93). Another oven in
Caseggiato della Cisterna, I, XII, 4 measures ca. 4.00m. in diameter. The imperiallyregulated oven at the Caseggiato dei Molini has a width of 5.00m. For a list of measurements
of ovens from Ostia, see Bakker 1999, 110-1.
119
be expected only in very sizable towns, as were Ostia and Pompeii, and not in the
ordinary small towns in Greece, where people baked their bread in smaller, private ovens.20
The quality of construction is also different between ovens and kilns: ovens are often
crude structures requiring only a small investment of labor, and they are easy to repair,
whereas kilns are constructed with the expectation of functioning for a longer time. If only
the lowest courses of a circular structure are preserved with indications of strong firing, as is
normally the case in the archaeological record, the criteria discussed above can be only of
limited use.21
20
Bakker (1999, 111, 127) estimated that about twenty bakeries served the population of
40,000 people at Ostia in the second century A.D.; in Rome, in the fourth-century A.D., 250275 bakeries served a population of 300,000-350,000 persons.
21
For a close similarity of a hearth construction to a kiln construction, see the example at
Thermon PAE 1993, pl. 63b. The hearth is located inside the northwestern corner of the
southern room of the eastern stoa ( 1.25m) and is covered with rooftiles.
120
121
22
Demierre (2000) collected twenty-nine examples of ancient lime kilns in Greece in her
recent catalogue. A selection of lime kilns of various dates from Thasos is presented in WurchKozelj and Kozelj 1995. Other examples: at Dimini, near the tholos tomb away from the
acropolis (unpublished; excavated in 1999); lime kilns in Asine in houses O and G with a
shelf ca. 0.60m above the floor, 4.50 [for bibliography, see Asine (109-110)]; Roman lime
kiln of Augustean era in Eretria (fully published in Demierre 2000). A late Roman or
Byzantine circular lime kiln was excavated in 1961 in the northern tower of the fortification
wall at Agia Irini on Keos [ADelt 26 (1971) 470], but it is still catalogued as a pottery kiln in
Seifert 1993, no. 27. Three late Roman lime kilns were excavated at Neo Panteleimona in
Pieria ( 1.90m, 2.40m, 3.20m). The preserved height in all three structures is 2.504.00m from the floor of the kiln. The excavators (Loberdou-Tsigarida et al. 1999) use the
term "eschara" in kiln 1 for a feature that resembles more a bench. Another lime kiln,
excavated at Sami on the island of Kephallonia ( 3.50m), was reported in ADelt 39 (1984)
106-7; a lime kiln of Ottoman date was excavated in Platamona near Thessaloniki
(Loberdou-Tsigarida and Messis 1997). Undated lime kilns are found at the sanctuary of the
Great Gods at Samothrace and at Isthmia, southwest of the northeastern gate of the fortress
[ADelt 24 (1969) 118, pl. 102a]. In the Laurion area (see Karten von Attika) where they are
designated as Kalkofen (KO). At Nemea at the Tretos pass, lime kilns which resemble tholos
tombs in their construction; probably a rectangular lime kiln at Xyste of the Gymnasium at
Delphi, BCH 110 (1986) 706. For the economics of a late 19th century A.D. lime kiln in
Attica and the organization of the work force for it, see Vekris 1998. Coulson and Wilkie
1984 on Hellenistic circular lime kilns in Ptolemaic Egypt. For lime kilns in Europe, see
Flach 1981; Dix 1982; Janke 1989.
All securely identified lime kilns in Greece are circular in shape.23 They are
usually quite large, more than 3.00m in diameter, in order to accommodate larger amounts of
stone, and their walls are quite thick. In the interior they are plastered with clay for better
insulation, as are the pottery kilns. There is an interior bench where the stones are piled up,
forming a solid corbelled vault; the larger stones are placed at the bottom and the smaller on
the top. No intermediate perforated floor is used. In the space created underneath this pile
of stones the fuel is placed. Since the firing lasts for many days, lime kilns usually have two
openings on opposite ends in the lower level, for the stokers to stoke the fuel inside the kiln
from the one opening and rake it regularly from the other. The firing lasts four to six days,
to which one should add one or two extra days for the cooling-off period. The limestone has
to undergo a preparation period of 30-45 days before it is ready to be fired.24 The fuel
consumption of a lime kiln, a klarokavmino (a twig-burning kiln), in Attica at the beginning
of this century together with other ethnographic evidence is presented below (Table
Exc.1).25
Lime kilns can easily be confused with pottery kilns because their construction is
quite similar. In addition, some pottery kilns have double entrances, like a typical lime kiln,
and some lime kilns have only one entrance, like a ceramic kiln. It is conceivable that an
23
Rectangular lime kilns do exist outside Greece: e.g. at Montceau-les-Mines, France (Le
Ny 1988, cat. no. 87).
24
25
Cato De Agric. 38, 44 offers instructions for the construction and firing of a lime kiln.
The design of the klarokavmina (Vekris 1998) was considered to be imported from the
island of Amorgos. For another estimation of 1,000 donkey loads of juniper wood for a lime
kiln burning, see Koster and Forbes 1983, cited in Wertime 1983, 450.
122
abandoned pottery kiln, with the perforated floor and its supporting system in ruins, can
be modified later and used as a lime kiln. A low ledge running around what seems to be a
pottery kiln perhaps reflects this change in use.26 Lime is easily dissolved after it is burnt,
leaving very little visual aid to the archaeologist who excavates a lime kiln.
DAYS OF FIRING
VOLUME OF
FUEL
BIBLIOGRAPHY
5-6 days
400-500
(100-150 hours)
batches of
PRODUCTION
cuttings
4-6
2839,5 tons
2000-2800
batches**
100,000 kg
*1 stater=44 okades=56kgs
The data on volume of production refers to one months production, given
the lengthy preparation period for such quantities of stones.
**One batch is equivalent to an adults arm load.
26
The potters at Camerota, south Italy, burn limestone in their pottery kilns while the pots
are being fired (Hampe and Winter 1965, 17); cf. the modern use of kilns in Tunisia (Adam
1994, 68, fig. 154) to fire simultaneously limestone in the lower part and bricks in the upper
part; McLoughlin 1993, 5, n. 23.
27
123
Most kilns indeed are found without any layer of lime; the attribution is based
on form and on negative evidence which excludes them from being pottery kilns.
In general, however, a circular construction with a bench, two entrances, and no
remains of perforated floor or any other signs of pottery-making activity in the surroundings,
is a strong candidate for being a lime kiln. Larger circular kilns which had proportionately
larger stoking chambers were more likely to have been transformed into lime kilns. The
long-standing confusion about the original interior arrangement of a lime kiln is evident in
the incorrect reconstruction of the interior arrangement of a lime kiln at Pyrgos in Boeotia.27
In order to be used as mortar, the lime is usually mixed with crushed pottery or
bricks (a way of producing a quasi-pozzolanic mortar), which give the lime a stronger
binding capacity. The result is a hydraulic mortar used to waterproof surfaces, e.g. cisterns.
It is not surprising, therefore that at Roman Corinth, in Kokkinovrysi (343), a lime kiln was
located near a ceramic kiln. The rejects of the ceramic kiln could potentially be used for
such a purpose, thus minimizing the amount of unused pottery of a kiln load.
In recent scholarship the pyrotechonology relating to lime burning has pushed back
the ancestry of lime kilns. The lime plaster used for the floors in settlements in Anatolia and
the Levant in the ninth millennium B.C., and the technology required to produce it, have
given a leading position to lime kilns as the first pyrotechnological structures, long before
the appearance of pottery kilns or metallurgical furnaces.28
28
Gourdin and Kingery 1975; Garfinkel 1987; Kingery et al. 1988; Moore 1995. For the first
pyrotechnological industries, see Wertime and Wertime 1982.
124
29
For molded vessels made of plaster, see Contenson and Courtois 1979; Moore 1995 with
earlier bibliography.
30
For two large examples of furnaces at Messene (each 3.00m), see PAE 1988, pl. 47 and
PAE 1990, pl. 44a-b; Corinth, Panagia Field (Sanders 1999); baths at Argos (Yegl 1992,
356-95, esp. 368-73). A bath furnace was also excavated at Pella (Chrysostomou 1994, 1123, fig. 8). Its dimensions are 1.15 x 1.00 x 0.50m. Inside it, three bases made of sandstone
were used to support the lebes. Lilimbaki-Akamati (1997) reports on the bath complex at
Pella and its associated furnace. In Ostia (Robinson O. 1984) there were established guilds
which procured the baths in Rome with the large quantities of wood. Probably the potters
secured some of their wood illegally from the large supplies of bath owners. A regulation in
Roman Portugal [CIL II, no. 5181 (=ILS 6891)] states that the "lessee shall not be allowed to
sell wood except for branch trimmings unsuited for fuel." Further restrictions were placed on
the lessee to ensure the undisrupted operations of the baths, by requiring that the lessee at all
times should have on hand a thirty-day supply of wood. More recently, Blyth 1999 on fuel
consumption at baths.
31
125
structure of a bath, it is rare to confuse a bath furnace with a pottery kiln. Some
misinterpretations, though, have endured in the literature which justify their discussion.
Bath furnaces have been excavated at many places, including Olympia, Corinth, and
Pella. Their dimensions range from 1.00m (Olympia) to 1.50m (Pella). At Pella near the
furnace there is a rectangular cistern for storing the water. A bath furnace never has a
perforated floor. Usually there is a solid floor separating the combustion chamber from the
water that is heated. Therefore the rectangular kiln of late antiquity excavated on Delos
(456), which has a well-preserved perforated floor, cannot possibly have been a bath, as was
suggested in the publication.31 On the other hand, it should be noted that its type of
supporting system in the form of rows of pillars made of tiles, is highly reminiscent of the
substructure of baths hypocausts and was probably influenced by bath construction. A
temporary misidentification of a bath furnace for a pottery kiln occurred in the excavations
of the Centaur Bath at Corinth.32 The continuation of the excavation in the following year,
however, revealed the bath complex and the real function of the structure as bath furnace.
The vitrification levels on the walls of a bath furnace must be lower than those of a
pottery kiln, because estimated temperatures in ancient baths rarely exceeded 200C. Only
occasionally in the large thermae would they have reached temperatures of 600C at the
early stages of firing.33
32
Incorrect identification: Williams and Fischer 1975, 6-7; corrected in Williams and
Fischer 1975, 1976; Williams 1977. In Seiferts catalogue (1993, no. 54) it still appears as a
kiln structure, despite the correction by the excavator.
33
Yegl 1992, 381, 468, n. 73; Kretschmer 1953 for estimations of furnace temperature and
fuel consumption (ca. 3kg of charcoal per hour).
126
34
For the most recent synthesis of excavation data and replication process, see Nicholson
and Jackson 1998. Also Jackson et al. 1998.
35
Triantaphyllidis 2000a, 2000b; for glass workshops in the Classical and Hellenistic period,
see Nenna 1998.
36
BCH 117 (1993) 823 (at Delphi); Adam-Veleni 1999 for Thessaloniki.
37
Davidson 1943.
127
vessels from remelting and working on cores of glass acquired from the large
production centers.
II. The reverbatory furnace. Inside them the core of glass was placed into clay
crucibles, which in turn were placed inside a three-tiered furnace. It is conceivable that for
this procedure an altered pottery kiln could have been used, because the underlying
technological principles are the same. The important remaining issue is whether or not such
modification would have been preferred to a newly-built glass kiln.
Below are a few criteria which can be employed in the identification of a glass kiln:
a. No perforated floor (eschara). This is not needed in the process. Even in the
replication process of the glass furnaces at Tell El Amarna the excavators did not reconstruct
a perforated floor, but instead an arrangement of embayments and shelves inside the
furnace.38
b. Stronger walls. In Egypt, at Tell El Amarna, the glass kilns studied by P.
Nicholson had walls which were three bricks' thick, compared with the walls of the local
pottery kilns which were only one brick thick.39 The temperature required for melting glass
is in the range of 1100-1400C depending on its composition.40
38
Nicholson and Jackson 1998, fig. 2. The entire furnace was ca 1.50m high and most of it
was underground.
39
Charleston 1978 (a theoretical account of glass furnaces as known from paintings, with no
examples of ancient glass furnaces). Nicholson (1997) interpreted the furnaces of the 14th
century B.C. at Tell El Amarna ( 2.00m) as glass kilns by process of elimination since the
vitrified material included no remains of metal.
40
128
c. The floor of the combustion chamber usually has white pebbles rather than
the clay floor found in ceramic kilns.41
d. Glass furnaces have multiple openings in the dome through which the glassworker
removes and works the hot glass as quickly as possible. This is an important distinction
from the pottery kiln, whose functional principle prohibits multiple openings. This striking
difference is explained by the fact that kiln firing is only one stage of pottery making, albeit
an important one; in glassmaking, however, the furnace itself is used constantly for the
finished product. Its presence is necessary during the entire manufacturing process.
e. Glass furnaces are much later in date in Greece: glassmaking spread widely
throughout Greece only in the second and first centuries B.C.42
41
The glass objects mentioned in Aristophanes and Plato were probably Egyptian imported
molded vessels (Forbes R. 1966, 164).
129
130
versa (Plates Exc. 9-12).43 Even what are now the best available representations of
ceramic kilns, those on the Penteskoufia terracotta plaques (see supra Ch. I), were first
interpreted as metallurgical furnaces.44
Before we present some cases of misinterpretations, we should describe briefly what
a metallurgical furnace is and how it functions. The metal workers dig a pit, construct a
cylindrical furnace of small diameter, place the metal inside a clay crucible, and cover it with
fuel, which they burn to the high temperatures necessary to melt such materials. The melted
material concentrates at the bottom and is channeled to molds for the finished product (Plate
Exc.9). In order to attain high temperatures, which in most cases cannot be reached only
with a natural draft, they used blowpipes or bellows (tuyres), to create a forced draft.
Metallurgical furnaces were much needed because metals were necessary not only for
statues, but also for armor, household equipment, ships, and for casting coins (Plates
Exc.13a, 14).45
43
Richter 1923; Shwandner and Zimmer 1983. For furnaces in bronze smiths, see Zimmer
1990 with extensive bibliography; also a metallurgical furnace on the shore in the place of a
neosoikos in Abdera before a cemetery was established in the same area [PAE 1993, pl. 74 p.
136 and AEMQ 2 (1989) 471-87]. Its dimensions are not recoverable, probably 0.80 x
1.00m. For the tall shaft furnaces in the Laurion area, see Conophagos 1974, 1980. A very
good discussion of the different types of furnaces and their evolution is presented by Forbes
R. 1971, 120-32.
44
45
See the four Roman metallurgical furnaces (Velenis 1996).) in the coin foundry in the
Roman Forum at Thessaloniki, dating from the second to fourth century A.D. The precedure of
casting coins is described in Conophagos et al. 1976. For the remains of a workshop for
coins at Argos, see Consolaki and Hackens 1980.
The basic type of a smelting furnace is a small pit in the ground, usually 0.70-1.00m.
in diameter. The shaft furnaces which are represented on classical vases were quite
common in Greek antiquity (Plate Exc.11).46 The metallurgical furnaces had tall circular
clay walls which contained the fuel and the metal. These are quite different in shape or form
from ceramic kilns and were used exclusively for metals. The best surviving remains of
metallurgical furnaces are in the area of Laurion, where the Athenians extracted silver from
the rich silver ores.47 Conophagos restores them at an unusual height. A slightly different
structure is required for cupellation, a method of separating silver from lead ores. So far the
only example of a cupellation furnace has been excavated in Argos (Plate Exc.9b).48 It is
dated to the Geometric period, much earlier than the first mention of the method in the
sources and the secure archaeological evidence for the practice of cupellation.49 An
interesting group of at least nine cementation furnaces (pear-shaped and rectangular) were
unearthed in Archaic levels at Sardis: the furnaces bear a central separating wall
(corresponding to type IIb in the new typology).50 Their dimensions are quite small; the
46
Oddy and Swaddling 1985. A shaft furnace is also carved on the north frieze of the
Siphnian Treasury at Delphi (Mattusch 1988, 12, fig. 2.2).
47
Conophagos 1980.
48
49
50
131
largest of the pear-shaped ones are ca. 0-70 x 0.50m. and the rectangular one is 1.00 x
1.00m.
Fragmentary metallurgical furnaces have been excavated in the Greek world at least
as early as the Early Minoan period on Crete and the Late Bronze Age on Cyprus.51
Spyropoulos in the early 1980s excavated six impressive structures at the Steno Arcadias.
He dates these to the Early Helladic period, making them the earliest extant Greek furnaces
(Plate Exc.9a).52 The interpretation of an archaeological feature as a foundry furnace
usually rests on very slim evidence (fragments of a mold probably used to cast a loaf of
metal from which the metal object was hammered). Lumps of vitrified material and the
vitrified walls of the kiln are equally present in ceramic kilns, as the extensive vitrification of
the East kiln at the Tile Works at Corinth (65) attests. Such an extensive workshop complex
at the Steno Arcadias in such an early period is also hardly to be expected. Finally, and most
important, the massive dimensions of these structures (reportedly one kiln is 15m. long)
would have made it impossible to maintain the high temperatures necessary for smelting
metals for a long time in such spaces without using as fuel all the woods of Arcadia. In
addition, the perforated floor is redundant, and even counter-productive, for the functioning
of a metallurgical furnace. Spyropoulos acknowledged encountering such problems in the
interpretation.
51
For prehistoric examples of furnace wall fragments, see Rothenberg 1990. Fragments
which may belong to the earliest furnace from the Greek world were excavated at
Chrysokamino, Crete (Betancourt et al. 1998); for fragments of furnace walls and furnace
linings of the earliest copper-smelting establishment on Cyprus (1600 B.C.), see Knapp et al.
1999, 125-46.
52
132
Another controversial attribution is the Middle Minoan IIA kiln outside the
Palace of Zakros, which had been characterized as a foundry furnace and not a kiln (Plate
IV.11).53 The palm shape of the structure led N. Platon to consider all palm shaped kilns on
Crete (see infra Ch. IV) as metallurgical. The imposing size of all these kilns, however,
especially the one at Agia Triadha, for the same reasons as in Arcadia, makes such
interpretations untenable.
Historic examples of furnaces can be found at Skala Oropou, dating from the Late
Geometric and Archaic period and from the Classical fort at Rhamnous. Mazarakis-Ainian
reported finding melted metals inside the furnaces at Oropos; the area has a long tradition of
coexisting ceramic and metal workshops (16-17).54 For the furnace at Rhamnous, Petrakos
does not give any further information about the criteria he used to identify the structure as a
furnace rather than as a kiln.55
53
Platon N. 1979, 1980; also Ergon 1973; 1975; PAE 1973; 1975; for similar confusion in
other non-Greek examples: the furnaces in Buhen, southern Sudan were previously presented
as metallurgical furnaces, but Craddock (1995, 131) thinks they are almost certainly pottery
kilns. The kiln is well constructed of brick, over 1.00m in diameter, and divided into an
upper and lower chamber by a radial grid of clay bars supported on a central pillar; probably
the furnace lining found belongs to a different structure, not preserved.
54
See also Demetrias, for the proximity of a casting pit and three ceramic kilns (two carved
in the bedrock and one built). In Kassope an abandoned residence of the third century B.C.
housed three different types of firing structures: a furnace, a kiln, and two ovens, see PAE
1981, 72-7.
55
PAE 1991, 23 (a kiln). Petrakos changed his mind (PAE 1995, 7, pl. 3b) because he found
slag around it and he associated it with production of iron. It is quite large, 2.50 (L.) x 2.00m
(W.), in its exterior dimensions, but the interior dimensions are 1.00 x 2.00m. The interior
support, though, remains inexplicable, if it is a metallurgical furnace. A terminus post quem
for its date is a funerary stele from the last quarter of fourth century B.C. incorporated in its
construction.
133
Secure identification criteria for a furnace are fragments of the furnace walls or
(what is most common) furnace lining, the extensive presence of slag, fragments of bellows
made of clay, clay or stone molds for metal objects, and clay crucibles for the smelting or the
gathering of the metal.
Still to be determined is whether the same structure could be used alternatively as a
ceramic kiln or a metallurgical furnace. It had been suggested that pottery kilns were used
by metallurgists to reduce copper ores.56
56
57
Forbes R. 1972.
Kantzia and Kouzeli 1987; ADelt 42 (1987) 638-40, plan 14; BCH 118 (1994) 795, figs.
118-9; BCH 116 (1992) 932. The production of lead to be used for the preparation of colors
is attested from the presence of many tubes of lead-rich silver. For dye-works in the Roman
world, see Uscatescu 1994.
134
by mixing salt, soda, lime, and scoriae of copper, burnt in a furnace.58 Three large
circular furnaces (average 2.10m) of the type Ia for the processing of porphyry have come
to light in a Late Hellenistic-Roman workshop on Rhodes.59
Another furnace, for the production of hematite pigment from iron hydroxide ores,
was unearthed in the Makriyianni barracks during the excavations for the Metro in Athens.60
The shape of the furnace was rectangular, 1.50m long with an interior width of 0.50m. Its
walls were quite thick and had an intensely red color. The hematite pigment was used in
antiquity for wall plastering. Scientific analysis showed that comparatively low
temperatures, ca. 700o C, were reached inside this kiln.61
Such furnaces had closer ties with metallurgical furnaces because metals are a basic
component of their final products. Colors or metallic glazes were also used on ceramic
vessels; thus it is not surprising that many late antique and medieval pottery workshops in
the Black Sea contained color-processing furnaces usually adjacent to a pottery kiln.62
58
59
Marketou 1999.
60
Parlama and Stampolidis 2000, 34, fig. 4; Cherry et al. 1991 for miltos production; For
analysis of the miltos (iron oxide) from the island of Kea, see Hall et al. 1997.
61
62
Ivaschekno 1997. Dsc. De materia medica 5.75 reports how a furnace for producing
pompholux worked (translated by Humphrey et al. 1998, passage 6.30). They postulate that
pompholux was probably a zinc oxide.
135
63
64
Hdt. 4.195; pissourgeia (Str. 5.1.12). For Latin sources, see Pliny NH 16.53 for pitch burnt
in alvei or furni.
65
PMasp. 110.38.
66 Recently the Macquarie University of Sydney [BCH 122 (1998) 669-70] has been
conducting technological analysis on metallurgical furnaces, charcoal, and pitch production
in the places Kimitiri and Lithosouri on Cyprus in order to determine the ecological impact
of such activities on the forests of Adelphi.
67
Wurch-Kozelj and Kozelj 1995. Although the preserne of a basin indeed requires
explanation, the suggestion that these structures are pitch furnaces still needs additional
reasons.
136
To summarize the observations made above: the archaeologist can address the
following issues once a pyrotechnological structure has come to light (Plate Exc.15).
a. shape: The most indistinguishable shape is circular because it can be any
pyrotechnological structure. The rectangular version limits the choices mainly to a ceramic
kiln.
b. size: A general rule of thumb is that the larger the structure, the more specialized
its character; hence, it is easier to decipher its function. A small, circular construction
without any distinguishing individual features may lead the archaeologist to an impass.
c. individual features: The perforated floor is essential only for a ceramic kiln. A
bench in the combustion chamber points to a lime kiln operation, but its use in a ceramic kiln
has been attested in a few cases. Finally, the strong walls of a structure indicate that very
high temperatures were reached (as in lime kilns and glass furnaces).
d. vitrification level: Although the vitrification level observed on the walls of the
structure can be one indication of the range of temperatures reached inside this structure, it
can also be misleading, since repeated firings of low temperatures can create superimposed
layers of vitrification which can be misinterpreted as the result of high temperatures.68
From this brief overview of the pyrotechnological structures, one can begin to
understand that ancient artisanal communities shared a large part of the collective traditional
knowledge for building and firing their kilns. Artisans depended on each other not only for
practical reasons such as procurement of raw material and fuel, but also for artistic
borrowings. On the practical side, the metal workers needed terracotta molds fired in a
ceramic kiln to produce their works. Lime burners could use the rejects of ceramic
68
A good example is the Late Classical kiln (East Kiln) in the Corinthian Tile Works (65).
137
workshops for binding additions to the lime. Seen through this light, the long-standing
academic argument over whether pottery was the cheaper imitation of metal vessels loses its
intensity.69 The interdependence between the two media must be reestablished on more even
levels.70
69
70
138
CHAPTER III
TYPOLOGICAL CLASSIFICATION
OF GREEK KILNS
Pottery kilns are normally divided into categories according to shape, construction,
and direction of the heat.1 In Ch. II, I reviewed the variations of the pottery kilns in regard
to the direction of the heat. The Greek kilns belong to the category of the updraft type. This
updraft type is popular in the Mediterranean basin, appearing at least as early as the third
millennium B.C.2 Some isolated examples of the type of channel kilns from Minoan-period
For historical development of kilns see Rhodes 1968; Delcroix and Huot 1972; Drews
1978/9; Duhamel 1978/9.
139
Crete have been reconstructed by scholars as cross-draft, but no universally convincing case
has been made yet about their original appearance.3 In this chapter I will examine the basic
shapes that are encountered in kiln-construction, and their variations.
As to shape, ceramic kilns can be circular, pear-shaped, or rectangular as far as their
general outside plan is concerned. This schematic, clear division becomes more complex,
however, once the supporting system of the perforated floor is taken into consideration.
Some combinations of general plan and specific support system seem to have a strong
chronological and/or geographical association; others, such as the circular kiln with the
central columnar support, cannot be used as indicators of a specific period or region because
they are common to all.
The discovery of a large number of kilns dating to the Roman period in Italy and in
the Roman provinces created the necessary corpus of material which could be subjected to a
typological arrangement. The first scholar to approach the ceramic kilns systematically and
arrange them typologically was N. Cuomo Di Caprio in 1971, who distinguished eight types
of updraft kilns based on the shape of the support for the perforated floor and the shape of
the combustion chamber (Plate III.1). Delcroix and Huot (1972) confined their discussion
to Prehistoric examples of kilns from the Near East and they were more interested in the
historical development of the firing structures (Plates III.2, 5, 14).4 Duhamel (1978/9)
For the latest attempt for the reconstruction of a cross-draft Late Minoan IA from Kommos,
see Kommos (145).
4
140
designed more detailed typologies for the Roman kilns in France (Plate III.15).5 The easily
expandable system established by Cuomo Di Caprio (Ia, Ib...; IIa, IIb...) allowed later
scholars to add new types attested in their specific areas. Le Ny (1988) in her detailed study
on Gallo-Roman tile kilns was able to expand Cuomos system of categorization by adding
type III (Plate III.3).
Before presenting my typology of the Greek kilns gathered in the catalogue, I will
discuss the basic typology of Cuomo Di Caprio. Davaras' preliminary attempt to classify the
Greek kilns by employing structural criteria will follow. At the end of the chapter I will both
explore the potential of such typologies as indicators of cultural and regional preferences and
address their limitations as chronological criteria.
5 A more refined proposal of classification of the Gallo-Roman kilns based on the typology
of Duhamel is put forward by Dufa 1996. Although they take into consideration the
separation or not of the combustion and the firing chambers, the number of stoking channels,
and the form of the perforated floor (besides the shape of the kiln, and the type of the
supports of the perforated floor), these additional criteria are not applicable to Greek kilns.
141
142
143
RECTANGULAR (II)
CIRCULAR (I)
Ia
central pedestal(s)
(a pilastro centrale)
IIa
Ib
central wall
(a muro assiale)
Ic
arches
(ad archi)
IIc
Id
IId
The date range of most types extends from the Prehistoric period to Hellenistic
times. The only examples which continue into Roman times are the universally common
types with the central columnar support, Ia and Id. The Ib type seems to be limited to the
Classical period; Ic is mainly Hellenistic and geographically centered around the area of
Morgantina.
The second group of the rectangular kilns consists of 33 examples, accounting for
17% of the total (33/192) and for 30% of the identifiable cases (33/110). These kilns, as a
144
rule, are encountered in the later periods. IIa and IId appear as early as the Classical period;
IIb and IIc are clearly the favorites in the Roman period.
Geographical preferences are not easily detectable in the catalogue, although there is
a strong regional preference for specific types (type Ic) at sites such as Morgantina (Tables
III.2-3).
PERIOD
TYPES
Ia
Ib
Ic
Id
IIa
IIb
IIc
IId
Bronze Age
Geometric
Archaic
Arch/Class
Classical
X
X
Hellenistic
X
X
Imperial
Roman
Only type Ia, which is the universally common kiln type, and type Ib of the Roman
typology apply to the Greek kilns. The rectangular examples of types IIa, IIc and rare
examples of IId have counterparts in the Greek world. Type IIb is absent from the currently
known examples.
145
AREAS
TYPES
I
Ia
Ib
Ic
Id
II
IIa
IIb
IIc
IId
1
Marche (1)
Abruzzo (1)
13
15
16
16
17
10
18
12
28
18
46
82
192
Puglia (2)
Umbria (4)
Veneto (6)
Toscana (8)
Campania (13)
Lucania (15)
3
3
Lombardia (16)
Lazio (16)
Calabria (17)
10
Puglia (18)
Sicilia (46)
11
TOTAL
36
22
1
2
6
6
2
77
Emilia (28)
Tota
Sardegna (1)
Circular (Total)
14
Rectangular (Total)
33
146
b. Davaras' Typology
In 1980 Davaras, after having excavated a number of ceramic kilns on Crete himself,
proposed a different typology of ceramic kilns (Table III.4).7 His main criteria were: a. the
presence or absence of two different chambers, one for fuel and one for pottery, and b. the
type of support for the perforated floor. He did not differentiate on the basis of the shapes of
the combustion chamber of the kiln.
TYPE A
No. of
chambers
Type of
support
One-chamber structures
TYPE B
Two-chamber structures
separated by a perforated floor
Interestingly enough, Davaras does not take Cuomo Di Caprios research into consideration
in his references.
Type A derives from the domestic type of oven and does not differentiate between
the combustion and the firing chambers. A later variation in Minoan times features a round
or oval-shaped structure with a narrow shelf running around the interior side, on which the
pots might have been placed (cf. new type Ig in the new typology, Plate III.4). The pots
come into direct contact with the fire because there is no eschara separating the firing
chamber from the kiln chamber. The kilns at Achladia (146) and Palaikastro (150) are the
only examples that Davaras attributes to this type.
This type of one-chamber structure was short-lived. The fact that it was discarded
can perhaps be attributed to its low capacity, if one accepts that the shelf was used to hold
pots.8 It remains to be proved whether such structures were primarily ovens and were never
intended to fire pottery on a regular basis. If this was the case, people were using structures
familiar and available to them until the strong need arose for constructing a kiln used
exclusively for firing ceramics.
Davaras' type B refers to the standard ceramic kiln as described in Ch. II, in which a
perforated floor divides two chambers: the lower one was used for the combustion of fuel
and the upper one for placing and firing pottery. Within type B, Davaras reconstructs an
Cf. supra Ch. II, "The 'bench' in the combustion chamber"; Momigliano (1986) also
comments on the narrowness of the shelf, the low capacity of the kiln, the small size of any
vessel fired in such kilns, and the disproportionate consumption of fuel for firing so few
vases.
9
Davaras records no prehistoric example of Type B2 from Crete, but mentions that the type
is known on the mainland from the Middle Helladic period onwards. Evely's typology for
Minoan kilns (2000) differentiates mainly between round and rectangular kilns, and presence
or absence of specific features: a. Type I (subdivided into i. hemispherical/horseshoe in plan;
no stoking channel; ii. hemispherical/horseshoe in plan, with stoking tunnels; iii. circular in
plan, with stoking channel and grate); b. Type 2 (with long, multiple flues); c. with squarish
features.
147
evolutionary improvement of the supporting system, from the more rudimentary method of
building multiple "short, parallel" walls to support the perforated floor (I call this type B1,
corresponding to the type Ie in the new typology) to the more evolved system of using only
one circular or rectangular free-standing pillar to support the perforated floor (which I call
type B2, corresponding to type Ia in the new typology).9 As an example of his type B1, he
refers to the kiln at Stylos in Chania (with two long parallel walls), but he does not make any
reference to channel kilns from Crete, which should have been included as well. Although
usually cautious about reaching definite conclusions, Davaras ventures to say that type B
"must be in general later than Type A."10
This very brief and schematic typological classification by Davaras presents many
shortcomings, primarily because he does not take into account the entire corpus of excavated
Greek kilns; this is a major obstacle to establishing correct chronological differentiations.11
His idea that the ceramic kiln evolved from a domestic oven structure is not to be dismissed
easily, and it is likely that a loan in this direction may have indeed taken place.12 But his
treatment of such structures as a distinct type of kiln requires serious reexamination and in
light of the following catalogue it must be abandoned (see infra Ch. IV).
As for the evaluation of the single central support as an improvement, Davaras'
argument is not supported sufficiently by the evidence. Also, if one keeps in mind that the
10
11
Davaras (1980, 126) acknowledges the preliminary character of this classification: "But
we must reserve judgement about a more accurate dating of the types until new examples are
found."
12
148
central circular wall appears early, remains in use throughout antiquity, and is used even
today, it is difficult, if not impossible, to prove that any development process resulted in the
adoption of this type.
13
Vekris 1998.
149
reintroduced by way of Turkey in the East.14 This term is also known for the rectangular
kilns in modern Marousi.15
In my typology (Table III.5) I also use the type of the support for the perforated
floor as the second major criterion, after the shape of the combustion chamber, to distinguish
the various types. I adopt the system established by N. Cuomo Di Caprio by differentiating
between circular or pear-shaped kilns (I) and rectangular kilns (II). Cuomo Di Caprio
herself suggested that her system allows for expansion according to local variations.
Therefore, I employ the same letters as Cuomo Di Caprio (a, b, c) when Greece shows the
same examples, and start the new types with e, the first available letter. This classification
will enable newly excavated kilns to be assigned easily to a category, either one that already
exists in the Graeco-Roman world (types a-d) or a new Greek category.
Adopting a previously existing typology facilitates the distinction between types
which have been universally adopted since all potting cultures have certain basic needs (such
as types Ia, Ib, IIa, IIb), and types that are unique or have a stronger presence in some
cultures (IId for Italy), or in some regions of one culture (IIc for northern Greece). In a
longer-term project, the typologies of all ceramic kilns from the Mediterranean could be
organized according to one typology. Such an endeavor, although far beyond the scope of
the present study, is likely to show the degree to which ceramic technology is specific in
each culture, the degree of regional influences on the type of the kiln, and finally, the number
14
15
Ioannou n.d.
16
150
and nature of types imported into a culture and the mechanisms that allowed this import to
take place (e.g. colonization or adoption).
151
152
153
3.00m. This is definitely a large kiln for the early periods, but in the Hellenistic and
especially in Roman times these sizes are no longer surprising.
REGION
Unknown
II
Grand Total
Attica
19
34
62
115
Peloponnese
22
58
28
108
Central
35
23
67
Western
17
23
Northern
24
23
53
Aegean
16
61
16
93
Grand Total
75
229
155
459
Very rarely are circular kilns exactly circular. Even kilns originally constructed as
circular eventually lose their shape after multiple firings and become pear-shaped kilns.
They are sometimes described by the excavators as horseshoe-shaped, elliptical, or oval.
Circular and pear-shaped kilns tend to have similar supports, although the pear-shaped ones
show a slight preference for long walls (type Ib) rather than central columnar supports for
the perforated floor. In addition, their stoking chamber, the praefurnium, tends to be longer
than that of the circular kilns.
Lato (28-30) and Phari on Thasos (25-26) preserve Archaic examples of pear-shaped
kilns, and the Athenian Kerameikos (40-42) has Classical examples. It is noteworthy that all
these sites have more than one kiln, and that all the kilns are of the same pear-like shape. At
this time it is not clear whether this shape required any specific technical knowledge which
was not widely shared in other areas.
17
The arrangement in the French kilns of multiple small piers as supports is not attested for
Greek kilns (Dufa 1996).
18
Obviously the statement by Cook (1984, 64) that earliest kilns with a central support date
to the sixth century B.C., with the Penteskoufia plaque F893 being the earliest example, is
wrong.
154
The central support can have a roughly circular or rectangular shape. It is usually
made of a combination of clay mortar, stones, broken sherds, and tiles.19 Its slender
diameter (ca. 0.30m) and its long exposure after a kiln is abandoned explain why it is usually
obliterated from the archaeological record. In kilns of this type, the central support averages
about one third of the total interior diameter of the combustion chamber.
Most examples preserve their dimensions: it is easy to distinguish four main groups
of dimensions: a. the small ones ( below 1.00m), b. the average ones ( 1.00-1.59m), c. the
larger ones ( 1.60-3.00) and d. the exceptionally large ones ( over 4.00m). The first two
groups of sizes are the most numerous.20 The larger examples are encountered in the later
periods (Hellenistic and Roman) with the exception of Archaic Prinias (35-36) and Thasos,
Phari A (25).
Because of the vulnerability of the central support to abandonment, and because of
the slow process of identifying a kiln during excavation, it is very likely that many of the
kilns which preserve no support originally belonged to this type, but that the support has not
left any traces.
19
For more details on this structural feature, see Ch. II, "The 'bench' in the combustion
chamber".
20
The same predilection of sizes is also evident in the kilns of the same type in Roman Gaul
(Dufa 1996).
155
156
21
For similar examples from Syria and Palestine, see Delcroix and Huot 1973 (Plate III.5).
c. Circular Kiln with Parallel Walls on the Long Axis (Type Ie)
An elaborate version of type Ib is Type Ie with more than one wall running parallel
to the axis of the stoking channel (Table III.9). The normal number of walls is two. It does
not appear often in the archaeological record, although its counterpart in the rectangular
kilns, IIe, is more prominent. Both in its circular and rectangular variants this type is absent
from Cuomo Di Caprios typology. There are only eight examples of type Ie (2% of the
total number of the kilns, and 4% of all circular kilns): the examples are mainly Prehistoric,
and the remainder are dispersed in antiquity. Interestingly enough, each of the two
prehistoric examples that are in central Greece, in Dimini (116) and Kirrha (106), has three
parallel walls. Both kilns are quite large in diameter: Dimini is 3.95m and Kirrha is 2.30m.
In Dimini, the central supporting wall is the longest (ca. 2.00m), whereas the other
two walls on each side of the long wall are shorter. Of the historical ones, especially
noteworthy is the "South Kiln" at Prinias (36) (Int. 2.98. Ext. 4.10) (Plate III.6).
On average, the kilns of this type are larger than 2.00 in diameter. Overall the Aegean and
central Greece preserve the most examples of the type.
It has been suggested in this study that these kilns might be variants of the channel
kilns from the Minoan period on Crete.22 Three walls are probably the maximum number
that a circular kiln can accommodate, given the restricted range that its diameter can attain.
The type has more occurrences in Hellenistic Istria, in western Turkey, and in western
Europe, but in different time ranges.23
22
23
157
24
158
bench was apparently added to the Hellenistic kiln at Evangelismos in Athens (157) when it
was converted for use as a lime kiln.25 This kiln has the largest dimension in the group.
The longer association of a bench with a lime kiln has led scholars to question whether
any of the kilns belonging to this category ever fired pottery.26
25
A kiln (type If) at Patras (7, Nikita and Karatza Sts.) (244) also preserves a bench 0.60m
wide and .035m high.
26
Demierre 2000 prefers to see the Palaikastro example (150) as a lime kiln.
27
Rectangular lime kilns are very rare. For glass, only the tank furnaces are rectangular.
159
160
31
30
25
20
n=73
12
15
7
10
10
Br
on
ze
G Ag
eo
e
m
et
r
A ic
rc
h
Cl aic
as
H sica
e
H lle l
el
le nist
ni
Ro c
m
an
La Rom
te
a
A n
nt
By ique
za
nt
i
U ne
nd
at
ed
17
17
15
14
12
10
n=73
8
5
rn
e
W
es
te
es
nn
po
Pe
lo
N
or
th
er
l
ra
nt
Ce
ca
tti
A
eg
ea
n
161
Br
on
ze
G Ag
eo
e
m
et
r
A ic
rc
h
Cl aic
as
H sica
H elle l
el
le nist
ni
Ro c
m
an
R
La om
te
A an
nt
By ique
za
nt
i
U ne
nd
at
ed
n=20
es
te
rn
es
e
nn
Pe
lo
th
or
N
po
er
n
l
ra
nt
Ce
ca
tti
A
eg
e
an
162
4
3
n=8
2
1
Br
on
ze
G Ag
eo
e
m
et
r
A ic
rc
h
Cl aic
as
H sica
el
l
l
H
el eni
le
n- stic
Ro
m
an
La Rom
te
a
A n
nt
By ique
za
nt
i
U ne
nd
at
ed
n=8
3
1
es
te
rn
es
e
po
Pe
lo
th
or
N
nn
er
n
l
ra
nt
Ce
ca
tti
A
eg
ea
n
163
n=8
2
1
ni
H
el
sti
le
c
nRo
m
an
Ro
m
La
an
te
A
nt
iq
By ue
za
nt
in
e
U
nd
at
ed
al
le
el
Cl
as
sic
ic
ha
rc
et
m
eo
G
Br
on
ze
A
ge
ric
5
4
3
n=8
rn
te
es
W
nn
po
lo
Pe
or
th
er
es
l
ra
nt
Ce
ca
tti
A
eg
ea
164
n=7
Br
on
ze
G Ag
eo e
m
et
r
A ic
rc
h
Cl aic
as
H sica
e
H llen l
el
le isti
nRo c
m
an
R
La om
te
a
A n
nt
By ique
za
nt
i
U ne
nd
at
ed
n=7
1
W
es
te
rn
Pe
lo
po
nn
es
e
N
or
th
er
n
Ce
nt
ra
l
A
tti
ca
A
eg
ea
n
28
For the adoption of rectangular-shaped kilns by the more enterprising members of the
potters' community in Los Pueblos, see Papousek 1989.
165
replica of the earlier West kiln (64)], and the more modest kilns at Nemea (60-62) and at
Olympia (73) of the late fourth century B.C. The Nemea and Olympia kilns measure in
average ca. 4.00m square. Despite their impressive dimensions, they constitute only a small
group of the total number of preserved kilns. Nevertheless, they become popular in the
Roman period, as revealed by the excavations of the Plateia Kotzia with its twenty-seven
rectangular kilns (274-300).29
There has been a long-standing argument as to whether the rectangular kilns were
used exclusively, or at least primarily, for firing tiles.30 The most commonly cited examples
are the kilns at the Corinthian Tile Works (64-65), the kiln at the sanctuary of Zeus at Nemea
(60), and the fourth century A.D. kiln at Olympia (392). It is argued that the rectangular kiln
could accommodate more tiles, which were also rectangular, than could a circular kiln. The
presence of rectangular kilns for tiles in other parts of Europe corroborates this
assumption.31
Such lines of argument take into consideration only the peculiarities of the
Corinthian-type tiles in antiquity which indeed were rectangular. The other major tile type
was concave and was known as the Laconian type.32 The Laconian and Corinthian types
require different arrangements inside a kiln since their shapes differ considerably. Laconian
29
Karagiorga-Stathakopoulou 1988.
30
31
Le Ny (1988) in her study of tile kilns in Roman France demonstrates that 81% of the
identified tile kilns (64/79) are indeed rectangular, but a considerable proportion, 19%
(15/79), are circular.
32
Winter N. 1993.
166
tiles were commonly fired in circular kilns, because according to the same argument of
compatibility of shape, concave items can be fired more easily in circular kilns.33 The
Archaic kilns at Phari (25-26) have shown evidence of firing of tiles as have the workshops
with circular kilns at Figaretto on Corfu (197-209) and at Nemea (62).34 In addition,
ethnographic examples from Italy and modern Ermioni in the Argolid corroborate this
practice of firing Laconian-type tiles in circular kilns.35
Once built, the rectangular kilns were used for firing other types of pottery as well:
in Eretria, a Roman rectangular kiln (352) produced coarse ware pottery (cooking pots, jugs,
and amphoras) in addition to rooftiles. The initial impetus for constructing rectangular kilns,
however, is the widespread use of rooftiles. Thus, it is not surpring that in historical periods
where we have little evidence for roofing structures with tiles (as in the Dark Ages), we also
have little or no evidence for rectangular kilns. In such sizable kilns ancient potters could
33
See comments of C.K. Williams in Perrault 1990, n. 13. Circular kilns for firing tiles were
preferred in Roman Italy, whereas Britain used exclusively rectangular tile kilns. Roman
Gaul, situated geographically between these traditions, exhibits examples of both types, with
a clear preference for rectangular tile kilns (Le Ny 1988).
34
Perrault 1990 on the production of tiles at the workshop at Phari. Blegen 1937, 180-1
interpreted a circular structure ( 2.40) in the dromos of a tomb as a tile factory because of
the large quantity of Greek tiles that he found scattered. The thick layer of lime plaster, the
thick walls (0.50m), and its large size, however, argue more in favor of a lime kiln.
35
For Italy, Hampe and Winter 1965; Kardulias 2000 for Ermioni. In southern France round
kilns were also used to fire rooftiles (Le Ny 1988).
167
also fire terracotta bathtubs36, water pipes, large-scale architectural sculpture, such as the
Zeus and Ganymede akroterion at Olympia, or large ritual basins (perirrhanteria).37
Rectangular kilns have also survived in traditional Greek pottery workshops of the 18th and
19th century A.D., but their structure, both in terms of plan and materials used, is quite
different (Plate III.12).38
36 A Late Geometric bath tub from Kalabaktepe (Milet I, 8,30, fig. 22). For fragments of a
louter in a Classical house at Vari, Patriarchou Gregoriou E St. [ADelt 44 (1989) 62]; louter
in a Late Hellenistic house at Aegion, Lysiou St. [ADelt 31 (1976) 97]; complete louter
comparable to the one at Isthmia at Pella [ADelt 16 (1960) 82, pl. 88]; clay larnakes at Voula
[ADelt 20 (1965) 111-2, pl. 73]; at the Athenian Kerameikos [ADelt 16 (1960) 21, pl. 17]; in
Kephallenia, Same [15, Metaxa St. and Anonymous, ADelt42 (1987) 165]. A childrens clay
larnax was excavated at Autantzes Karioton, Leukada [ADelt 26 (1971) 480, pl. 338st]
measuring 0.83 x 0.45m, which preserves its rectangular cover measuring 0.83 x 0.45 x
0.18m.
37
The only example of a kiln which had been associated with the firing of water pipes is the
Late Minoan IIIA kiln at Kato Gouves in Herakleion (Kiln A) (127) where many fragments
of water pipes are preserved. For terracotta large scale sculpture, Bookidis 2000; terracotta
statues were fired at hight temperatures, above 1100C , see Gaugler and Anderson 1980.
38
Psaropoulou 1986; Giannopoulou and Demesticha 1998. Most of them are two-storied in
order to produce the glazed wares. The walls of the combustion and firing chambers are
thick and built primarily of stone. Their size, however, is in the same range as the ancient
kilns, that is between 2.00 and 3.00m. For their nickname as anatolivtika (Easterners), see
infra.
168
not clear whether the potters used the rectangular shape as a conscious choice, or whether it
simply developed from the circular, pear-shaped type (Table III.12). There are twenty-two
examples of this type (5% of the entire corpus and 14% of all rectangular kilns). The earliest
example is the Geometric kiln at Phaistos (12), and it barely appears in the Archaic,
Classical, and Hellenistic times [Herakleidon St. (15), Sindos (89), Kerameikos (260-269),
respectively]. It becomes much more common in the Roman period, especially in Athens.
When the large Kerameikos in the Kotzia Square (274-300) is fully published, more
examples will be added to this type, making it the favorite type of Athenian potters in the
Roman period. Generally, however, the type never became very popular because rectangular
kilns usually attain a large size, and a central circular support would make any system of
supporting arches very long and consequently very weak. The average size for this type of
kiln is ca. 2.00 x 2.00m.39
39 Of ten kilns of this type with recorded measurements, the distribution is: for
measurements 1.00-1.49m (2), 1.50-1.99 (4), 2.00-2.99 (4). Much smaller is the Geometric
kiln at Phaistos (12) (1.25x1.60) while the Classical kiln at Sindos (89) (4.25x1.85) is bigger
than normal.
40
Ramage and Craddock 2000 and supra Excursus, "The Metallurgical Furnace".
169
170
Thirty-three kilns constitute this subtype (7% of all kilns and 23% of all rectangular ones).
Although there are single examples from the Geometric and Archaic periods [Samos
Pythagorion (14) and Aigion (18)], they should be viewed with caution regarding the
beginning of this type, since both their dates are preliminary and the associated pottery is not
yet fully studied. The type was undoubtedly adopted by the end of the Classical period (with
seven examples). During Hellenistic and Roman times potters show a predilection for this
type, and in the Roman Kerameikos at the Kotzia Square in Athens, it shares first place with
type IIa (see supra).
Regarding its geographical distribution, the type is widely adopted by the Peloponnesian
potters with thirteen examples (especially tile-makers). In this local version however, the
central long support/divider is not a built wall, but the natural ground itself, and the stoking
corridors of the combustion chamber are dug into the ground on both sides of this generally
substantial wall. This serves as a central wall from which arches spring out to the side walls
of the kiln. The Peloponnesian examples also exhibit the larger sizes, ranging from 4.50 x
4.50m [Nemea (60)] to 6.80 x 6.80m [ancient Elis (172)] to 7.50 x 5.20m [East Kiln, Tile
Works (65)].
It is therefore understandable that the potters preferred the strength of the natural
massive support to any built means of supporting the perforated floor of such a large
structure. At ancient Corinth [Tile Works (64-65) and West Tile Works (344) and in ancient
Olympia, especially, the type has strong roots. Attica, central Greece, and the Aegean also
preserve some examples, whereas the type is much less popular in northern and western
Greece. In Keramidario, Vassiliki, in western Greece (402) the kiln of this type is the only
surviving example of a kiln with double stoking channels.
It is also worth noting that in the cases of multiple kilns in one workshop, potters
tend to duplicate the same type for their other kilns, such as at Krannon (181-182), or the
Tile Works at ancient Corinth (64-65) where both kilns of the workshop are of type IIb.
The length of the wall is proportional to the length of the combustion chamber and
tends to be a little shorter than the combustion chamber. Its width varies from 0.50 to
1.00m. The wider walls are more common in Athens (37-38) and in ancient Elis (172). Most
of the walls of this type touch the back wall across from the stoking chamber.
A small subgroup of this type is the one with more than one wall, on the same axis
as the stoking channel. Five excavated kilns, from Velestino (189), Olympia (392), Berbati
(340), Delos (456), and Kato Kastelliana on Crete (384) form this type. The walls are
usually short and wide, with dimensions ranging from 0.30 to 0.50m. The type appears only
in the Hellenistic and Roman periods. The average size for kilns of this subgroup is
2.00x2.00m. In some examples the two separate walls are close to each other, and halfway
up their height they are consolidated into one support with the help of arches [ancient
Olympia (392), Kokkinovrysi (343)].
An even less frequent variant has the walls made of pairs of pillars which bear strong
resemblance to the hypocausts of baths. The proximity of pottery workshops and baths is
noteworthy (see supra Ch. VI). So far, the only known examples are a Byzantine kiln at
Lefkadia, itself near a bath (423), and an undated kiln at Delos (456).
This type is also attested in the Etruscan workshops of the fourth and third centuries
B.C. (e.g. Marzabotto), whereas it is absent from Cuomo Di Caprios typology (1971/72) for
the Roman kilns.41
41
171
42
It is also adopted by circular kilns in Britain and France in the Roman period (Dufa 1996
who questions their efficiency).
43
172
(363). In other areas of Greece rectangular kilns with cross-walls generally date to the
Roman period, e.g. at Olympia (347).
It seems that this arrangement was the most appropriate for a rectangular-shaped kiln
as is shown from the majority of Roman tile kilns in France (44/79, or 65%), which are of
the type with cross-walls, but in France they are more evenly distributed than in Greece
where they are clustered regionally.44
44
The average dimensions of this type are (Le Ny 1988): combustion chamber, L. 3.00m
(0.87m), W. 2.70m (1.00m); firing chamber: L. 2.79m (0.86m), W. 2.39m (1.00m).
173
174
18
n=22
ni
H
el
sti
le
c
nRo
m
an
Ro
m
La
an
te
A
nt
iq
By ue
za
nt
in
e
U
nd
at
ed
le
Cl
as
sic
al
el
ic
ha
rc
et
m
eo
Br
on
ze
ge
ric
17
15
10
n=22
rn
te
es
W
nn
po
lo
Pe
N
or
th
er
es
l
ra
nt
Ce
ca
tti
A
eg
e
an
175
n=34
3
1
Br
on
ze
G Ag
eo e
m
et
A ric
rc
h
Cl aic
a
H ssic
e
H lle al
el
le nis
n- tic
Ro
m
a
R
La o n
te ma
A n
n
By tiqu
za e
nt
U ine
nd
at
ed
15
10
5
n=34
4
1
rn
te
es
W
Pe
lo
po
nn
er
or
th
N
es
l
ra
nt
Ce
ca
tti
A
A
eg
ea
n
176
8
6
n=17
Br
on
ze
G Ag
eo e
m
et
r
A ic
rc
h
Cl aic
as
H sic
H elle al
el
le nist
nRo ic
m
an
R
La om
te
A an
nt
By iqu
za e
nt
i
U ne
nd
at
ed
15
10
n=17
rn
te
es
W
nn
po
lo
Pe
or
th
er
es
l
ra
nt
Ce
ca
tti
A
eg
ea
n
7<32/2*,&$/&/$66,),&$7,212)*5((..,/16
_____________________________________________
,9*(1(5$/7<32/2*,&$/2%6(59$7,216
After the individual treatment of each type of kilns in Greece, it can be illuminating
to look at the available information on their sizes, since the size of a kiln is commensurate
with its firing capacity
7<3(68%7<3
(
8QNQRZQ
,"
,D
,E
,H
,I
,J
,,"
,,D
,,E
,,F
,,H
*UDQG7RWDO
',0(16,216
*UDQG
7RWDO
One third of the kilns fall within the range from 1.00-3.00 in diameter. Only a small
percentage is larger than 4.00m and usually these are the rectangular kilns (especially of
Type IIb), which fired primarily architectural and other construction-related terracottas.
On the basis of the attested examples for each type, it seems that the circular types
appear earlier and last throughout the prehistoric and historical periods. Rectangular kilns, if
the isolated example of the channel kilns on Minoan Crete is excluded, show up later in the
archaeological record: the first securely dated examples occur in the late Classical period in
the tile kilns at ancient Corinth (64-65) and Nemea (60-61). We may be able to date the
introduction of historical rectangular kilns as early as the Archaic and Geometric periods
once the kilns at Aigion near Patras (18) and Kyme on Euboea (05-06) receive their final
publication.
178
although slightly larger than the Hellenistic examples, still fall short of fully exploiting this
technique.45
Such uniformity in shape and size contrasts strongly with the variety of pottery types
that potters produced in the course of about 5,000 years, both in shape and especially in
decoration. The kiln belongs to the technical equipment of a ceramic workshop, along with
the potters wheel and the various tools for forming and decorating a vessel. As such it is
less prone to change than are the aesthetic aspects of potmaking.46 In ethnographic
literature, potters in many parts of the world are more willing to change the decoration or
shapes of their vessels to meet new demands imposed by the tourist market, but are reluctant
to accept kerosene-fired kilns or electrically-powered wheels.47 The cumulative and longtested efficiency of kilns made the potters reluctant to change the technology in this aspect.
45
Arched types may cost more than simpler constructions. (cf. Papousek 1989 where an arch
kiln costs three times a tube kiln in Los Pueblos).
46
The potter will either create new decoration and/or shapes, but continue using traditional
techniques of producing and firing, or he will use modern equipment but retain the
traditional shapes and patterns in some kind of connection with tradition; in any case, a
complete break with tradition is avoided. Arnold (1985, 229-30) also points out that
technical innovations originate from low-status potters, whereas new artistic trends are set by
high-status potters. The driving force for the first group is survival; for the second, luxury.
47
"Within limits [] a Tonaltecan potter will make any clay object which can be made by
the moulding methods he is accustomed to and by using his kind of kiln." (Diaz 1966, 17 and
138 cited in Nicklin 1971). In the Japanese village of Tamba they rejected the new kilns as
inferior to their traditional ones. "This was not merely conservatism, for they know that their
pots derive much of their vitality from contact with fire, wood, and ash." (Janet Leach 1957,
13-14, cited in Nicklin 1971, 26).
179
Equally striking is the consistency of the shape of kiln furniture, especially the clay rings and
the tripods, which were used widely across areas and periods.48
When multiple examples of kilns exist at one site, we find instances where all are of
the same shape, as in the workshops at Lato (28-30), Prinias (31-36), and Figaretto, Corfu
(197-209). Elsewhere both circular and rectangular kilns are built, as in Lenormant Ave. in
Athens (51-53), at Nemea (60-62), and in the Hellenistic workshop at Pella (218-223).
Such a resistance to technical innovation persists despite economic and market
stimuli to adopt new types of equipment. A seemingly non-economical type of kiln (or the
use of any old-fashioned technology) will prove to be energy- and time-saving as well as
profitable, because the learning curve is very high for new technology in the ceramics
industry. Old, familiar kilns will produce consistent results, whereas experimental types will
cost a potter much loss of time and profit until he becomes familiar with it and fully explores
its potentialities and restrictions.
A strong tradition, especially at the local level, can also be attributed to the family
relationships that apply in the case of most of the potters. Some brothers might decide to go
to another village and build a kiln, using the knowledge they have acquired in their
birthplace. Nor does the sedentary character of potters contribute to interaction or exchange
of knowledge with potters from remote places. Even among itinerant potters in Greece and
Cyprus the potters used their own kilns and their own techniques in the places that they
48
At Nicobars, the Chowrans use a hi-wat, a ring of unfired clay placed on top of the pot to
prevent firebrands from touching the sides of the vessels in a bonfire (Man 1894, 25 cited in
Nicklin 1971, 25). Notice that in this case the clay rings are placed on top and not under the
pots. For the kiln furniture in detail, see supra Ch. II, "Kiln Furniture".
180
visited.49 These places, after all, did not have a strong tradition in pottery, hence their
dependence on specialists.
Moreover, what we would perceive nowadays as technological advancement might
differ considerably from what an ancient or even a modern potter considers as such. If a
type of kiln works well, the potter may decide simply to build more of the type and size with
which he is familiar. He might not attempt to build a larger version of the older kiln,
however, lest the breakage rate increase exponentially. In other words, it was safer to fire
pots in smaller batches rather than in large firings, in the equivalent of not "putting all one's
eggs in one basket." Alternatively, progress in kiln firing can be determined by better
control of the firing cycle, which would result in a lower breakage rate as well as in a more
economical use of fuel. After all, one should not forget that many of the different techniques
of decoration (such as black-glaze in Classical Greece) are the result of firing atmospheres,
not of a peculiar construction of the kiln itself.
Sometimes the practice of a specific technique forms part of a larger body of habits,
ideas, and customs which differ from those of other potters who do not use this specific
technological device or method.50 In these cases the unwillingness is a conscious reaction,
49
50
Some potters' groups in northern and western India (Nicklin 1971, 29) are separated into
two types: those who use the wheel and those who do not. "Certain features of pottery
technology act together with features of dress, food habits, and customs as differentiating
criteria" (Saraswati 1967 cited in Nicklin 1971). Also, within the same region, one can see
different preferences (cited from Behura 1967a, 35); in southern India , the Pandyan-Velars
practise open firing whereas the Cholar Velars prefer kiln firing (Nicklin 1971, 30). For
cultural-psychological reasons for adhering to one type of technology, see ibid. 30, cited
from Behure 1967b, 123: the Pandyan Velar potters of Madras do not fire in a reducing
atmosphere "because their customers consider black pots inauspicious."
181
deriving from an equally strong desire for cultural differentiation. Papousek (1989) went as
far as to consider changes brought to the kiln size and construction of a community a type of
"social rebellion."
Finally, the kiln should always be examined in relation to other technical equipment
in the workshop. Because no major innovations took place in the design and function of the
wheel, nor in the degree of market demand, there was no exterior stimulus to increase the
size of the ceramic kilns; hence the standardization of sizes in ceramic kilns. Such an
interdependence is bound to cause a chain reaction when an element of technology changes:
for example, the introduction of a faster kick-wheel increased the number of vases produced.
This change was destined to affect the other end of the production cycle, the kiln, and led to
the abandonment of open firings, which cannot accommodate many pots at each firing.
Moreover, a continuous production of the same types of vessel poses no challenges to a
potter seeking to explore other designs for constructing his kilns.51
Innovation in firing does not need to involve only a different design for a kiln, but
could apply to the use of different types of fuel. This innovative aspect is more elusive
archaeologically.
51
Papousek 1989, where the correct stacking of plates made the potters build a stronger grid
inside the kiln.
182
52
53
For a late Hellenistic kiln in Pella (first century B.C.), located at the northeast corner of
the eastern wing of the Agora, found filled with figurines, see Akamatis 1993, 159, 320; for
the Roman lamp workshops in Patras, see Petropoulos 1999.
183
184
workshops (on the islands, especially on Crete, Chios and Thasos) had been labeled as
amphora workshops.54
54
For the frequent proximity of amphora workshops to wineries, see infra Ch. VI.
55
The average size for a circular kiln in Roman Gaul is 2.00m (Le Ny 1988).
56
See supra Ch. II, "The Perforated Floor. For kilns in ancient Palestine, see also Wood 1990.
detect any diffusion or isolation of technological advances among ancient cultures. Such an
exchange of technological knowledge becomes extremely important when one examines
intraregional or interregional relationships. Any cross-cultural comparison should also take
into consideration that the same internal arrangement does not always mean technological
exchange since some designs are universally practical and therefore they are independently
adopted.
185
CHAPTER IV
THE PREDECESSORS OF HISTORICAL
KILNS
(Neolithic Ovens to Late Bronze Age Kilns)
During the first millennia of ceramics in Greece, kilns are absent from the
archaeological record. Their absence can be explained in two ways: either they did not exist
(as was probably the case for the Neolithic period), or they have not yet been excavated
(which is probably true for the Early Bronze Age). By the Middle Bronze Age (2000-1600
B.C.), ceramic kilns appear fully developed in their standard form (two separate chambers
divided by a perforated floor). Finally, in the Late Bronze Age, both on the Greek mainland
and in the Aegean, existing kilns display a variety of shapes and sizes comparable to the rich
corpus of later, historical kilns.
186
When compiling a catalogue of Prehistoric kilns, one must exclude many examples
erroneously identified in the past as ceramic kilns (mostly the Neolithic examples, which
were domestic ovens), but one must include other ceramic kilns previously misinterpreted as
metallurgical furnaces (the channel kilns from Minoan Crete). The following overview of
the prehistoric periods focuses solely on the evidence of kilns: their number, typology, and
geographical and chronological distribution in mainland Greece and the islands. Issues
about pottery production in general will be discussed only when they are pertinent to kilns.
A detailed study of the ceramic industry in prehistoric Greece is outside the scope of this
dissertation.1 So far sixty-one examples of Prehistoric kilns have been unearthed with the
vast majority dating to the Late Bronze Age (Plate IV.17). They represent five types of
circular kilns and one type of rectangular kilns, the controversial channel type (IIe).
In Ch. IV and V I will synthesize in chronological order my observations on the
kilns included in the main catalogue and in Appendix I. By adopting this approach I will be
able to analyze the ceramic production in various periods in Greek prehistory (Ch. IV) and
history (Ch. V), and compare characteristics of each period with those of preceding and
following periods. The historical kilns will be investigated in detail in Chapter V. In the
prehistoric phases, I first discuss developments in the Greek mainland (the Helladic sphere),
then the technological developments on Crete and the Aegean islands (the Minoan sphere) to
return to the Mycenaean world at the end.
187
188
45
50
40
30
20
11
10
0
Circular
Rectangular
20
15
11
10
61
II/
e
II/
?
I/g
I/f
I/e
I/b
I/a
I/?
nk
no
a. Neolithic Ovens
So far no firmly identifiable kiln used exclusively for ceramics and resembling the
later type of a two-chambered kiln has been excavated in Neolithic layers.2 Most fired clay
structures that have been identified as kilns should best be considered as ovens. Incomplete
knowledge of the structural and functional characteristics of a ceramic kiln has led
archaeologists to make incorrect interpretations of such features.
The fired clay structure that Mylonas excavated at Olynthus in northern Greece is
reported in the literature to be the earliest Greek pottery kiln (Plate IV.1).3 A closer
examination of his description of the remains and his reconstruction, however, renders such
an interpretation impossible. First, the reconstruction with three underground firing channels
has no precedent and makes little sense from either an architectural or technological point of
view. Second, the presence of only one hole of 0.07m in a rectangular area measuring 0.50 x
0.75m. would have allowed only a very small amount of heat to reach the chamber, where
the pots would be placed. Even the lower temperatures required for Neolithic pots would not
have been reached inside the firing chamber.4 The function of this hole still remains unclear.
For the most recent account of Neolithic pottery technology, see Kalogirou 1997; Vitelli
1994, 1997. These ovens are often called saggars in the literature.
3
Mylonas 1929, 12-8, figs. 10-18; Cook 1961, 65, A1; Davaras 1980, 124, n. 54; Seifert
1993, no. 2.
4
See Introduction, Table Intro.2, for a list of temperatures measured in sherds of various
periods.
189
See Goldman 1931, 43, fig. 47 for a compilation of examples of clay bins and ovens from
Eutresis.
6
Chourmouziades 1977.
190
a circular structure made of baked clay, rough tiles, and flat limestone slabs. The floor of the
kiln has been preserved and is made of compact, baked clay. The structure was originally
closed off with a small clay parapet wall (0.30-0.40m in height), preserved now only at the
eastern half. The structure was definitely exposed repeatedly to firing activity as
demonstrated by the large amount of ash and chunks of burnt clay. Chourmouziades
reconstructed it as an enclosed space made of clay, where pots were placed and fire was lit
above the pots. He interpreted the remains of the clay wall not as part of a dome, but as a
low wall which bordered the area and served as a retaining wall to confine fire within an
area.
More complete ovens have been excavated in the Neolithic sites at Dikili-Tash
(Philippoi) and at Arhontiko Giannitson in Macedonia. Scientific analyses conducted
recently by the French excavators at Dikili-Tash showed that low temperatures (200-400C)
were developed inside these structures reaffirming their interpretation as ovens for cooking
and baking.7 These ovens are generally oval in shape. A thick clay floor rests directly over
the contemporary surface. Their dimensions are usually 0.60 x 0.70m and their
reconstructed height would not surpass 0.80-1.00m.
Given the absence of physical remains, it is the pottery that supplies us with
information about the technology employed by the Neolithic people. First, did the Neolithic
people need to fire pottery? And second, where did they fire their pottery? The first,
seemingly naive question finds its answer in the archaeological observations that a large
See also supra Excursus, "The Baking Oven", Plates Exc.1, 4, for archaeological remains
and for terracotta models of ovens. Deshayes 1974; Truil 1992, 42. For technological
analysis, see Youni et al. 1994.
191
amount of Neolithic pottery (especially figurines) was only sun-dried. This explains the lack
of kilns in the archaeological record and perhaps the delay in the appearance of a specialized
firing installation.8 This method of sun-drying continued even later into the Early Helladic
period, when many pots near or inside the Early Helladic II graves at the settlement of Agios
Kosmas at Attica were never fired but left in a leather-dry condition.9
According to the available evidence, there are no compelling reasons to assume that
Neolithic people used a specialized ceramic kiln to fire their pottery. Undoubtedly they had
the basic knowledge needed to construct a baked clay structure, as the large fired clay
structures attest, but the production rate of the Neolithic people was so low that it did not
require a specialized structure. It has been argued that the Neolithic potters were mainly
women and they probably could have used their household equipment to fire their pots,
which did not surpass ten or twelve in number annually.10 Technological analysis of
Neolithic pottery does not indicate high temperatures, although it has been demonstrated that
the Neolithic potters had developed good control of the firing atmospheres. For example, the
Middle Neolithic (5500-5000 B.C.) Urfirnis ware includes calcium carbonates, which
Vitelli 1999.
Mylonas 1929, 150. But pottery which is underfired also displays similar characteristics, so
the recovered pottery from Agios Kosmas might have been underfired rather than unfired.
10
For discussions on Neolithic pottery, rate of production, and the status of the potters, see
Vitelli 1995. The same scholar (1997) proposed that perhaps the Neolithic people had a
portable bell-shaped kiln which could fire a small number of pots, which must have been
placed one inside the other as the "ghosts" on the decoration show.
192
11
Kotsakis 1983; Vitelli 1999, 193. Vitellis (1993) preliminary suggestions that some
Neolithic sherds could have been potters wasters immediately were rejected by the author
herself, since many sherds from that phase had some sort of flaw. For scientific work on
Neolithic pottery, see Schneider et al. 1991.
12
Arnold (1985, 108, 228) notes this change from female to male potters, which he
correlates to the shift from "household industry" to "workshop industry". It is mainly female
potters who fire their pots in open fires. Even in the household industry where women often
form the pots, it is the men who operate the kilns.
193
kiln firing to men, no data about women building a kiln has survived from either past or
traditional potting societies.13
All these examples are one-chamber structures, where the fuel and the items to be
fired were placed in the same chamber. Domestic ovens, however, were not always built
directly over the floor. There were two-floor structures such as a Late Bronze Age two-story
oven from Dipli Trapeza Sindou (Plate Exc.4) where there is even evidence that a central
small column supported the second floor. In other cases, the small oven is built on a
podium, which rests on the floor of the yard and has an opening for storing wood. The
Neolithic house that has been reconstructed at Volos also features a similar oven (Plate
Exc.2).
This picture of kiln technology from Neolithic Greece is poor when compared with
the ceramic kilns in mid- and southeastern Europe. Petraschs survey of Neolithic excavated
ovens and terracotta models of ovens from these areas distinguishes primarily between onechamber and multi-chambered ovens.14 Some of the multi-chambered ovens even had an
interior perforated floor.
The preserved range of types of ovens shows that the addition of advanced features
to simple, basic structures was a long process. Consequently the development of what later
became the standard ceramic kiln (a two-chambered circular structure with a supporting
column in the lower chamber and a perforated floor to allow heat to pass to the upper
13
Wright 1991 generally on women potters; Nordquist 1995, 1997 for Middle Helladic
potting personnel.
14
Petrasch 1986.
194
chamber) was probably a slow process. Most likely the ceramic kiln was a larger, more
technologically advanced version of the small household structure, the oven.
15
Clay storage vessels certainly existed in Neolithic times and were used both in funerary
and domestic contexts. None of these vessels, even the pithoi, surpassed 0.70m in height and
therefore they could conceivably have been fired in a rudimentary kiln. For an example of a
large Neolithic pithos, see Papathanassopoulos 1996, 274, fig. 140: pithos from Sphakovouni
in Arcadia (Tripoli Archaeological Museum, inv. no. 5347. H. 0.625m). Even the tall
Neolithic amphoras are slightly over 0.50m.
16
Kalogirou 1997.
17
195
temperatures during firing, could only have been fired in a sizable kiln, and not in the
smaller Neolithic ovens. Because the appearance and the use of the pithos encapsulate the
social and economic processes which led to the accumulation of surplus, one might say that
the advancement of the pottery technology (including the kiln) owes much to the pithos and
to the general need for larger containers.18 On the other hand, the introduction of the
potters wheel is not the sine qua non prerequisitive for the development of a kiln; large
vessels such as pithoi were made, after all, in the coil-technique.19
The Early Bronze Age is as cryptic about its kiln equipment as is the preceding
Neolithic period.20 The Neolithic silence, however, probably reflects a real absence of kilns,
while the absence of kilns from the Early Bronze Age should be considered coincidental.
One region in mainland Greece contributes information for EBA pottery technology:
northern Greece, (Plate IV.2), where one structure so far can be qualified as a ceramic kiln.
A large pit (diam. 1.60-1.70m) with clay-coated walls dug into the ground, from Polychrono
resembles a standard ceramic kiln with a well-defined lower chamber (94). Because there
are no traces of a perforated floor, it is not yet clear whether the fuel was separated from the
pots, or whether these structures consisted of only one chamber. Its preserved height,
however, speaks in favor of a horizontal separation into two chambers. The stoking channel,
which is probably the most significant step in the development of kiln design aside from the
perforated floor, starts to make its modest appearance.
18
19
For the history of the development of the potters wheel, see Rieth 1960.
20
196
The structure from Agios Mamas, which is often cited as an example of an early
kiln, is still in the tradition of the Neolithic ovens (Plate IV.2).21 The reconstruction shows
a permanent one-chamber structure, ca. 0.90m high. Had the five vessels not been found in
situ inside this oven, it still would have been debatable whether that structure was a kiln or
an oven.
Despite the handmade nature of EBA pottery, chemical and petrographic analysis of
twenty-eight Early Helladic sherds from Sindos, Agios Mamas showed that they were fired
consistently at temperatures between 850oC and 950oC.22 The firing technology of the EBA
also could have been restricted to one-chambered ovens/kilns or to a rudimentary kiln, but
regional surveys in the Argolid show that the EH houses were roofed with tiles. The
question arises: "Where were those tiles fired? Temporary firing equipment might have
been adequate for the occasional firing of household pottery, but the large quantities of
rooftiles would have required a more permanent establishment.23 Unfortunately, the Argolid
is still devoid of excavated examples of kiln structures in the EBA. The magnetometer
investigations in Perachora, where kiln wasters were found, failed to detect any kilns beneath
the surface.
Recent petrographic and stylistic studies of Early Minoan (EM) pottery have
ascertained the existence of specialization in ceramic production as early as this period.
Careful mixing of different clays according to the shape and function of the vessel,
21
22
Kesisoglou et al. 1985. The highest temperatures recorded from the fired clay ovens at
Arhontiko Giannitson are 650C (see supra Excursus, "The Baking Oven").
23
Wiencke (1989, 506) also emphasizes the skill and time required for "massive tile-firing."
197
24
For detailed discussion of degrees of specialization in pottery workshops, see infra, Ch.
VI.
25
198
26
27
Zerner 1993.
199
period, 2.30m in diameter. One of the best-preserved kilns, at Eretria (103), is also dated to
this period.28 The perfect state of preservation of the combustion chamber, with the stoking
entrance, the entire perforated floor, as well as its interior columnar support, offer a rare
glimpse showing how an ancient kiln would have appeared.
Three different types of supporting systems are attested in this period:
a. Type Ia: central columnar support [Eretria (103)],
b. Type Ib: central wall [Lerna (96-99)]
c. Type Ie: multiple parallel walls [Kirrha (106)]
28
The Middle Helladic date of the Eretria kiln is still preliminary. Although the kiln was
found below the Classical levels at the Agora, it might have been dug into those levels.
Given its very common shape and size, it is impossible to date the kiln on typological
criteria.
29
A. Skorda, Ephor of the Delphi Ephorate (pers. comm.), whose on-going dissertation
focuses on the prehistoric kilns from this area.
30
200
Crete presents a large number of kilns, but the great majority date to the last phase of
the Minoan civilization, Late Minoan I-III (Plate IV.5).31 A few kilns are tentatively dated
to MMIII-LMI. Most of these kilns [Vathypetro (124), Knossos (139-141), Phaistos (122)]
have been dated on the basis of pottery found in connection with the kiln. In most cases
these pots ideally provide only a terminus post quem, but they do not inform us precisely of
the period when the kiln was used. Only the kiln at Kommos (145) and the material from its
interior have been studied in an exemplary manner, supplying information on the range of
vessels fired in the kiln, the firing atmospheres developed inside it, and the placement of
various shapes inside the kiln (Plate IV.6).32 A long article on the kiln and its ceramic
material at Agia Triadha (143) is less informative because very little pottery was found
inside the kiln.33 Its importance lies in the authors' dismissal of the idea that the palmshaped (or channel) kilns were used as metallurgical furnaces.
This chronological concentration must be viewed as a coincidence of the foci of
archaeological investigation, rather than as a reliable reflection of ceramic production and
technology in the earlier phases of the Minoan civilization.
31
Myers et al. 1992. For the most updated list of Minoan ceramic kilns, see Evely 2000.
Although he supplies thirty-one examples, only eighteen of them are certainly kilns.
32
33
201
With the exception of the complex of three kilns at Knossos (141-143) and the
potters quarter at Kato Gouves (127-137), all other kiln sites listed in the catalogue are
represented by only one kiln. There are seven examples of rectangular kilns and twenty-one
of circular kilns. Only at Gouves do we see both types coexisting.34 No geographical region
shows any preference for either of these two types. The kilns and the workshops to which
they belonged appear in various settings: at palace sites (Phaistos, Knossos, Zakros), at large
settlements [Mochlos (148-149], at isolated farms [Zou (125)] or unconnected with any other
habitation sites [Vathypetro (124)]. It is worth noticing that the kilns at Mochlos and
Gouves lie close to the modern shore (within 100m) and probably were even closer to the
shore in antiquity.
Only at Gouves are the kilns part of an archaeologically detectable workshop. No
other equipment for pottery manufacture has been excavated at any of the other kiln sites. In
Evelys comprehensive article on potters' disks on Crete, only three out of the twenty-six
sites where pottery disks were found also preserved a kiln (at Zakros, Phaistos, and
Knossos), but kilns and disks were not found close to each other.35
34
A third kiln at Knossos, of circular shape, is thought to have been used as a lime kiln.
35
Evely 1988.
202
The Minoan kilns display a unique typology in regard to the rectangular channel kilns.
Because such kilns are attested solely on Crete, I present this type first, and then offer a brief
discussion of the circular kilns.
36
203
kiln has been unearthed is in Miletus, where it was associated with the Minoan level of
occupation of the site.37
The channel kilns come only in larger sizes, ranging from 3.00 x 2.00 to 5.00 x
5.00m (the kiln at Agia Triadha, which far surpasses its counterparts in size) (Plate IV.7).
The complete structure at Vathypetro, if it is a kiln, would have been comparable in size to
the kiln at Agia Triadha, or even larger.38
The firing chamber consists of a number of channels, which are formed by tall
separating walls parallel to the long sides of the kilns. The channels probably facilitated a
steady temperature for the horizontal draft inside the kiln, as P. Warren speculated for the
Knossos examples (139-140) (Plate IV.12). In the comparable channel kiln in Miletus,
however, the channels are perpendicular to the long axis of the kiln.
The number of channels varies according to the overall dimensions of the kilns; thus
the smaller kilns at Knossos and at Gouves have two or three channels, whereas the larger
ones at Zakros, Kommos, and Agia Triadha have as many as four. The walls are placed at
regular distances from each other. In front of the channels there is an ovoid space, where the
fuel was probably burned. No fragments of a perforated floor, if there had been any, have
been recovered from any of the sites with rectangular kilns. Therefore, it has been suggested
either that the vases were fired inside the channels or that slabs were placed on top of the
37
For a prelimininary study of distribution of Bronze Age kilns and for the Miletus kiln, see
Niemeier 1997. The kiln measures 4.00 x 2.50m and dates to the MMIII/LMIA-LMIB period
The most comprehensive list of ceramic workshops on Prehistoric Crete is in Evely 2000,
298-312.
38
The fragmentary condition of the kiln combined with the absence of any other evidence of
pottery production make the interpretation of the structure as ceramic kiln highly dubious.
204
separating walls which bridged the gap and provided a surface for the stacking of the pots.
The most complete example of this category is at Kommos, where the kiln is preserved
almost in its entirety. Elsewhere parts of the channels were destroyed by later building
activities at the sites.
The peculiar shape of the kilns attracted the attention of the scholars. The presence
of many channels is their common characteristic, but the surrounding frame may be elliptical
(Kommos) or rectangular (Agia Triadha). The intermediate phase of such construction can
perhaps be seen in the kilns at Phaistos and at Stylos near Chania. An elliptical shape could
be maintained and accommodate as many as three walls (at Kommos, Knossos, and Zakros).
The elliptical kilns resemble circular ones but can offer larger capacity. When the number of
channels increases, it leads naturally to the adoption of a rectangular frame (Agia Triadha,
Miletus). In other cases the rectangular shape is dictated by the preexisting walls, which
surrounded the kiln as in the examples at Gouves.
Occasionally, the channel kilns have been reconstructed as downdraft (also known as
horizontal or cross-draft), which would make them the only downdraft kilns in the Greek
world.39 This reconstruction is highly problematic due to the incomplete nature of the
evidence. Downdraft kilns tend to develop very high temperatures, over 1300C, but the
Greek calcareous clays vitrify if fired at temperatures over 1000C. Therefore it is not
immediately apparent why the Greek potters would invest in another technology, which
would have been detrimental to their products. The excavators of the kilns at Agia Triadha
39
Cf. the reconstruction of the kiln at Miletus in Niemeier 1997 and Shaw et al. 2001 for the
kiln at Kommos (145).
205
(143) and Kommos (145) have reconstructed their kilns as horizontal, but still of an updraft
version.
The exact function of channel kilns has long been hotly debated in the
archaeological community.40 N. Platon, upon excavating a similar example at Zakros (123),
challenged their initial identification as pottery kilns and argued that they were metallurgical
furnaces (Plate IV.11).41 Subsequent discoveries of the Agia Triadha kiln and the kiln at
Kommos reestablished their function as ceramic kilns. No metal-processing residues have
been excavated in association with any of these kilns, and their size would not have allowed
the achievement of very high temperatures throughout the structure (ca. 1200C), which are
required for metal processing.42 Although the walls of the kiln at Agia Triadha are heavily
vitrified, it is impossible to imagine how such high temperatures could be maintained inside
the entire firing chamber of a kiln measuring 5.00 x 5.00m. It is useful to mention again that
even the shaft furnaces at Laurion in Classical times, when silver production was at its
highest point, did not exceed one meter in diameter.43
The excavation of three small rectangular kilns at the production center at Gouves
sheds new light on this discussion (Plates IV.9-10). Their presence in a secure potting
establishment proves that this was an acceptable typological alternative to the circular kiln
40
A large-scale program of taking samples from all the kilns excavated by the Italian
Archaeological School is in progress (1999-2000 University of Catania, pers. comm.). The
results of this study will clarify many functional issues of these kilns.
41
42
43
Conophagos (1974) restores shaft furnaces with a diameter of 1.00m and as high as 3.00m.
206
for the Cretan potters. What remains to be explained is not so much their unusual shape, but
rather their imposing size. The connection mentioned above, between large kilns and major
centers (palatial or nonpalatial), should be kept in mind.
A few comments on the kiln at Agia Triadha are required since its reconstruction by
V. Varoufakis presents many problems. His flawed argument that the necessary air
combustion would have been supplied most probably by means of one or more bellows
through holes of the front wall has no parallel in traditional kiln technology.44 The draft in
all pottery kilns is created with the aid of the chimney(s), which are placed either on the
dome of updraft kilns or at the backside of downdraft kilns. Any holes in that wall would
have caused the heat to take a very short circuit and would have prevented it from reaching
the entire length of the firing chamber.
This peculiar form of these rectangular kilns was designed to increase the kilns size
and capacity. Since the larger kilns are situated near major palatial centers, one can
hypothesize that the construction and operation of these spacious kilns could only be
afforded in areas which could produce or were required to produce considerable quantities of
ceramics. Therefore, their unusual shape is intriguing not only in terms of function, but also,
and more importantly, in terms of capacity and scale of ceramic production in the relevant
areas.
No one has attempted yet to explain the presence or origins of these kilns. The
isolated appearance of channel kilns both chronologically (only in the LM period) and
geographically (on Crete and at settlements with strong Minoan influences, such as Miletus)
renders their nature even more problematic. If they were used as metallurgical furnaces, it
44
207
does not seem to have been an imported phenomenon because Cyprus, the center for
metallurgy in antiquity, has no examples of such kilns. It might have been an indigenous,
experimental enterprise undertaken by a potter or a group of potters who traveled to Crete
and built their kiln on the sites. It is not clear whether this very short-lived phase can be
attributed to the defective function of these kilns, or whether it coincided with the lifetime of
their inventor(s). The shape of these kilns probably did not offer more advantages than the
traditional circular kiln, and therefore did not justify the extra labor, time, and fuel spent on
its construction and use. This expensive type of kiln probably could be maintained only by
the connection with a palatial administration, and the fall of the Minoan palaces brought on
the end of the large rectangular kilns.
It remains to be stressed that perhaps the structure at Zakros which initiated this
controversy might well not have been a pottery kiln. The channels are arranged quite
distinctly with large dividing walls between them and with an obvious attempt on the part of
the builder to have straight walls within each channel. The clay lining of the walls seems to
protrude above the dividing walls and therefore it is difficult to reconstruct how a perforated
floor could have existed on top of these channels. Finally their height is much smaller than
all the other channel kilns. A metallurgical function cannot be excluded, but this
interpretation cannot unquestionably be applied to all other channel kilns.
A possible use of the larger kilns which I propose here is the firing of large vessels,
such as large pithoi and burial larnakes (Plate IV.8).45 Tsipopoulou and Vagnetti (1997)
have demonstrated that the same decorative motifs were used both on pithoi and larnakes,
45
For larnakes, see Mavriyannaki 1972; Morris 1995. The kilns could also have been used
occasionally for asaminthoi, bathtubs.
208
suggesting that the same workshop might have produced both types of objects. The palatial
centers with their constant demand for pithoi, as their storerooms testify, would have
encouraged the production of such heavy items close to their destination, thus minimizing
any risks of breakage during transportation. The large kiln at Agia Triadha could have fired
twenty to forty pithoi.46 One should not expect to find wasters of such large vessels in the
vicinity of the kilns, however, because pithoi have a low waster rate and any wasters can be
used as burial pithoi. Larnakes also require a sizable chamber. The cost of production, due
to the amount of clay used and the decoration, would have made the larnakes available only
to the upper strata of Minoan society. Workshops for larnakes, therefore, conceivably could
be controlled by the palace administrators who were their primary customers.47 An
objection to such use of the rectangular channel kilns is the material recovered and studied
from the Kommos kiln on Crete (145) where all the pottery belongs to cups or small storage
vessels. But as a rule a high failure rate is less likely with such large objects, and because of
their large size the potters would have quickly removed any wasters from the immediate area
around the kiln.
46
For this reconstruction I used an average Minoan pithos measuring 1.15m in height and
0.80m. in diameter. See, for example, Betancourt 1985, pl. 16E (a MMIII-LMI pithos from
Knossos, H. 1.15m).
47
209
48
For a more detailed discussion of this issue, see supra Ch. II, "The 'bench' in the
combustion chamber".
210
Parts of the perforated floors have survived in situ in the kilns at Kavousi and at Stylos near
Chania, which date to the LM period. A central part of the eschara with two holes has been
preserved at Stylos near Chania, thus proving that a gap of 0.40m can be spanned by a
perforated floor. This example provides the necessary precedent for arguing that the spans
between the channels in the larger examples (see section above) could be covered with a
perforated floor, not only with slabs, as has been suggested.49 The diameter of the ventholes
at Stylos is quite large: 0.15-0.20m, compared with the average 0.10-0.12m. At Kavousi the
holes are preserved in the periphery.
The kilns with a bench did not provide physical evidence of central support,
although it may have existed. Other scholars have entertained the idea that the kilns with a
bench were lime kilns, because in later times the bench is the standard characteristic of such
kilns.50
The uncertainty regarding the true function of the kilns with an interior bench stems
from a more general scarcity of material found in association with the kilns. Very few kilns
provided a large quantity of pot sherds or wasters to establish their identification as pottery
kilns beyond doubt.
49
50
Demierre (2000) did not find the evidence adequate for a pottery kiln at Palaikastro (150),
which she identified as a lime kiln. For lime kilns in general, see supra Excursus, "The Lime
Kiln".
211
51
52
See supra Ch. VI for an extensive discussion of archaeological criteria for identifying a
ceramic workshop. See infra Ch. VI n. 23 for criteria used for palatial workshops by L.
Platon (1993).
212
SITE
DATE
CRITERIA
213
KILN
DISCUSSED
Myrtos
EM IIA
disks
no
no
Mallia
MM II
no
no
Phaistos
MM III
architecture,
yes
no
(bench)
Zou
Vathypetro
MMIIIB-LM IA
basin
yes
yes
LM IA
benches, smoothing
yes
yes
no
no
pebbles?, disks
Zominthos
LMIA
disks, potters
wheel, benches,
clay basin
Gournia
LM I
disks
no
no
Knossos
LM IIIB
basin?,
yes
no
Only two sites have provided kilns from the Prehistoric islands: Naxos (118-119) and
Cos (120-121), both circular and of small sizes. This scarcity must be considered a coincidence,
because the stylistic analysis of Cycladic pottery has shown that the Cyclades had developed
their own decorative repertoire, distinguishable from that on Crete. This implies that they had
established ceramic workshops with their own kilns on the islands.53
53
Papagiannopoulou 1991.
In the last period of the Bronze Age there is a more balanced ratio between sites and
kilns, which indicates that Mycenaean sites, regardless of their size, satisfy their immediate
pottery needs through local production (Plate IV.15). The larger centers, such as Dimini,
could easily have supplied a broader geographical area.
All the kilns from this period continue to be mainly elliptical. The structure (not
considered a kiln in this study) at Agios Kosmas has not been investigated in depth and its
rectangular shape should be considered the result of an incomplete excavation (Appendix
II).54 Although there are small kilns, it is interesting that most of the kilns are more than 2m
in diameter, a phenomenon which is rare in later periods. The largest of all is found at
Dimini (116) in Thessaly, with a diameter of 3.85m.
The geographical area represented is now wider: Attica, Peloponnese, Cyclades,
Thessaly, and central Greece. Northern Greece has not, so far, supplied any kilns in the
Mycenaean period, in sharp contrast to her early examples of kilns (see supra "The Early
Bronze Age").
The eschara has not been preserved in any kiln, but in many cases the preservation of
the supporting system is more promising. A favorite supporting system is a long, thin, main
wall parallel to the long side of the kiln [Dimini (116), Berbati (111), Pylos (114)], which
occasionally is supplemented by additional walls on either side for stronger support of the
eschara (Dimini, Berbati). The multiwall system has a predecessor in the MH kiln at Kirrha,
where three walls are also preserved (Plate IV.16). In all the examples which come from
different geographical areas (Peloponnese, Thessaly, and Thebes) the central wall is attached
54
Mylonas 1959.
214
to the interior walls of the kiln. The kiln from Aigeira (108) with the central, circular,
unattached support is the only example of any type other than the standard.
Most Mycenaean kilns were found in isolation from any other artisanal installation.
At Berbati and at Dimini, potters dumps with by-products of the ceramic production have
been found. No clay-setting basins or clay disks like the Minoan potter's disks, or areas
labeled workshops, have been identified.
The palatial focus of archaeological research in the first half of the twentieth
century, when most of these kilns were excavated, resulted in minimal and mostly superficial
recording of these structures. It is not surprising, then, that little can be said about the
pottery produced in these kilns.55 Even the detailed publication of the impressive kiln at
Dimini included few pottery fragments recovered from the kiln. The kiln fired both smaller
and larger (from kylikes to pithoi), plain and decorated pots but most of the sherds belonged
to plain wares.
The evidence from the Mycenaean kilns offers us one more testing ground for
reassessing our notions about Mycenaen pottery production, which were previously based on
the study of potters described on Linear B tablets and on the pottery itself.56 The Argive
area, which had been considered the main pottery export center on the basis of petrographic
analyses, has provided few examples of kilns [Asine (109-110), Berbati (113), Tiryns (112113)]. The large size of the Berbati kiln (second only to the Dimini kiln (116) probably
55
56
For references to potters and other craftsmen in Linear B tablets, see Bech-Gregersen
1997.
215
57
Galaty 1999.
58
Lupack 1999.
59
216
While studying the Greek prehistoric kilns, one is faced with a large amount of
negative evidence and deeply-rooted misinterpretations. Bound by dearth of evidence, we
are unable at the present to draw a clear picture about the early stages of the ceramic kilns in
Greece. The extant remains provide hints, but no concluding evidence. The minimal
contribution of kilns from the Greek islands (besides Crete) empedes us from tracing the
typology of kilns in this area which lies at the intersection of two powerful potting traditions
of the Minoans and the Mycenaeans.
Despite the comparatively small number of kilns recovered from Prehistoric Greece,
two types pose interesting and still largely unresolved questions: first, the channel Minoan
kilns (Type IIe). The eagerly-awaited scientific analysis of the kilns themselves would
elucidate many aspects, but I hope to have demonstrated the difficulty to develop high
temperatures for working metal inside such large structures. Second, a less controversial
type, the circular kiln with parallel walls of unequal length (Type Ie) deserves special
consideration for its technological advantages (if any). The similarity between the
rectangular channel kilns on Crete and the circular kilns with multiple walls as support (e.g.
Kirrha, Dimini) on the mainland might constitute one instance in which a Minoan idea was
adopted and modified by the Mycenaeans. In spite of the broad range of interactions
between the late phases of the Minoan and Mycenaean civilizations, the kilns of each culture
display some distinctive characteristics: for example, Mycenaean kilns prefer the central
wall arrangement (Type Ib). The size of the Prehistoric kilns is also noteworthy. Out of
thirty examples of measured kilns (less than half of the available prehistoric kilns) most of
the circular kilns fall within the range of 0.90-2.20 with an equal distribution.60 The channel
60
Analytically for the thirty prehistoric kilns whose measurements are recorded: 0.50-0.99m
(2 kilns), 1.00-1.49m (6 kilns), 1.50-1.99m (7 kilns), 2.00-2.99m (11 kilns), 3.00-3.99m (2
217
kilns belong to the larger group of measurements. There are no small kilns (below 0.90m)
which become more common in the later periods (see infra Ch. V).
218
CHAPTER V
This chapter, like the preceding one, is based on the catalogue and Appendix I. A
comprehensive approach is adopted so that the future researcher can obtain a panoramic
view of the evidence for kilns in each period. For each period I will provide the total number
of kilns, their geographical distribution, the range of sizes, and construction details, as well
as discussing the production of these ceramic workshops.1 The sites within each period are
In this section, the sites with kilns are presented alphabetically within each period, for
easier reference. Since the catalogue entries are arranged geographically, the readers can
choose whichever arrangement best fits their scholarly interests.
219
220
Areas
9
Sites
10
TOTAL
14
So far fourteen examples of excavated and identified kilns have been dated to the
Geometric period (Plates V.1-3). Among these, permanent remains of eleven kilns have
survived at only ten sites:
1. Amorgos-1
(13)
(03)
3. Athens-1: Agora
(01)
(02)
221
(10)
6. Eretria
(04)
(05-06)
8. Phaistos-1
12)
(14)
10. Torone
(11)
We also have fragments from the structures of kilns at Lefkandi (07-09) (Plate
II.7b). All five major geographical areas of Greece are represented, but slightly larger
concentrations are detected in Attica, the Aegean, and central Greece (Euboea in particular)
predominate, with eight kilns. Individual examples occur in northern Greece (Torone),
Peloponnese (Argos), and western Greece (Dodona).
The average size of a Geometric kiln is 1.00-1.50m, when calculated from the
dimensions of twelve kilns.2 At either side of this normal size are the small kiln at Torone,
0.80m, and the kiln under the Classical Tholos in the Athenian Agora, with a diameter of
1.33m. A larger kiln in Argos, 2.20m, reminds us that ceramic production already had
assumed considerable importance in the Geometric period.3 The small size of the majority
of kilns barely qualifies them as pottery-firing structures. In many cases, as at Dodona and
Torone, their identification as kilns would have been controversial had not enough pottery
been preserved in situ to rule out their identification as ovens.
The kiln at Samos measures 2.00x2.00m, but its date is still problematic; equally uncertain
is the Geometric or Archaic kiln at Eretria measuring 2.10x1.80m.
222
Almost all the securely dated Geometric kilns are circular or ovoid. Only in three
sites (at Samos, Kyme, and Lefkandi) do we have evidence for a rectangular structure.
Unfortunately the early date of the kiln at Samos is still under consideration. In regard to
construction, most kilns in this period are partly subterranean structures with the combustion
chamber dug into the ground. In only one case [Amorgos (227)] is the kiln dug into the
bedrock. In the five cases where the supports of the perforated floor have survived, they are
of the simple type with a central column or wall (e.g. the Athenian Agora, Amorgos, Phaistos, Samos).
TYPES
Percentage
s
Grouped Types
I?
29%
Ia
14%
Ib
7%
If
7%
Ig
7%
II ?
21&
Rectangular
II a
7%
II b
7%
Geometric Total
14
ca. 100%
Circular
9
14
In the remaining kilns no central column has survived (Type If) (e.g. Torone, Dodona, Amorgos,
Eretria); or, as in Athens-Makriyianni and Kyme, the excavation of the kilns did not proceed
far enough to indicate the type of the supporting system. For the former group, where no
support has been found, it is very likely that no support existed at the first place, given the
small dimensions of the kiln (0.80m for Torone and ca. 1.00m for Amorgos and Dodona).
As for the intermediate perforated floor, one intact floor has been preserved in situ at Samos.
Likewise fragmentary floors are found in situ at the two rectangular kilns in Kyme on
Euboea. The excavations of the Protogeometric levels at Lefkandi have provided more
fragments from both a rectangular and a circular floor (Plate II.7b) At Dodona one notperforated clay plaque has been found in association with the oven/kiln; it is quite small, ca.
0.50m in diameter (Plate III.7). Since all kiln floors must be perforated to perform, this
plaque must be dissociated from kilns.
Although the production of the Geometric ceramic workshops is well illustrated in
the overviews of Greek painted pottery, the picture cannot be enhanced further by
archaeological remains of workshops. In most cases the kilns were found either empty of
pots or with very few sherds, whose major contribution is to assist with a general dating of
the kilns. The kiln at Torone, which apparently collapsed with most of the contents of a
single firing, informs us that kiln loads consisted mainly of vessels of comparable size.
Mostly sherds from cups have survived in the kilns at the Athenian Agora and Argos.
As sample vessels, I used the two-handled cup from Agora P15030 (0.08m high, rim
0.11m, including handles 0.15m), the oenochoe Agora P 15122 (0.215m high, max. .
0.17m, and the Early Geometric amphora P 20177 (0.52m high, max. diam. 0.30m). For a
sample oenochoe, I used all the measurements taken from Coldstream 1968.
223
The monumental funerary vessels of the Dipylon 809 Painter or of the Hirschfeld
Painter would barely have fit individually in an average ceramic kiln of the period.5 It is
unknown whether special kilns were constructed for firing these vessels. The old
interpretation, that they adorned the graves of aristocrats, is further supported by the high
price that they must have commanded, if each one needed to be fired individually.6 Probably
the firing of such an elaborate vessel could have occurred only once a year; and therefore the
limited number of vases, between sixteen and twenty, attributed to the Dipylon Master in a
period of twenty years, might be closer to the original number of vases he actually produced
than previously thought, spanning the mature years of an experienced potter.
Only one Geometric kiln was found with what seems to have been its final load. At
Torone in Chalkidike (11) a small kiln measuring 0.80m in diameter contained fourteen
vessels, mainly jugs. In a reconstruction of the kiln load, the vases do not seem all to fit
inside the kiln. One may safely say, however, that this small kiln could probably fire twelve
large vessels.
As for the location of the Geometric kilns, three examples (at Argos, the Athenian
Agora, and Torone) have been excavated in cemeteries. The products of the pottery
workshops, however, were not necessarily purchased by families of the deceased as funerary
dedications. Scientific analyses conducted on the pots from the kiln at Torone and the
The name vase of the Dipylon Painter, Athens 804, measures 1.55m in height and has an
Est.max. 0.75m. The name vase of the Hirschfeld Painter, Athens 990, measures 1.23m in
height with an Est.max. 0.80m.
6
224
225
pottery offerings in the tombs of the cemetery indicated that they were completely different
in their composition.7
Of the ten Geometric local style areas as established by Coldstream --Attic,
Corinthian, Argive, Thessalian, Cycladic and Euboean, Boeotian, Laconian, West Greek,
Cretan, and East Greek-- the only ones that have not provided an excavated example of a
workshop are four: Corinth, Thessaly, Boeotia, and Laconia.8 The absence in Thessaly is
particularly noticeable (and almost certainly coincidental) since Thessalian kilns feature
prominently in our records from Prehistoric times. Coldstreams regionally-based stylistic
analysis of the Geometric styles, implicitly suggests that pottery was produced in all areas of
Greece, probably operating on a low level and fulfilling local needs. A high degree of selfsufficiency in pottery production led to artistic isolation which fostered the development of
distinct decoration styles.
Areas
11
Sites
TOTAL
11
22
The association of kilns and pottery workshops with necropoleis may be explained on the
grounds that both were relegated to the outskirts of the cities.
8
Cf. "Workshop" has been applied to assemblages that might be the work of a single artist
not cohesive enough to justify that assumption." (Benson 1989, 10). The presence of kilns in
West Greece has not been examined in this study.
226
Twenty-two kilns from fifteen sites date to the Orientalizing and Archaic period
(Plates V.4-5). Alphabetically the sites are:
(15)
(18)
(19)
(21-22)
(27)
(28-30)
(25-26)
(23-24)
(31-36)
(16-17)
11. Sparta-1
(20)
Only specific geographical areas are represented: Attica (Athens and Skala Oropou),
the Peloponnese (Aigion, ancient Corinth, and Sparta), central Greece (Eretria, Pherai),
northern Greece (Thasos) and the Aegean (Knossos, Lato, and Prinias on Crete).
Except for the sites in Attica and the Peloponnese and at Knossos on Crete, all other
sites preserve more than one kiln at each site; this is a new phenomenon which we did not
encounter during the preceding Geometric period. Eretria, Skala Oropou, Pherai, and Thasos
have two kilns each. Lato has three, and Prinias preserves six.
Of the twenty-two kilns only seventeen preserve complete dimensions and only
eighteen a recognizable shape. Thirteen are circular, two are elliptical, and three are
rectangular. The absolute size of the seventeen kilns ranges from 0.65m (Knossos) to 4.50 x
3.90 (Aigion).9 Generally, the circular kilns are the smallest, with an average diameter of
1.40m: the smallest is the Knossian example and the largest a kiln at Prinias at 2.98m). This
size averages approximately one half meter larger than the Geometric kilns. The elliptical
and rectangular kilns are quite large, as a rule. Except for Aigion, all other large kilns (of
more than 2m in diameter) belong to established workshops with two or more kilns,
suggesting that only full-time workshops could undertake the construction, repair, and
loading of a large kiln. The other kilns in those same workshops, however, tend to conform
to the average sizes of the period. Multiple kilns in a workshop may reflect multiple sizes of
products, since we have seen that similarly-sized pots tend to be fired together.
Another interesting structural feature is that some kilns, such as the large example on
Thasos ( 2.60m), are supported by a rectangular stone structure. This can be explained as
an additional support required by the large size of the kiln. Y. Garlan interpreted a
comparable structure at a kiln site at Vamvouri, Ammoudia as an insulating device to limit
loss of heat.10 In Prinias, or in later examples (Paroikia, Pherai), the kilns abut on previously
built walls on one or more sides, but they are not surrounded by a permanent stone structure,
as is the Thasos example.
Garlan 1986.
227
11
Small kilns were more economical of fuel: a potter might want to build a kiln which
would hold his pots, but would be as small as possible.
228
229
TYPES
Percentages
Grouped Types
Unknown
5%
I?
41%
Ia
27%
Circular
Ie
5%
17
If
5%
II a
5%
Rectangular
II b
17%
Archaic Total
22
ca. 100%
22
Number: It would be interesting to know whether the multiple kilns at the Archaic sites
were used simultanesouly. In cases, such as Lato, the situation is not clear-cut: we cannot
say whether the kilns were used simultaneously or sequentially. The fact that the walls of
kilns 1 and 2 bond speaks for the presence (if not for the use as well) of kiln 1 while kiln 2
was being constructed. The material recovered from the Prinias workshop is homogeneous
enough to suggest that all six kilns operated within a brief period of time.
230
Areas
20
Sites
TOTAL
32
57
The Classical kilns are more numerous: fifty-seven examples are preserved, and
more than half of these are located in Athens, or Attica (Plates V.6-7). Alphabetically, the
sites with Classical kilns are as follows:
1. Amphipoli-1
2. Ancient Corinth-1: Tile Works (Plates II.13-14,VI.2)
(84)
(64-65)
3. Ancient Elis-1
(66)
(67-72)
(73)
(74)
7. Ano Kyme
(76)
(83)
(37-39)
(43-45)
(46-49)
(40-42)
(50)
(51-53)
(54)
231
(55)
(56)
(57)
19. Berbati-1
(58-59)
20. Chania-1
(91)
21. Demetriada
(79)
(78)
23. Karystos
(77)
(92-93)
25. Kynouria
(63)
(60-62)
(85)
(82)
(80-81)
(86-89)
(90)
32. Thermon
(75)
Four of the fifty-seven kilns are not sufficiently preserved to allow us to determine their
shape, whether circular or rectangular. Of the remaining fifty-three the circular and elliptical kilns
are slightly in the majority (37/57), but the rectangular kilns now have a strong presence
(16/57) and will continue in the later periods to constitute a considerable proportion of the
kilns. The rectangular kilns tend to appear often in sets of two or three in the Classical
workshops.
232
TYPES
Unknown
7%
I?
20
35%
Ia
12
21%
Circular
Ib
7%
37
Ie
3%
II ?
14%
II b
14%
Rectangular
16
Classical Total
57
100%
57
As for size, the circular kilns cover a broader range of diameters, from 0.70m (Demetriada)
to the imposing Athenian example at Lenormant Ave. (2.30m). Three distinct size groups
now can be distinguished:
a. Small kilns, with a diameter smaller than 1.00m
Examples: Demetriada and Olympia-Greek Baths
b. Average kilns, 1.00-1.49m in diameter
Examples: Olympia, Sindos, Nemea, Arta
c. Larger kilns, from 1.60-3.00
Examples: Athens-Vouliagmeni, Lenormant, Kynouria, Sindos.12
The larger examples tend to appear in established workshops which have more than
one kiln, such as in Athens and in Sindos. Medium-sized kilns with a diameter from 1.40 to
1.80m. are absent. This gap, however, is filled by the group of kilns of elliptical shape,
12
Analytically the measurements for thirty-one Classical kilns are distributed as follows: for
the dimensions 0.50-0.99m (2); 1.00-1.49m (5), 1.50-1.99m (4), 2.00-.2.99m (10), 3.003.99m (2), 4.00m+ (8). At the same time an amphora workshop in the active port of
Marseilles in southern France operated a kiln 8.00m in exterior diameter (Hesnard et al.
1999, 91-3).
whose sizes fall exactly within these limits (Kerameikos kilns, Velestino, Demetriada,
Sindos). The rectangular kilns, as noted above, have a more focused distribution and they
appear repetitively in the same sites: Nemea, Olympia, Corinth, or Athens. Five sites have
only one kiln, four sites have two and three sites have three rectangular kilns.
Number: In the Classical period the workshops develop a more permanent
character. Although a large number of sites (20) still have only one kiln excavated, a large
number (12) have multiple kilns at the site: four sites with two kilns, four sites with three
kilns, and two with more than three. This phenomenon shows that the workshops functioned
full-time rather than being seasonal occupations. A long-term commitment explains
investing in building these kilns, and more importantly, implies that the volume of
production was such to fill these kilns. Even if at these sites with multiple kilns, only one
kiln functioned at a time, the continuous construction of new kilns indicates that the potters
enjoyed a steady demand for their production and that these medium-size workshops were
viable. For example, at the Kerameikos in particular, the two kilns under the modern
museum (40, 42) are identical in shape and they replaced each other exactly, their only
difference being the different orientation.
As for production, it is difficult to paint a representative picture. The Athenian
workshops are largely unpublished or little information was retained at the time of their
excavation. A few other workshops had a brief operation time and were used for the firing
of architectural terracottas (e.g. Corinth, Nemea). One of the most disappointing situations
are the kilns at Olympia (67-72) excavated in the early decades of the 20th century of our era;
the material kept is minimal and its main function was to date the structures. The Sindos
workshop in northern Greece (86-89) which has been well-published produced a variety of
coarse-wares and a few black-glazed types of pots. A more intense study of the Athenian
workshops would corrobate the initial impression that potters specialized in either
233
234
coarsewares (and perhaps glazed wares) or decorated fine wares, but no example so far
provides evidence for production of both types of pottery. Each area probably had its own
specialized production in coarseware, especially for cookware where there is a stronger
specialization since it requires the use of clays with specific thermal qualities.13
Areas
Sites
TOTAL
29
52
87
From Hellenistic period fifty-two sites with eighty-seven kilns have been excavated
in twenty-nine areas (Plates V.11-12).14 The Hellenistic ceramic production sites seem to
13
14
At eight sites the excavators have given a wide date to the nine kilns ranging from
Hellenistic to Roman. I included the counts in the typology statistics, but they are excluded
in this discussion. Their small number does not affect in any way the general observations.
The sites are: 1. Akraifnio (246), 2. Argos, Hypostyle Hall (245), 3. Athens, Argyroupoli,
235
have clustered in major centers: Athens in Attica, Pherai-Velestino in central Greece, and
Pella in northern Greece, to mention some examples. Although the production was quite
decentralized from Athens, it can be argued that each region had only a few centers
specializing in pottery and supplying the neighboring areas. Alphabetically the sites with
kilns are:
1. Amorgos-2
(227)
2. Amphipoli-2
(224)
3. Ancient Elis-2A-C
(172-174)
(168)
(169)
(170)
(171)
(196)
(183-184)
(185)
(186-187)
(155-157)
(158)
(159)
(160-161)
(162-166)
(197-209)
(212-213)
23. Elateia
(175)
Marathonomachon St., Vouliagmeni Ave., and Alimou Ave. (242), 4. Attica Voula (243), 5.
Aulis (247), 6. Chalkis, Papadimitriou Plot (248), 7. Patras-2: 7, Nikita and Karatza Sts.
(244), 8. Philotas-Ancient Eordaia A-B (249-250) (Plate II.5b0. See infra "Roman Kilns".
236
24. Eleutherna
(241)
(177)
(178)
(193)
(240)
(181-182)
(235-237)
(179)
(180)
(194-195)
(228-233)
(167)
(214)
(215)
(216)
(217)
(218-223)
(188)
(189)
(190-192)
46. Polymylos-1A-B
(210-211)
47. Pyrgaki/Palaiomazi
(176)
(238)
(239)
50. Tenos
(234)
(225)
(226)
Many workshops in the Hellenistic period are full-time establishments, usually with
two or three kilns functioning at each site [e.g., Pherai-Velestino (190-192), Pella (218-
237
223)]. The workshops excavated mainly produced coarseware pottery and molded items
(e.g. Eretria, Pherai-Stamouli-Bolia plot, Corfu-Figaretto).
TYPES
Percentages
Unknown
15 (18)*
17%
(19)
I?
14 (15)
16%
(16)
Ia
31
36%)
(32
Ib
5%
(4)
If
1 (2)
1%
(2)
Ig
2%
II ?
9 (11)
10%
(11)
II b
10%
(9)
Rectangular
II c
2 (4)
2%
(4)
20 (24)
Hellenistic TOTAL
87 (96)
ca. 100%
Grouped Types
15 (18)
Circular
52 (54)
87 (96)
* The numbers in the parentheses represent the total when the kilns dated as
Hellenistic or Roman are added.
Besides the excavated kilns, the presence of a large number of workshops had been
assumed on the basis of homogeneous deposits containing molds or misfired items. In
Athens, especially, Rotroff has identified no fewer than four workshops associated with
deposits on the Areopagus.15 The intensive production of the Hellenistic and Roman
ceramic workshops generated considerable debris; hence the more frequent presence of
"orphan" Hellenistic deposits.
Types: The circular kilns are almost three times as common as the rectangular ones
(53/20 in number respectively). Average sizes for Hellenistic circular kilns fall into two
15
Rotroff 1984.
238
groups of 1.00-1.50 and 1.50-3.00m, therefore 0.50m larger than in previous periods.16
There are a few cases of kilns measuring below 1.00m in diameter, but they normally belong
to larger established workshops with many kilns of larger dimensions (e.g. Corfu-Figaretto,
Pherai, and Paros). The rectangular kilns are by now a standard feature and not an
exception. Many of them are within the range of 3.00-4.00m. There are also some
exceptionally large kilns over 5.50m on a side, notably one measuring 8.60 x 6.20 in Spata
(162-166) in the Attic countryside. There are six types represented, but the newlyintroduced type IIc becomes especially favored in northern Greece in the Roman period.
The favorite types are Ia (31 examples) and IIb (9 examples). What is worth noting,
however, is that now the rectangular kilns do not appear only individually as in the Classical
period, but either in sets of two or more (e.g. Krannon, Polymylos) or as part of a larger
workshop, where all the other kilns are circular [e.g. Pella (Plate V.12)].
16
Areas
Sites
TOTAL
40
83
135
Analytically the measurements for fifty-six Hellenistic kilns are distributed as follows: for
the dimensions 0.50-0.99m (8); 1.00-1.49m (14), 1.50-1.99m (6), 2.00-.2.99m (9), 3.003.99m (13), 4.00m+ (6).
239
In the Roman period, despite our expectations that the ceramic production would
have exploded, the archaeological evidence from kilns suggests that the degree of production
remained about the same. One hundred and thirty-five kilns are documented for this period,
excavated in eithgty-three sites and representing forty cities/towns in Greece (Plate V.13):17
17
1. Aigeira
(313)
(314)
(315)
4. Ancient Corinth-3
(342)
(343)
(344)
(345)
(347)
(338)
(339)
(251)
(252)
(253)
(254)
(255)
(256-257)
(258)
At eight sites the excavators have given a wide date to the nine kilns ranging from
Hellenistic to Roman. I included the counts in the typology statistics, but the main discussion
they are excluded. Their small number does not affect in any way the general observations.
The sites are: 1. Akraifnio (246), 2. Argos, Hypostyle Hall (245), 3. Athens, Argyroupoli,
Marathonomachon St., Vouliagmeni Ave., and Alimou Ave. (242), 4. Attica Voula (243), 5.
Aulis (247), 6. Chalkis, Papadimitriou Plot (248), 7. Patras-2: 7, Nikita and Karatza Sts.
(244), 8. Philotas-Ancient Eordaia A-B (249-250) (Plate II.5). See also supra the discussion
of the Hellenistic kilns.
240
(259)
(260-269)
(270)
(271-272)
(273)
(274-300)
(301)
(302-305)
(340)
(349)
(350)
(351)
(371)
(372)
(373)
(356)
(306)
38. Epitalion
(346)
(352)
40. Europos
(363)
(357)
(337)
(385)
(316)
45. Kastelli-1A-B
(379-380)
(381)
(382)
(384)
49. Lerna-2
(341)
(307)
(308)
241
(309)
53. Megara-4
(310)
54. Messene
(348)
(368)
(353)
(370)
(360)
(361-362)
(317)
(318)
(319)
(320)
(321)
(322-325)
(326)
(327)
(328)
(329-332)
70. Pharai:Vasiliko
(333)
(354-355)
72. Polymylos-2A-C
(365-367)
(374-378)
(334-336)
(311-312)
(358-359)
(369)
(383)
(364)
242
Percentages
Grouped Types
Unknown
30 (33)*
22% (23)
I?
24 (25)
18% (17)
Ia
10
7%
Ie
1%
If
1 (2)
1% (2)
Ig
2%
II ?
34 (36)
25%
II a
18
13%
Rectangular
II b
6%
67 (71)
II c
7 (9)
5% (6)
Roman Total
135 (144)
30 (33)
Circular
ca. 100%
38 (40)
135 (144)
* The numbers in the parentheses represent the total when the kilns dated as
Hellenistic or Roman are added.
They were used not only for firing architectural ceramics, but also for coarsewares and lamps.
The Roman rectangular kilns measure in average 2.00 x 2.00m. Their circular counterparts
243
remain as large as the Hellenistic ones.18 The fact that a Roman kiln most would probably be
rectangular and of considerable size makes the visibility of Roman kilns quite striking in the
archaeological record. In other words, a Roman kiln is hard to miss.
Areas
Sites
TOTAL
10
17
20
Most of the Late Antique kilns are clustered at Delphi where a very active
community of potters was established (Plates V.16-19).
18
(392)
2. Athens-29:Areos St.
(386)
3. Athens-30: Makriyianni
(387)
(394)
(395-400)
(402)
Analytically the measurements for forty Roman kilns are distributed as follows: for the
dimensions 0.50-0.99m (3); 1.00-1.49m (7), 1.50-1.99m (5), 2.00-.2.99m (15), 3.00-3.99m
(5), 4.00m+ (5).
244
(401)
(403)
(390-391)
(388-389)
(393)
TYPES
Unknown
I?
II ?
II a
II b
Late Antique Total
n
2
5
7
1
3
18
Twice as many kilns are rectangular than circular (11:5). At Delphi the potters had a
peculiar tendency to construct arches using cylinders (the excavator calls them amphora
necks). The Kerameikos quarter was mainly near the southeastern Villa. The workshops
were producing primarily coarsewares for everyday needs.19
Byzantine ceramic production is known primarily from the distinguishing
characteristics of each ware rather than from extensive study of centers of production.
Twenty-three kilns are dated to this period and have been excavated in thirteen areas. Most
of them are quite large, especially in northern Greece, which speaks for a high degree of
specialization and centralization. The kilns in Corinth are smaller, although it is not
19
245
absolutely certain that they were pottery kilns (Plates V.18-19). The rectangular shape is
predominant for the larger kilns, preparing the ground for the widespread adoption of the
shape in post-Byzantine and the modern periods.
(418)
(412)
(413)
(414)
(411)
(404-407)
(408)
(409)
(415)
(421-422)
(425)
(426)
(423)
(410)
(424)
(416)
(417)
(419-420)
246
TYPES
Percentages
Unknown
I?
Ia
Ie
II ?
II b
II c
Byzantine Total
6
6
4
1
1
1
4
23
26%
26%
17%
4%
4%
4%
17%
Ca. 100%
Grouped
Types
6
Circular
11
Rectangular
6
23
e. Undated Kilns
For the following thirty-three kilns not enough information survives to assign
confidently a date, mainly because they are the result of salvage excavations:
1.
Agia Marina
(453)
14.
Narthakio
(446)
2.
Aigeira
(429)
15.
(430-431)
3.
Amphissa
(447)
16.
Patras-16: 90-92
Boukaouri St.
(432)
4.
Athens-38:
Dionysiac
Theater
(427)
17.
(433)
5.
Attica, Eleusis
(428)
18.
(434-435)
6.
Axos,
Rethymno
(455)
19.
(436-437)
7.
Delos
(456)
20.
(438)
8.
Ierapetra
(454)
21.
(439)
247
9.
KassandraSarti
(449)
22.
Patras-22: 100-102
Londou St. A-B
(440-441)
10.
Kastritsi
(443)
23.
(450)
11.
Kato Achaia
A-B
(444445)
24.
Rhodes-5: 2, Kennedy
and Diagoridon Sts. A-B
(457-458)
12.
Katochi,
Vonitsa
(448)
25.
Rhodes-6: Archangelos
(459)
13.
Kleitor,
Katarrachi
(442)
26.
Thessaloniki-2:
Koloniari and Galina
Sts. A-B
(451-452)
248
249
known kilns validates to some degree our observations about the type distribution and
preference within each period.20 We have the dimensions preserved of almost half of the
catalogued examples and recorded (Table V.2).
DIMENSIONS
PERIOD
0.50-0.99
1.001.49
1.501.99
2.002.99
3.003.99
4.00+
Grand Total
Bronze Age
11
30
Geometric
Archaic
17
Classical
10
31
Hellenistic
14
13
56
15
40
Hellenroman
Roman
Late
Antique
Byzantine
Undated
Grand Total
24
12
48
28
58
27
8
25
20
210
The largest groups are the ones between 1.00-1.49m and 2.00-2.99m. If one adds to the
former group some kilns which measure exactly 1.50m and have been grouped with the next
group, then the two groups are almost equal in numbers.
Combined the groups of dimensions between 1.00-3.00m account for almost two
thirds of the total number of kilns. Within periods some general trends are detected from the
Classical period onwards (Classical, Hellenistic, and Roman) where the larger sizes (over
2.00m) appear more regularly. An interesting phenomenon is the distribution of the smallest
kilns (0.59-0.99m). Although in the Geometric period this size is characteristic, in the
Hellenistic where we have the largest concentration of small kilns, they usually coexist with
much larger kilns within the same workshop [e.g. Pella (218-223), Paros (228-233)]. In a
specialized workshop which wanted to produce fast and economically a small batch of pots,
the smaller kiln must have been time and fuel-efficient. Caution about the trends of sizes is
highly recommended since we only have recorded dimensions for 39 out of 140 Roman
kilns.
250
CHAPTER VI
251
CHAPTER VI
251
relationship of the ceramic workshop with other workshops in the artisanal quarters which
share a similar pyrotechnology and generally its location in an ancient city.
a. Defining a Workshop
A workshop is "a room, apartment, or building in which manual or industrial work is
carried on."1 This definition has two major components:
a) the structure itself (size is not important, but the areas must be well
defined and closed off architecturally)
b) the activity conducted inside this structure
Semantically, the word "workshop" is not to be confused with "working area" or an
"activity area"2, which suggests low-scale, probably part-time production. In contrast,
"workshop" implies some level of regularity and organization. Regularity and/or
organization suffice to denote a workshop. The term "workshop" should be reserved only
for sites which have a specific locale, and not for a group of material sharing stylistic
similarities, as is common in Classical archaeology.3 For the latter, Rudolph recommends
the use of the terms school, studio, or manufacture.4
OED (The Complete Edition of the Oxford English Dictionary) vol. II, p. 3821. Also cited
in Tournavitou 1986, 447.
See supra Introduction and infra for a discussion of Beazley's "workshops" defined on
stylistic criteria.
252
The ancient testimonia preserve the generic terms ejrgasthvrion, oi[khma, and
sunoikiva to refer to a workshop.5 jErgasthvrion can denote any of the workshops that one
encounters in an artisanal area, such as that of a sculptor6, or a metal worker,7 a perfume
shop,8 and even promiscuous places (i.e. brothels) which are often located near artisanal
quarters in many cultures. Horoi record ejrgasthvria and oijkivai either in leases9 or in dowry
transactions.10 Sometimes the lease of an ejrgasthvrion also includes the lease of the
Rudolph 1988.
LSJ s.v. Other sources for ejrgasthvrion: Hdt. 4.14; Lys. 12.8; D 37.4; Isae. 3.22; a butcher's
shop in Ar. Eq. 744. In Ptolemaic Egypt in the third and second centuries B.C. ejrgasthvrion
acquired the more specific meaning of granary (Duttenhfer 1993).
6
For sculptors' workshops, see Paus. V.15.1 (where Pheidias worked on the
chryselephantine statue of Zeus at Olympia); IG I3 436 (dated to 437-432 B.C.) mentions
ejrgasthvria where stone (presumably marble) was transported from the Penteli quarries
(liqolkiva"); in IG I3 445, 446, 447 ejrgasthvria appear in a context, where payments of
sculptors (ajgalmatopoioiv) are mentioned. For ejrgasthvria associated with the undertaking
of important architectural projects, as in Olympia, Epidaurus and the Acropolis, see for
example IG IV2 1, 102, ll. 35, 38-39, 44-45, 222 [from Epidaurus]; Thiersch 1939; Roux
1961, 86-9; Martin 1965, 172.
7
For the proliferance of this term in the mining leases from Laurion, see Crosby 1950, 1957;
e.g. IG II2 1582; 1583.
8
Hyp. Ath. 6.
IG II2 1370, 2746, 2752; only an ejrgasthvrion is mentioned in IG II2 1370.2760; for
another one with a garden and a fountain, see IG II2 1370, 2759. For ejrgasthvria on Delos,
see ID 2.406, 3.1416.
10
253
11
IG II2 1370, 2747, 2748, 2749; SEG 32.236 (see supra Ch. 1, "kavmino""); Fine 1951, nos.
23, 32.
12
13
For a distinction between permanent and domestic workshops, see Tournavitou 1986, 447.
14
In the orators' speeches, sunoikiva means tenement house, whereas in the Platonic works
(Leg. 2.664a, 3.679b, 3.681b, 5.746a; Rep. 2.369c), it takes on a more general meaning of
people living together in a city or a community.
15
16
Aeschin. 1.124.
Isae. 5.26-27: Dicaeogenes gave to his sister's husband, Protarchides, a sunoikiva, instead
of the promised dowry of forty mnae; see also Isae. 6.20 for a sunoikiva owned by Euktemon
and run by the prostitute Alce.
254
255
tenants in these specific passages, it is hard to believe that in reality sunoikivai did not house
any potters. On the other hand, the sources are very clear that prostitutes occupied these
places, and foreigners, who could not own land.17 In other cases sunoikivai are located in
close proximity to commercial centers (e.g. at Colonus in Athens, in Piraeus).18 Euktemon,
apparently a wealthy property owner in Classical Athens, had at least two sunoikivai one at
Kerameikos and one at Piraeus.19
Regarding ceramic workshops in particular, Blmner's collection of relevant terms is
a good starting point.20 The terms are usually encountered in Aristophanic comedies and in
the orators' speeches. The number of terms multiplies and they are more specifically defined
in the work of the later lexicographers. Keramei'on is the generic term for ceramic
17
18
Isae. 6.19-20. Three prices are mentioned in connection with the sunoikiva: a sunoikiva at
Kerameikos was given as a dowry instead of 40 mnae (2400 drs), a mortgage price of 16
mnae (960drs) [Dem. 53.13], and a sunoikiva worth 100 mnae left to Archippe by her
deceased husband Pasio [Dem. 45.28]. An average ancient house covered an area of 225
square meters, at least in planned cities (Hpfner and Schwandner 1994). It was more
profitable to owners of centrally located plots to subdivide them into smaller units and to
rent them to people most interested in being very close to the Agora, namely the tradesmen
and the craftsmen. For example, houses in Olynthus of the fourth century B.C. were gradually
transformed into four stores, of symmetrical and equal size. [Olynth AVI 8, AVII 8, A IV 9
in Hpfner and Schwandner 1994, 68-113, fig. 89]. I thank W.T. Loomis for his generous
help on prices relating to housing. For prices in antiquity in general, see Loomis 1998.
20
Blmner 1885-87.
workshop.21 Plasthvrion is presumably where large quantities of clay are processed, and
perhaps a ceramic workshop was also included. The plinqei'on /plinqourgei'on (brickworks)
and the cutropwlei'on/cutropwvlion (workshop for cooking pots) refer to ceramic
workshops of a more specialized nature. A comparable vocabulary exists for the craftsmen
involved in these specialized production. 22
21
kerameuv" (Il. 18.601; Hom. Epigr. 14.1; Hes. Op. 25; Arist. Ph. 1381b 16; EN 1155a, 35);
kadopoiov" (Schol. Arist. Pax 1202); kwqwnopoiov" (Din. fr. 89.19); lhkuqopoiov" (Strab.
15.1.67; Poll. Onom. 7.182); lucnopoioiv (Ar. Pax 690; Philetaer. 4; Cat.Cod.Astr. 8 (4).215;
Ath. 11.474D; Poll. Onom. 7.178; Dio Chrys. or. 15 p. 241M); cutreuv" (Plat. R 4.421d; Tht.
147a; Suda s.v. cutreva. Eustr. in Apo 158.13); cutroplavqo" (Poll. Onom. 7.163; Phryn. PS
p. 125B; B.A. 72.10); cutropwvlh" (Critias 70D).
23
Tournavitou (1986, 448) classifies the crafts into group A, where no built-in facilities are
required, and group B, where built-in facilities are required. The latter group is more visible
in the archaeological record. Platon L. (1993) has suggested a similar list of criteria for over
twenty Minoan palatial workshops: unworked, raw material, unfinished objects, wasters,
tools, equipment, and finished products.
256
b. Identifying a Workshop
How can one identify a workshop archaeologically? Tournavitou (1986), in an
article about the criteria for identifying of a workshop in the prehistoric period, singles out
six major criteria which can contribute to the secure identification of a workplace:
a. Architecture
b. Pottery
c. Facilities23
d. Tools
e. Material worked
(raw material, half-worked pieces, waste, finished objects)
f. Connection with central administration (Linear B tablets)
Tournavitou then applies each criterion and its parameters to places which have
already been identified as workshops, and evaluates the weight of each criterion and its
contribution to the identification. Her general conclusion is that most of them, like finished
objects, can confirm, but cannot prove independently the character of a space. Tools and
material worked are considered most important; architecture is completely irrelevant. For
the remaining three criteria, pottery, connection with central administration, and facilities,
the picture is very vague. It is worth noting that architecture ranks low in the identification
process, whereas it is a major component of the definition. The weakness of her study is the
sample size: six secure workshops and two possible ones, a total of only eight, upon which
Tournavitou has based her conclusions. Also, she confines herself only to permanent,
257
palatial workshops.24 Therefore, the correlation between workshop and connection with
palatial administration, which is her last criterion, would have been a priori very strong and
her criteria were not tested in cases of non-palatial workshops.
Regarding ceramic workshops in particular, their identification by students of
prehistory poses serious problems: too much attention is drawn to secondary elements which
can possibly appear in a workshop, such as a bench or a drainage system, but these factors
alone are very weak for the secure identification of a ceramic workshop.25 Michaelides, in
his overview of Minoan ceramic workshops, places more importance on clay disks (which
are movable objects) and benches than on the reliable presence of kilns.26 It is undeniable
that in most traditional ceramic workshops there is a bench next to the potter's wheel, where
the potter's assistant or the potter himself works the clay before it is placed on the wheel.
Considered therefore within its relevant context, a bench can be a feature of a ceramic
workshop.27 Given the multifunctional role of a bench, however, it is highly risky to identify
a ceramic workshop solely on the presence of a bench.
24
25
See Lupack 1999 for her discussion on the Berbati workshop (111).
26
For a detailed discussion of his analysis, see supra Ch. IV, "Minoan Pottery Workshops".
27
258
28
Stark (1985), in a more succinct fashion, identifies the following criteria as evidence for
loci of production: raw materials, tools of production, products, and by-products. In a critical
reappraisal of these criteria she notices their limited use to identify "household" production.
29
For some examples of settling basins excavated within workshops, see Phari on Thasos
(25-26), eighteen settling basins at the Roman Kerameikos at Kotzia Square in Athens (274300). Often associated with settling basins are systems of canalizations [e.g. Papadates (194195), Philotas (249-250), Chalkis (350)].
30
For the in situ stone of a potter's wheel in the Minoan workshop at Gouves see HadjiVallianou 1995; also in the Roman workshop at Chalkis (350).
31
See Nijboer (1998, 118) who, I believe, is incorrect in not differentiating between the
location of a workshop and its degree of activity: "the presence of a kiln does not necessarily
indicate the presence of a workshop: it can indicate household industry or a semi-permanent
workshop."
259
260
more elusive character and they are likely to create some "archaeological noise" for
the identification of a ceramic workshop.
Most of the workshops studied in archaeological reports usually consist of cases
identified on the basis of large quantities of pottery (e.g. amphoras), and the presence of
molds. It needs to be emphasized that large deposits of pottery are helpful as criteria to
qualify ceramic establishments as "workshop industry" in the categories of specialization
(see infra), since everything below this category has a low visibility in the archaeological
record. The value of some criteria differs when considered individually than when
considered collectively (Table VI.2). Also, the quantitative aspect (the presence of many
PERMANENT FEATURES
MOVABLE OBJECTS
Clay-settling Basins
Raw Material
In situ installations
for potter's wheel
Pottery
homogeneous deposits
wasters
Kiln
Technical Equipment
potter' s wheel
potter's jars
molds
forming tools
kiln props
wasters, for example) may give each criterion a higher value. Collectively, the value of the
criteria available to an archaeologist could indicate a workshop, or point to the presence of a
workshop in the vicinity, or help to locate a ceramic workshop more precisely.
In principle, each criterion among the permanent features suffices in itself to locate a
workshop physically. Among the moveable objects, each criterion can be an indication of a
workshop. When many criteria of this group coexist in one case, or if one criterion is
represented in large quantities, we can say safely that a workshop is present in the vicinity.
By evaluating their data against this framework, the archaeologists may confidently identify
a ceramic workshop and better understand the dynamics of an industrial or potters' quarter
within their site.
Finally, identification of an area as a workshop is only the first step in the longer
process of understanding its perplexing character: its operation schedule (part-time or fulltime, the nature of products manufactured, its degree of specialization, and the variety of
activity areas within the workshop. In other words, full-time and part-time workshops might
have used the same types of archaeologically detectable elements (e.g. a kiln or a settling
basin).31 Even large quantities of debris should be carefully examined before one concludes
that they come from a full-time operating workshop because they can very easily represent
the gradual accumulation of debris from part-time work.32
32
261
Table VI.2
262
In addition, the excavation of a kiln alone cannot show conclusively whether it had
been used by sedentary or by itinerant potters. Lastly, one kiln should not automatically
point to only one workshop. Although communal firing is less common in ceramic
workshops which use kilns compared to the workshops which fire pots in open pits, the
possibility of firing one's pots at someone else's kiln, and thus "two workshops" sharing
"one" technical facility, should not be dismissed without consideration.33 In the last two
cases (itinerant potters and communal firing), the archaeologist is faced with two skewed
results: either there are more kilns than potters (as with the itinerant potters who would build
a kiln in many different places) or there are fewer kilns than potters (as in the cases of
communal firing).
Even the identification of a workshop is a "frozen" recognition: we know its activity
only from the latest finds in situ, and there is no possible way (except by the presence of
tools obviously designed for a different craft) to restore its entire range of activities. Besides
the aforementioned example of a tenement house occupied successively by various types of
craftsmen (Aeschin. 1.124), we also have a few ceramic workshops that housed other crafts
as well.
These multiple functions of ancient workshops are a direct result of the versatility of
ancient craftsmen. Numerous instances of craftsmen working with various materials are
mentioned in the ancient literature: Daedalus34, Endoios, Theodoros of Samos, Kanachos of
33
34
263
Sikyon were known masters not only in one material, but in many, such as wood, ivory,
marble, and bronze. Rhoikos of Samos was a bronze caster and architect; Theodoros worked
in metal, cut gems, invented mechanical devices, and advised on temple building;
Mandrokles bridged the Hellespont for Darius and then dedicated a painting of the project in
the Samian Heraion; Douris made and painted pottery. In Argos, Polykleitos worked on both
marble and bronze; the sculptors Eupolemos, Pheidias, and Skopas were all concerned with
architectural design; Hectoridas, a sculptor, provided patterns for the painted decoration on
the sima of the Asklepios temple. Euphranor was both a sculptor and a painter.35
35
Quint. Inst. Orat. XII.10.b: "Euphranor, on the other hand, was admired on the ground
that, while he ranked with the most eminent masters of other arts, he at the same time
achieved marvellous skill in the arts of sculpture and painting."
264
the specialized mode of production, inevitably they also deal with the space where this
production takes place, namely the workshop.
Categorization of craft specialization has proliferated, ranging from the general to
the specific.36 The following table (Table VI.3) shows the categorization of workshops
according to the level of production, from the lowest to the highest output. Since machinery
is excluded in these studies, low production also reflects a small crew, while industrial-level
production assumes the employment of many workmen.
Van der Leeuw developed his categories based on ethnographic data on pottery
communities conducting primarily pit-firing. Peacock's degrees were a result of his study of
Roman pottery which had achieved a larger scale of production and therefore his degrees
(especially the factory and up) reflect settings much closer to the industrialized production.37
Scheibler's degrees are the only ones which addressed issues specific to Greek antiquity, and
especially pottery workshops. Finally Costin's framework originates from her work in the
New world and encompasses a larger number of crafts besides pottery.
The 459 kilns examined in this study represent at least 296 workshops. Speaking in
numerical terms 227 sites (or 77%) with ceramic workshops have only one kiln (or one kiln
has been excavated). Workshops with more intensive production (as shown by the presence
of more kilns) do exist, but there again we still deal with a level of production that could
perhaps have supported two to three families. There are only forty-two sites (or 14%) with
36
37
Peacocks (1979) early version of his categories, as they apply to tile and brick works: a.
household production, b. rural brickyard, c. nucleated brickyard complex, d. estate
brickworks, f. municipal brickworks.
265
two kilns and only thirteen where three kilns were used (or 4%), not necessarily
simultaneously. The number of workshops with four kilns is six (or 2%) and there are four
workshops with six kilns. In rare cases, forests of kilns as in Figaretto in Corfu (197-209),
in the Building Y in the Athenian Kerameikos (264-273) and in the Kotzia Square in Athens
(274-300) have been excavated, but it is highly unlikely that they all belonged to only one
workshop. The instances of workshops with more than four kilns represent merely a 3% of
the known pottery workshops.
At least two-thirds of the ancient Greek workshops fall into the categories of Costin's
"individual workshops," Scheibler's "Familien Betrieb", van der Leeuw's "workshop
industry," and Peacocks individual workshops. Cases of ceramic manufacture at the
household production and household industry levels must have existed at a limited scale, but
do not have a major effect on our appreciation of the ancient ceramics industry. The vast
majority of the kiln sites have one or two kilns (a combined 91% of the workshops examined
in this study) and could easily have been run by the potter's immediate family, or members
of his extended family. Potters quarters fall under Costin's "nucleated workshops,"
Scheibler's "Werkstattkreis", and van der Leeuw's "Workshop Industry" categories of craft
specialization. In order to identify a site as a Potters' Quarter the following points should be
kept in mind.
First, the most important requirement is the presence of many workshops. They
have to be securely identified through kilns or other strong criteria; they have to be some
distance from each other in order to exclude common ownership, but close enough to be
called a quarter. Second, if retail and manufacturing places coexist, they could provide a
more complete picture of craftsmen's quarter. And finally, adjacent residential areas may or
may not be necessary.
266
267
PEACOCK
SCHEIBLER
COSTIN
(1977)
(1982)
(1984)
(1991)
household production
household production
individual
specialization
household industry
household industry
communal
specialization
ein-Mann Betrieb
individual industry
individual
specialization
(one-man workshop)
workshop industry
individual workshops
Familien-Betrieb
dispersed
workshop
(Family Business)
Meister Betrieb
(Workshop of a
Master)
village industry
nucleated workshops
Werkstattkreis
nucleated
workshops
(Workshops Quarter)
large-scale industry
the manufactory
Grossbetriebe
(Large-scale Factory)
the factory
estate production
military and other
official production
nucleated corve
retainer workshop
dispersed corve
individual retainers
By the late 1960s J.D. Beazley had given flesh to over 1,000 artists in the Athenian
Kerameikos and had reconstructed various "stylistic workshops" where a number of painters
were working for a specific potter. These crowded stylistic workshops had recently received
attacks by scholars who try to understand the economics and workings of such large
establishments in ancient Athens.
Scheibler (1984) denies the existence of such large-scale production that the
specialists of vase-painting conjectured on the basis of an elaborate network of affiliations
among the vase painters and the potters they worked for. His test case was the workshop of
Nikosthenes: following another avenue of speculation, Scheibler multiplied by ten all the
vases of the painters who were associated with Nikosthenes, and assumed that the activity
period of a painter was ten years, which is far from realistic estimations.38 Since for many of
them we have only one example surviving, Scheibler multiplied by 100 (based on the 1%
survival rate of ancient pottery) to estimate the total number of vases that a painter
decorated.
With a ten-year career each painter would have decorated ten pots per year. We are
thus compelled to lump together some of the hands isolated by Beazley. Hannestad, using
ethnographic data from Spain, believes that the annual production of potters of non-
38
The number of painters associated with the Nikosthenes workshop and that of Pamphaios
(with which the Nicosthenic workshop shares many similarities) is close to forty. Its
flourishing period is 540-510 B.C. Schreiber estimated that ten painters probably worked for
Nicosthenes for each decade, rather than all forty being employed during the entire period of
thirty years.
268
decorated pottery was much higher than the 100 decorated vases per year estimated by
Scheibler and she proposes ca. 570 pots per vase-painter per annum.39
Valavanis (1994) has argued that as many as ten painters could be employed by
some Athenian workshops that received many commissions, such as those responsible for
Panathenaic amphoras. Valavanis suggestions are very carefully expressed, and he
concludes that perhaps only one or two workshops in each period had personnel that
exceeded twenty persons, whereas the majority of the workshops were of a much smaller
size.
All previous attempts have based their calculations on number of pots produced by a
potter, the span of his artistic career, and a gross estimation of all the pots that have survived
from antiquity. In every criterion, the range is very wide, and the final outcome can be
skewed multifold. What the evidence from the number and size of kilns attested in an
average workshop of the period can offer is the firing capacity of the kilns, which will show
that most of these estimations are still quite low. In other words, the combined annual output
of all ten painters that were working for Nikosthenes for 530-520B.C. would have been ca.
1000 vases which could have easily been fired in a circular kiln of 2.00m in size in two or
three months of firings (and even in less time if the workshop had two kilns).40 To rephrase
Scheibler's question, what did the kiln(s) of Nikosthenes' workshop fire for the remaining
39
Hannestad 1988. A nebulous area in all such reconstructions is whether we estimate the
pots that the potter has produced, or the pots that the vase-painter has decorated. Hannestad
also assumes, rather incorrectly, that the same workshop produced both decorated and coarse
pottery, an assumption not substantiated by the evidence of Athenian workshops at least.
40
For estimating an average dimension, see for example the dimensions of the Classical
Athenian kilns at Lenormant Ave. (51-53).
269
months of the year?41 Perhaps the Greek pottery production was much higher than what we
had postulated, not because there were many potters/painters, but because they were
producing on a full-time basis and their kilns could fire this continuous production. To look
at the problem from another perspective, having ten potters producing at their "normal" rate
full-time for ten years, the size of the kilns, their number, and the general space of the
attested workshops does not allow us to believe how those workshops could absorb such a
level of production.
Large-scale workshops, which could even qualify as factories (Scheibler's "Meister
Betrieb" and Peacock's "Workshop Industry") are mentioned occasionally in the orators'
speeches. They frequently speak of factories, such as those of the couch makers and the
sword makers, staffed by twenty slaves and thirty-three slaves respectively, with full-time,
regular production.42 But the archaeological record does not provide evidence for such large
ceramic factories.43
41
42
Dem. Ag. Aphobus 9 and 21 for the klinopoiei'on and macairopoiei'on; Dem. Ag. Aphobus
31, where fifty slaves are mentioned in connection with two factories. The shield factory of
Lysias (Lys. 12.19) employed no fewer than 120 slaves.
43
Only the pottery factories which used machinery in 18th century England could employ
ten to twenty employees (Peacock 1982, 45).
270
44
Lacovara 1985.
271
272
MODES OF FIRING
MODES OF SPECIALIZATION
Pit fire
One kiln
Many kilns
household production
household industry*
X (?)
individual industry**
X (?)
workshop industry
village industry
large-scale industry
A household industry can have a kiln that is occasionally used and the same holds
true for the individual industry. The workshop level and the kiln are almost
synonymous.
There can be various sizes of workshops and therefore a variable number of
kilns. The village industry presupposes the presence of many workshops and
subsequently of many kilns. Finally, large-scale industry relies heavily on
simultaneous use of many and large kilns for voluminous and timely production.
The last scenario is not attested in Greek antiquity as it has been mentioned above.
Most of the kilns presented in this study have come to light in the course of rescue
excavations, offering us minimal information about the workshop that was centered around
them; but a few ceramic workshops have been excavated over a larger area. We are able,
therefore, to speculate at least the minimum area covered by an ancient workshop (Table
VI.5).45
45
As comparanda we can use data from more recent workshops estimated from site plans
(Peacock 1982, 30, fig. 11; 45, fig. 15) for examples a, b, g.
a. Workshop at Orei, Euboea, in Greece :
ca. 175m2
b. Workshop at Istiaea, Euboea
ca. 324m2
c. Workshop at Tsikalario, Kentri (Blitzer 1984):
ca. 300m2
d. Workshops at Messene (Blitzer 1990):
1. For large pithoi and water jugs
ca. 600 m2
2. For water jugs
ca. 140 m2
e. Workshop at Marousi (Valavanis 1990):
ca. 625m2
273
274
The following table presents the data in chronological order. From the data below
one sees that the larger workshops with two or more kilns cover a minimum area of 300400m2.
SITE
Dimensions
1. Kirrha (104-106)
10 x 10
30 x 25
3. Prinias (31-36)
20 x 15
31 x 13
26 x 16
6. Lenormant (51-53)
10 x 3
7. Paros (228-233)
10x12
120+
8. Krannon (181-182)
12 x 12
144+
9. Sindos (86-89)
9x4
36+
6.50 x 6.50
19 x 23
437+(Plate V.12)
11 x 16
18 x 9
162+
8 x 12
96+
Kalamodgarti Sts.(322-326)
f. Etruscan workshop at Marzabotto (Nijboer 1998, 179, fig. 42) ca. 540 m2
g. Nantgarw Pottery in South Wales:
ca. 1125m2
Smaller workshops extend over 200m2. An interesting case is Corfu, where a dozen
kilns are enclosed within a very small space of 172m2, a further indication that, most
probably, not all of these kilns operated at the same time. As for the last group, whose areas
range between 42 and 100 m2 one can safely say that we have found only part of the
workshop. Surfaces for processing the clay and for drying the unfired vessels and even for
fuel storage are quintessential for potters of large size vessel, especially for those of pithoi or
architectural terracottas. This need of potters for extensive space contrasts sharply with the
needs of bronze-casters, whose casting pits cover a much smaller area and are usually of a
temporary nature.46
Preliminary estimates of the average size of different types of workshops can assist
surveyors and excavators in determining the total size of a workshop, and in mapping their
trenches so that they can recover the most information from the workshop site. It would
also be interesting to study the distances of deposits coming from excavated workshops to
establish a range of distance between the places of production and the places of deposition of
rejected pieces.
Pursuing the wider implications of the size of a kiln, one should regard the kiln as
the physical attestation of the entire system of demand, transportation, and trade of pottery.
Ethnographic studies of pottery manufacture and distribution in Spain have shown that the
46
Zimmer 1990.
275
standard unit of measurement for quantifying the output of a ceramics workshop is a donkeyload, that is, the amount one donkey can carry at one time. The output of a single firing was
equal to 20 donkey-loads.47
In the early 20th century the Messenian potters would load a donkey with 203 sacks
of vessels (comparatively small vessels since each sack contained ten pots) and transport
them to distances of 26-30 hours toTripolis or Olympia.48 The donkey-load had almost
become a type of currency in itself: middlemen would purchase pottery in terms of donkeyloads, and the hired potters would be paid according to how many donkey loads of pottery
they produced daily.
In a system where potters had to depend on transportation to sell their pottery, it is
no surprise that the efficiency and availability of means of transportation would
predetermine the level of productivity. In ancient Greece, the situation was similar, and the
size of the workshop belongs to a wider system of demand. Building larger kilns would have
been easy, but who would have bought these pots, and how long would it be before the
unsold pots occupied the entire storage capacity of an ancient workshop? In addition to the
donkey-load, one can think for example of a kaiki's (small boat) load and its capacity to
transport amphoras, and then correlate this to the size of an average amphora kiln (see infra
Epilogue).49
47
Vossen 1984.
48
Blitzer 1990. She also records that one donkey could carry within one to two days all the
clay necessary for 500 small pots and 4-6 large pithoi.
49
Peacock (1982) emphasizes the beneficial impact of the introduction of railways on the
more centralized organization and long-distance trade of English brick-making.
276
The well-preserved East kiln in the Tile Works in Corinth (65) is ideal for estimating
the capacity of large rooftile kilns, as well as for reconstructing a chane-opratoire in the
workshop, from the phase of procuring the clay to the final stage of unloading the kiln (Plate
VI.2).50
In this hypothetical firing, both pan and cover tiles as well as simas and antefixes of
the Corinthian type will be fired for this roof. The requirements for unobstructed circulation
of heat, coupled with the need to leave the decorated sides of tiles uncovered, pose
limitations on how one can place the tiles inside the kiln.
Two rows of pan tiles topped with simas and antefixes is a reasonable load, because
the total height, as restored, is both sustainable for the lower row of tiles and easy for the
workers to handle. With two superimposed rows of pan tiles, and an additional row of
lighter tiles, one can assume that the kiln supported at least 1,000 kg of products at each
square meter.51 I have calculated a crew of five or six persons for this tile-workshop. This
crew size is recurrent in the ethnographic record for medium-size workshops.52 Given the
size of the kiln, some auxiliary help cannot be ruled out, perhaps bringing the crew size up to
ten.
50
51
Le Ny (1988, 34) estimated that a rectangular kiln can support as much as 2,112 kg/m2.
52
277
278
The optimal potting season, at least in the dry climates in the Mediterranean, has
long been thought to last from March-April to September-October. This period is apparently
the best in other climates as well: an unexpected confirmation of this widely-held opinion is
to be found in a decree issued in England by Edward IV in 1477, which specifies that
although clay can be collected as early as November, tiles should be formed no earlier than
the following March to ensure high quality.53
FIRED
END OF DRYING
22% shrinkage
13% shrinkage
FORMING
RAW MATERIALS
75:25 ratio
CLAY
WATER
(kg)
(lt)
Pan tile
18
23
26
20
Cover tile
10
13
10
Sima
40
50
60
45
15
Antefix
4.5
3.5
53
This kiln, with a restored size of 7.50 x 5.50 x 2.00m, could easily fire ca. 900 tiles, enough
to cover the ridged roof of a treasury building measuring 10 x 4m.54 Even for the collection
of the raw material, the numbers already become daunting. Given that a Corinthian tile
weighs 18 kg after its firing, its original weight while drying must be 23 kg with a 20%
weight loss rate.55 While drying, the water of the unfired rooftile evaporates. Before
forming the tile then, a potter would need 20 kg of clay and 6lt of water.56 Thus, for a total
of 880 tiles, 19-20 tons of clay would be required.57
54
A treasury similar to the Sikyonian treasury at Olympia, although the Sikyonian treasury
is earlier in date than our kiln. Although the roof only needs about 790 tiles, I also estimated
a loss percentage of 10% of wasters from one firing. Wertime (1983, 452) estimated that the
Late Classical kiln at Nemea (60) would have produced at most 140 tiles (a very low
estimate in my opinion), but he does not venture to estimate the quantity of fuel required.
55
For average percentages of water added to clay, see Echallier and Montagu 1985; Rice
1987, 631-3. The water content is lower for coarser clays, which are used for tiles, than for
pottery clay. In terms of volume, a pot consists of 55% clay and 45% water; in terms of
weight, the ratio of clay to water is 75:25. After drying, the percentage of water in the true
volume of a vessel is 10-26%. The percentage of loss of weight after drying is ca. 20-22%.
See Vallianos and Padouva (1986, 117-35) with useful tabulated data on dimensions of
vessels before and after firing.
56
The calculations are based on the evaporation and shrinkage rates reported in Vallianos
and Padouva 1986, 117-35.
57
With the waster percentage of 10%, the number of each type of tile before firing is
calculated as follows: pan tiles: 421; cover tiles: 330; simas: 35; antefixes: 55; ridge tiles: 29.
Henrickson and Blackman (1999) had estimated 10m3 for 1000 pan tiles and cover tiles for a
Hellenistic roof at Gordion. An outcrop of clayey soil, still visible today, lies directly to the
south of this complex in Corinth. Although analysis of the clay from this deposit has shown
it as unsuitable for potting (Sanders 2000 pers. comm.;Whitbread 2000 pers. comm.), the
construction of another large tile kiln in Roman times in this area (344) makes us wonder
whether the standards of suitability among the ancient tile makers were different from our
assumptions.
279
Table VI.7: Time schedule to prepare and fire the roof of a treasury building
at the East kiln at the Corinthian Tile Works (65).
280
Similar calculations are conducted to estimate the original content of clay and water for a
cover tile, a sima, and an antefix (Table VI.6).
Since no clay-settling facilities were found in the excavations of the workshop, we
cannot estimate how long it would take to purify this massive amount of clay. On the other
hand, the clay composition for rooftiles is intentionally quite coarse, and perhaps the
purification was conducted very summarily.
The time needed to form the tiles can be quite short if the entire crew is involved,
but the drying period must have been very long (over two weeks), given the large size of the
tiles. Any necessary decoration on simas and antefixes can be done in a week while the
other tiles are drying. On average, I have calculated three weeks for forming the tiles and
drying them. By the end of this period the tiles have lost 20% of their water content. The
tiles will have dried under sheds, for which a large drying area must be reserved.58 The
large areas to the north of the kilns, which were covered with a heavy layer of clay, could
have been used for the drying sheds of the workshop.59 Archaeometric studies have not yet
been conducted on Greek rectangular kilns to estimate the range of temperatures attained.
The notion that that rectangular kilns would have operated only at lower temperatures if they
58
In their experiments, Rostoker and Gebhard (1981) concluded that for combination tiles
(which are comparable to Corinthian-style tiles) the upright position is best for avoiding
cracks during drying. For smaller terracottas, such as bricks, the tile makers placed them
successively on all sides to ensure uniform drying. In the Archaic tile workshop at Murlo, the
tiles bear animal footprints, which could mean that they were lying on the ground when the
animals stepped on them. The alternative explanation, that the animals caused the tiles to
fall, is less convincing because the tiles preserve the entire footprint of the animal, not only a
part of it.
59
The drying shed at the Archaic workshop of architectural terracottas at Pioggio Civitate in
Etruria measures 42m long x 12m wide (a total of 504m2) (Nijboer 1998).
281
were firing rooftiles does not hold true, since analyses on Hellenistic rooftiles from Pella
have shown that Corinthian-style rooftiles were fired at temperatures over 1000C.60 The
loading of the kiln, lasting an estimated two to three normal working days, must have been
quite an enterprise in itself, as a result of the sheer quantity and weight of the tiles. The fuel
required for such a large kiln could easily surpass four to five tons of wood. Younger,
inexperienced assistants could have gathered this fuel while the tiles were drying. The firing
itself would have lasted about five to seven days, and the important cooling-down period as
long as a week. The entire firing process from loading the kiln to unloading the fired tiles
could have lasted about 10-15 days.61
Once the kiln is unloaded, the total enterprise for making the roof tiles for a treasury
building would have lasted one month (Table VI.7).62 On a much larger scale, the roof of an
average temple (for example, the temple of Athena Alea at Tegea, with 6x14 columns,
60
61
In contemporary rooftile workshops in France (Le Ny 1988), the tiles are first fired at low
temperatures for two days and then at high temperatures for three days. A cooling period of
one week is essential.
62
A fragmentary yet informative document for the time schedule of a tile workshop has
survived at Montenach (Moselle) (Archologue 49, Aug-Sept. 2000). In translation it reads
Having worked with Anaillus [. .].days
with Tertius 1 day
3 days to transport concave tiles
(to transport) 6 batches of clay to a kneading machine 3 days.
1 day to transport flat tiles
to the field of Rassuraand
1 day (to transport tiles) to the field of Paterclus
63
282
283
measuring 19.19 x 47.55m) would have been produced during a single potting season; and
the extraordinarily large roof of the South stoa at ancient Corinth, whose dimensions at
foundation level are 164.38 x 24.38m would have not been ready in less than four to five
years (Plate VI.6).63 These calculations rest on the assumption that the tile workers have
only one kiln available.64 Then again, the tile makers could have worked along with the
builders of these buildings, because the rough measurements of the roof would have been
available to them before the project was begun.65 This tile workshop (which must have
attracted a large commission, because of the size of its kiln) is flanked on the East by a
number of limestone quarries used extensively in antiquity, such as the Examilia Quarries.66
The architects, or building contractors, could have made the original negotiations with this
tile-workshop (or with others still unexcavated) on their way to and from the quarries.
Although we can approximate the production period of an average roof for a treasury
building, we are on less firm ground in estimating its total cost. Prices of tiles have survived
from antiquity but only for partial orders of rooftiles, usually for repairs of a roof, and most
64
These estimates can be considered quite modest for an annual production rate compared to
ethnographic data: Peacock (1979) records that the municipal brickworks in Mlln (Germany)
produced annually 40,000 bricks and 10,000 roof tiles; Peacock (1982) mentions a tilery at
Civry-la-Fret (France) with an annual output of 1,500,000 tiles.
65
For similar estimates of marble required for the construction of the large temples in
Magna Grecia and the costs, see Martin 1973.
66
For the use of the limestone quarries at Examilia and Mauro Spilies, to the east of Ancient
Corinth, and the estimated total volume of stone extracted, see Hayward 1995.
284
tiles mentioned are of the simpler Laconian style.67 Using one drachma as the lowest price
that a cover and pan tile pair could have cost in the late fourth century B.C., the roof of a
fourth century B.C. treasury building would have cost ca. 1,290 drachmae.68 Transportation
costs would raise the price even higher ( 35-40 additional drachmae), so a total of ca. 1,330
drachmae (the equivalent of a four-year salary for an architect of the Erechtheion). The cost
would have risen even more if the tiles received any extra treatment on site (e.g. covered
with pitch). This price does not include the wages of the craftsmen who would tile the building.
67
Prices for tiles and bricks are collected in Orlandos 1955, 109-19; Martin 1965, 82-3. This
hypothetical cost is quite low. I estimated that a sima and a ridge tile would cost 1dr. each
and the antefix 1/2 dr. For transportation, I used the price of 6dr. 4 ob. for 200 tiles
(mentioned in IG II2 1672, lines. 71-72) for tiles transported from Corinth to Eleusis.
Generally on prices in antiquity, see Loomis 1998.
68
The Epidaurian building account for the Asclepios temple (IG IV2 1.102) supplies us with
information on wages of the craftsmen responsible for tiling the roof, rather than the prices
of tiles themselves (Burford 1969, 212-20: the translations are taken from her work); for
prices of tiles for the Epidoteion at Epidaurus, see ibidem, 182.
ll. 46-47
ll. 52-53
ll. 78-79
l. 80
ll. 97-99
ll. 170-180
ll. 200
l. 230
ll. 280-290
Eukleon took up the contract to tile the temple for 235dr. and 3ob.
Mnasikleidas took up the contract for tiles, for 799 dr.
Ikadion took up the contract to provide tiles for 313 dr. and 3 ob.
to Euphraios for tiles, 140 dr.
__ took up the contract for the tiles on the raking cornice of the pediment,
the antefixes and the base for the akroteria, for +320dr.
to Agakles for laying tiles and supplying them, 5dr. and 5 ob.
to Mafor tiles, 30 dr.
for squaring up tiles, to __ , 3 dr.
to Timasitheos, for treating the tiles with pitch, 60 dr. and 5 ob.
Aristaios took up the contract to tile the rest of the tiles tiling, 45 dr.
to Aristaios, for tiling the temple, 60 dr.
ga;r ajnagkai'on ei\nai (pa'sa ga;r dei'tai povli" tecnitw'n), kai; duvnantai
diagivgnesqai kaqavper ejn tai'" a[llai" povlesin ajpo; th'" tevcnh".
(Arist. Pol. 1268a 30)
69
70
For maps showing the zoning of these cities (commercial, administrative/religious, and
military) see Martin 1987, 97, fig. 1 (Piraeus) and 98, fig. 2 (Miletus). The location of
artisanal quarters in newly-founded cities is discussed in Schwandner 1988.
285
Because of the unpleasant fumes, ceramic workshops tend to form potters' quarters
(Kerameikoi) in ancient cities.71 In terms of craft specialization, the potters quarter is
equivalent to the "nucleated workshops" category (see supra). Some quarters were formed
due to the central location of the site, close to markets and road systems, such as the
Athenian Kerameikos, and other quarters developed near raw clay sources, such as the
Corinthian Kerameikos. Besides the Athenian Kerameikos, ancient sources also mention the
Kolias area, near modern Agios Kosmas on the southwest coast of Attica, where the clay as
well as the pottery production were of high quality.72 Notable cases of ancient kerameikoi
can also be found at Pherai (24, 80-82, 188-192), and at Figaretto on Corfu (197-209).
Very often in these quarters we find other craftsmen as well, such as bronze casters,
sculptors, and shoemakers, to mention only a few. At the Archaic site at Skala Oropou (1617), metal workers worked side by side with potters. Near the Athenian Kerameikos, the
Classical bronze casters were creating their statues in casting pits.73 To the southeast of the
Agora, figurine makers worked in the same neighborhood with sculptors, or rented places
71
Keramos was a hero, son of Dionysos and Ariadne (Paus. I.3.1, who assigns the naming of
the Athenian Kerameikos to this hero). In Athens there was a deme called Kerameis, which
consisted of many artisans, not all necessarily potters (Whitehead 1986; Vickers and Gill
1994, 93-5; Sparkes 1996, 110), who worshipped the hero Keramos (Harp. s.v.). For other
unpleasant industries, see schol. Ar. Ach. 724 where tanneries, also unwelcome within the
city, were situated in an area outside the city, called the equally unpleasant name, Leprov".
72
Suda s.v. Kwliavdo" keramh'e"< Kwliav", tovpo" th'" jAttikh'", e[nqa skeuvh plavttontai.
levgei ou\n o{ti o{sai ejpi; trocouv" fevrontai (troco;n de; to;n skeuoplastiko;n levgei), tou't j
e[stin, o}sai pro;" skeuoplasivan ejpithvdeiai, pasw'n hJ Kwliavdo" kreivsswn w{ste kai;
bavptesqai uJpo; th'" mivltou; see also Pliny NH 35.152.
73
Mattusch 1975, 1977; Zimmer 1990. For coexistence of various crafts, see also ChalkisErgatikes Katoikies (248). Hellenistic sculptors and potters also worked side by side in
Polymylos, Kozanis (210-211, 365-367).
286
that previously belonged to sculptors.74 The painter of the Berlin Foundry cup displays an
intimate knowledge of the organization and equipment of a bronze sculptors workshop,
which might have been located near the painters workshop.75 In Hellenistic Pella, potters
and metal workers had a strong presence, as is proved by the presence of numerous kilns and
by the clay molds for metal objects.76 This phenomenon continues throughout antiquity: a
ceramic workshop in Byzantine Corinth shares a wall with the adjacent glass workshop.77
Carpenters' shops like the klinopoiei'on in Demosthenes would also be welcome neighbors
of potters since the latter can use the former's cuttings as fuel, as is done today in Moknine,
Tunisia.78
The physical proximity of all these types of workshops should not be considered a
coincidence, but a choice. All of these crafts, pottery, bronzecasting, sculpture, figurines,
and glassmaking, overlap in many respects and are interdependent: the sculptors must
possess skills similar to those of potters to make their wax and clay models, or they must hire
potters to make their models. Bronzecasters must use terracotta molds fired in a ceramic
74
Young 1951.
75
Berlin, Staatliche Museen F 2294 from Vulci (ARV 2 400.1 attributed to the Foundry
Painter) Mattusch 1980 for a detailed description of the iconography.
76
77
Davidson 1943.
78
Hasaki, in preparation.
287
288
kiln for their statues and the same is true for the glassmakers.79 Bronze sculptors also had to
to be familiar with controlling temperatures for ceramic objects, since they had to fire the
clay investments of their wax models so that the wax could be evacuated. Potters need
access to leadworkers for the lead joints used to restore vessels.80 Therefore, it is no
surprise, that their pyrotechnological structures --the metallurgical furnace, the ceramic kiln,
and the glass furnace-- display so many similarities, since exchange of technical knowledge and
simultaneous development must have been inevitable.81
On the artistic level, the koine of these workshops is reflected in the similarity in the
shapes of vessels produced in different materials. Also, although scholarly discussion
traditionally had been limited to establishing whether clay vessels had been the prototypes
for metal vessels or vice versa, this dual approach needs now to be expanded to
accommodate the Hellenistic glass vessels used as tomb offerings in Pydna in Macedonia,
which are direct copies of their terracotta or metal counterparts.82 This evidence
corroborates the theory that an active artistic exchange relationship existed among all the
artisans, rather than a static, one-way, process between the original and its imitation.
In other cases, the ceramic workshops were located very close to the product for
which the pots would have been used. Potters in the Late Antique period at Palaios Oropos
79
Zimmer (1990, 159-60) emphasizes the need of bronze smiths for accessibility to large
quantities of clay for their clay models.
80
See Faklaris 1997 for a vast quantity of lead joints from the Acropolis at Vergina.
81
82
In sanctuaries we might expect to find very good customers for ceramic products for
consumption and dedications, but curiously the sanctuaries have not provided many
workshops. It is even more surprising that the great Panhellenic sanctuaries did not house
any grand-scale ceramic production. On the other hand, the presence of a kiln within the
boundaries of a sanctuary does not automatically mean that the workshop and the sanctuary
were contemporaneous.
The Olympia (347, 392) and Nemea (60-62) kilns were mainly producing tiles and
bricks to serve the practical, immediate needs of the maintenance of the sanctuaries rather
than the religious needs of their visitors.84 The same holds true for a Roman rectangular kiln
in Dion, near Demeter's precinct. Olympia, in particular, had an extensive Classical ceramic
83
84
A similar function was proposed for the Archaic kiln excavated in Aphrodite's sanctuary
in Lokroi Epizephyrioi (Fischer-Hansen 2000; Costamagna and Sabbione 1990).
289
290
workshop in the area of the South Stoa, where at least six kilns have survived (67-72), but
unfortunately the excavation of the kilns in the 1940s was conducted very summarily in this
area. Misfired tiles recovered from the sanctuary at Kalydon in Aitolia also indicated the
presence of a kiln.85 Of all the kilns surveyed in the present study, twenty-six kilns from
eight sites were excavated near sanctuaries (Table VI.8). Of these, only six workshop areas
(in four different sites) are encountered in the periods between Geometric and Classical, and
four for the periods before and after.
GEOMETRIC CLASSICAL
HELLENISTIC
ROMAN
ARCHAIC
PELOPONNESE
Nemea (60-62)
Olympia
Olympia
(347, 392)
(67-74)
CENTRAL
Aulis (247)
Philia
(354-355)
NORTHERN
Dion (212-213)
AEGEAN
Amorgos (13)
Amorgos (227)
Prinias (31-36)
No sanctuary seems to have housed a pottery workshop before the Archaic period.
At Prinias, however, in the early seventh century B.C., the large workshop with six kilns (31-
85
Dyggve and Poulsen 1948, 201; Mertens-Horn 1978, esp. 54, n. 134; Antonetti 1992, 253.
291
36) produced pottery that was used as votive cups in the sanctuary located on the opposite
acropolis. In Lato (28-30), during the Archaic period, the kilns are intersected by the later
construction of the temple, so any contemporaneity and relationship between the two is
excluded (Plate II.5).
In a few other cases there are only indications for pottery production on site: for
example, at the Mycenaean remains of the Apollo Maleatas sanctuary at Epidaurus, materials
belonging to a ceramic kiln were discovered.86
This absence of pottery workshops stands in vivid contrast to the relatively frequent
discovery of metal workshops close to or inside sanctuaries. Twenty-three out of the forty
metal workshops published by Zimmer are located inside sanctuaries.87 The weight of the
final product and the high risk involved in its transportation may account for their proximity
to the final place of display.
86
87
Lambrinoudakis 1988.
Data taken from Zimmer 1990: at Olympia, on the slopes of the Athenian Acropolis, at
Nemea, six in the Athenian Agora, and six workshops in other parts of a city. See Huber
1991, 1997 for a metal workers workshop near the temple of Apollo Daphnephoros at Eretria
with rich bibliography about other similar cases.
For a long time there was a lingering, unfounded assumption that crafts associated
with a high risk of fire and of air or water pollution were placed near or replaced cemeteries
on the outskirts of cities.88
PERIOD
Bronze Age
SITE
Kavousi (151)
Zarkos (107)
Athens, Makriyianni (02)
Geometric
Argos (03)
Torone (11)
Archaic
Classical
Hellenistic
Elateia (175)
Eretria (17)
Metropoli Karditsas (353)
Byzantine
Thebes (416)
88
See especially Papadopoulos J. 1989, 1996 for a discussion of workshops near cemeteries.
292
The Athenian Kerameikos encapsulated this notion in the best way in that the
potters' workshops and a cemetery were in close proximity to each other. Although it is
undeniable that many kilns have been excavated in areas that were used at one time or
another as cemeteries, this association should not be overestimated. The archaeological
record contains many workshops associated with cemeteries, for the simple fact that
cemeteries had received more attention by excavators and were investigated more
thoroughly. Once habitation quarters were also excavated, then cemeteries ceased to have
the monopoly on being neighbors of workshops. With the amount of evidence available
now, it cannot be argued that cemeteries were preferred over other areas of a city for potters'
workshops.
For statistical reasons I supply some examples of kilns excavated near or inside the
area of a cemetery (Table VI.9). This phenomenon is witnessed in different areas and
periods.89 Three reasons can be suggested for this coexistence: first, a workshop near a
cemetery could conveniently supply offerings for relatives to use when visiting the graves of
the deceased. Second, the unpleasant by-products of ceramic production (heat, smoke, dust)
would be least offensive if the workshop was located in the necropolis, and vice versa.
Third, the confines of the city walls might have restricted the potters access to their raw
materials (clay, water, fire wood), and they probably preferred the more open area outside
the city limits. Finally, a less likely reason might be that the potters had more leeway to
dispose of their unsuccessful products inside a cemetery. Each of these suggestions applies
89
There are also some cases of kilns found in association with dispersed or individual
burials: Skala Oropou (16-17), Nea Philadelpheia in Thessaloniki (370), Europos (363).
293
only if the stratigraphical relationship between cemetery and workshop is fully understood at
each site.
Pottery workshops, despite their fumes and debris, did appear near market centers
(ajgoraiv) or major roads. More unpleasant industries such as foundries were also common
occupants of central places in a city.90 Many Athenian workshops are located along roads
leading outside the city or toward the ports.91 Amphora-makers in Phari Thasos (25-26), and
Figaretto, Corfu (197-209) preferred to locate their workshops within a short distance (ca. 2
miles) of ports.
Some other features, such as frequent location of the shops along the main roads,
seem to hold true throughout the periods, and pertain more to the meaning of the workshops.
In the case of the roads one has to take into consideration the archaeological bias of
excavating major streets in order to retrieve the city plan and the interrelationship of major
buildings to each other.
It should not be overlooked that quite often the clay-workers would establish their
workshops next to a major building project, just as had been done by the masons, sculptors,
or metalworkers. Clay in large quantities, if not as heavy as stone, is still not easily
transportable. In many cases, therefore, the ceramic workshops followed the projects, and
90
Mattusch 1975, 1977; Zimmer 1990, 19. Their studies show that these concerns are a
product of our modern insurance-based way of thinking.
91
294
were set up to fire the rooftiles of a major building (e.g. Nemea (60-61), or the hypocaust
columns, floors, and heating system of baths (e.g. Olympia (73), Chania (91). It is therefore
not surprising that kilns are often found next to baths. The ceramic establishments were
removed after the completion of the project.
295
EPILOGUE
_____________________________________________
EPILOGUE
The aim of this study was to define, analyze, and explain a very important structure
of a ceramic workshop, the kiln. Although ceramics in ancient Greece could have been fired
in a limited quantity in other firing structures (such as bonfires or even inside ovens), the
percentage of pottery thus produced is negligible. In this study only the two-chambered
kilns (with combustion and firing chambers) that could attain temperatures above 750C
have been considered. In the preceding chapters the ceramic kiln has been the focus of our
investigations in isolation (Chs. I-II), in comparison with similar technological structures
(Excursus), in its chronological and typological parameters (Chs. III-V); and finally it was
reinstated in its natural setting, the ceramic workshop (Ch. VI) where it was used to
address issues of craft specialization, size of workshop area and personnel.
In this final part of my discussion I would like to draw a synoptic picture as offered
by the evidence of kilns and the chronological and geographical distribution of their types.
High priority should be given to the systematic excavation of the physical remains of
296
EPILOGUE
_____________________________________________
ceramic workshops and their kilns. After presenting what we have been able to gain from
the kilns, and what our limitations are due to lack of evidence, I will offer certain future
directions in which this study can engage us.
297
EPILOGUE
_____________________________________________
study of the kilns of Roman Britain outlines clearly the best methodology of a detailed
recording of excavated kilns in order to retrieve as much information as available.1 The
French archaeologists, led by Dufa, emphasize the importance of the study of stratigraphy
of the ash layers inside a kiln in order to calculate the minimum number of firings conducted
in a kiln.2
A detailed description and measurements of the structural parts of a kiln
(combustion chamber, stoking channel, interior support of the perforated floor) should be
offered. Special awareness should be recruited for the identification of fragments of
perforated floor, whose shapes are usually deceptive and elusive (supra Ch. 2, Plate II.7).
The type of support and its dimensions (recoverable even from a sectional excavation of a
kiln) must be mentioned in the publication of the kiln, since, as it is argued in this work, it
helps in detecting local and/or regional traditions. A closer analysis of fuel remains inside
kilns can elucidate whether certain types of fuel prevailed at certain times and/or areas,
although it is most likely that ancient potters generally utilized as fuel what was seasonally
and regionally available.
Given the preliminary typology offered in this study, it will be feasible for
excavators to compare the newly-found kilns against a typology and examine the similarities
and peculiarities of their case. Once identification and recording have taken place, the next
challenge is to assign a date to the kiln. Because the methods for dating kilns affect any
298
EPILOGUE
_____________________________________________
chronological observations, it is necessary to survey the ways in which kilns are dated. The
process of digging through earlier layers to construct the combustion chamber makes
stratigraphical observations frequently confusing and unreliable.3 The dates assigned to the
ceramic kilns depend largely on the dating of the pottery found inside, or in association with
them. Yet various other formation processes can account for the presence of pottery inside a
kiln. First, abandoned kilns without a dome attract intruding sherds from later periods.
Therefore, even pottery found on the floor of the combustion chamber of a kiln should be
treated with caution when one tries to establish the date of the activity for a kiln. Second, the
workmen who build a kiln dig through earlier levels, thus contaminating later strata with
earlier pottery. Finally, random sherds that happen to be readily available can be used for
the construction of the kiln; therefore, they should not be treated as examples of the products
fired inside the kiln. Only a homogeneous body of pottery (or of wasters) can represent what
the kiln originally produced. Generally speaking, pottery dates can indicate the century of
the kiln's operation, but for any closer dating, one should rigorously scrutinize the associated
pottery. Kilns, as ethnographic data informs us, have a lifetime of two to three generations
(supra Ch. II). The construction of kilns of average size requires only a modest investment
of time and labor, and (as is true with any type of technological equipment or installation),
after some decades have passed, it is more economical to replace them than to try to repair
them. Therefore, one should face broad dates assigned to kilns with scepticism since it is not
The Middle Helladic kiln in Eretria (103) (Courbin 1963, 82) has been found in the
Classical Agora of the town, but has been dated earlier because its elevation is below the
Classical horizon at the site.
299
EPILOGUE
_____________________________________________
likely that they operated over many centuries, such as the Figaretto Kerameikos on Corfu
(197-209) or the Geometric kiln on Amorgos (13), which, according to the excavators'
interpretation, would have fired pottery from Geometric to Hellenistic times.
300
EPILOGUE
_____________________________________________
which create the draft in these updraft kilns, if recovered, contain valuable information about
controlling firing temperatures.
This stability in the construction of the kiln forces us to reconsider skeptically the
evolutionary patterns that have usually been proposed regarding the development of the
ceramic kiln. The usual evolutionary scheme from open bonfire, to pit-firing, and, finally, to
the various arrangements for separating the fuel from the pottery might fit a scenario of
technological progression, but it does not necessarily reflect the order of steps that specific
cultures took in their adoption of a ceramic kiln.4 The general consensus is that cultures only
reluctantly change their firing structures if those satisfactorily fulfil their needs (Ch. III).
Not all cultures will go through the above-mentioned stages. Some skip stages, and some
never evolve if other economic, social, or technical factors do not compel them to do so.
This diachronic study reinforces a theoretical reconstruction where pottery
technology does not follow a linear development, but occurs in cycles (not at regular
intervals) of appearance, development, and disappearance. When pottery technology
reappears in an area or a period, we cannot predict whether it will start from the same point it
left off; whether it will begin from a later point of the previous development process; or
whether it will develop along a completely different route.
4 For a discussion of such evolutionary diagrams, see Delcroix and Huot 1972 (who
emphasize that more evolved kilns can appear earlier at some Near Eastern sites, whereas
less evolved kilns continue into later periods at others. Cf. Rhodes 1968, 3-27); Rice 1997b
(equally skeptical).
301
EPILOGUE
_____________________________________________
302
EPILOGUE
_____________________________________________
developed alerts the archaeologist to consider many options before identifying a circular
structure with vitrified walls as a ceramic kiln. The requirements that a metallurgical
furnace, a lime kiln or an oven had to fulfill in order to function, and the identification traits
that would have survived, display an array of similarities and differences that relate these
structures to each other. Multiple uses of a single structure may also complicate the picture.
In the end, it is the context and logic that will cast the die.
Intrinstically related to the issue of shared pyrotechnology is the shared meaning of
many ancient words that described these structures (Ch. I): kavmino" is an all-encompassing
term for any type of pyrotechnological structure, whether it fired pottery or smelted metal.
The main occurrence of a word relating to a ceramic kiln is on the Penteskoufia plaque
F482+627+943, where next to the depiction of a kiln there is the dipinto KAMINOS. The
problematic (in authorship and date) poem about demons that can destroy the load of a
ceramic kiln is also entitled KAMINOS. jIpnov", klivbano" (krivbano"), and fou'rno"
primarily meant a baking oven (usually for bread), but later, all these words were treated as
synonyms to kavmino" by the lexicographers.
303
EPILOGUE
_____________________________________________
representations of kilns has been revisited with the aim of better examining their
iconography (which is largely standardized) and their context.
The scenes of the kilns were decorated by a small number of painters, which
explains their shared iconography and their short life-span. Most of the kiln scenes cover
one side of plaques that are decorated on both sides, and only one quarter of these plaques
have Poseidon depicted on them. It is therefore unlikely that these are votive dedications to
Poseidon to secure a successful firing. Certain oddities were observed, not only in the
plaques depicting kilns, but also in the entire corpus of the plaques. The final two scenarios
that are likely to apply to these plaques are:
a. If they are dedications found in situ inside or nearby a sanctuary to Poseidon, this
religious expression was very limited both chronologically (mid-sixth century B.C.) and
geographically (ancient Corinth), and adopted by a small group of potters, probably the
successive owners of a single workshop (or a few workshops) at ancient Corinth. There is
also the possibility that these plaques were placed inside the kiln to test the progress of the
firing while, at the same time, the potters addressed their requests to Poseidon and later
dedicated these plaques to him.
b. If these votive plaques were not found in a religious context, then one should
place more weight on the absence (so far) of any other sacred architecture and/or deposits,
the sketchy careless drawings on some of them, the changes in the choice of decoration,
indications that they were done in haste, their small size (the largest being 0.12x0.20m), and
that in most of them both sides were decorated, often with a different orientation on each
side. Considering all of these issues, it seems possible that they are products rejected by a
nearby pottery workshop which produced, among other items, votive plaques for a sanctuary
304
305
EPILOGUE
_____________________________________________
of Poseidon (and Amphitrite) that may have been in the vicinity of the workshop. The
possibility of their being test pieces applies to this scenario as well.
The creation of a corpus of ancient Greek kilns makes it possible to conduct stratistic
analyses of kilns more effectively, and it is also easier to detect both lacunas and potential
venues for further research. The methodology adopted is the one currently used for Italian,
Roman-British, and Gallo-Roman kilns, whereby the general shape of the combustion
chamber accounts for the first grouping of kilns (I: circular/pear-shaped, II: rectangular) and
the type of support for the perforated floor distinguishes the subtypes.
TYPE/SUBTYPE
TOTAL
Unknown
75
I?
113
II ?
74
Ia
73
II b
34
II a
22
Ib
20
II c
17
Ie
If
II e
Ig
Grand Total
459
EPILOGUE
_____________________________________________
This typology was developed with the archaeologists in mind, and was intended to
facilitate their attempts to incorporate even a partially excavated kiln into a general
typological framework. It is not likely that technological efficiency varied considerably
among all these types.
More than one sixth of the kilns (75/459 or 16%) cannot be attributed even to a
general shape, and a combined 40% (187/459) lack a specific subtype. A disheartening 56%
of the kilns, therefore, do not have complete documentation. This again underscores the
need for detailed excavation and recording of kilns, even in cases when they are backfilled.
Of the remaining 197 examples whose types can clearly be identified, the majority of
kilns of both circular and rectangular shape have adopted the central column/pillar (Ia, IIa)
or the central wall (Ib, IIb) system of support. It is more than likely that a large number of
the I? and II? can also be assigned to these types. Despite the large corpus of known kilns,
their overall uniformity makes spatial, and temporal trends in development difficult to
detect. The only strong correlation of type and place is the rectangular channel type of
Minoan kiln, which is limited to Crete (IIe), as well as the rectangular subtype with pairs of
cross-walls, which is characteristic of northern Greece (IIc). Because of the popularity of
these types, it is impossible to use them as chronological or geographical indicators,
although a distinctive preference for IIa by the Roman Athenian potters, and of IIb by the
Peloponnesian potters, is discernible. The types IIc (with three to five pairs of cross-walls)
and IIe (with parallel channels) have a limited geographical and chronological distribution:
IIc in Hellenistic and Roman northern Greece, and IIe in Minoan Crete. The less popular
ones (e.g. If: no central support or Ig: with an internal bench) are anomalous, and they have
no further impact on the general development of Greek kilns.
The aim of building a typology for the Greek kilns is two-fold: first, to establish the
range and the frequency of types favored by potters in Greece in different regions and
306
EPILOGUE
_____________________________________________
periods, and second, to compare it with other typologies across the Mediterranean basin. It
is easily seen that even with a comparatively simple structure such as the ceramic kiln, each
culture had a predilection for specific types. Although it is more likely that each culture
developed similar types independently, it is worthwhile pursuing in the future a systematic
study of the kiln types of Greek colonies (e.g. in Magna Graecia5 and the Black Sea6, or
even within Greece, such as the Parian colony at Thasos) to detect whether the immigrant
potters from mainland Greece brought with them not only the shapes and favorite themes,
but also their technological preferences (Plate III.17).
The significance of rectangular kilns: As a result of this study, we can go beyond the
common observation that rectangular kilns fired primarily rooftiles. 7 In many instances
rectangular kilns are not associated with other permanent structures in workshops, such as
clay-settling basins. We cannot always attribute this dearth of evidence to excavation
techniques, because even in the cases where extended areas around the kilns have been
investigated, they sometimes provide no signs of permanent workshop installations.
5 McDonald 1981 for the immigration of Classical Athenian potters to Magna Graecia. The
kilns at Basilicata in Metaponto, for example, (Adamesteanu et al. 1980) have an unusually
long stoking channel when compared with Greek kilns from the metropolitan areas. For
distribution of kilns in major Italian colonies, see Cuomo Di Caprio 1992a.
6
E.g. Coja 1974, in her study of the kilns in Istria, notes Archaic kilns of type If ( 1.05m),
Classical kilns of type Ia ( 1.00-1.05m), and a strong preference in the Hellenistic period
for kilns of type Ib (with two parallel walls) and of large dimensions ( 2.60 and 3.60). All
of the kilns presented were circular in shape.
7
Hasaki 2001.
307
EPILOGUE
_____________________________________________
This isolation of rectangular kilns suggests that they were probably constructed only
to serve short-term and project-specific needs by a workshop that had its headquarters
somewhere else in the area. They are often located in sanctuaries with a bustling
construction activity (e.g. Nemea, Olympia). They are also to be found near baths whose
construction requires large amounts of tiles for the hypocausts (e.g. Olympia).
Aside from the single instances of isolated rectangular kilns, we have two more
situations involving a larger group of kilns:
1. two or more rectangular kilns placed together or in proximity [Olympia (347,
392), Corinth (64-65), Nemea (60-62), Krannon (181-182), Delphi (395-400)]. All of these
sites have a strong ceramic workshop tradition, and the rectangular kilns should be seen as a
clear indicator of a high-level specialization in the ceramic industry.
2. a single rectangular kiln as part of a large established workshop [(e.g. Lenormant
(51-53), Pella (218-223), Sindos (86-89)]. Here we notice a smaller-scale specialization
inside a workshop, which, despite its primary production line requiring a circular kiln, also
invests in a specialized rectangular kiln for firing commissions of larger ceramic products.
The attached catalogue and Appendix I at the end of this study are, of course, not the
final ones. Ceramic kilns appear daily in rescue excavations, and now they are actually
better recorded. My aim has been to establish a substantial reference group for each period,
stressing major types and characteristics. Trends, not absolute numbers, are what I was after.
The newly excavated examples can then be compared to what is now thought to be the norm.
308
309
EPILOGUE
_____________________________________________
And it is equally possible, as with any numerical statistics, that what seems now to be the
norm can soon become the exception with the addition of new material.
PERIOD
Bronze Age (BA)
Geometric
Archaic
Classical
Hellenistic
Roman
Late Antique
Byzantine
Undated
Grand Total
TOTAL
61
14
22
57
87 (96)*
135 (144)*
18
23
33
459
For example, the Hellenistic pottery workshops at Mesogaia in Attica feature kilns of a
variety of sizes and shapes, compared to the remaining kilns from Attica of that period.
From the table above one can make some interesting observations: only thirty-three of the
459 kilns cannot be dated. This does not mean automatically that the remaining 426 have
specific (or reliable) dates, since most of them are dated only within a general period.
Particularly problematic are the kilns that fall in transitional phases, such as the fourth
century B.C. (grouped as Classical in this study), and the transition from Hellenistic to
Roman (9 kilns). The numbers of each period cannot automatically be compared to each
other without taking into account the length of periods that they cover: for example, the
sixty-one kilns of the Bronze Age span a period of 2000 years, whereas the fifty-seven kilns
of Classical Greece correspond to less than two centuries.
310
EPILOGUE
_____________________________________________
Athens, as a large and well-excavated site, ranks at the top of the list, followed closely
by the Peloponnese with her long history.
REGION
Attica
Peloponnese
Central
Western
Northern
Aegean
Grand Total
Unknown
19
25
9
3
6
16
75
I
34
57
35
17
24
61
229
TYPES
II
62
27
23
3
23
16
155
Total
115
109
67
23
53
93
459
But despite Athens prominent place in the history of ceramics, no early kilns prior
to the Late Geometric period [Athenian Agora (01)] appear there. The Peloponnese has
more circular kilns than rectangular, but the latter have a strong presence. In Attica the
twenty-seven rectangular kilns of the Kotzia Square (274-300) skew the picture, and it is
more probable that the circular kilns were in the majority in Attica as well, but not by much.
The Aegean ranks third due to Crete, with 63/96 or two thirds of the kilns, although it is
interesting that most large islands (e.g. Chios, Samos, Paros, Rhodes) had their own
production of coarse ware, which made them self-reliant in terms of pottery-production.
311
EPILOGUE
_____________________________________________
1. Attica
2. Achaia
3. Herakleiou
4. Argolis
5. Lasithiou
115
48
28
26
23
6. Euboea
7. Elis
8. Ionian Islands
9. Dodekanese
10. Magnesia
11. Pella
12. Cyclades
13. Phocis
14. Chalkidiki
15. Corinthia
16. Chania
17. Thessaloniki
18. Boeotia
19. Kavala
20. Karditsa
21. Arta
22. Kozanis
23. Locris
24. Arcadia
25. Chios
26. Ioannina
26. Messenia
27. Rethymno
18
15
14
13
13
13
12
12
10
10
8
8
7
7
6
5
5
5
4
3
3
3
3*
*Cos, Evros, Florina, Laconia, Larissa, Trikala have two entires and
Aetolia, Amphissa, Emathisas, Kilkis, Samos, Thresprotia, Veria have only example
Within Crete, the prefectures of Herakleiou and Lasithiou provide most of the
examples. There are comparatively fewer rectangular kilns there than in the Peloponnese.
Fifteen of them are found on Crete and the remaining two on Samos and on Delos, indicating
that the rectangular shape was an unpopular choice among Aegean potters.
EPILOGUE
_____________________________________________
Central Greece has a long history of potting beginning in the Middle Helladic period
[at Kirrha (104-106)]; this continues in the community in Magnesia [Mycenaean Dimini
(116) to Hellenistic Pherai (Velestino) (188-192)], and finishes in the active Late Antique
ceramic production at Delphi (394-400). Northern Greece has an almost equal distribution
of circular and rectangular kilns, and in this case this pattern should be considered closer to
reality than was the case in Attica. We cannot yet determine the motivation for the
development of the indigenous type IIc. Western Greece is the least technologically
advanced area with the fewest kilns, and a very narrow range of types. In such a
geographical survey, the negative results (i.e. the absence of kilns from a specific period, or
during a specific period) deserve equal attention as positive results and further study.
After identifying the locations of ceramic workshops, the next step in a future study
is to examine their commercial relationships and the pockets of isolated production.
Secondly, the plotting of the locations of production can also be correlated to the sources of
raw materials as they are detected through petrographic analyses of the clays. A richer data
set of the distances of workshops from raw materials can be established to substantiate or
refute the ceramic ecologists view that most raw material sources lay five to ten kilometers
from the workshop.
viii. The kiln as a yardstick of ceramic production (or size does matter)
The Kiln and the Potter: Systematic recording of the sizes of the ancient Greek kilns
permits us to attempt certain calculations regarding the production potential of an ancient
workshop, since our assumption is that the potters built their kilns in sizes that would allow
production at a satisfactory pace. The overview of Greek kilns and the workshops that
312
EPILOGUE
_____________________________________________
housed them indicates that the average ceramic workshops of most of Greek antiquity were
equipped with one or two kilns (Ch. VI). These establishments could have functioned with a
workforce of four to six people with one master potter. The larger workshops with three and
more kilns could have accommodated perhaps two master potters. Recently the analysis of
fingerprints on a Classical deposit in Metaponto also indicated a comparably structured
workforce: four different persons were identified who participated in distinct phases of potmaking, such as forming the vessels, dipping them in glaze, and adding details to them.8
The sizes of the kilns, and the reconstructed minimum sizes of the surface area covered by a
workshop (Ch. VI), point towards smaller workshops far away from the imaginary factories
of Classical fine wares (Ch. VI).9 Even in Athens where one would expect larger workshops,
the difference is in the number of workshops present and not in their sizes. Earlier attempts
by Scheibler (1984) to disperse these ghosts of ceramic factories took into account the
number of pots that a potter could produce per year, and argued strongly that the
Nikosthenes workshop could not possibly have employed almost forty painters unless they
were each producing ten pots per year, an impossibly low number. Scheibler assigns most
workshops to a family-business category with two to five employees, midway between a
one-person business and a larger workshop of five to ten employees. Hannestad (1988) has
also calculated that a vase painter could have decorated at least 570 undecorated pots per
year. Such a rhythm combined with the average size of the kilns is consistent with a smallscale workshop that employs one master potter surrounded by three to five assistants.
8
Wade 2001: craftsman A did the oenochoae; craftsmen B and C dipped vessels; craftsman
D retouched vessels. The fingerprints of craftsmen B, C, and D often appear together in the
same vessel. Gender could not be identified.
9
313
EPILOGUE
_____________________________________________
314
A workshop with four to six persons working full-time and using two kilns is a safe
candidate for an average workshop in ancient Greece. The importance of such a
reconstruction lies in the full-time occupation of its workforce rather than its size. The total
volume of production of Greek pottery may still have been considerable, but it was not the
result of ceramic factories operating in the Kerameikoi of different cities. It may be closer
to reality to reconstruct many, medium-scale workshops that produced comprehensively
large amounts of pottery. And perhaps we should also turn our focus to middlemen, the
distributors of the produced pottery, who probably were not potters themselves.10
The Kiln and the Kaiki (boat): While the construction of a ceramic kiln is a
technological choice, its size is an indicator of volume and frequency of production. We
have estimated that a small Geometric kiln 1.00m in diameter could fire 300 small conical
cups, or sixty oenochoae, or ten large amphoras, and most probably it fired combinations of
these numbers. Similarly, one thousand Archaic miniature aryballoi could have been
produced in a month and fired inside other larger pots in two to three firings. The degree of
production is determined not only by the sizes of the kilns, but also by the transport capacity
of the major means of transportation available in ancient times, especially the boats in a sea
country such as Greece. Based on the excavation of ancient Mediterranean shipwrecks of
the fifth and fourth centuries B.C., it has been estimated that an ancient boat could carry
between 1,500 and 4,200 amphoras depending on its size, or as few as 400 amphoras (e.g.
the Kyrenia ship measuring only 14.00m in length).11 A Classical kiln 1.50 in diameter could
10
11
Hadjidaki 1996.
EPILOGUE
_____________________________________________
hypothetically fire sixty to eighty amphoras of Coan type, and the 400 amphoras could
therefore have been produced and fired in almost two months in a single workshop with only
one kiln. The larger cargos of 1,500 or more amphoras could have been the product of a
normal workshop with two kilns over the summer, or of a combination of two to four
average amphora workshops on an island. It is evident, then, that a medium-size island like
Thasos or Cos could produce and distribute its merchandise with its own means. For larger
sea journeys, tradesmen in larger centers like Athens may have rented a bigger boat where
pots from different areas were gathered. After all, the period of intense productivity (AprilOctober) coincided nicely with the optimal navigation period in the Mediterranean.
An overview of the sizes of ancient kilns shows a solid consistency of sizes between
1.30-3.00m., and only some examples of rectangular kilns (most likely tile kilns) attained
larger dimensions of more than 4.00 on each side. The extreme diameter of 7.00m in a kiln
on Rhodes (377) is still puzzling, but the recent excavation of a large circular kiln in the
Attic countryside shows us that we should not be surprised by such unusual sizes. A
cautionary point, of course, is that size alone cannot determine the output, which is a
correlate of specialization, intensity, and demand. Even the rectangular kilns for Arretine
wares (first century B.C to first century A.D.) were not much different in size from the Greek
norm, but unlike the Greek examples, they could fire 10.000 vessels each time.12
The Ceramic Workshop: Whether we discuss the output of a potter or the capacity of
an ancient boat, we ultimately refer to the degree of specialization and production of the
12
About five to ten workshops of Arretine ware were capable of firings of 25,000-30,000
pots each time. Their capacity owed much to their higher firing chambers (Flle 1997).
315
EPILOGUE
_____________________________________________
ceramic workshops in ancient Greece. It has been ascertained above that most workshops
belong to the category of workshop-industry, and few are more elaborate versions of that
category. But nowhere in the archaeological record have we encountered a workshop that
can be called a factory.
The frequent dearth of sherds in the excavated kilns and their surroundings provides
us with little information about the degree of specialization on specific shapes in each locale.
But it is safe to say that the specialization of a workshop focused first on ware (coarse or
fine) and secondly on the size of the pots (large or small). The Athenian workshops
(especially those at Lenormant Ave. (51-53) seem to have produced only decorated (and
perhaps glazed) pottery. Rooftiles, amphoras, and large coarse ware vessels tended to be
produced in the same workshop.13 The Roman workshops in Kotzia Square in Athens (274300) housed manufacturers of rooftiles and lamps.
If such a characterization seems disappointing to the student who expected a much
more industrialized society, I hasten to emphasize that these workshops could have
supported a year-round period of operation. Residential areas are conspicuously absent
within workshop sites and many of them are quite removed from houses. So even in
architectural terms we can no longer speak of household production. The investment to
build a workshop on a separate piece of land and equip it with settling basins and kilns
betrays a year-round, full-time commitment on the part of the potters, and not a part-time
activity in which land cultivators engaged when their agricultural obligations allowed them
to do so.
13
This emerging picture is validated not only by excavated workshops [Eretria [350)], but
also by the extensive survey of amphora workshops in western Crete by Empereur et al.
1991, where evidence of this diversity in production was attested.
316
EPILOGUE
_____________________________________________
14
Psaropoulou 1996.
317
EPILOGUE
_____________________________________________
15
In Vasanello (west-central Italy), a pottery workshop would use no fewer than four types
of clay, each one for specific types of ceramics (Pea 1992).
318
319
CATALOGUE
GEOMETRIC TO CLASSICAL
(ca. 1100-300 B.C.)
The catalogue is strongly influenced by two criteria: first, chronology and second,
geography, so that it can be easily accessible to scholars engaged either in chronological and/or
geographical surveys.
Each kiln has its own number, even when they belong to the same workshop. Their
presentation follows a chronological order:
Submycenaean and Geometric (1100-700 B.C.)
Orientalizing and Archaic (700-480 B.C.)
Classical (480-300 B.C.).
The Classical period is extended in order to include the entire fourth century B.C. since
excavators use this century frequently to date Classical kilns.
320
Appendix I contains the Prehistoric kiln as well as the Hellenistic, Roman, Late Antique,
and Byzantine kilns. Within each period, I present the kilns according to larger geographical areas.
The geographical areas are then broken down to the modern Greek prefectures (nomoi) in
alphabetical order (see infra for list of geographical areas and prefectures in the order adopted in
this catalogue). The order of the geographical areas is clearly Atticocentric, but the purpose of a
catalogue is to operate within established conventions. Within each prefecture, the sites will be
presented alphabetically; for example, in the Peloponnese, in the prefecture Achaia, Aigion will
appear before Patras. This geographical approach follows the presentation adopted by the
Archaeologikon Deltion so that future researchers can add new entries to it.
A complete catalogue entry adopts the following format:
Bibliography:
Description:
Date:
Production:
Discussion:
321
When any of these sections do not appear, no information is available. In workshops where
more than one kiln have been excavated, any information on Date, Production, and Discussion will
be presented after the last kiln. For the sake of consistency I have labeled with letters of the
alphabet the multiple kilns of a workshop. Where the excavators have assigned a different label, I
have included it in the discussion of the individual kiln.
Length
Pres.
Preserved
H.
Height
Dim.
Dimension
Th.
Thickness
Max.
Maximum
Diameter
Ext.
Exterior
cent.
century
322
323
SUBMYCENAEAN-GEOMETRIC
(1100-700 B.C.)
ATTICA
Production:
In the preliminary publication only five
vessels with Corinthianizing and Protoattic
decoration were presented (P 13326,
P 13327, P 13329). No wasters were found
in the neighboring area.
Date:
The workshop clearly predates the
cemetery since the latter used the
southwestern wall of the former. The
original construction of the workshop must
be placed before the Late Geometric
period, when the burials are dated. If the
kiln is indeed part of the workshop, then
324
02. ATHENS,
Makriyianni St.
Bibliography:
Parlama and Stampolidis 2000, 32,
plans 1, 2.
Description:
Type: I?
Circular. 1.00.
No more information available.
PELOPONNESE
03. ARGOLIS, ARGOS
Agora, Square G4
Bibliography:
*P. Courbin "Stratigraphie et
stratigraphie." in P. Courbin (ed.), tudes
archologiques 1963, 59-102, esp. 72;
Courbin 1966; P. Courbin, BCH 81 (1957)
Type: I?
Combustion chamber, entrance and
stoking channel partially preserved. Est.
(from the cuttings into the bedrock)
less than 2.20 (E-W) and 2.50 (N-S).
Walls made of orthostates. On top of
them rectangular plaques were laid (one
of them was also the lintel for the
entrance); entrance from the south;
Pres.H. 0.60. Only the beginning of the
stoking channel was preserved with
thick walls of 0.25.
Date:
Protogeometric (10th cent. B.C.),
based on pottery found inside it.
Discussion:
Excavations in 1956 and 1958 under the
location of the present museum revealed a
Protogeometric artisanal quarter where
pottery was produced as well as silver,
using the cupellation method for the latter.
Later the site was used for burials. The
precise chronological relationship between
325
ARGOLIS, ARGOS
Plate Exc.9b
A cupellation furnace misinterpreted as a
pottery kiln. See supra Excursus, "The
Metallurgical Furnace" and Appendix II,
CENTRAL GREECE
Description:
Type: Ia
Pear-shaped. Dim. 2.00x1.50. Stoking
channel L. 0.46. Combustion chamber
walls preserved up to H. 0.30. Central
rectangular pillar used as support for the
eschara.
Date:
Geometric (or Archaic).
Plate V.3
05. KILN A
Description:
Type: II?
Rectangular. Not completely excavated.
Three finished, slightly raised, sides. Only
part of the perforated floor preserved.
Max.Pres.Dim. 0.60x0.73. Eleven
ventholes, lined with clay, are wholly or
partially preserved. Distinctive rings
formed in the upper surface.
06. KILN B
Description:
Type: II?
Rectangular. Not completely excavated.
Three sides, slightly raised, preserved.
Max.Pres.Dim. 0.60x0.75.
Production:
No architecture or other features are yet
associated with the kilns. The pottery from
the site is generally discussed without
mention of specific find spots. The
majority of the sherds belong to onehandled cups. Also jugs, skyphoi and
pyxides were used at the site. Besides
drinking vessels there is a considerable
number of craters.
Discussion:
It is unlikely that the two fragmentary
structures were part of one larger structure
because their elevations are different. If the
perforated floors have collapsed, and not
found in their original height, then the
elevations are irrelevant.
It is difficult to visualize how this
structure would have worked. It might be a
collapsed perforated floor. The structures
326
08. KILN B
Bibliography:
*Catling and Lemos 1990, 75, pl. 36c.
Description:
Type: II?
Three non-joining fragments of the
perforated floor of a possibly rectangular
kiln. All three preserve parts of the
ventholes. Est. of ventholes 0.09; one of
327
09. KILN C
Bibliography:
*Catling and Lemos 1990, 75-6, pl. 36a,b.
Description:
Type: I?
Nine fragments of a clay floor of a kiln
or an oven. Dim. of the best preserved
fragment: 0.29x0.30. Th. 0.14.
Date:
Middle Protogeometric based on the
associated pottery.
Discussion:
The excavators suggest that the nine
fragments belong to a floor of a kiln, but
do not explain why. Another possibility is
that they come from the roof of the
building; it is not clear what the
importance of the reed would have been.
The description of the excavators does not
differentiate clearly between this group
328
WESTERN GREECE
10. IOANNINA, DODONA
Bibliography:
Plates III.7, V.1-2
*S.I. Dakaris, " A
j naskafhv tou' iJerou' th'"
Dwdwvnh"." PAE 1967, 40-1, figs. 4-5, pls.
30a, 33a, b.
Description:
Type: Ig
Combustion chamber and stoking pit in
a figure-eight formation, eschara, and
pithos cover of the firing chamber
preserved. Combustion chamber and
stoking hole dug into bedrock. 1.10.
Upper L. 2.40. Lower L. 1.90. Small
step inside the combustion chamber at
H. 0.40 from the floor of the
combustion chamber. Step's width fades
out near the entrance. Parts of the
plaque which served as the eschara is
preserved. The plaque is not perforated.
The upper half of a hand-made pithos
with two vertical handles was used as a
cover of the firing chamber; 0.55; H.
0.40. Stoking pit (Dim. 0.70x0.85).
Entrance from the north.
Date:
Protogeometric (?).
Discussion:
This small oven-kiln was located at the
eastern end of the Doric stoa in front of
the Bouleuterion at the sanctuary.
During the period of its use (ca. 1000
B.C.), inhabitants of the site were the
prehistoric tribe of Selloi or Helloi.
Because of the movable character of the
upper chamber and its dome-like shape,
this oven-kiln at Dodona can be
considered as an intermediary phase
between an oven and a fully developed
kiln. Dakaris (1967) mentions that this
structure could also have been used to
heat food. The non-perforated plaque
would considerably reduce the
temperature in the upper compartment.
Two vessels, possibly of Protogeometric
date, were found inside the combustion
chamber.
Because of the restricted space in
the upper chamber the oven could hold
only two small jugs or cooking pots and
as many as four to six small bowls of
the Protogeometric type. It seems,
therefore, that the structure was more
often used as an oven for cooking and
329
NORTHERN GREECE
11. CHALKIDIKE, TORONE
Bibliography:
Plates V.1-2
*Papadopoulos 1989;*Whitbread et al.
1997, 88-91; ARepLondon 1982, 43 fig. 70.
Seifert 1993, no. 44.
Description:
Type: If
Combustion chamber and stoking channel
preserved.
Circular. Combustion chamber carved
in the bedrock. 0.80. Pres.H. 0.40.
The walls had a red and yellow clay
lining. Parts of the eschara are probably
preserved in the fill: Pres.Dim.
0.30x0.10, but none carried any
ventholes. No internal support was
found. The stoking channel was cut in
the bedrock. Pres.L. 0.50-0.60; W. 0.40.
The entrance is from the southeast
(against the prevailing winds, as the
excavator notes).
Production:
Pots found inside the kiln included large
amphoras and water jugs.
Date:
Second half of the 8th cent B.C. (750700B.C.) based on pottery found inside the
combustion chamber.
Discussion:
Fourteen vessels in fragmentary
condition were recovered from the
combustion chamber. Probably the floor
of the firing chamber collapsed under
the weight. Twelve of them probably
belonged to the last firing, whereas two
might have belonged to a previous one.
One more kiln may have existed in the
vicinity.
The kiln is located in an Early
Iron Age cemetery at the promontory of
Torone, where one hundred and thirty
four tombs, mostly cremations, were
excavated. The kiln postdates the
cemetery and probably is quite distant
chronologically since its products have
only a faint resemblance to the offerings
inside the tombs.
330
AEGEAN ISLANDS
12. CRETE, HERAKLEIOU
PHAISTOS, Palace, Vano G
Bibliography:
Plates V.1-2
Discussion:
The site is located near the modern town of
Amorgos, at the ancient site of Minoa. It
has an acropolis with a Geometric cultic
building and contemporary houses. In the
lower city a distyle in antis temple dates to
Hellenistic times. Near the temple a
ceramic workshop specializing in the
production of "Megarian" skyphoi was
located outside the walls of the settlement,
but incorporated inside the workshop
structure. Remains of the combustion fuel
were recovered (wood coals, olive pits) as
well as fired, clay lumps and slag. For a
Hellenistic kiln on the site see (227).
Bibliography:
Plates V.1-2, VI.10
ADelt 28 (1973) 537-40, pl. 500b; BCH
102 (1978) 748; ARepLondon 1978-79, 36.
Seifert 1993, no. 80 (presented as
Hellenistic).
Description:
Type: IIb
Rectangular kiln with two firing
chambers. The eastern part of the
combustion chamber, the firing
chamber, and the eschara are preserved.
The northern and western parts were
destroyed by later activity. Ext.W. 2.00
The floor of the combustion chamber is
covered with stone slabs. H. of
combustion chamber from the highest
preserved wall of the firing chamber:
1.40. The central columnar support was
331
332
ARCHAIC
ATTICA
15. ATHENS,
21-23 Herakleidon St.
Bibliography:
ADelt 29 (1973-74) 86-7, fig. 1; BCH 103
(1979) 536.
Description:
Type: IIa
Rectangular. Central support.
L. 1.27m.
16. KILN A
Description:
Type: I?
17. KILN B
Description:
Type: IIb
Combustion chamber and support central
wall preserved inside the ellipsoid building
G.
Roughly rectangular. Dim. 1.00x0.70. A
central wall of clay supports the eschara. A
large quantity of burnt wood, ash and olive
pits were found. Entrance from the east.
Date:
End of the 7th cent. B.C. (it belongs to
the fourth and last phase of the
building's occupation)
Discussion:
The wall (or bench) T16 can be associated
as an addition or alteration to the Building
B. This wall is contemporary with the
phase of the kiln. A bench seems a more
preferable and practical feature near a kiln.
The buildings B and G presented many
places with ash and burnt lumps of clay
where fire was used (hearth ovens or other
firing structures, but no evidence of
metalworking). Three spherical clay lumps
and one pyramidal loomweight found in
the fills of the building can be interpreted
as kiln furniture.
The site where the two kilns were
excavated has provided many Late
Geometric and Archaic structures. Two
main complexes (here called western and
eastern complex) occupy the area, the
eastern one with five apsidal buildings (AE) and the western one with three apsidal
buildings, two circular, and one rectangular
(Z-IB). Each complex was surrounded by
peribolos walls which were often repaired.
At least six phases of occupation are
attested archaeologically within the narrow
length of one and a half centuries. In both
complexes extensive traces of
metalworking were excavated [circular pits
( 0.18. D. 0.050 in the floor of Building
A), slag in Building D, similar ground pits
with burnt walls, blow pipes, slag, and
pure ash layers in Building I]. A few more
parts of peribolos walls were excavated as
well as a cluster of Late Geometric and
Archaic burials to the east and southeast
area of the site. The excavator believes
that, during the occupation phase of the
industrial establishments, the site was used
as a cemetery, primarily for children. Only
two burials date to the 6th cent. B.C., that
333
334
PELOPONNESE
19. CORINTHIA,
ANCIENT CORINTH, Gotsi Plot
Bibliography:
ADelt 26 (1971) 68, pl. 58a.
Description:
Type: I?
Remains of a small circular kiln. No more
information available. No plan available.
Date:
Archaic, based on the one thousand
Protocorithian aryballoi found in the
vicinity which may be products of this
kiln.
335
CENTRAL GREECE
21-22. EUBOEA, ERETRIA
Tamvaka Plot
Bibliography:
ADelt 23 (1968) 227, plan 1 on p. 228;
BCH 94 (1970) 1097.
Lang 1996, 293-5.
21. KILN A
Description:
Type: Uncertain
The kiln is in a very fragmentary state;
it is impossible to ascertain its shape or
dimensions. It was made of crude
unbaked bricks. In its interior a large
quantity of straw was collected.
22. KILN B
Description:
Type I?
Combustion chamber and stoking channel
partially preserved.
Circular. Est. 1.00. Total L. 1.80.
Stoking channel L. 0.80.
Date:
7th-6th cent. B.C.
Discussion:
The surrounding area of the kilns includes
an apsidal Geometric building and Archaic
walls.
23-24. MAGNESIA,
VELESTINO-PHERAI
Alcestes St., Tsoumbekou Plot
Bibliography:
ADelt 42 (1987) 255-6, pl. 146 a, b.
23. KILN A
Description:
Type: I?
Circular. 1.50.
24. KILN B
Description:
Type: I?
Circular. 0.90.
Date:
Both kilns are Archaic, based on pottery
found around them and inside the
neighboring building.
.
336
Discussion:
The two kilns belong to an Archaic
building located in the center of ancient
Pherai, to the W. of Hypereia Fountain. In
the area burials and settlements alternated
in antiquity. Archaeological evidence on
the site preserved a burial ground from the
Middle Bronze Age, then a Mycenaean
wall, later Protogeometric and Geometric
burials and finally an Archaic building,
possibly an extensive workshop.
The Archaic building consisted of at
least three separate rooms: Room A: (
3.50x2.80 which preserved remains of
bronze-working). Room B: ( 3.05x5.50).
Room C was partially preserved. The kilns
were dug to the south of this building. The
site was occupied into the Classical period
by two rectangular buildings following the
orientation of the Archaic structure
NORTHERN GREECE
25-26. THASOS, PHARI
Bibliography:
Plates V.4, VI.11
* Perreault et al., 1992;
*Perreault, 1990; *K. Peristeri, F. Blond,
J. Y. Perreault, and M. Brunet, "QASOS
1985. Prwvth anaskafikhv evreuna se evna
ergasthvri aggeioplastikhv" sth qevsh
Favri Skavla" Marivw n." AAA 18 (1985)
29-38; *K. Peristeri, F. Blond, and
J.Y.Perreault, "QASOS 1986-1987.
Deuvterh kai trivth anaskafikhv evreuna
tou arcai>kouv aggeioplasteivou sth qevsh
Skavla" Marivw n." AAA 19 (1986) 71-80;
ADelt 41 (1986) 170-3; BCH 111 (1987)
596; BCH 117 (1993) 869; ARepLondon
1985-86, 81, fig. 119; ARepLondon 198687, 49, fig. 86; ARepLondon 1987-88, 64.
Lang 1996, 130, no. 60, fig. 126. Seifert
1993, no. 48.
25. KILN A
Description:
Type: Ia
The combustion chamber and the stoking
channel are preserved.
Pear-shaped. 2.80. The entire kiln is
built within a square podium (full meas.
5.00x5.00. Combustion chamber walls
covered with clay layer of 0.02-0.03.
Central columnar support. Original 1.15,
after restoration, 1.30-1.40. Due to
26. KILN B
Description:
Type: Ia?
It lies five meters to the south of kiln,
no. 25. Combustion chamber preserved.
Pear-shaped. 1.60. No central support
preserved. Entrance from the southwest.
Pres. H. of walls: 0.60. Types of kiln
furniture: ring-shaped and rectangular
ones; fragments of small clay plaques
with a hole in the middle are interpreted
as test pieces.
Production:
The workshop produced a wide range of
products capable of fulfilling the needs
of the neighboring settlements. A total
of eleven shapes which bear similarities
to Cycladic and Attic prototypes:
drinking vessels lekythoi, olpae, wine
jars, cups of Subgeometric and
Ionicizing style type B1 and B2, column
craters, amphorae, pithoi, lekanes. A
cylindrical seal with flower motif used
for the decoration of pithoi was found,
and pyrauna. The potters produced both
decorated and undecorated vessels as
well as Laconian-style tiles.
Date:
Last quarter of the 6th-first quarter of
the 5th cent. B.C. (525-475 B.C.)
337
Discussion:
This workshop consists of two kilns
located five meters apart. They make part
of an organized workshop since one large
clay-settling basin was excavated to the
south. Dim. 4.00x3.80x1.20. The walls are
internally and externally plastered over.
Another square basin to the southeast
measuring 3.60x3.60x1.10 (estimated
volume capacity of clay mixture: ca.
18m3). A channel connects them. Two
small lekanes were found at the southeast
and southwest. Two holes on the south
wall allowed the water to flow out. At least
two building phases of the complex were
documented. The excavators had
conjectured, unconvincingly, that Kiln B
predated Kiln A because of the former's
smaller size.
The workshop lies next to the sea on
the southwest coast of Thasos. Many more
ceramic workshops have been located near
the sea on the island on the basis either of
architectural features or material
frequencies. In the surrounding area as
many as eight different clay types were
detected by Picon. The workshop made use
of all of these.
Since many complete Laconian-style
tiles, both pan and cover tiles, were found
stuck up against a wall in the southern part
of the excavation, it has been surmised that
the workshop produced both pottery and
tiles. It is the first time that it is strongly
suggested that tiles could be fired in a
circular kiln and do not necessarily need a
rectangular kiln.
338
AEGEAN ISLANDS
27. CRETE, HERAKLEIOU
KNOSSOS
Bibliography:
Plate V.4
*J.N. Coldstream and C.F. MacDonald,
"Knossos: Area of South-West Houses."
BSA 92 (1997) 191-245; *Tomlinson and
Kilikoglou 1998; BCH 118 (1994) 820.
Description:
Type: Ia
Combustion chamber, eschara support,
stoking channel and stoking hole
preserved.
Circular. Int. 0.65. Total L. 1.50.
Combustion chamber walls lined with
thick clay ranging in color from red to gray
because of high temperatures. Central
support, columnar made of clay. 0.18.
Entrance from the northwest. Stoking hole
lined with clay. 0.40.
Production:
The kiln was used for firing primarily
small fine vessels, many fragments of
which were found both inside the firing
chamber and the stoking hole. This deposit
F contained twenty-three pieces: eight
black cups, two plain cups, five lekanidae,
three hydriae, two domed lids, one lekane,
and one cooking pot.
Discussion:
The kiln was found during excavations
conducted in the area west of the southwest
house where Evans had deposited some of
his excavations dump. They uncovered a
house (with no Minoan deposits) with a
sequence of layers from Protogeometric to
28. KILN A
Description:
Type: Ia
Combustion chamber and column
preserved; dug into bedrock in the
southeast and south.
Pear-shaped. Dim:1.00x0.80. Pres.H. 0.60.
Central oval pillar: Dim. 0.24x0.18.
Pres.H. 0.40. Inside the combustion
chamber a powdery black layer full of
sherds and underneath this a layer of ash.
Six semicircular niches around the
combustion chamber (to fit the supporting
branches of the eschara?). Part of the firing
floor is retained in the form of a shelf
around the interior circumference at the
same level as the openings of six semicircular vertical channels hollowed into the
walls. Entrance from the west.
29. KILN B
Description:
Type: If
Combustion chamber preserved.
Pear shaped. 0.90; Pres.H. 0.10. No
traces of eschara or support were found.
Very similar in construction to kiln A. The
entrance is from the north.
Date:
The excavators placed this kiln only a little
earlier than kiln A, because the pottery
found inside both of them is similar.
30. KILN C
Description:
339
Type: I?
Partially preserved in a mass of bricks and
stones. Only the southern side of
combustion chamber has survived;
Circular. Pres. 2.00x1.60; Pres.H. 0.80.
Combustion walls made of bricks and
stones faced with clay lining. No trace of
internal support or of the eschara. To the
south one, or two (?) fragments of the
perforated floor.
Production:
Coarse pottery, large basins, small
pithoi, small skyphoi with flat bottom,
large bowls (upper 0.20-0.30, lower
0.10-0.16), chalices, Daedalic
terracotta figurines. With the exception
of one basin, it was not possible to
restore any complete vessel.
Date:
7th-6th cent. B.C. based on the coarse
pottery (provisional date). One plaque
and two terracotta Daedalic masques
give us a more precise dating, ca. 650625 B.C.
Discussion:
Three kilns were excavated, in close
proximity to each other, between the
northern wall of the temple and the
polygonal wall. The kilns predated the
temple as the northern part of the third kiln
was destroyed by the construction of the
wall of the temple.
Three connecting pieces which
formed a hole ( 0.15) were misinterpreted
as a chimney, whereas they obviously form
a venthole.
All three kilns provided similar
material, which means that they were used
within a short period of time.
It is possible that they served a
previous sanctuary on the spot of the later
temple. Such a connection with the
sanctuary would explain the production of
31. KILN A
Description:
Type: Ia
K1. Combustion chamber and stoking
channel preserved, dug into bedrock.
340
32. KILN B
Description:
Type: Ia
K2: Pear-shaped. 0.95. Pres.H. 0.86.
Combustion chamber walls covered with
rectangular tiles. Central support made of
two parts cemented together. 0.31.
Pres.H. 0.20. Sides covered with clay
plaques. Dim. of plaques:
0.42x31.50x0.04. At one place a second
row of plaques is preserved, slightly
recessed. Bottom part cylindrical, upper
part truncoid. Lower 0.23. Upper 0.10.
The two parts correspond to two phases of
use. Fragments of the eschara preserved.
The stoking channel is not entirely
33. KILN C
Description:
Type: Ia
K3. Part of its perimeter is obliterated
by the eastern wall of K1.
Circular. 1.06. The combustion
chambers walls were covered with
rectangular slabs of clay coating.
Cylindrical support covered with layer of
clay coating 0.004 thick. 0.31. Pres.H.
0.30. Fragments of eschara, Th. 0.07-0.08.
traces of the vent holes 0.03-0.06.
Distance between holes 0.10-0.125. Rings
around some holes W. 0.03; H. 0.01.
34. KILN D
Description:
Type: I?
K4. Pear-shaped. Dim. 1.15x1.06.
Followed by a stoking channel and an
alimentation channel ( 0.90), Pres.H.
0.63; L. of stoking channel: 0.47; W.
0.63.
35. KILN E
Description:
Type: I?
North Kiln: partially dug into the
ground.
Pear-shaped. Dim. 3.14x2.35. Entrance
from the east; W. of stoking channel:
0.70-0.84.
36. KILN F
Description:
Type: Ie
South Kiln: It occupies the southwestern
corner of the area;
Circular. Int. 2.98. Ext. 4.10. W. of
stoking channel 1.04. Entrance from the
341
342
CLASSICAL
ATTICA
Rectangular. Dim. 2.80x2.80. Traces of a
central pillar. The eastern retaining wall of
37-39. ATHENS
Apellou, Eupolidos and Lykourgou
St.
Bibliography:
ADelt 23 (1968) 39-42.
Plate V.6
37. KILN A
Description:
Type: IIb
Partially excavated. Combustion chamber
preserved, dug in bedrock. Only its
southeastern half was investigated.
Rectangular. Dim. 1.80x1.80. The walls of
the combustion chamber were covered with
mudbricks and a heavy clay coating. Pres. H.
0.85. Entrance from the southeast. W. of
entrance: 0.50. Beneath this floor
semicircular drainage pipes were excavated.
38. KILN B
Description:
Type: IIb
39. KILN C
Description:
Type: Unknown
Partially excavated. No other information
available. Probably also rectangular.
Discussion:
The ceramic workshop lies ca. 800 meters
northeast of the northern limits of the
Athenian Agora and it might have served its
construction needs. The kilns were exposed
in an area where a road 5.50-9.00 wide and a
cemetery (active in Late Classical and
Hellenistc times) also came to light. The
street, which led to the Acharnian Gates,
remained in use until Hellenistic times.
To the east of Kiln B there is a
rectangular cistern D (1.50x1.50). The walls
were 0.80 thick, plastered inside with mortar,
40. KILN A
Description:
Type: Ib
Combustion chamber and central
supportive wall preserved. Pear-shaped.
Max.Dim. 4.00x5.00. Central supportive
wall for the perforated floor: W. 0.50, L.
3.00. L. of stoking channel: 1.00. Entrance
from the west.
Date:
5th-4th cent. B.C. (from the associated
black-glazed pottery).
343
41. KILN B
Description:
Type: I?
Combustion chamber partially preserved.
Circular. The walls are cut by the later kiln
on the site. Max.Pres.Dim. 1.80x2.30. The
remains point to an unusually long
combustion chamber.
42. KILN C
Description:
Type: Ib
Combustion chamber and supporting wall
preserved. Pear-shaped. Max.Dim.
4.00x2.70. Central supportive wall of the
perforated floor: L. 2.00, W. 0.50. Stoking
channel L. 1.00. Entrance from the south.
Discussion:
This kiln is almost a twin of kiln no. 40 and
therefore must have been built shortly after
the first one, perhaps because of the
defective performance of the first.
43. KILN A
Description:
Type: Ia
Partially preserved. Pear-shaped. Max. Dim.
2.50x2.00. Central support, destroyed by a
later sarcophagus. Entrance is from the
southwest.
44. KILN B
Description:
Type: I?
Circular (?). Kiln B is oriented east-west.
Only one part of the walls of the combustion
chamber is preserved. To the north there is a
boundary marker (horos). Between the Tomb
of the Peloponnesians and the State burial
monument Kiln B lies four meters to the east
of Kiln A and Kiln C two meters to the north
(all enclosed inside the grave monument).
45. KILN C
Description:
Type: II?
Only part of the eastern wall of the
combustion chamber is preserved.
Rectangular. Est.Dim. 4.70x3.00 (from
Monaco 1999).
344
46. KILN A
Description:
Type: Ia
Combustion chamber walls partially
preserved. Circular L. 1.95. Entrace from the
east. Kiln A is presented as the earliest of all
kilns in this area.
47. KILN B
Description:
Type: Ia
Circular. Combustion chamber walls
preserved. Max. L. 1.35.
Production:
Monaco (1999) suggested that the kiln was
used to fire architectural terracottas based on
its large rectangular size.
48. KILN C
Description:
Type: I?
Max. L. 4.72.
Date:
400-350 B.C.
49. KILN D
Description:
Type: I?
Preserved in a very fragmentary position.
Discussion:
The seven channels that Monaco mentions
represent an unprecedented internal
arrangement for a rectangular kiln. Perhaps
they represent different firings or phases.
Between the last period of use of Kiln
C and the use of the space as a cemetery
some time elapsed. The three kilns were not
contemporary. Each seemed to belong to a
separate phase.
Date:
4th cent. B.C. The later kilns continued to be
used into the 3rd cent. B.C.
Discussion:
Many pits are scattered around the
workshop. The ceramic refuse of the
workshop covered an area of 80m2.
51-53. ATHENS,
Lenormant Ave.
Bibliography:
Plate VI.12
* Baziotopoulou-Valavani 1994;
Zachariadou et al. 1992; Zachariadou et al.
1985; Karagiorga-Stathakopoulou 1988;
ADelt 40 (1985) 39-50, figs. 1, 4-5; BCH 112
(1988) 617; ARepLondon 1988-89, 13.
Seifert 1993, no. 50.
51. KILN A
Description:
Type: I?
Circular. 2.20-2.40. The combustion
chamber has survived with overlaying layers
of clay on the walls. Entrance from the south.
The stoking channel had a saddle roof made
of clay, stones, plinths, and tiles. The kiln
was destroyed by later graves.
52. KILN B
Description:
Type: I?
Circular. 2.00. There are six radiating
grooves through which the heat would
circulate. The eschara would have rested
upon the walls of the kiln since no central
support was excavated. The entrance is from
the south, similar to that of kiln A.
Kiln B is later than A (or at least it was built
later than kiln A, since it rests on dump A1
which is associated with Kiln A).
53. KILN C
Description:
Type: II?
345
54. ATHENS,
31, Monasteriou and Nafpliou Sts.
Matsouka Plot
Bibliography:
ADelt 42 (1987) 19-20; BCH 117 (1993)
771; Baziotopoulou-Valavani 1994, 47, n.
10; Monaco 2000, 234, pls. 38-9.
Description:
Type: I?
Circular. Max.L. 4.00. Max.W. 1.00.
Entrance from the southeast.
Discussion:
South of the kiln there is a basin (Dim.
3.80x0.71) perhaps for clay-settling. In the
upper layers of the area there were burnt
plinths, with a few stones and sherds from
the 5th cent. B.C. The area was later
disturbed by cemeteries.
55. ATHENS,
42, Monasteriou and Phaiakon Sts.
Bibliography:
ADelt 34 (1979) 20, plan on p. 21;
Baziotopoulou-Valavani 1994, 45; Monaco
2001, 234, pls. 38-39.
Description:
Type: I?
Circular. Preserved in a very fragmentary
condition.
Date:
4th cent. B.C.
346
Discussion:
The kiln was uncovered across an area where
remains (architecture and pottery) of
workshop were unearthed: cisterns, burnt
clay balls, test pieces, misfired pieces, and
tools. The area was later occupied by burials.
56. ATHENS,
Vouliagmenis Ave.
Bibliography:
BCH 120 (1996) 1124; Adevsmeuto" Tuvpo"
(daily press) 10.10.95; Parlama and
Stampolidis 2000, 129, plan 1;
Eleuqerotupiva (daily press) 26.5.96.
Description:
Type: I?
Combustion chamber preserved.
Circular (?). Total L. 2.50.
Date:
Second half of the 5th cent. B.C.
Discussion:
The excavations for the Athenian Metro
brought to light the existence of a necropolis
in use from Archaic to Paleochristian times:
eleven Classical tombs, traces of habitation,
and a ceramic kiln were revealed.
At the corner of Vouliagmenis Ave.
and Kassomouli St., in the ancient deme of
Alopeke. The site is near the modern church
of Agios Ioannis the Hunter. Nearby a
waterfall ran down from the hill. A major
road passes to the west of the workshop
leading from the Diomeiai Gates to Sounion.
347
Date:
4th cent. B.C.
Discussion:
The kiln and its adjacent rooms form part of
a larger workshop area which was excavated
further south in Mani Plot [ADelt 40 (1985)
62].
PELOPONNESE
58. KILN A
Description:
Type: II?
Rectangular. Combustion chamber
preserved, dug into the bedrock.
Max.Pres.Dim. 4.10x2.50 Probably it was
larger originally. A large baulk of bedrock
is left in the middle as support for the
perforated floor.
59. KILN B
Description:
Type: II?
Rectangular. Max.Dim. 2.75x1.50.
60. KILN A
Description:
Type: IIb
Combustion chamber, eschara, and stoking
channel preserved. Excavated in 1964.
Unpublished.
Rectangular. Dim. 4.60x4.20. Combustion
chamber H. 1.56. Clay plastering on walls,
Th. 0.02. On the wall and flat ceiling,
towards the southern end of the firing
chamber the workman's finger strokes of
the last coating are preserved. The
combustion chamber was divided by a
central massive wall made of mud bricks
and chunks of poros limestone. It was lined
with terracotta plaques (0.41x0.41x0.08).
On top one or two layers of mudbrick;
eschara Th. 0.40; ventholes arranged
symmetrically in a row; total of twelve
ventholes in each row ( 0.08-0.09).
Distance between rows: 0.33-0.39. The
firing chamber was delimited by baked
brick walls to the west and east. Walls
plastered over with clay (0.2 thick).
Stoking corridors extend northward, and
were partially excavated. Western corrido:r
Pres.L. 1.56. Eastern corridor: Pres.L. 0.45.
Both have vault roofing. Upper Int.W.
348
61. KILN B
Description:
Type: II?
Rectangular. Partially preserved.
62. KILN C
Description:
Type: I?
Combustion chamber preserved in M17;
dug into bedrock. Excavated in 1977.
Unpublished.
Circular. Combustion chamber walls
vitrified. No remains of central support or
eschara. Entrance from the northwest.
Date:
Mid-4th cent. B.C. (Miller 1975)
Discussion:
The upper layers were filled with carbon,
ash, and burnt pottery and have some
intrusive Byzantine pottery. A few
rooftiles recovered from the fill included
an antefix. The almost complete absence of
pottery and the tile separators point to the
conclusion that the kiln was used probably
exclusively for tile production. At the
northern area of the kiln, a red layer
probably represents a fallen mudbrick wall.
Based on the stratigraphical
correlation between the layers surrounding
the kiln and the neighboring northern wall
of the Xenon, it is suggested that the
circular kiln was built into the layers,
which accumulated following the
construction of the Xenon (Nemea
excavation notebook M17, p. 155).
The kiln seems to have been
renovated at least twice based on the
presence of two floors. The earlier floor
consisted of a layer of bluish-gray charrel
earth. The later floor is a layer of white,
plastered mud material. The layer beneath
the floor consists of brownish red, fairly
hard earth and extends to the northwest.
(Nemea excavation notebook M17, p. 163).
Plate V.6
349
64-65. CORINTHIA,
ANCIENT CORINTH
Bibliography: Plates II.13-14, V.6, VI.2-6
* Corinth excavation notebooks nos.
140, 141. Both kilns unpublished.
Roebuck 1995; Corinth VII.III, 205,
Deposit 26 (Well C, Tile Works); Heiden
1987; H.S. Robinson, "Corinth as a
center for the manufacture of
architectural terracottas." Acta Centri
Historiae Terra Antiqua Balcanica, I
(1986) 41-56; C. Roebuck, "Some
aspects of urbanization in Corinth."
Hesperia 41 (1972) 96-127; S.S.
Weinberg, "Terracotta sculpture at
Corinth." Hesperia 26 (1957) 289-319;
S.S. Weinberg, "A cross section of
Corinthian antiquities." Hesperia 17
(1948) 197-241, pls. 87-88; Orlandos
1955, figs. 41-42; O. Broneer, Ancient
Corinth. A Guide to the Excavations,
1960; O. Walter, "Archologische
Funde. Griechenland." AA 1940, 204-6;
Seifert 1993, no. 55; Belsch et al. 1963,
11, GZ; Cook 1966, 66, G13.
64. KILN A
Description:
Type: IIb
West kiln. Combustion chamber, forecourt
and eschara preserved; dug into bedrock.
Rectangular. Dim. W. 2.70. Pres.L. 3.70;
combustion chamber divided into two long
corridors (called hypocausts by the
excavator), by a solid central baulk. L. of
hypocausts: 2.90. Parts of the eschara with
fourteen holes preserved.
Date:
Date of construction: 5th cent B.C.
Period of use: downdated to 300-250 B.C.
(by Merker 1988). Unfortunately no fill
ascribed definitely to the kiln's period of
use was found during the excavation. The
only stratigraphical help for dating is the
group of skyphoi dating to the 4th cent.
B.C. which were found near the bottom of
the forecourt of the kiln. Archaeomagnetic
dating: 400-300 B.C. (Belsch et al. 1963
consider this date "fair," i.e., fairly
reliable).
Discussion:
The West kiln was made by digging a
rectangular pit out of the bedrock. In the
center a baulk of soil was left to divide the
two hypocausts and support the eschara.
Against the eastern, western, and southern
sides of the pit, walls made of bricks and
rooftiles were constructed.
A homogeneous loose fill of many
brick fragments and pieces of vitrified clay
probably represents the destroyed upper
part of the kiln. No fill of its period of use
was found inside the kiln.
Remains of fourteen vent holes have
been preserved. Each row had six holes but
it is difficult to estimate the total number
of rows, since we are uncertain of the total
length of the kiln. The preserved level on
350
65. KILN B
Description:
Type: IIb
East kiln. Combustion chamber, eschara
and forecourt preserved, dug into the
bedrock.
Rectangular. Overall dimensions (incl.
forecourt): 15.50x5.30. Kiln Dim. L.
7.50, W. 5.50. Combustion chamber
divided into two corridors by a baulk of
soil, Pres.D. 1.80. The sides of the walls
were made of tile fragments, mostly
slipped, and courses of bricks (Dim.
0.42x0.31x0.07-0.09) with layers of clay
between them. The courses alternate with
bricks set flat and bricks set on their
sides. The walls were heavily vitrified
and they gradually slope towards the
interior to form arches. At the northern
end of the western corridor the beginning
of a vault which would have arched the
351
352
353
Production:
Due to the paucity of pottery sherds, the
excavator attributed its function to the
firing of architectural terracottas. Later
sherds of Roman date were interpreted by
the excavator as intrusive.
Date:
Late 4th-early 3rd cent. B.C
67. KILN A
Description:
Type: Ia
Combustion chamber, supporting wall of
the eschara, and lower parts of the firing
chamber were preserved.
Combustion chamber: 0.75. H. 0.40.
Support Wall: H. 0.23; W. 0.06; Stoking
channels L. 0.60, W. (at kiln mouth) 0.30.
H. (at kiln mouth) 0.20.
68-72. KILNS B-F
Remains of those were found during
excavation.
The remains of at least six kilns were
identified under the South Stoa at Olympia.
Minimal information was retained.
354
355
CENTRAL GREECE
75. AETOLIA, THERMON
Bibliography:
Rhomaios 1916.
Seifert 1993, no. 60; Davaras 1980, 125, n.
60.
Description:
Type: II?
Trapezoidal. Dim. 5.60x1.90 (one side), 2.50
(the other side). A central rectangular pillar
made of bricks and clay. Inadequately
described by excavator.
Date:
Thought to be Classical or generally earlier
than Hellenistic, since many monochrome
pottery sherds were found. The reasons for
such dating are very vague to be reliable.
Description:
Type: Uncertain
Unknown shape. Only fragments of
ventholes of the kiln preserved. No
dimensions given.
Production:
Mainly cooking wares, lopades, chytrae,
lids.
Date:
Late 5th-4th cent. B.C.
Discussion:
Large masses of clay were found in the
vicinity as well as considerable
quantities of misfired cooking ware so
that the surveyor believed that the kiln's
main production was cooking ware.
Keller (1985, 208-12) believes
that the kiln perhaps supplied cooking
pots for a small community in the
immediate vicinity which consisted of
one tower and two structures. The
workshop was located near a small
stream. At the opposite side of the bay,
to the northwest, there is a good clay
source.
Description:
Type: I?
Small circular kiln.
Bibliography:
ADelt 44 (1994) 345.
Bibliography:
Keller 1985, site no. 112, pp. 152, 208-12.
Description:
Type: II?
Combustion chamber, only partially
excavated.
356
81. KILN B
79. MAGNESIA, DEMETRIADA
Bibliography:
ADelt 45 (1990) 198, pls. 95b-c; BCH 120
(1996) 1211.
Description:
Type: I?
Combustion chamber, central column support,
stoking pit preserved, dug into the ground
Circular. 0.70(?). Central column ( 0.20).
Total L. (combustion chamber and stoking
pit): ca. 1.50.
Discussion:
Skyphos bases, black-glazed sherds with
stamped decoration and a lamp, all Classical
in date, were found in this plot (in addition to
a few Hellenistic walls) and are considered to
be the products of this kiln.
Abutting the kiln to the west there was a
floor of beaten earth and pebbles. Near the
kiln there was also a pit filled with porphyry
shells, tiles, and sherds.
80-81. MAGNESIA,
VELESTINO-PHERAI,
Admetou St., Kogouli Plot
Bibliography:
ADelt 42 (1987) 258; BCH 117 (1993) 834.
80. KILN A
Description:
Type: I?
Combustion chamber and stoking channel
preserved.
Pear-shaped. 1.40. Combustion chamber
walls, Pres.H. 0.60. Made of clay mixed with
sherds, tile fragments and pebbles. Total
length: 3.30. Entrance from the southwest.
Description:
Type: I?
Combustion chamber, only partially
excavated.
Pear-shaped. Entrance from the
southwest.
Date:
5th cent. B.C.
Discussion:
The kilns are located on the hill
Kastraki, north-northeast of the
Hypereia Fountain. The distance
between them is five meters. In the area
a Middle Helladic tomb was excavated
as well as Hellenistic walls.
82. MAGNESIA,
VELESTINO-PHERAI
Dodou Plot
Bibliography:
ADelt 44 (1989) 220, pl. 134a; BCH 120
(1996) 1214; Doulgeri-Intzesiloglou
1997b.
Description:
Type: Ia
Combustion chamber, central support,
and stoking channel preserved
Pear-shaped. 1.50. Walls made of
upstanding stone plaques, tiles, and
clay, Pres.H. 0.40. The central columnar
support was made of small tile sherds
and clay plaques. Inside and all around
the combustion chamber were thick
layers of ash. Stoking channels L. 1.00.
Date:
Late Classical-Early Hellenistic.
Discussion:
The kiln intrudes through the Classical
destruction layer. It was later used as a
dumpsite and was filled with pottery sherds,
animal bones and other material. In the 2nd
cent. B.C. a building of uncertain function
occupied this site.
357
WESTERN GREECE
83. ARTA,
Corner of Ag. Vasileiou and Ag.
Theodoras Sts., Karassoula Plot
Bibliography:
Plate V.6
ADelt 43 (1988) 304-6; Hpeirwtikav
Cronikav 31 (1994) 17-29, esp. 22-3, pl.
25; BCH 119 (1995) 901.
Description:
Type: Ia
Combustion chamber preserved.
Circular. 1.30. Combustion chamber
walls plastered with clay.
Date:
Late 5th-early 4th cent B.C.
Discussion:
Many black-glazed and unglazed sherds
were found inside the kiln, some of them
wasters. Also associated with the kiln are
Corinthianizing and Atticizing skyphos
bases, and a few fragments of large
figurines. The workshop (whose other
features should be sought to the eastsoutheast) went out of use in the mid-4th
cent. B.C. The site was later occupied by a
Hellenistic house.
NORTHERN GREECE
84. KAVALA, AMPHIPOLIS
Bibliography:
D. Lazaridis, " jAnaskafaiv kaiv e[reunai
jAmfipovlew"." PAE 1973, 43-54, folded plan
G, pl. 59a; PAE 1974, 58-64.
Description:
Type: II?
Partially excavated; part of the eschara
preserved.
Trapezoidal. Pres.Dim. 4.20-4.35(western
side) x 2.85(eastern side). Central
rectangular wall as support W. 0.27.
Ventholes 0.09-0.12. At the center of the
86. KILN A
Description:
Type: Ia
The combustion chamber and the stoking
channel were preserved.
Pear-shaped. Upper Pres. 2.00; Lower
1.65; Pres. H. 0.90m. The combustion
chamber is dug into bedrock; the walls
incline inwards, like the walls of a large
pithos. The kiln has a southward slope. Two
358
87. KILN B
Description:
Type: Ia
Combustion chamber and stoking channel
preserved, dug into bedrock.
Pear-shaped. Dim. 1.55x1.30. Combustion
chamber walls plastered with two layers of
clay mixed with straw. Large fingerprints
preserved. Th. 0.12. Pres.H. 0.88. Central
ellipsoidal support, Pres.H. 0.35. Made of
small bricks; eschara started at ca. 0.70 from
the floor of the combustion chamber. Parts of
the eschara were found in fills; eschara
supported by arches made bricks of two
sizes: a) of semicircular section, W. 0;19. L.
0.55. Th. 0.10. b) flat plaques, Pres.Dim. W.
0.24, Th. 0. 085. The ends of these plaques
88. KILN C
Description:
Type Ia?
Combustion chamber, supporting pillar and
arches preserved, lower part dug into
bedrock.
359
89. KILN D
At the northeastern part of the late Archaic
cemetery.
Description:
Type: II?
Combustion chamber, two supporting walls,
and eschara preserved.
Rectangular. Combustion chamber: max. L.
4.25. Max. W. 1.85. One free standing
support for the perforated floor vertical to the
stoking channel.
AEGEAN ISLANDS
90. THASOS, KERAMIDI
Date:
A general date from the 5th-3rd cent. B.C.
is assigned to the site.
Bibliography:
ADelt 39 (1984) 279-80; BCH 108 (1984)
880; ARepLondon 1983-84, 57;
ARepLondon 1984-85, 55.
Seifert 1993, no. 64.
Description:
Type: Uncertain
Only fragments of the perforated floor were
found.
Bibliography:
ADelt 45 (1990) 435-41; BCH 118 (1994)
836; S. Markoulaki, "Arcaiologikev"
eidhvsei"." Krhtikhv Estiva 4 (1991-93)
206-7.
Description:
Type: I?
Combustion chamber preserved.
Circular. 1.00.
Production:
Amphorae, lids for amphorae, and figurines.
Date:
4th cent. B.C.
Discussion:
Not only the kiln but also a deposit and a
92. KILN A
Description:
Type: Ie
Combustion chamber partially preserved
and partially subterranean.
Circular. Est. 2.30. The floor of the
combustion chamber is made of beaten
earth. Two irregular walls seem to have
360
93. KILN B
Description:
Type: I?
Kiln C. Combustion chamber partially
preserved.
Pear-shaped. Pres. Max. Dim. 2.20x1.00.
Figure-eight-shaped central support.
Est.Dim. 1.00x0.30. To the northwest, the
361
REFERENCES
_____________________________________________
ABBREVIATIONS
For journals I have adopted the abbreviations as they appear in
http://www.ajaonline.org/shared/pdfs/Instructions%20for%20Contributors.pdf,
except for the following
JOURNALS
AEMQ
EYPPO
ADelt
Archaeologikon Deltion
AEphem
Archaeologike Ephemeris
Ergon
PAE
MONOGRAPHS
Amphores grecques
362
REFERENCES
_____________________________________________
363
Archaeological Sciences
Archaeometry 94
Ateliers de potiers
REFERENCES
_____________________________________________
364
A v EllKer
B v EllKer
G v EllKer
D v EllKer
E v EllKer
Euboica
Kerameikav Ergasthvria
REFERENCES
_____________________________________________
365
TECNH
REFERENCES
_____________________________________________
Thasos
Thessalie
366
REFERENCES
_____________________________________________
367
REFERENCES
Adam, J.-P.
1994
Adam-Veleni, P.
1998
1999
Akamatis, I.M.
Phvline" mhvtre" aggeivw n apov thn Pevlla. Sumbolhv sth melevth th"
1993
ellhnistikhv" keramikhv". Dhmosieuvmata tou Arcaiologikouv Deltivou, no. 51.
Aqhvna.
Agricola G.
1912
"Geomagnetic intensity results for Greece and Crete for the first and second
millennia B.C. Comparison with Egypt, Cyprus and the eastern Mediterranean."
in Maniatis (ed.) 1989, 69-74.
Amyx, D.A.
1983
1988
Anderson, W.P.
1987
Andr, J.
1964
"La rsine et la poix dans l antiquit. Technique et terminologie." AntCl 33: 86-97.
Andreadaki-Chronaki, E.
1999
REFERENCES
_____________________________________________
368
Antonetti, Cl.
Les toliens. Image et religion. Paris.
1992
1989
Arnold, D.E.
1985
Attas, M.
1977
1983
Regional Ceramic Trade in Early Bronze Age Greece: Evidence from Neutron
Activation of Early Helladic Ceramics from Argolis and Korinthia. Unpublished
Ph.D. diss., McGill University.
Bakirtzis, C.
"Didymoteichon: un center de cramique postbyzantine." Balkan Studies 21:
147-53.
1980
Bakker, J.T.
1999
Balfet, H.
1965
1973
Battaglia, E.
1989
Baziotopolou-Valavani, E.
1994
Beatrice Annis, M.
1985
REFERENCES
_____________________________________________
Beazley, J.D.
1946
1971
Bech Gregersen, M. L.
1997
Behura, N.K.
1967a
1967b
Benson, J. L.
1989
Betancourt, P.
1985
1999
Vasilike Ware: An Early Bronze Age Pottery Style in Crete: Results of the
Philadelphia Vasilike Ware Project. Gteborg.
Biers, W.
1971
Biringuccio, V.
1977
Birmingham, J.
1967
Blakely-Westover, S.
1998
Blegen, C.W.
1937
369
REFERENCES
_____________________________________________
370
Blitzer, H.
1984
1990
Blmner, H.
1885-87
Technologie und Terminologie der Gewerbe und Knste bei Griechen und
Rmern. Reprint New York 1979.
Blyth, P.H.
1999
"The consumption and cost of fuel in hypocaust baths." in Roman Baths and
Bathing. Proceedings of the First International Conference on Roman Baths held
at Bath, England, 30 March-4 April 1992, edited by J. Delaine and D.E.
Johnston, 87-98. Portsmouth, Rhode Island.
Boardman, J.
1954
"Painted votive plaques and an early inscription from Aegina." BSA 49:
183-201.
1956
"Some Attic fragments: pot, plaque and dithyramb." JHS 76: 18-25.
Bookidis, N.
2000
"Corinthian terracotta sculpture and the temple of Apollo." Hesperia 69: 381-452.
Boss, M.
1997
Brijder, H.A.G.
1997
Brodie, N.
1997
"Nabada potters: masters in clay preparation or just plain clay importers." in 5th
European Meeting on Ancient Ceramics, 18th-20th October 1999. Abstracts, 17.
Athens.
Broneer, O.
1954
The South Stoa and its Roman Successors. Corinth I.V. Princeton.
REFERENCES
_____________________________________________
371
Bryant, G.F.
1978/9
Burford, A.
1969
1972
Burkhalter, F.
1990
Campbell, M.T.
1946
Carpenter, T.H.
1989
Carter, J.C.
1983
Casson, S.
1938
1951
"The modern pottery trade in the Aegean: further notes." Antiquity 85: 187-90.
Chadwick, J.
1973
Chapelot, J.
1975
Charleston, R.
1978
REFERENCES
_____________________________________________
372
Chourmouziades, G.
1977
" vEna eijdikeumevno ejrgasthvrio kerameikhv" sto Neoliqikov Dimhvni." AAA 10:
207-26.
Chrysostomou, P.
1994
Clark, J.E.
1995
Cockle, H.
1981
Coldstream, J.N.
1968
Greek Geometric Pottery. A Survey of Ten Local Styles and Their Chronology.
London.
Coleman, J.F.
1986
"The archaeological bitumen of Bahrain Iran. The Early Dilmun period (ca. 2200
B.C.) to the 16th century A.D. A problem of sources and trade." ArabAEpigr 9:
141-81.
Conophagos, C.
1974
1980
"A propos des vases en chaux: recherches sur leur fabrication et leur origine."
Palorient 5: 177-82.
REFERENCES
_____________________________________________
Cook, R.M.
1948
1951
1961
1984
"The Calke Wood kiln." in Ancient Greek and Related Pottery, 63-6.
1997
Corbett, P.E.
1965
Corder, P.
1957
Costello, J.G.
1997
"Brick and tile making in Spanish California with related old and new world
examples." in The Prehistory and History of Ceramic Kilns, 195-217.
Costin, C.L.
1991
"Ptolemaic kilns in the western Nile Delta." in Ancient Greek and Related
Pottery, 67-71.
Courbin, P.
1963
1966
Cracolici, V.
1998
Craddock, P.T.
1995
373
REFERENCES
_____________________________________________
374
Crosby, M.
1950
1957
"More fragments of mining leases from the Athenian Agora." Hesperia 26: 1-23.
"A curse tablet from the Industrial District near the Athenian Agora." Hesperia
67: 215-8.
Cuomo Di Caprio, N.
1971/72
1978/9
"Updraught pottery kilns and tile kilns in Italy in pre-Roman and Roman times."
ActPrHistA 9/10: 21-31.
1979a
"Pottery- and tile-kilns in south Italy and Sicily." in Roman Brick and Tile, 7395.
1979b
1981
1982
1984
"Pottery kilns on pinakes from Corinth." in Ancient Greek and Related Pottery,
72-82.
1985
1992a
1992b
1995
"Osservazioni tecniche sul tornio da vasaio nell antiquita." RdA 19: 145-52.
Dakaris, S.I.
1960
Davaras, C.
1973a
1973b
1980
Davidson, G.R.
1943
Day, P. L.
1989
De Caro, S.
1985
REFERENCES
_____________________________________________
375
"Les fours dits 'de potier' dans l' Orient ancient." Syria 49: 35-95.
Delorme, J.
1961
Demierre, B.
2000
Despoini, A.
1982
Deshayes, J.
1974
Diaz, M.
1966
Dinsmoor, W.B.
1921
"Attic Building Accounts IV. The Statue of Athena Promachos." AJA 25: 118-29.
Dix, B.
1982
"The manufacture of lime and its uses in the western Roman Provinces." OJA 1:
331-45.
Doulgeri-Intzesiloglou, A.
1990a
1990b
1992
1994
1997a
1997b
Drews, G.
1978/9
REFERENCES
_____________________________________________
376
Dufa, B.
1996
Duhamel, P.
1973
1978/9
Duttenhfer, R.
1993
"Die Function and Stellung des ejrgasthrivou in der Getreide Verwaltung der
Ptolemerzeit." ZPE 98: 253-62.
El-Ashmawi, F.
1998
El-Fattah, A. A.
1998
Empereur, J.-Y.
1993
REFERENCES
_____________________________________________
1989b
Evely, R.D.G.
1988
1993
2000
Ewell, C.A.
2000
Fabbri, B.
1996
Faklaris, P.
1997
Farnsworth, M.
1960
1963
"Corinth and Corfu. A Neutron Activation study of their pottery." AJA 81: 45568.
Faraone, C.A.
1991
"The agonistic context of early Greek binding spells." in Magika Hiera. Ancient
Greek Magic and Religion, edited by C.A. Farraone and D. Obbink, 3-32.
Oxford.
Faure, P.
1973
Feyel, C.
1998
"La structure d'un groupe socio-conomique: les artisans dans les grands
sanctuaires grecs du IVe sicle." Topoi 8: 561-79.
377
REFERENCES
_____________________________________________
378
Fine, J.V.A.
1951
Fischer-Hansen, T.
2000
"Ergasteria in the western Greek world." in Polis and Politics. Studies in Ancient
Greek History. Presented to Mogens Herman Hansen on his Sixtieth Birthday,
August 20, 2000, edited by P. Flensted-Jensen, T. Heine Nielsen, and L.
Rubinstein, 91-120. University of Copenhagen.
Flach, G. L.
1981
"Les fours chaux l' poque gallo-romaine." Revue Archologique, Sites 12:
21.
Forbes, H.
1992
1993
"Ethnoarchaeology and the place of the olive in the economy of the southern
Argolid, Greece." in La production du vin et de l'huile en Mditerrane, 213-26.
"The queen of all trees: Preliminary notes on the archaeology of the olive."
Expedition 21: 37-47.
Forbes, R.J.
1964
1966
1972
Foster, G. M.
1967
Foxhall, L.
1993
Frnkel, M.
1886
Frayn, J.M.
1978
Flle, G.
1997
REFERENCES
_____________________________________________
379
Furtwngler, A.
Beschreibung der Vasensammlung im Antiquarium. 2 vols. Berlin.
1885
Galaty, M.L.
1999
Garlan, Y.
1986
Garfinkel, Y.
1987
1980
Geagan, H.
1970
Giannopoulou, M.
1996-7
1999
Gillis, C.
1988
Goldman, H.
1931
"A ground radar survey of medieval kiln sites in Suzu City, western
Japan." Archaeometry 36: 317-26.
REFERENCES
_____________________________________________
380
"Datations d' apports de tuiles et de briques sur les sites gallo-romains l'
aide de mesures archomagntiques opres sur d' abondants
chantillonnages." Revue d' archometrie 4: 153-84.
Gratsia, E.
1999
Gregoriadou, A.
1999
Hadji-Vallianou, D.
1995
1997
Hadjidaki, E.
1996
Hadjidakis, P.I.
2000
Hadjidimitriou, A.
1997
Hgg, R.
1990
"Kean miltos. The well-known iron oxides of antiquity." BSA 92: 359-71.
REFERENCES
_____________________________________________
1965
381
Hannestad, L.
1988
"The Athenian potter and the home market." in Symposium on Ancient Greek and
Related Pottery, 222-30.
Harold, M.R.
1960
Hasaki, E.
2000
2001
In prep.
Hayward, C.L.
1995
Heurtley, W.A.
1939
Homann-Wedeking, E.
1950
Hostetter, E.
1994
REFERENCES
_____________________________________________
382
Huber, S.
1991
"Un atelier de bronzier dans le sanctuaire d Apollon Ertrie." AntK 34: 13754.
1997
Hughes, D.
1983
Ignatiadou, D.
2000
Ioannou, I.
n.d.
Ivaschenko, Y.
1997
Jameson, M.H.
1969
"Excavations at Porto-Cheli and vicinity. Preliminary report, 1. Halieis 196268." Hesperia 38: 311-42.
Janke, D.M.
1989
Jeffery, L. H.
1990
The Local Scripts of Archaic Greece: A Study of the Origin of the Greek
Alphabet and its Development from the Eighth to the Fifth Centuries. Revised
edition with a supplement by A.W. Johnston. Oxford.
Jena Painter
1996
REFERENCES
_____________________________________________
383
Jones, J.E.
1991
Jones, R.E.
1986a
1986b
1993
"Pottery as evidence for trade and colonisation in the Aegean Bronze Age: the
contribution of scientific techniques." in Wace and Blegen, 11-7.
Jordan, D.S.
2000
"A personal letter found in the Athenian Agora." Hesperia 69: 91-103.
Kakavoyiannis, E.
1984
"Paragwghv moluvbdou apov liqarguvrou sthn Ellhnistikhv Rovdo." AAA 17: 12440.
Kalogeropoulou, A.
1970
Kalogirou, A.
1997
Karagiorga, T.
1971
Karagiorga-Stathakopoulou, T.
1988
Karayianni, E.
1984
Kardulias, P.N.
2000
REFERENCES
_____________________________________________
384
Kardos, J. et al.
1985
Karivieri, A.
1996
Kehrberg, I.
1982
Keller, D.R.
1985
Keramopoulos, A.D.
1909
1911
1996
"A study of ancient roof tiles found in Pella, Greece." Material Research
Society Symposium Proceedings 123: 117-22.
Killebrew, A.
1996
"Pottery kilns from Deir-el-Balah and Tel Miqne-Ekron." in Retrieving the Past.
Essays on Archaeological Research and Methodology in Honor of G. W. van
Beek, edited by G.D. Seger, 135-62. Winona Lake.
Kingery, W.D.
1997
REFERENCES
_____________________________________________
Klein, J.
1972
Kleiner, D.E.E.
1986
1992
Korres, G.S.
1971
Kotsakis, K.
1983
Kovacheva, M.
1989
Kretschmer, F.
1953
IV. Bericht ber die Ausgrabungen in Olympia. 1940 und 1941. Berlin.
Kurtz, D.C.
1985a
1985b
Lacovara, P.
1985
Horoi. Poletai Records. Leases of Public Lands. The Athenian Agora XIX.
Princeton.
385
REFERENCES
_____________________________________________
Lambrinoudakis, V.K.
1988
Lapatin, K.D.S.
1997
Lauter, H.
Die gesellschaftliche Stellung des bildenden Knstlers in der griechichen
Klassik. Mit einem Exkurs: Paradeigmata. Erlangen.
1974
Leach, J.
1957
Lemonnier, P. (ed.)
1993
Lemos, A.A.
1997
Le Ny, F.
1988
Lilimbaki-Akamati, M.
1993
1997
Liritzis, Y.
1984
Lohmann, H.
1993
386
REFERENCES
_____________________________________________
"Arcaiologikev" evreune" sthn periochv tou kavstrou tou Platamwvna 19981999." AEMQ 13: 435-64.
London, G.A.
1987a
1987b
1989a
1989b
1991a
1991b
2000a
2000b
2000c
Longacre, W.A.
1991
Loomis, W. T.
1998
Lorber, F.
1979
387
REFERENCES
_____________________________________________
388
Lupack, S.
1999
MacGillivray, J.A.
"Pottery workshops and the Old Palaces in Crete." in The Function of the
Minoan Palaces. Proceedigns of the Fourth International Symposium at the
Swedish Institute in Athens 10th-16th June 1984, edited by R. Hgg and N.
Marinatos, 273-9. Stockholm.
1987
Maniatis, Y.
1984
1981
"A pigment roasting kiln: Its characterisation and use." in Color Conference held
in Thessaloniki in April 2000. Abstract.
Marketou, T.
1999
"Ergasthvrio porfuvra" sthn povlh th" Rovdou." in Rovdo" 2400 crovnia. H povlh
th" Rovdou apov thn ivdrushv th" mevcri thn katavlhyh apov tou" Touvrkou" 1523,
Rovdo" 24-29 Oktwbrivou 1993. Praktikav dieqnouv" episthmonikouv sunedrivou
Vol. 1, 243-52. Athens.
Martin, R.
1965
REFERENCES
_____________________________________________
389
1973
1987
Marwitz, H.
1960
Mattingly, D. J.
1988
1993
Mattusch, C. C.
1975
1977
"Bronze and iron-working in the area of the Athenian Agora." Hesperia 46: 34079.
1980
1988
"The Berlin foundry cup: the casting of Greek bronze statuary in the early fifth
century B.C." AJA 84: 435-44.
Greek Bronze Statuary from the Beginnings through the Fifth Century B.C.
Ithaca and London.
Mau, A.
1910
Mavriyannaki, C.
1972
Mayes, P.
1961
1962
Mazarakis-Ainian, A.
1998
REFERENCES
_____________________________________________
390
McDonald, B.R.
1981
"The emigration of potters from Athens in the late fifth century B.C. and its
effect on the Attic pottery industry." AJA 85: 159-68.
McLoughlin, B.
1993
Merritt, B.D.
1936
"H keramikhv th" neoliqikhv" kai th" Prwvimh" Epochv" tou Calkouv apov to
Mavndalo." AEMQ 11:157-64.
Mertens-Horn, M.
1978
Michaelidis, P.
1993
Miller, S.G.
1990
Mingazzini, P.
1954
Misailidou-Despotidou, V.
1998
Momigliano, N.
1986
Monaco, M.C.
1999
2000
Moore, A.M.T.
1995
"The inception of potting in western Asia and its impact on economy and
society." in The Emergence of Pottery. Technology and Innovation in Ancient
Societies, edited by W.K. Barnett and J.W. Hoopes, 39-53. Washington and
London.
Morgan, C.H.
1942
REFERENCES
_____________________________________________
Morris, C.
1995
Mller, D.
1974
Handwerk und Sprache. Die sprachlichen Bilder aus dem Bereich des
Handwerks in der griechischen Literatur bis 400 v. Chr. Beitrge zur
klassischen Philologie Heft 51. Meisenheim am Glan.
Mylonas, G.E.
1929
1959
Neesen, L.
1989
Nenna, M.-D.
1998
Nicholson, P. T.
1995
1997
1989
Nicklin, K.
1971
391
REFERENCES
_____________________________________________
392
Niemeier, W. D.
1997
Nijboer, A.J.
1998
Noble, J.V.
1988
Nordquist, G.
1995
Who made the pots? Production in the Middle Helladic society." in Politeia.
Society and State in the Aegean Bronze Age, Proceedings of the 5th International
Aegean Conference University of Heidelbrg, Archologisches Institut 10-13
April 1994. Aegaeum 12. Edited by R. Laffineur and W.-D. Niemeier, 201-7.
Lige.
1997
"Male craft and female industry in the Aegean Bronze Age." in TECNH,
533-7.
Oakley, J.
1999
Olson, S.D.
1991
Orlandos, A.
1966
Papadopoulos, J.K.
1989
1992
1994
"Early Iron Age potters' marks in the Aegean." Hesperia 63: 437-507.
REFERENCES
_____________________________________________
1996
393
"The original Kerameikos of Athens and the sitting of the Classical Agora."
GRBZ 37: 107-28.
"Drawing circles. Experimental archaeology and the pivoted multiple brush." AJA
102: 507-29.
Papadopoulos, S.
1999a
1994 `
1995
1997a
"Oi proi>storikoiv oikismoiv sto Mavndako kai sto Arcontikov Pevlla"." AEMQ
10: 143-58.
1997b
1998
Papagiannopoulou, A.G.
1991
Papanikola-Bakirtzi, D.
1987
1999
Papathanassopoulos, G.
1971
Papousek, D.
1989
The City under the City. Finds from the Excavations of the Metro at Athens.
Athens.
REFERENCES
_____________________________________________
394
Payne, H.
1931
Peacock, D.P.S.
1979
1982
Pea, J.T.
1992
"Raw material use among nucleated industry potters: the case of Vasanello,
Italy." Archaeomaterials 6: 93-122.
Penttinen, A.
2001
Berbati between Argos and Corinth: Excavations at Pyrgouthi in 1995 and 1997
from the Early Iron Age to the Early Roman Period. Ph.D. diss., Stockholm
University.
Perdrizet, P.
1908
Pernice, E.
1897
"Die korinthischen Pinakes im Antiquarium der kniglichen Museen." JdI 12: 9-48.
Perreault, J.Y.
1990
Petrasch, J.
1986
Petridis, P.
1997
1998
REFERENCES
_____________________________________________
395
Petropoulos, M.
1999
Philipp, H.
1968
Platon, L.
1993
Platon, N.
1979
1980
Preka-Alexandri, K.
1992
Psaropoulou, B.
1986
1996
Raubitschek, A.E.
1949
Rayet, O.
1880
Rhodes, D.
1968
Rhomaios, K.A.
1916
REFERENCES
_____________________________________________
396
Rice, P.M.
1987
1997a
"Introduction and overview." in The Prehistory and History of Ceramic Kilns, 110.
1997b
1984
1997
The Prehistory and History of Ceramic Kilns. Proceedings of the Prehistory and
History of Ceramic Kilns, held at the 98th Annual Meeting of the American
Ceramic Society in Indianapolis, Indiana, April 14-17, 1996. The American
Ceramic Society. Westernville.
Richter, G.M.
1923
The Craft of Athenian Pottery: An Investigation of the Technique of Blackfigured and Red-figured Athenian Vases. New Haven.
Rieth, A.
1960
Rizza, G.
2000
Citta Cretese dell' "Eta Oscura" sulla Patela di Prinias." in Un ponte fra l'Italia e la
Grecia: atti del Simposio in onore di Antonino Di Vita, Ragusa, 13-15 febbraio
1998, 39-54, Padova.
Rizza, G., D. Palermo, and F. Tomasello
1992
Roberts, J.P.
1963
Robertson, M.
1982
Robinson, D.M.
1938
Robinson, O.
1984
REFERENCES
_____________________________________________
Rodziewicz, M.
1998
Roebuck, C. (ed.)
1969
The Muses at Work: Arts, Crafts and Professions in Ancient Greece and
Rome. Cambridge Mass. London.
Roebuck, M.
1995
Rossetto, P.C.
1973
Rothenberg, B. (ed.)
1990
Rotroff, S.I.
1982
1984
Rouet, P.
2001
Rouse, W.H.D.
1902
Roux, G.
1961
L' architecture de l' Argolide aux IVe et IIIe sicles avant J.-C. Paris.
Rudolph W.
1988
397
REFERENCES
_____________________________________________
398
Rutter, J.
1993
Sagui, L.
2000
Salmon, J.B.
1984
Sanders, G.D.R.
1995
1999
"A Late Roman bath at Korinth. Excavations in the Panayia field, 1995-1996."
Hesperia 68: 441-80.
Sapouna-Sakellaraki, E.
1998
Saraswati, B.
1967
Schallin, A.M.
1997
"The Late Bronze Age potters workshop at Mastos in the Berbati valley." in
Production and the Craftsman, 73-88.
Scheibler, I.
1979
1984
1986
1995
REFERENCES
_____________________________________________
399
Schreiber, T.
1999
Schwandner, E.L.
1988
Seifert, M.
1993
"Pottery kilns in mainland Greece and on the Aegean islands." RdA 17: 95105.
2001
Sherratt, S.
1980
1982
"Patterns of contact: manufacture and distribution of Mycenaen pottery, 14001100B.C." in Interaction and Acculturation in the Mediterranean Proceedings of
the 2nd International Congress of Mediterranean Pre-and Protohistory,
Amsterdam, 19-23 November 1980, edited by J.G.P. Best and N.W. de Vries,
179-95. Amsterdam.
Sillar, B.
2000
Skibo, J.M.
1992
Sparkes, B.
1962
1975:
1991
1996
The Red and the Black Studies in Greek Pottery. London and New York.
REFERENCES
_____________________________________________
400
"Archaeointensity results from two ceramic kilns from N. Greece." Journal of the
Balkan Geophysical Society 3: 67-72.
Stark, B.L.
1985
Stevens, C.
1992
"Refractory bricks for lime kilns: small-scale production using local raw
materials." in LIME. Lime and Other Alternative Cements, edited by N. Hilll, S.
Holmes, and D. Mather, 150-5. London.
Stillwell, A.N.
1948
1952
Stissi, V.
1999a
Swan, V.G.
1984
REFERENCES
_____________________________________________
"Provenance studies of Roman African Red Slip Ware using Neutron Activation
Analysis." Archaeometry 38: 245-55.
Tekkk-Biken, B.
2000
"Pottery production in the Troad: ancient and modern Akky." Near Eastern
Archaeology 63: 94-101.
Thellier, E.
1981
Themelis, P.
1975
Thiersch, H.
1939
Thomas, R.
1981
Thompson, H.A.
1940
Tiverios, M.
1995
1998
Tomasello , F.
1996
401
REFERENCES
_____________________________________________
402
Tournavitou, I.
1986
1992
Torrence, R.
1986
Truil, R.
1992
Triantaphyllidis, P.
2000a
2000b
Tsaravopoulos, A.
1986
Tsenoglou, E.N.
1991
"Workshop attributions for some Late Minoan III East Cretan larnakes." in
TEXNH, 473-9.
Tsoumis, G.
1999
Uscatescu, A.
1994
REFERENCES
_____________________________________________
403
Valavanis, P.
1990
" vEna arcaivo ergasthvrio sthn epochv ma"." Arcaiologiva 36: 31-41.
1997
Valladas, H.
1977
Ta krhtikav aggeiva tou 19ou kai 20ou ai. Ekdovsei" Mouseivou Krhtikhv"
Eqnologiva", Bovroi Hravkleio.
Vekris, E.
1998
Velenis, G.
1996
Verfenstein, C.D
2001
"Craftsmen's dedications and the Penteskoufia plaques." AJA 105: 303. Abstract.
Vitelli, K.
1993
1994
1995
1997
1999
REFERENCES
_____________________________________________
von Bothmer, D.
1987
von Raits, H. A.
1964
von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff, U.
1929
Vossen, R.
1984
Voyatzoglou, M.
1974
1984
Wade, M. F.
2001
Warren, P.
1972
Washburn, O.M.
1906
Webster, T.B.L.
1968
"Another red figure pelike with a hole on its side." Klearchos 10: 65-8.
Wertime, T.A.
1983
404
REFERENCES
_____________________________________________
405
Whitbread, I.
1995
"The Early Iron Age kiln at Torone, Greece: geological diversity and the
definition of control groups." in Archaeological Sciences 1995, 88-91.
Whitehead, D.
1986
The Demes of Attica from 508/7 to ca. 250 BC. A Political and Social
Study. Princeton.
Wiencke, M.H.
1970
1989
Williams, C. K.
1977
1976
Winter, A.
1957
1959
Winter, N.
1993
Greek Architectural Terracottas from the Prehistoric to the End of the Archaic
Period. Oxford.
Wiseman, J.
1978
Wood, B.G.
1990
The Sociology of Pottery in Ancient Palestine. The Ceramic Industry and the
Diffusion of Ceramic Style in the Bronze and Iron Ages. Journal for the Study of
the Old Testament. Supplement Series 103. Sheffield.
REFERENCES
_____________________________________________
406
1990
Wright, R.P.
1991
1995
Yegl, F.
Baths and Bathing in Classical Antiquity. The Architectural History
Foundation and the Massachusetts Institute of Archaeology. New York.
1992
Young, R.S.
1951
Youni, P.
1996
Zerner, C.
1993
"New perspectives on trade in the Middle and Early Late Helladic periods on the
mainland." in Wace and Blegen, 39-56.
Zikos, N.
1998
"Swstikhv anaskafikhv evreuna sto Mikrov Pistov nomouv Rodovph"." AEMQ 12:
41-52.
Zimmer, G.
1982
1990
REFERENCES
_____________________________________________
Ziomecki, J.
1958
1975
407
408
APPENDIX I:
LIST OF BRONZE AGE
AND HELLENISTIC THROUGH BYZANTINE KILNS
Explanatory Note:
In this list I adopted the same way of presentation of entries as I did in the Catalogue.
First chronologically, Bronze Age (EBA-MBA-LBA). Hellenistic, Hellenistic-Roman, Roman,
Late Antique, Byzantine and Undated. Within each period the entries are arranged
geographically: Attica, Peloponnese, Central Greece, Western Greece, Northern Greece, and
Aegean Islands. Within Attica, I start with Athens and each site is listed alphabetically according
to the name of the street. Outside Athens, the sites are listed alphabetically. Within the other
regions, the sites are entered alphabetically according to their prefectures and again alphabetically
within each prefecture. The numbers after some sites (e.g. Athens, Corinth, Pherai) denote
separate workshops that have been excavated in the same site. Kilns believed to belong to the
same workshop are labeled A, B, etc. For example, Pherai-7A-C (Stamouli-Bolia Plot) is the
seventh recorded workshop in the area and it has three kilns.
CAT.NO. REGION
PREFECTURE
SITE
STREET/PLOT
TYPE
409
SUBTYPE DIMENSIONS
SPECIFIC DATE
REFERENCES
BA
EH
ADelt 45 (1990) 317-8; M. Pappa, "Egkatavstash Epochv" Calkouv sto Poluvcrono." AEMQ 4 (1990) 385-98, pl. 3, fig. 5.
BA
MH
S. Marinatos, From the silent earth. AAA 3 (1970) 14, 61-6; 53, 344; id ., "Anaskafhv Maraqwvno"." PAE 1970, 5-20; R. Hope-Simpson and
O.T.P.K. Dickinson, A Gazetteer of Aegean Civilization in the Bronze Age I , 1979, 219.
no. 94
Northern
Chalkidiki
Polychrono
no. 95
Attica
Attica
Marathon-1
no. 96
Peloponnese
Argolis
Lerna-1A
2.70x1.80
BA
MH
J.L.Caskey, Excavations at Lerna, 1955. Hesperia 25 (1956) 159, pl. 41a; K. Syriopoulos, Proistorikoiv Politismoiv th" Peloponnhvsou, 1964,
306, XI 19; P.P. Betancourt, G.H. Myer and J.B. Rutter, The ceramic petrography of Early Helladic pottery from Lerna. in Kolb and Lackey 1988,
73-80; Davaras 1980, 126, n. 61.
no. 97
Peloponnese
Argolis
Lerna-1B
2.50x1.60
BA
MH
no. 98
Peloponnese
Argolis
Lerna-1C
BA
MH
no. 99
Peloponnese
Argolis
Lerna-1D
BA
MH
Argolis
Mycenae-1
Unknown
BA
MH
Arcadia
Sparta-3A
Aetos Hill A
BA
MH
ADelt 35 (1980) 153-7, fig. 3, pl. 57a; BCH 105 (1981) 794, fig. 41; ARepLondon 1980-81, 16-19, fig. 23; H. W. Catling, Excavation and study at
the Menelaion, Sparta 1978-1981. Lakwnikaiv Spoudaiv 5 (1982) 28-43.
Arcadia
Sparta-3B
Aetos Hill B
BA
MH
Vouratsa Plot
BA
MH
A. Tuor and C. Krause, Eretria, Ausgrabungen 1979-1980." AntK 1979-1980, 70-87; A. Tuor, "Eine bronzezeitliche Siedlung auf Eub a. AntK 24
(1981) 83-4. BCH 105 (1981) 847; BCH 106 (1982) 597, figs. 119-121; ARepLondon 1983-84, 16.
Phasi
1.6-1.7
PERIOD
Unknown
no. 103
Central
Euboea
Eretria-3
no. 104
Central
Phocis
Kirrha-1A
1.30x0.90
BA
MH
ADelt 44 (1989) 205-6, plan 10, fig. 122a. EUPPO 2 (1998) 99; D. Skorda, H arcaiologikhv evreuna sthn periochv tou kovlpou th" Iteva" kai tou
Galaxidiouv. in Galaxivdi kai periochv, apov thn arcaiovthta mevcri shvmera, 29-30 Septembrivou 2000 . Forthcoming.
no. 105
Central
Phocis
Kirrha-1B
1.20x1.00
BA
MH
no. 106
Central
Phocis
Kirrha-1C
2.3
BA
MH
no. 107
Central
Trikala
Zarkos
BA
MH
Achaia
Aigeira-1
BA
LH
no. 109
Peloponnese
Argolis
Asine A
BA
LH III
O. Frdin and A.W.Persson, The Excavations at Asine 1, 1922-1930, 1938, 67, 74-7, figs. 53, 66; B. Sjoberg, "Two possible Late Helladic kilns at
Asine: a research note." in Production and the Craftsman, 89-100.; Davaras 1973, 80, C6; id ., 1980, 121, n. 23.
no. 110
Peloponnese
Argolis
Asine B
BA
LH III
Petromagoula
CAT.NO. REGION
PREFECTURE
SITE
STREET/PLOT
TYPE
410
SUBTYPE DIMENSIONS
PERIOD
SPECIFIC DATE
REFERENCES
no. 111
Peloponnese
Argolis
Berbati-2
BA
LH
AA 53 (1938) 533, fig. 11; A. Akerstrm, "Das mykenische Tpferviertel in Berbati in der Argolis." in Bericht ber den VI. Internationalen
Kongress fr Archologie, Berlin, 21.-26. August 1939, 1940, 296-8, pl. 20a; The same article in English translation: A Mycenaen potters factory
at Berbati near Mycenae. Atti e Memorie del 1o Congresso internazionale di micenologia, 1968, 48-53; A. Akerstrm, Berbati II: The Pictorial
Pottery, 1987; Schallin 1997; Lupack 1999; Cook 1961, 65, D2; Belsch et al. 1963, 11, HB; Davaras 1973, 80, C3; id ., 1980, 115, n.3.
no. 112
Peloponnese
Argolis
Tiryns A
BA
LH III
H. Dragendorff, "Tiryns. Vorbericht ber die Grabungen." AM 38 (1913) 328-54, esp. 339-40, figs. 3-4; G. Karo, Fhrer durch Tiryns,1934, 33; U.
Jantzen, Fhrer durch Tiryns, 1975, 40. H. Mommsen et al. "Neutron Activation Analysis of Mycenaean pottery from the Argolis: the search for
reference groups." Archaeometry Symposium 26 (1988) 165-71; Cook 1961, 65, D7; Davaras 1973, 80, C5; id., 1980, 117, n. 5.
no. 113
Peloponnese
Argolis
Tiryns B
II
1.60x1.50
BA
LH III
C.K. Kilian et al. "Ausgrabungen in Tiryns 1978/1979." AA 1981, 149-256, figs. 14, 18.
no. 114
Peloponnese
Messenia
Pylos
1.5
BA
LH IIIB
no. 115
Central
Boeotia
Thebes-1
BA
LH III
A. Keramopoulos, "H oijkiva tou' Kavdmou." AEphem 1909, 56-122, esp. 61; id., "A iJ biomhcanivai kaiv to; ejmpovrion tou' Kavdmou." AEphem 1930, 2958; A.W. Persson, New Tombs at Dendra near Midea, 1942, 148, 151; S. Symeonoglou, The Topography of Thebes, 1985, 223; Cook 1961, 65, D6;
Davaras 1973, 79, C1; id. , 1980, 124, n. 49.
no. 116
Central
Magnesia
Dimini
Tsakanika Plot
3.95
BA
LH III
V. Adrimi-Sismani, Newvtera dedomevna twn ereunwvn gia thn arcaiva Iwlkov. Praktikav episthmonikhv" sunavnthsh" 1 2/05 /1993, 1994, 17-44;
id., Mukhnai>kovv" keramikovv" klivbano" sto Dimhvni. H Perifevreia tou Mukhnaikouv kovsmou. Praktikav A v dieqnouv" diepisthmonikouv
sumposivou, Lamiva 25-29 Septembrivou , 2000, 131-42; ADelt 47 (1992) 222-3, plan 1; BCH 118 (1994) 734.
no. 117
Central
Magnesia
Pherai-4
Saranti Plot
1.6
BA
LH IIIC
no. 118
Aegean
Cyclades
Naxos A
Metropoli A
1.5
BA
LH
ADelt 39 (1984) 295; ADelt 49 (1994) 668; Ergon 1983; Ergon 1984; PAE 1983, 304-11; PAE 1994, 167-9; pls. 104-105.
no. 119
Aegean
Cyclades
Naxos B
Metropoli B
BA
LH
no. 120
Aegean
Cos
Cos A
BA
MM
ADelt 35 (1980) 547-57; ADelt 36 (1981) 409, fig. 309a; ADelt 39 (1984) 329-35; BCH 113 (1989) 675; BCH 115 (1991) 931.
no. 121
Aegean
Cos
Cos B
BA
LM IA
no. 122
Aegean
Crete-Herakleiou
Phaistos-2
Palace
2.5
BA
MM IIB
D. Levi, Annuario 27-28 (1965-66) 351-4, figs. 43-44; D. Levi, Festos e la Civilt Minoica, 1976, 327, figs. 494, 510; E. Pernier and L. Banti, Il
Palazzo minoico di Festos II, 215-7, figs. 134-135, 285 (at point 53); Belsch et al. 1963; Davaras 1980, A6; Evely 2000, no. 3.
no. 123
Aegean
Crete-Lasithiou
Zakros-1
II
3.00x2.00
BA
MM IIIA
Ergon 1973, 106-7, fig. 100; Ergon 1975, 180-1, figs. 179-180. PAE 1973, 137-66; PAE 1974 , 344. N. Platon, 1979, 1980; L. Platon, The
Workshops and Working Areas of Minoan Crete. The Evidence of the Palace and Town of Zakros for a Comparative Study, 1988.
C. Blegen and M. Lang, The Palace of Nestor, Excavations at 1959-Part I." AJA 64 (1960) 113-64, esp. 155, pl. 40.9; C. Blegen, The Palace of
Nestor at Pylos, I, 1966, 18-19; C. Blegen et al., The Palace of Nestor at Pylos in Western Messenia, III, 1973, 19, figs. 44, 45, 307; Galaty 1999,
26; Cook 1961, 65, D5; Davaras 1973, 80, C7; id. , 1980, 122, no. 29.
A. Batziou-Eustathiou, Mukhnai>kov" kerameikovv" klivbano". in Thessalie, 215-24; BCH 117 (1993) 834; BCH 119 (1995) 922.
CAT.NO. REGION
PREFECTURE
SITE
STREET/PLOT
TYPE
411
SUBTYPE DIMENSIONS
PERIOD
SPECIFIC DATE
BA
MM IIIA-LM IA
REFERENCES
S. Marinatos, Anaskafaiv megavrou Baqupevtrou Krhvth" PAE 1951, 258-72; id. Anaskafaiv ejn Baquvpetrw. PAE 1952, 592-610; id ., "
Anaskafaiv ejn Baquvpetro Krhvth"" PAE 1953, 298; id., Anaskafaiv ejn Lukavstrw kai; Baquvpetro, PAE 1955, 306-10, pl. 115 S. Hood, The
Minoans, 1971, 83; J. Driessen and J. Sakellarakis, The Vathypetro complex. Some observations on its architectural history and function. in R.
H gg (ed.), The Function of the Minoan Villa. Proceedings of the Eighth International Symposium at the Swedish Institute at Athens, 6-8 June
1992, 1997, 63-77; Davaras 1973, 79, A3; id ., 1980, 124, n. 27; Momigliano 1986, 78, no.6; Evely 2000, no. 10.
no. 124
Aegean
Crete-Lasithiou
Vathypetro
II
no. 125
Aegean
Crete-Lasithiou
Zou
II
2.30x1.70
BA
MM IIIB
N. Platon "Anaskafaiv eij" th;n perioch' Shteiva"." PAE 1952, 630-48. N. Platon, "Anaskafhv minwikh'" ajgroikiva" eij" Zou' Shteiva"." PAE 1956, 23240; ARepLond 1956, 23; Fasti Arch. 17 (1962) 2258; Cook 1961, D8; Davaras 1973, 79, A2; id ., 1980, 20, n. 16; Momigliano 1986, 77, no. 3-4.
no. 126
Aegean
Crete-Chania
Stylos
2.3
BA
LM IIIB
* Davaras 1973b; Momigliano 1986, 77, no. 7; ARepLondon 1974-75, 28; Betancourt 1985, pl. 15.7; Evely 2000, no. 8.
no. 127
Aegean
Crete-Herakleiou
Kato Gouves A
Koukouvitaki Plot A
BA
LMIIB
no. 128
Aegean
Crete-Herakleiou
Kato Gouves B
Koukouvitaki Plot B
1.1
BA
LMIIB
no. 129
Aegean
Crete-Herakleiou
Kato Gouves C
Koukouvitaki Plot C
II
2.20x1.10
BA
LMIIB
no. 130
Aegean
Crete-Herakleiou
Kato Gouves D
Koukouvitaki Plot D
BA
LMIIB
no. 131
Aegean
Crete-Herakleiou
Kato Gouves E
Koukouvitaki Plot E
0.9
BA
LMIIB
no. 132
Aegean
Crete-Herakleiou
Kato Gouves F
Koukouvitaki Plot F
1.5
BA
LMIIB
no. 133
Aegean
Crete-Herakleiou
Kato Gouves G
Koukouvitaki Plot G
0.80x0.60
BA
LMIIB
no. 134
Aegean
Crete-Herakleiou
Kato Gouves H
Koukouvitaki Plot H
1.19x0.88
BA
LMIIB
no. 135
Aegean
Crete-Herakleiou
Kato Gouves J
Koukouvitaki Plot J
BA
LMIIB
no. 136
Aegean
Crete-Herakleiou
Kato Gouves I
Koukouvitaki Plot I
BA
LMIIB
no. 137
Aegean
Crete-Herakleiou
Kato Gouves K
Koukouvitaki Plot K
BA
LMIIB
no. 138
Aegean
Crete-Herakleiou
Knossos-3
SE of the palace
II
BA
LM II
BCH 82 (1958) 785, fig. 12; ARepLondon 1957, 24; Fasti Arch. 12 (1957) 2019; Cook 1961, 65, D3-4; Belsch et al. 1963, 10, GA; Davaras 1980,
120, n. 13; Evely 2000, no. 16.
no. 139
Aegean
Crete-Herakleiou
Knossos-4A
Stratigraphical Museum
A
II
1.80x1.00
BA
LM IA-IB
* ADelt 33 (1978) 360-1; ADelt 34 (1979) 386; ARepLondon 1979-1980, 49; ARepLondon 1981, 73-92; D.H. Tarling and W.S. Downey,
"Archaeomagnetic study of the Late Minoan kiln 2. Stratigraphical Museum Extension, Knossos." BSA 84 (1989) 345-52; Evely 2000, nos. 11-13.
no. 140
Aegean
Crete-Herakleiou
Knossos-4B
Stratigraphical Museum
B
II
2.94x1.45
BA
LM IA-IB
CAT.NO. REGION
PREFECTURE
SITE
STREET/PLOT
TYPE
Stratigraphical Museum
C
Chalara
412
SUBTYPE DIMENSIONS
PERIOD
SPECIFIC DATE
REFERENCES
BA
LM IA-IB
1.2
BA
LMIB-LMIIIC
9.00x3.40
BA
BA
no. 141
Aegean
Crete-Herakleiou
Knossos-4C
no. 142
Aegean
Crete-Herakleiou
Phaistos-3
no. 143
Aegean
Crete-Herakleiou
Agia Triadha
II
no. 144
Aegean
Crete-Herakleiou
Metropoli, Gortyna
II
e?
no. 145
Aegean
Crete-Lasithiou
Kommos
II
5.40x4.10
BA
no. 146
Aegean
Crete-Lasithiou
Achladia
2.00x1.75
BA
N. Platon, "Anaskafhv periochv" Shteiva"." PAE 1952, 630-48; Davaras 1980; Evely 2000, no. 7.
no. 147
Aegean
Crete-Lasithiou
Zakros-2
2.00x1.35
BA
N. Platon, "Anaskafaiv periochv" Shteiva"." PAE 1952, 646, fig. 25; Krhtikav Cronikav 6 (1952) 479;
Cook 1961, 65, D1; Davaras 1980; Momigliano 1986, 78, no. 8.
no. 148
Aegean
Crete-Lasithiou
Mochlos A
2.00x0.70
BA
LM IB
J. S. Soles, A community of craft specialists at Mochlos. in TECNH, 425-31; BCH 118 (1994) 813; BCH 119 (1995) 1019.
no. 149
Aegean
Crete-Lasithiou
Mochlos B
BA
LM IB
no. 150
Aegean
Crete-Lasithiou
Palaikastro
2.68
BA
no. 151
Aegean
Crete-Lasithiou
Kavousi
2.13x1.88
BA
LMIIIC
ADelt 42 (1987) 581; P.L. Day, W.D.E. Coulson, and G.C. Gesell, "A new Early Iron Age kiln at Kavousi, Crete." RdA 13 (1989) 104-6; G.C.
Gessel, L.P. Day, and W.D.E. Coulson, Excavations at Kavousi, Crete, 1987. Hesperia 57 (1988) 279-302; Evely 2000, no. 8a.
no. 152
Aegean
Crete-Rethymno
Armenoi
Unknown
BA
LM III
ADelt 29 (1973-74) 917-21; ADelt 31 (1976) 368-372; ADelt 33 (1978) 378-81; ADelt 35 (1980) 512-17; Myers et al. 1992.
no. 153
Aegean
Crete-Lasithiou
Zakros-2A
Unknown
BA
LM IA
no. 154
Aegean
Crete-Lasithiou
Zakros-2B
Unknown
BA
LM IA
no. 155
Attica
Attica
Athens-13A
Euangelismos A
II
3.00 x 3.00
Hellenistic
2nd century BC
no. 156
Attica
Attica
Athens-13B
Euangelismos B
II
3.00 x 3.00
Hellenistic
2nd century BC
no. 157
Attica
Attica
Athens-13C
Euangelismos C
3.00 x 3.00
Hellenistic
2nd century BC
no. 158
Attica
Attica
Athens-14
Kerameikos-5
II
3.00x3.00
Hellenistic
ADelt 23 (1968) 31; K. Gebauer, "Ausgrabungen in Kerameikos." AA 1936, 210, fig. 21T.
no. 159
Attica
Attica
Athens-15
Makriyianni
Hellenistic
no. 160
Attica
Attica
Athens-16A
II
3.00x1.75
Hellenistic
ADelt 35 (1980) 24-41; ADelt 36 (1981) 5-7, 10-25, pls. 16 b-c; BCH 113 (1989) 587-88.
no. 161
Attica
Attica
Athens-16B
II
3.00x1.80
Hellenistic
Unknown
LM I A-IB
D. Levi, "L' abitato di Festos in localit Chalara." ASAtene 45/46 (1967/68), 55-166, esp. 71; Davaras 1980, 120, n. 14; Momigliano 1986, 78, no.10;
Evely 2000, no. 6.
*Shaw et al. 2001; Shaw et al. 1997; BCH 118 (1994) 831; BCH 119 (1995) 1026; BCH 120 (1996) 1335.
CAT.NO. REGION
PREFECTURE
SITE
STREET/PLOT
TYPE
413
SUBTYPE DIMENSIONS
PERIOD
SPECIFIC DATE
REFERENCES
no. 162
Attica
Attica
Attica
Spata 1
1.2
Hellenistic
G. Steinhauer, " vEreuna cwvrou aerodromivou Spavtwn." PAE 1982, 122-126. Mesogaia 2000.
no. 163
Attica
Attica
Attica
Spata 2
1.5
Hellenistic
no. 164
Attica
Attica
Attica
Spata 3
II
2.5
Hellenistic
no. 165
Attica
Attica
Attica
Spata 4
II
5.00x2.50
Hellenistic
no. 166
Attica
Attica
Attica
Spata 5
II
8.50x6.20
Hellenistic
no. 167
Peloponnese
Achaia
Patras-1
Germanou and K.
Palaiologou St.
Hellenistic
no. 168
Peloponnese
Argolis
Argos-2
Agros Piteros
Hellenistic
no. 169
Peloponnese
Argolis
Argos-3
Unknown
Hellenistic
no. 170
Peloponnese
Argolis
Argos-4
N. Kourou St.
Unknown
Hellenistic
Paliopyrgos, N. and B
Blogiari Plot
Unknown
Hellenistic
ADelt 35 (1980) 111-20; ADelt 36 (1981) 107-14; BCH 113 (1989) 602, 709, fig. 11.
Unknown
II
no. 171
Peloponnese
Argolis
Argos-5
no. 172
Peloponnese
Elis
Ancient Elis-2A
II
6.80x6.80
Hellenistic
no. 173
Peloponnese
Elis
Ancient Elis-2B
II
3.80x3.60
Hellenistic
no. 174
Peloponnese
Elis
Ancient Elis-2C
2.8
Hellenistic
no. 175
Central
Boeotia
Elateia
Hellenistic
no. 176
Central
Boeotia
Pyrgaki/Palaiomazi
Unknown
Hellenistic
no. 177
Central
Euboea
Eretria-4
Hellenistic
no. 178
Central
Euboea
Karystos-2
Site no. 57
Hellenistic
no. 179
Central
Karditsa
Metropoli-1
Papadouli Plot
Hellenistic
ADelt 40 (1985) 195, pl . 68b; BCH 115 (1991) 893, fig. 72.
no. 180
Central
Karditsa
Metropoli-2
Kotoula Plot
Hellenistic
no. 181
Central
Larissa
Krannon A
II
5.70x5.70
Hellenistic
Late Hellenistic
no. 182
Central
Larissa
Krannon B
II
3.00x3.00
Hellenistic
Late Hellenistic
II
Unknown
0.59
CAT.NO. REGION
PREFECTURE
SITE
STREET/PLOT
TYPE
414
SUBTYPE DIMENSIONS
PERIOD
SPECIFIC DATE
REFERENCES
no. 183
Central
Locris
Atalante-1A
Karagiozi Rema A
Hellenistic
Unpublished.
no. 184
Central
Locris
Atalante-1B
Karagiozi Rema B
Hellenistic
Unpublished.
no. 185
Central
Locris
Atalante-2A
Kolomvrezos Plot A
3.50x3.10
Hellenistic
L. Lambropoulou, "Duvo keramikoiv klivbanoi sthn Atalavnth Lokrivdo"." AAA 16 (1983) 74-9; ADelt 35 (1980) 232-6; ADelt 36 (1981) 214-8; BCH
110 (1986) 708; BCH 113 (1989) 629; ARepLondon 1985-86, 41.
no. 186
Central
Locris
Atalante-2B
Kolomvrezos Plot B
5.85x4.10
Hellenistic
no. 187
Central
Locris
Atalante-3
Kioulafa Plot
Hellenistic
no. 188
Central
Magnesia
Pherai-5
Merminga Plot
Hellenistic
no. 189
Central
Magnesia
Pherai-6
Agrokosta Plot
(Avlagadia Area)
II
5.00x2.50
Hellenistic
ADelt 35 (1980) 269-73; ADelt 36 (1981) 249; BCH 113 (1989) 637; BCH 115 (1991) 891, fig. 69; BCH 117 (1993) 834; Doulgeri-Intzesiloglou
1990a, 1990b, 1992, 1994, 1997a, 1997b.
no. 190
Central
Magnesia
Pherai-7A
1.45
Hellenistic
2nd cent. BC
no. 191
Central
Magnesia
Pherai-7B
1.35
Hellenistic
2nd cent. BC
no. 192
Central
Magnesia
Pherai-7C
0.65
Hellenistic
2nd cent. BC
no. 193
Central
Phocis
Kassope
House 5
no. 194
Western
Arta
Papadates A
Ftelobryso-Deka Plot
no. 195
Western
Arta
Papadates B
Ftelovryso-Deka Plot
no. 196
Western
Arta
Arta-2
Sklivanitis Plot
Unknown
no. 197
Western
Ionian
Corfu-Figaretto A
Mikalef Plot A
no. 198
Western
Ionian
Corfu-Figaretto B
Mikalef Plot B
Hellenistic
2.3
Hellenistic
0.8
Hellenistic
Hellenistic
Hellenistic
* Kourkoumelis and Demesticha 1997; Preka-Alexandri 1992; * D. Kourkoumelis, Recherches Archologiques Corfu. Topographie, Questions
historiques. Amphores de Transport et Commerce Attique. Thse Aix-en-Provence, 1988; ADelt 38 (1983) 252-3; ADelt 40 (1985) 228-9; ADelt
42 (1987) 336-7; ADelt 43 (1988) 338-40; ADelt 44 (1989) 296; ADelt 45 (1990) 286; ADelt 46 (1991) 255; ADelt 47 (1992) 334; ADelt 50 (1995)
435-7; Ergon 1975, 77; Ergon 1982, 62; BCH 119 (1995) 893; Lang 1996, 129.
2.5
Hellenistic
CAT.NO. REGION
PREFECTURE
SITE
STREET/PLOT
TYPE
415
SUBTYPE DIMENSIONS
no. 199
Western
Ionian
Corfu-Figaretto C
Mikalef Plot C
no. 200
Western
Ionian
Corfu-Figaretto D
Mikalef Plot D
no. 201
Western
Ionian
Corfu-Figaretto E
Mikalef Plot E
no. 202
Western
Ionian
Corfu-Figaretto F
Mikalef Plot F
no. 203
Western
Ionian
Corfu-Figaretto G
no. 204
Western
Ionian
no. 205
Western
no. 206
PERIOD
SPECIFIC DATE
REFERENCES
Hellenistic
1.9
Hellenistic
1.15-1.35
Hellenistic
2.8
Hellenistic
Mikalef Plot G
1.10-1.30
Hellenistic
Corfu-Figaretto H
Mikalef Plot H
1.10-1.30
Hellenistic
Ionian
Corfu-Figaretto I
Mikalef Plot I
1.2
Hellenistic
Western
Ionian
Corfu-Figaretto J
Mikalef Plot J
1.60-1.92
Hellenistic
no. 207
Western
Ionian
Corfu-Figaretto K
Mikalef Plot K
Hellenistic
no. 208
Western
Ionian
Corfu-Figaretto L
Mikalef Plot L
1.4
Hellenistic
no. 209
Western
Ionian
Corfu-Figaretto M
Mikalef Plot M
0.8
Hellenistic
no. 210
Northern
Kozanis
Polymylos-1A
Hellenistic
ADelt 50 (1995) 568-9; "Via Egnatia. Ancient Greek cities along a restored Roman road." Minerva 11 (2000) 41-2.
no. 211
Northern
Kozanis
Polymylos-1B
Hellenistic
no. 212
Northern
Pella
Dion A
II
2.60x.3.00
Hellenistic
S. Pingiatoglou, " To ierov th" Dhvmhtra" sto Divon." AEMQ 10 (1996) 225-32.
no. 213
Northern
Pella
Dion B
II
3.60x3.60
Hellenistic
no. 214
Northern
Pella
Pella-2
South of Area I
Hellenistic
no. 215
Northern
Pella
Pella-3
South of Area I
II
Hellenistic
C. Makaronas, " Anaskafaiv Pevllh" 1957-1960." ADelt 16 (1960) Meletai 72-83, plan 2, pl. 50b; BCH 83 (1959) 702, fig. 20; ARepLondon 1958,
13, fig. 16.
no. 216
Northern
Pella
Pella-4
Area I
Unknown
Hellenistic
no. 217
Northern
Pella
Pella-5
Unknown
Hellenistic
M. Lilimbaki-Akamati, "Ierav th" Pevvlla"." in Povli" kai Cwvra sthn Arcaiva Makedoniva kai Qravkh. Mnhvmh D. Lazarivdh. Praktikav
arcaiologikouv sunedrivou Kabavla 9-11 Maivou 1986, 1990, 195-200.
CAT.NO. REGION
PREFECTURE
SITE
STREET/PLOT
TYPE
416
SUBTYPE DIMENSIONS
PERIOD
SPECIFIC DATE
REFERENCES
no. 218
Northern
Pella
Pella-6A
Tsagarli Plot A
Hellenistic
1st cent. BC
ADelt 48 (1993) 395, pls. 111 a-b; *Lilimbaki-Akamati 1993; BCH 120 (1996) 1242, figs. 164-5.
no. 219
Northern
Pella
Pella-6B
Tsagarli Plot B
1.7
Hellenistic
1st cent. BC
no. 220
Northern
Pella
Pella-6C
Tsagarli Plot C
1.7
Hellenistic
1st cent. BC
no. 221
Northern
Pella
Pella-6D
Tsagarli Plot D
1.2
Hellenistic
1st cent. BC
no. 222
Northern
Pella
Pella-6E
Tsagarli Plot E
2.5
Hellenistic
1st cent. BC
no. 223
Northern
Pella
Pella-6F
Tsagarli Plot F
II
3.5
Hellenistic
1st cent. BC
no. 224
Northern
Kavala
Amphipoli-2
2.8
Hellenistic
no. 225
Northern
Kavala
Thasos-3
Gounophia
Hellenistic
no. 226
Northern
Kavala
Thasos-4
Vamvouri-Ammoudia
Hellenistic
no. 227
Aegean
Cyclades
Amorgos-2
Minoa
Hellenistic
PAE 1984, pl. 194d; PAE 1986, 225, pl. 91a-b; PAE 1998, 163-88, plan 2; V. Pappa, "Apov thn ellhnistikhv keramikhv th" Minwva"." in
Ellhnistikhv kerameikhv apov to Aigaivo , 1994, 82-99; id. , "Ergasthvria paragwghv" megarikwvn skuvfwn sthn Amorgov." D V EllKer, 352-8. "Minwva
Amorgouv. Ellhnistikhv keramikhv apov thn tomhv sto bovreio toivco tou Gumnasivou." E v EllKer, 105-14.
no. 228
Aegean
Cyclades
Paros A
Skiada Plot A
2.5
Hellenistic
ADelt 41 (1986) 213; ADelt 42 (1987) 490-1, plan 1; ADelt 43 (1988) 490-1, plan 10; ADelt 47 (1992) 539-44, fig. 2; BCH 117 (1993) 878; BCH
118 (1994) 788; Zapheirophoulou 1992; Archeologia 299 (1994), 5; id ., Archeologia 300 (1994) 5-6. Y. Kourayos and P. Zapheiropoulou, "La
capitale antique de Paros." Archeologia 302 (1994), 36-43; Y. Kourayos, "Une exposition permanente Paros." Archeologia 311 (1995) 12.
no. 229
Aegean
Cyclades
Paros B
Skiada Plot B
0.75
Hellenistic
no. 230
Aegean
Cyclades
Paros C
Skiada Plot C
0.75
Hellenistic
no. 231
Aegean
Cyclades
Paros D
Skiada Plot D
Hellenistic
no. 232
Aegean
Cyclades
Paros E
Skiada Plot E
0.8
Hellenistic
no. 233
Aegean
Cyclades
Paros F
Skiada Plot F
1.85
Hellenistic
no. 234
Aegean
Cyclades
Tenos
Hellenistic
Whitbread 1995, 42; R. Etienne and J. Gautier, Recherches sur la ceramique de Tenos. Etude petrographique. in Rougemont, G. (ed.) Les
Cyclades: Materiaux pour une tude de geographie historique , 1993, 191-200, 204.
no. 235
Aegean
Dodekanese
Lemnos-1
Hellenistic
BCH 109 (1985) 830; ARepLondon 1980-81, 41; ARepLondon 1982-83, 50.
Unknown
Hephaisteia Sanctuary
CAT.NO. REGION
PREFECTURE
SITE
STREET/PLOT
TYPE
417
SUBTYPE DIMENSIONS
PERIOD
SPECIFIC DATE
REFERENCES
no. 236
Aegean
Dodekanese
Lemnos-2
Hephaisteia Sanctuary
Unknown
Hellenistic
no. 237
Aegean
Dodekanese
Lemnos-3
Hephaisteia Sanctuary
Unknown
Hellenistic
no. 238
Aegean
Dodekanese
Rhodes-2
Aphantou
Unknown
Hellenistic
no. 239
Aegean
Dodekanese
Rhodes-3
Charaki
Unknown
Hellenistic
no. 240
Aegean
Crete-Herakleiou
Knossos-5
Kephali Monastery
Hellenistic
Unpublished.
no. 241
Aegean
Crete-Rethymno
Eleutherna
Hellenistic
Krhtikhv Estiva 4 (1991-93) 247-63; T. Kalpaxis, "Ellhnistikov" klivbano" keramikhv" sthn arcaiva Eleuvqerna." in Kerameikavv Ergasthvria, 25760; T. Kalpaxis, A. Furtwngle, and A. Schnapp, Eleuvqerna, Tomeva" II, 2. vEna ellhnistikov spivti (Spivti A) sth qevsh Nhsiv, 1994, 178-82; N.
Tsatsaki, "Keramikhv apov evna ellhnistikov spivti sthn Eleuvqerna." E v EllKer, 45-51; BCH 118 (1994) 832.
no. 242
Attica
Attica
Argyroupoli
no. 243
Attica
Attica
Voula-2
Voula
no. 244
Peloponnese
Achaia
Patras-2
no. 245
Peloponnese
Argolis
Argos-6
Hypostyle Hall
no. 246
Central
Boeotia
no. 247
Central
no. 248
Marathonomachon St.,
Vouliagmeni Ave., and
Alimou Ave.
0.9
II
II
1.3
Hellen-roman
ADelt 42 (1987) 69-70; ADelt 44 (1989) 55-6; BCH 115 (1991) 845; BCH 117 (1993) 773; BCH 120 (1996) 1126.
Hellen-roman
Hellen-roman
Unknown
Hellen-roman
Akraifnio
Unknown
Hellen-roman
Boeotia
Aulis
II
Hellen-roman
Ergon 1956, 33-7; Ergon 1958, 53-60; Ergon 1959 24-31; Ergon 1960, 49-53; Ergon 1961, 48-51; PAE 1956, 94-104; PAE 1957, 45-51, fig. 60;
PAE 1959, 26-9, fig. 29; PAE 1960, 42-43, fig. 22; BCH 80 (1956) 297-8; BCH 81 (1957) 586-8; BCH 83 (1959) 683-7; BCH 84 (1960) 760-3;
BCH 85 (1961) 751-3; ARepLondon 1956, 15; ARepLondon 1958, 10; ARepLondon 1959, 13; ARepLondon 1960, 14; ARepLondon 1961, 12;
Leeskey 1980, 17; J. Travlos, "Trei" naoiv th" Artevmido"." in U. Jantzen (ed.), Neue Forschungen in griechischen Heilgtmern, 1976, 197-206;
Cook 1961, 67, J5.
Central
Euboea
Chalkis-1
Hellen-roman
no. 249
Northern
Florina
Philotas A-Ancient
Eordaia
II
2.30x2.00
no. 250
Northern
Florina
Philotas B-Ancient
Eordaia
II
no. 251
Attica
Attica
Athens-17
Aktaiou-EptahalkouHephaisteion Sts.
II
1.80x1.80
Roman
ADelt 40 (1985) 25-7, pl. 11c; BCH 116 (1992) 841, fig. 10.
no. 252
Attica
Attica
Athens-18
6-8, Aktaiou-Eptahalkou
Sts.
2.1
Roman
no. 253
Attica
Attica
Athens-19
Amalias St.
Roman
Papadimitriou Agros
Unknown
Unknown
1.9
Hellen-roman eHellenistic-Early Rom K. Moschakis, "O kerameikov" klivbano" K3 ston Filwvta Flwvrina"." AAA 16-18 (1996) 189-200; BCH 122 (1998) 850-1, fig. 158.
CAT.NO. REGION
PREFECTURE
SITE
STREET/PLOT
TYPE
418
SUBTYPE DIMENSIONS
PERIOD
SPECIFIC DATE
REFERENCES
Roman
Eleuqerotupiva (daily press) 26.5.96, 10.4.07, 11.4.97; BCH 122 (1998) 724.
1.2
Roman
1.80x1.40
Roman
Late Roman
AAA 1 (1968) 224-9; ADelt 24 (1969) 37-41; BCH 95 (1971) 819; Karivieri 1996.
II
2.50x2.50
Roman
Late Roman
II
Roman
Kerameikos-6
Roman
Athens-25A
Kerameikos-7A-Bau Y
II
Roman
Late Roman
U. Knigge and A. Rgler, "Die Ausgrabungen im Kerameikos 1986/1987." AA 1989, 80-99, plan 1, figs. 7-8; ARepLondon 1988-89, 11, fig. 5.
Attica
Athens-25B
Kerameikos-7B- Bau Y
II
Roman
Late Roman
Attica
Attica
Athens-25C
Kerameikos-7C- Bau Y
II
Roman
Late Roman
no. 263
Attica
Attica
Athens-25D
Kerameikos-7D- Bau Y
II
Roman
Late Roman
no. 264
Attica
Attica
Athens-25E
Kerameikos-7E- Bau Y
II
Roman
Late Roman
no. 265
Attica
Attica
Athens-25F
Kerameikos-7F- Bau Y
II
Roman
Late Roman
no. 266
Attica
Attica
Athens-25G
Kerameikos-7G- Bau Y
II
Roman
Late Roman
no. 267
Attica
Attica
Athens-25H
Kerameikos-7H- Bau Y
II
Roman
Late Roman
no. 268
Attica
Attica
Athens-25J
Kerameikos-7I- Bau Y
II
Roman
Late Roman
no. 269
Attica
Attica
Athens-25I
Kerameikos-7J- Bau Y
II
Roman
Late Roman
no. 270
Attica
Attica
Athens-26
Kerameikos-8 Pompeion
II
2.08x2.08
Roman
W. Zschietzschmann, "Einbauten im griechischen Pompeion." AM 56 (1931) 90-6; AA 1937, 185-6; W. Hoepfner, Das Pompeion und seine
Nachforgerbauten. 1976, 172, fig. 158; Cook 1961, 66, J1; Belsch et al. 1963, 11, HE.
no. 271
Attica
Attica
Athens-27A
II
1.20x1.20
Roman
W. Hoepfner, Das Pompeion und seine Nachforgerbauten. 1976, 173, figs. 185-9; Cook 1961, 66, J2.
no. 272
Attica
Attica
Athens-27B
Kerameikos-9B Propylon
of the Pompeion B
II
1.00x1.00
Roman
no. 273
Attica
Attica
Athens-28
no. 254
Attica
Attica
Athens-20
Asomaton Square
no. 255
Attica
Attica
Athens-21
16-18, Athanassiou
Diakou St.
no. 256
Attica
Attica
Athens-22A
5, Demophon St. A;
Ifantidou Plot
II
no. 257
Attica
Attica
Athens-22B
5, Demophon St. B;
Ifantidou Plot
no. 258
Attica
Attica
Athens-23
no. 259
Attica
Attica
Athens-24
no. 260
Attica
Attica
no. 261
Attica
no. 262
Kerameikos-10 West of
Sacred Gate
Unknown
Unknown
Roman
CAT.NO. REGION
PREFECTURE
SITE
STREET/PLOT
TYPE
SUBTYPE DIMENSIONS
419
PERIOD
SPECIFIC DATE
REFERENCES
no. 274
Attica
Attica
Athens-29-1
Kotzia Square 1
II
Roman
Karagiorga-Stathakopoulou 1988; ADelt 43 (1988) 22-9; BCH 110 (1986) 676; BCH 111 (1987) 525; BCH 112 (1988) 617; BCH 119 (1995) 854.
no. 275
Attica
Attica
Athens-29-2
Kotzia Square 2
II
Roman
no. 276
Attica
Attica
Athens-29-3
Kotzia Square 3
II
Roman
no. 277
Attica
Attica
Athens-29-4
Kotzia Square 4
II
Roman
no. 278
Attica
Attica
Athens-29-5
Kotzia Square 5
II
Roman
no. 279
Attica
Attica
Athens-29-6
Kotzia Square 6
II
Roman
no. 280
Attica
Attica
Athens-29-7
Kotzia Square 7
II
Roman
no. 281
Attica
Attica
Athens-29-8
Kotzia Square 8
II
Roman
no. 282
Attica
Attica
Athens-29-9
Kotzia Square 9
II
Roman
no. 283
Attica
Attica
Athens-29-10
Kotzia Square 10
II
Roman
no. 284
Attica
Attica
Athens-29-11
Kotzia Square 11
II
Roman
no. 285
Attica
Attica
Athens-29-12
Kotzia Square 12
II
Roman
no. 286
Attica
Attica
Athens-29-13
Kotzia Square 13
II
Roman
no. 287
Attica
Attica
Athens-29-14
Kotzia Square 14
II
Roman
no. 288
Attica
Attica
Athens-29-15
Kotzia Square 15
II
Roman
no. 289
Attica
Attica
Athens-29-16
Kotzia Square 16
II
Roman
no. 290
Attica
Attica
Athens-29-17
Kotzia Square 17
II
Roman
no. 291
Attica
Attica
Athens-29-18
Kotzia Square 18
II
Roman
no. 292
Attica
Attica
Athens-29-19
Kotzia Square 19
II
Roman
no. 293
Attica
Attica
Athens-29-20
Kotzia Square 20
II
Roman
no. 294
Attica
Attica
Athens-29-21
Kotzia Square 21
II
Roman
CAT.NO. REGION
PREFECTURE
SITE
STREET/PLOT
TYPE
420
SUBTYPE DIMENSIONS
PERIOD
SPECIFIC DATE
REFERENCES
no. 295
Attica
Attica
Athens-29-22
Kotzia Square 22
II
Roman
no. 296
Attica
Attica
Athens-29-23
Kotzia Square 23
II
Roman
no. 297
Attica
Attica
Athens-29-24
Kotzia Square 24
II
Roman
no. 298
Attica
Attica
Athens-29-25
Kotzia Square 25
II
Roman
no. 299
Attica
Attica
Athens-29-26
Kotzia Square 26
II
Roman
no. 300
Attica
Attica
Athens-29-27
Kotzia Square 27
II
Roman
no. 301
Attica
Attica
Glyfada
no. 302
Attica
Attica
Marathon-2
no. 303
Attica
Attica
Marathon-3
no. 304
Attica
Attica
Marathon-4
no. 305
Attica
Attica
Marathon-5
no. 306
Attica
Attica
Eleusis
Perikleous St.
Unknown
II
Roman
ADelt 29 (1973-74) 79, plan 34; ADelt 42 (1987) 34-49; BCH 117 (1993) 782.
II
Roman
Unknown
Roman
no. 307
Attica
Attica
Megara-1
42, Konstran.
Palaiologou St.
no. 308
Attica
Attica
Megara-2
no. 309
Attica
Attica
Megara-3
Sahtouri St.
no. 310
Attica
Attica
Megara-4
no. 311
Attica
Attica
Roman
ADelt 35 (1980) 67, fig. 3; BCH 113 (1989) 588; ARepLondon 1988-89, 16.
Roman
Roman
Roman
Roman
Unknown
Roman
Unknown
Roman
Skala Oropou-2A
Unknown
Roman
Late Roman
Unknown
Roman
Late Roman
Unknown
Roman
Imperial
Imperial
no. 312
Attica
Attica
Skala Oropou-2B
no. 313
Peloponnese
Achaia
Aigeira-2
no. 314
Peloponnese
Achaia
Aigio-2
4, Messinezzi St.
Unknown
Roman
no. 315
Peloponnese
Achaia
Aigio-3
8, Polychroniadou St.
Unknown
Roman
CAT.NO. REGION
PREFECTURE
SITE
no. 316
Peloponnese
Achaia
Kallithea
no. 317
Peloponnese
Achaia
Patras-3
no. 318
Peloponnese
Achaia
no. 319
Peloponnese
no. 320
STREET/PLOT
TYPE
421
SUBTYPE DIMENSIONS
SPECIFIC DATE
REFERENCES
Roman
Roman
ADelt 44 (1989) 127; BCH 110 (1986) 195; BCH 120 (1996) 1175.
Patras-4
Danielidos St.
Roman
Achaia
Patras-5
Peloponnese
Achaia
Patras-6
Ileias St.
no. 321
Peloponnese
Achaia
Patras-7
no. 322
Peloponnese
Achaia
Patras-8A
no. 323
Peloponnese
Achaia
Patras-8B
no. 324
Peloponnese
Achaia
Patras-8C
PERIOD
Unknown
Roman
Unknown
Roman
Imperial
Unknown
Roman
1.5
Roman
ADelt 43 (1988) 151, plan 5, 154; BCH 119 (1995) 887, figs. 29-30.
1.3
Roman
1.5
Roman
II
3.80x2.10
Roman
no. 325
Peloponnese
Achaia
Patras-8D
no. 326
Peloponnese
Achaia
Patras-9
0.6
Roman
no. 327
Peloponnese
Achaia
Patras-10
1.20x1.00
Roman
209-211, Trion
Nauarhon and Maizonos
St.
0.72
Roman
0.82
Roman
ADelt 33 (1978) 86; BCH 110 (1986) 695; BCH 120 (1996) 1174; ARepLondon 1985-86, 35.
no. 328
Peloponnese
Achaia
Patras-11
no. 329
Peloponnese
Achaia
Patras-12A
no. 330
Peloponnese
Achaia
Patras-12B
Roman
no. 331
Peloponnese
Achaia
Patras-12C
Roman
no. 332
Peloponnese
Achaia
Patras-12D
Roman
no. 333
Peloponnese
Achaia
Pharai
no. 334
Peloponnese
Achaia
Sihaina A
no. 335
Peloponnese
Achaia
Sihaina B
no. 336
Peloponnese
Achaia
Sihaina C
Vasiliko
Roman
Roman
Roman
Roman
Unknown
CAT.NO. REGION
PREFECTURE
SITE
STREET/PLOT
TYPE
no. 337
Peloponnese
Arcadia
Gortys
no. 338
Peloponnese
Argolis
Argos-7
no. 339
Peloponnese
Argolis
Argos-8
Karmoyiannis Plot
no. 340
Peloponnese
Argolis
Berbati-3
no. 341
Peloponnese
Argolis
Lerna-2
no. 342
Peloponnese
Corinthia
Ancient Corinth-3
no. 343
Peloponnese
Corinthia
Ancient Corinth-4
Kokkinovrysi
II
no. 344
Peloponnese
Corinthia
Ancient Corinth-5
II
no. 345
Peloponnese
Corinthia
Ancient Corinth-6
Theater Area
no. 346
Peloponnese
Elis
Epitalion
no. 347
Peloponnese
Elis
Ancient Olympia-4
no. 348
Peloponnese
Messenia
no. 349
Central
no. 350
SUBTYPE DIMENSIONS
SPECIFIC DATE
REFERENCES
Unknown
Roman
Unknown
Roman
ADelt 44 (1989) 94, plan on p. 95, pl. 62c; BCH 113 (1989) 602; 709, fig. 11
Roman
Roman
J.L. Caskey, Excavations at Lerna, 1954. Hesperia 24 (1955) 42, pl. 20c.
Roman
Roman
ADelt 20 (1965) 144 figs. 129a-b; BCH 89 (1965) 689-91, figs. 1-2. Ancient Corinth Excavation Notebooks 276, 277; M. Sakelarriou and N.
Faraklas, Corinthia-Ciconea , 1971, 147.
Roman
Roman
II
2.00x2.00
PERIOD
Roman
II
Dima Plot
422
2.20x2.20+
Unknown
Unknown
4.5
Roman
South of Palestra
II
3.50x2.90
Roman
Kunze and Schleif 1944, 24-5, fig. 12, pl. II; Cook 1961, 67, J9.
Messene
Roman
Late Empire
Euboea
Chalkis-2
Pneumatikos Plot
II
Roman
Central
Euboea
Chalkis-3
II
Roman
no. 351
Central
Euboea
Chalkis-4
Lilantion St.
II
1.67x0.72
Roman
Late Roman
no. 352
Central
Euboea
Eretria-5
II
2.00x1.50
Roman
no. 353
Central
Karditsa
Metropoli-3
Goutzamani Plot
1.43
Roman
no. 354
Central
Karditsa
Philia A
II
2.80x2.60
Roman
no. 355
Central
Karditsa
Philia B
II
2.00x2.00
Roman
A. Sampson, "To koroplastikov ergasthvrio th" Calkivdo"." ADelt 35 (1980) Meletai 135-66; id., "Arcaiva Calkivda I. Topografiva, rumotomiva."
Anqrwpologikav Cronikav 1 (1986) 7-66; id ., "Ena kerameikov ergasthvrio sth Calkivda sthn perivvodo th" Rwmaiokrativa"." Anqrwpologikav
Cronikav 2 (1987) 73-131; ARepLondon 1982-83, 11; Leeskey 1980, 61.
PAE 1974, 34-46; Ergon 1974, 17-24, fig. 27; Ergon 1975, 26-35, fig. 27: Ergon 1976, 14-25, fig. 13; ARepLondon 1974-5, 4-5; ARepLondon 197576, 5; ARepLondon 1978, 17; Leeskey 1980, 63.
CAT.NO. REGION
PREFECTURE
SITE
STREET/PLOT
TYPE
423
SUBTYPE DIMENSIONS
PERIOD
SPECIFIC DATE
REFERENCES
no. 356
Western
Ionian
Corfu
Anemomylos
Unknown
Roman
no. 357
Western
Thesprotia
Thesprotia
Gitani
Unknown
Roman
no. 358
Northern
Chalkidiki
Stratoni A
II
Roman
no. 359
Northern
Chalkidiki
Stratoni B
Roman
no. 360
Northern
Chalkidiki
Nea Roda-Tripiti
Unknown
Roman
no. 361
Northern
Chalkidiki
Paliouri-Kassandras A
II
Roman
Imperial
ADelt 38 (1983) 277; BCH 108 (1984) 803; BCH 114 (1990) 792; Misailidou-Despotidou 1998.
no. 362
Northern
Chalkidiki
Paliouri-Kassandras B
Roman
Imperial
no. 363
Northern
Kilkis
Europos
II
2.45x2.35
Roman
Late Roman
no. 364
Northern
Veria
Aliakmon
II
4.00x3.75
Roman
A. Hondroyianni-Metoki, "Aliavkmwn 1997. Stoiceiva apov thn epifaneiakhv evreuna kai thn anaskafhv duvo nekrotafeivw n, th" UEC kai PES."
AEMQ 11 (1997) 31-42, fig. 4.
no. 365
Northern
Kozanis
Polymylos-2A
II
2.85x2.75
Roman
G. Karamitrou-Medessidi and M. Vatali, "Poluvmhlo" Kozavnh" 1998." AEMQ 12 (1998) 481-97; G. Karamitrou-Medessidi and M. Vatali,
"Poluvmhlo" Kozavnh" 1999." AEMQ 13 (1999) 369-98.
no. 366
Northern
Kozanis
Polymylos-2B
II
3.40x3.30
Roman
no. 367
Northern
Kozanis
Polymylos-2C
II
3.80x3.40
Roman
no. 368
Northern
Pieria
Methone
Roman
no. 369
Northern
Thessaloniki
Thessaloniki-1
no. 370
Northern
Thessaloniki
Nea Philadelpheia
no. 371
Aegean
Chios
Chios-2
Ancient City-Choremi
Plot
Unknown
Roman
Tsaravopoloulos 1986; BCH 109 (1985) 831; BCH 110 (1986) 732; ARepLondon 1986-87, 53; ARepLondon 1988-89, 91.
no. 372
Aegean
Chios
Chios-3
Christou Plot
Unknown
Roman
BCH 109 (1985) 831; BCH 110 (1986) 732; ARepLondon 1986-87, 53; ARepLondon 1988-89, 91.
no. 373
Aegean
Chios
Chios-4
Spartounda
no. 374
Aegean
Dodekanese
Rhodes-1
New Cemetery-1
no. 375
Aegean
Dodekanese
Rhodes-2
New Cemetery-2
2.50x2.35
3.00x2.00
Roman
Unknown
II
Roman
Misailidou-Despotidou 1998.
Ciakav Cronikav 17 (1985) 65-73, 76-7; Ciakav Cronikav 18 (1987) 61-7; BCH 113 (1989) 666.
Roman
2.7
M. Valla, "Keramikov" klivbano" sthn Eurwpov tou nomouv Kilkiv"." AAA 13-18 (1990-1995), 109-15; T. Savvopoulou and M. Valla, "Eurwpov" 19911992." AEMQ 6 (1992) 433-51.
Roman
Roman
CAT.NO. REGION
PREFECTURE
SITE
STREET/PLOT
TYPE
424
SUBTYPE DIMENSIONS
no. 376
Aegean
Dodekanese
Rhodes-3
New Cemetery-3
no. 377
Aegean
Dodekanese
Rhodes-4
New Cemetery-4
no. 378
Aegean
Dodekanese
Rhodes-5
New Cemetery-5
no. 379
Aegean
Crete-Chania
Kastelli-1A
no. 380
Aegean
Crete-Chania
Kastelli-1B
no. 381
Aegean
Crete-Chania
Kastelli-2
Theodosaki Plot
no. 382
Aegean
Crete-Chania
Kastelli-3
no. 383
Aegean
Crete-Chania
Topolia
no. 384
Aegean
Crete-Herakleiou
Kato Kastelliana
SPECIFIC DATE
REFERENCES
Roman
Roman
Roman
Roman
Roman
Unknown
Roman
Berdiou Plot
Unknown
Roman
Ay Kyr-Yiannis
Unknown
Roman
Gerokolympos
no. 385
Aegean
Crete-Lasithiou
Istronas-Kalo Chorio
Mirabellou
no. 386
Attica
Attica
Athens-30
Areos St.
no. 387
Attica
Attica
Athens-31
Makriyianni
no. 388
Attica
Attica
no. 389
Attica
no. 390
Peloponnese
PERIOD
II
2.00x1.70
Roman
Roman
Unknown
ADelt 27 (1972) 624, pls. 583 a-b; BCH 101 (1977) 648; ARepLondon 1976-77, 64.
Krhtikav Cronikav 18 (1963) 405; Davaras 1973a, 80, B4; id ., 1973b, figs. 1-2; pls. 62-67; id ., 1980, 119.
Late Antique
EY PP O 2 (1998) 74.
Late Antique
Skala Oropou-3A
0.6
Late Antique
Attica
Skala Oropou-3B
0.6
Late Antique
Achaia
Patras-13A
Late Antique
Late Antique
NW of Palestra
II
no. 391
Peloponnese
Achaia
Patras-13B
no. 392
Peloponnese
Elis
Ancient Olympia-5
no. 393
Peloponnese
Laconia
Sparta-4
Christou Plot
II
no. 394
Central
Phocis
Delphi-1
Gymnasium, Xyste
II
4.00x2.00
Late Antique
no. 395
Central
Phocis
Delphi-2
North-Eastern Villa
II
2.00x1.00
Late Antique
no. 396
Central
Phocis
Delphi-3
North-Eastern Villa
II
1.80+x1.80+
Late Antique
3.00x3.00
Late Antique
Late Antique
Kunze and Schleif 1944, 21-3, figs. 10-11; Cook 1961, 67, J8; Belsch et al. 1963, 10, GT.
BCH 111 (1987) 611, fig.2; BCH 112 (1988) 723-4 fig. 4; ARepLondon 1986-87, 25, fig. 38; Petridis 1998.
CAT.NO. REGION
PREFECTURE
SITE
STREET/PLOT
TYPE
425
SUBTYPE DIMENSIONS
PERIOD
SPECIFIC DATE
REFERENCES
no. 397
Central
Phocis
Delphi-4
North-Eastern Villa
II
Late Antique
no. 398
Central
Phocis
Delphi-5
North-Eastern Villa
II
Late Antique
no. 399
Central
Phocis
Delphi-6
North-Eastern Villa
II
Late Antique
no. 400
Central
Phocis
Delphi-7
North-Eastern Villa
II
Late Antique
no. 401
Central
Phocis
Kirrha-2
no. 402
Western
Ioannina
Kato Vassiliki
no. 403
Aegean
Crete-Herakleiou
no. 404
Attica
no. 405
2.00x1.90
Unknown
Late Antique
Keramidario
II
5.00x3.90
Late Antique
Knossos-5
Venizeleio Hospital
II
2.00x2.00
Late Antique
Attica
Athens-32
Areopagus-1
II
Attica
Attica
Athens-33
Areopagus-2
no. 406
Attica
Attica
Athens-34
no. 407
Attica
Attica
no. 408
Attica
no. 409
Byzantine
R.S. Young, "An industrial district of ancient Athens." Hesperia 20 (1951) 135-288.
Unknown
Byzantine
H.A. Thompson, "Excavation of Athenian Agora 1947." Hesperia 17 (1948) 149-96, fig.6. Cook 1961, 67, K1; Belsch et al. 1963, 11, HD.
Areopagus-3
Unknown
Byzantine
Athens-35
Areopagus-4
Unknown
Byzantine
Attica
Athens-36
Hadrian's Library
Byzantine
ADelt 48 (1993) 12-17; ADelt 49 (1994) 18-20, plan 1; BCH 122 (1998) 718.
Attica
Attica
Athens-37
Roman Agora
Byzantine
no. 410
Peloponnese
Achaia
Patras-14
Byzantine
no. 411
Peloponnese
Argolis
Argos-9
Unknown
Byzantine
no. 412
Peloponnese
Corinthia
Ancient Corinth-7
2.7
Byzantine
Morgan 1942.
no. 413
Peloponnese
Corinthia
Ancient Corinth-8
Byzantine
no. 414
Peloponnese
Corinthia
Ancient Corinth-9
Byzantine
no. 415
Peloponnese
Messenia
Chora Trifyllias
Byzantine
CAT.NO. REGION
PREFECTURE
SITE
no. 416
Central
Boeotia
Thebes-2
no. 417
Central
Trikala
Trikala
no. 418
Western
Arta
Ambrakia
no. 419
Northern
Chalkidiki
no. 420
Northern
no. 421
STREET/PLOT
Fasoulopoulou Plot
TYPE
426
SUBTYPE DIMENSIONS
Unknown
PERIOD
SPECIFIC DATE
REFERENCES
Byzantine
Byzantine
II
Byzantine
II
Byzantine
10th century AD
T. Pazaras and A. Tsanana, "Anaskafikev" evreune" sth Bevria N. Sullatwvn." AEMQ 4 (1990) 353-60; AEMQ 5 (1991) 289-301; BCH 118 (1994)
758.
Chalkidiki
II
Byzantine
10th century AD
Northern
Evros
Didymoteicho A
3, Karaiskaki St.
Byzantine
Bakirtzis 1980.
no. 422
Northern
Evros
Didymoteicho B
3, Karaiskaki St.
Byzantine
no. 423
Northern
Emathias
Naoussa
Lefkadia
II
Byzantine
no. 424
Northern
Pieria
Pydna
Plot 568
II
Byzantine
ADelt 42 (1987) 410-1; M. Besios and A. Chrahtopoulou, " Anaskafhv sto B. Nekrotafeivo th" Puvdna"." AEMQ 8 (1994) 147-50; E. Marki,
"Anaskafhv ergasthrivou keramikhv" kai cuvteush" sidhvrou sthn Arcaiva Puvdna." in A.B. Katsaros (ed.), Antivfwnon. Afievrwma ston kaqhghthv
N. B. Drandavkh, 1994, 121-31.
no. 425
Aegean
Crete-Herakleiou
Gortyna
Unknown
Byzantine
no. 426
Aegean
Crete-Herakleiou
Gortyna
Byzantine
A. Di Vita, " Il forno bizantino per ceramica dipinta di Gortina (Creta)." in Kerameika Ergasteria, 49-53.
no. 427
Attica
Attica
Athens-38
Undated
no. 428
Attica
Attica
Attica
Undated
no. 429
Peloponnese
Achaia
Aigeira-3
Undated
no. 430
Peloponnese
Achaia
Patras-15A
no. 431
Peloponnese
Achaia
no. 432
Peloponnese
no. 433
Dionysiac Theater
Eleusis
Unknown
II
1.2
Undated
Patras-15B
1.4
Undated
Achaia
Patras-16
Undated
Peloponnese
Achaia
Patras-17
Undated
no. 434
Peloponnese
Achaia
Patras-18A
Unknown
Undated
no. 435
Peloponnese
Achaia
Patras-18B
Undated
CAT.NO. REGION
PREFECTURE
SITE
STREET/PLOT
TYPE
427
SUBTYPE DIMENSIONS
no. 436
Peloponnese
Achaia
Patras-19A
no. 437
Peloponnese
Achaia
Patras-19B
II
no. 438
Peloponnese
Achaia
Patras-20
no. 439
Peloponnese
Achaia
Patras-21
Unknown
no. 440
Peloponnese
Achaia
Patras-22A
II
no. 441
Peloponnese
Achaia
Patras-22B
no. 442
Peloponnese
Achaia
Kleitor
Katarrachi
no. 443
Peloponnese
Achaia
Kastritsi
no. 444
Peloponnese
Achaia
Kato Achaia A
Leivada Plot A
II
no. 445
Peloponnese
Achaia
Kato Achaia B
Leivada Plot B
II
no. 446
Central
Boeotia
Narthakio
no. 447
Central
Amphissa
Amphissa
no. 448
Western
Ioannina
Vonitsa
no. 449
Northern
Chalkidiki
Kassandra-Sarti
no. 450
Northern
Pieria
Pella-7
1.8
REFERENCES
Undated
Undated
Undated
Undated
II
Undated
II
Undated
Undated
Undated
Undated
Unknown
Undated
Unknown
Undated
Undated
Undated
Undated
Katochi
II
Platanitsi
SPECIFIC DATE
Undated
Unknown
PERIOD
3.30x3.20
Unknown
no. 451
Northern
Thessaloniki
Thessaloniki-2A
no. 452
Northern
Thessaloniki
Thessaloniki-2B
no. 453
Aegean
Crete-Chania
Agia Marina
Unknown
no. 454
Aegean
Crete-Lasithiou
Ierapetra
Undated
A. Zois, "Anaskafhv Basilikhv" Ieravpetra"." PAE 1991, 331-91, pls. 219 a,b.
no. 455
Aegean
Crete-Rethymno
Axos
Undated
no. 456
Aegean
Cyclades
Delos
II
Undated
Delorme 1961.
Palestra
II
Undated
II
Undated
Undated
2.20x2.20+
CAT.NO. REGION
PREFECTURE
SITE
STREET/PLOT
TYPE
428
SUBTYPE DIMENSIONS
PERIOD
SPECIFIC DATE
REFERENCES
no. 457
Aegean
Dodekanese
Rhodes-5A
2, Kennedy and
Diagoridon Sts. A
Undated
no. 458
Aegean
Dodekanese
Rhodes-5B
2, Kennedy and
Diagoridon Sts. B
Undated
no. 459
Aegean
Dodekanese
Rhodes-6
Undated
Archangelos
Unknown
429
no. 2: Olynthus
no. 3: Achladia
(146)
not considered a kiln in the present study
(108)
no. 6: Asine
(109-110)
no. 7: Berbati
(111)
Seemingly an oven/kiln
no. 8: Chania
no. 9: Cnossus (Knossos)
(139-141)
(103)
not considered a kiln in the present study
(142)
incorrect reference; the reference provided
refers to Metropoli at Gortyne, Crete
(151)
(96-99)
(150)
no evidence for kilns after geomagnetic
survey (J.M. Fossey, pers. comm.2000)
(114)
not considered a kiln in the present study
(101-102)
(126)
(115)
(112)
(113)
(124)
430
uncertain identification
no kiln excavated
no kiln excavated
no kiln excavated
no kiln excavated
no kiln excavated
no kiln excavated
no kiln excavated
(03)
not a ceramic kiln (a cupellation
furnace)
no kiln excavated
(31-36)
(11)
(01)
not a ceramic kiln (a lime kiln)
(28-30)
(25-26)
(40-42)
(51-53)
(43-45)
(92-93)
not a ceramic kiln (a bath furnace)
(64-65)
(74)
(73)
(67-72)
(86-89)
(75)
(76)
431
not included
(90)
incorrect reference
(230)
no specific information for a kiln
(170)
(171)
(185-186)
(46-49)
(90)
(160-161)
(63)
not included
(188-189)
(235-237)
(85)
(374-378)
(14)
no kilns excavated
(225)
(189)
(190-192)
(244)
432
incomplete reference
no kiln excavated
(429)
(313)
(270)
(271-273)
(260-264)
(278-304)
(351)
(351)
(371-373)
(343)
(346)
(337)
(385)
(379-380)
(74)
(347)
(329-332)
(327)
(319)
(247)
(392)
incomplete reference
(394)
(301)
(384)
(214)
no kiln excavated
(404)
(405-407)
incomplete reference
(421-422)
no kiln excavated
post-Byzantine kiln (outside the limits of
this study)
incorrect reference
433
(423)
not included
(417)
(225))
(158)
unexcavated kiln
(337)
(402)
(105)
unexcavated remains -
incomplete reference
(436-437))
no kiln excavated
(450)
not included
not a ceramic kiln (a metallurgical
furnace)
not included
(361-362)
(459)
434
1.
Louvre
MNB
2856
CATALOGUE 1
2.
Louvre
MNB
2858
3.
I74
4.
11
I75
In the bibliography, I refer only to the primary publications and illustrations in Antike Denkmler (abbr. as AD), in
Furtwngler 1885, Pernice 1897, Geagan 1970, Zimmer 1982, and Cuomo 1988. n.n. refers to uncatalogued
fragments in Furtwangler's description. The numbers preceded by F refer to fragments inventoried by Furtwngler
1885, and the ones preceded by I refer to fragments inventoried by Pernice 1985; The joining fragments are entered
according to the lowest number, unless the joining has occurred much later and for the sake of easy reference I have
kept the higher number first. I first describe the side which bears the kiln scene (side A), then the rear side (side B).
At the end of each entry I supply the basic bibliographical references.
I76
6.
I77
7.
I78
A. Depiction of a kiln.
B. Undecorated.
Pernice 1897, 44.
8.
I79
9.
I80
10.
I 123
11.
I 141?
435
I 172?
A. A kiln?
B. The leg of a man and a small bird are
presented.
Pernice 1897, 48.
13.
I 179
14.
F414
15.
F482+
627+
943+n.n
16.
F555
436
17.
F607
18.
F608
19.
F609+
356
20.
F610
437
21.
F611
22.
F612
23.
F613
24.
F614
438
eagle is depicted.
B. Undecorated.
Furtwngler 1885, 71.
25.
F615
26.
F616
27.
F617
439
28.
F618
29.
F619+
826
30.
F620
31.
F622+
n.n
32.
F623
440
F624
34.
F625
35.
F626
A. A kiln with its loading door depicted.
B. Undecorated.
Furtwngler 1885, 72.
36.
F628+
666
37.
F629
441
F631
39.
F632+
887
40.
F633
A. Parts of a kiln.
B. A flying bird.
Furtwngler 1885, 72-3.
41.
F634
A. Parts of a kiln.
B. A flying bird.
Furtwngler 1885, 72-3.
42.
F635
442
43.
F636
A. Parts of a kiln.
B. Two sets of curved parallel lines, with a
row of dots in the center between them.
AD II. 40.11; Furtwngler 1885, 72-3.
44.
F637+
819
45.
F683+
757+
822+
829
46.
F694+
524
443
47.
F709+
n.n.
48.
F763
49.
F785?
50.
F800
51.
F801
444
52.
F802
53.
F803
54.
F804
55.
F805
445
F806
57.
F807
58.
F808+
691
59.
F809
60.
F810
446
61.
F811
62.
F812+
773
63.
F814?
64.
F816
65.
F817?
447
66.
F827
67.
F830
A. Depiction of a kiln.
B. Amphitrite.
Inscription: ..LOS and another inscription
. KRA .
Furtwngler 1885, 90; cf F846 (in the style
of the painter Timonidas).
68.
F845?
448
69.
F846
70.
F863+
877+
879
71.
F865
449
72.
F866+
546
450
73.
F867
74.
F878+
909
75.
F881?
A. Two men standing in front of a kiln (?)
B. Horseback rider.
Furtwngler 1885, 97.
76.
F885?
77.
F889
78.
F890+
n.n.
79.
F891?
451
80.
F892
81.
F893
82.
F900?
83.
n.n
452
453
PLATES
Plate I.1:
454
Plate I.2:
Penteskoufia plaques depicting kilns. Part II (and possibly painted by the same artist).
(F608, F609, F618, F637+819, F867).
455
Plate I.3:
Penteskoufia plaques depicting kilns. Part III. (F615, F683+757+822+829, F810, F811, F816).
456
Plate I.4:
Penteskoufia plaques depicting kilns. Part IV. (MNB 2858, F632+887, F843, F866+546, F909).
457
458
Plate I.5:
Plate 1.6:
Penteskoufia plaques possibly painted by the same artist. (F639, F789, F865, F871, F893).
459
460
Plate I.7:
461
Plate I.8:
462
Plate I.9:
463
464
Plate I.11:
465
Plate I.12: Uncertain representations of kilns. a. Black-figure skyphos from the Robinson
collection in Baltimore, by the Theseus Painter; b-c. Gem engravings (now lost).
Plate II.1
466
467
Plate II.2:
Different methods for firing pottery a. pit firing; b. horizontal kiln firing; c-d. socalled horizontal kilns from ancient Palestine. Scale applies only to d.
Plate II.3:
468
469
Plate II.4:
Hellenistic kiln at Chalkis (349). Walls of the combustion chamber lined with
Corinthian-style rooftiles.
The stoking channel of the kiln. a. Classical kilns at Kerameikos, Athens (40-42); b. Archaic kilns at Lato (28-30);
Plate II.5:
c. Roman kiln at Philotas (250); d. Kiln with double-stoking channel at Klirou on Cyprus. Scale applies only to a.
470
471
Plate II.6:
472
a.
b.
Plate II.7:
473
Plate II.9:
474
475
Plate II.10:
Roman Kiln at Gortys, Arcadia (337) preserving the perforated floor and the
system of supporting arms.
476
477
Plate II.12: Different types of stacking supports. Part I. a-b. From the Athenian Agora ; c.
Tripods from ancient Corinth and the Athenian Agora; d-e. Types of supports from Corinth.
Reconstructions A and B of their use inside the kiln.
478
Plate II.13: Different types of stacking supports. Part II. a. Stacking supports from the Tile
Works at ancient Corinth (64-65); b. Modern kiln-supports for pitharia at Korone, Messenia.
479
Plate II.14:
480
Plate II.15:
Plate II.16:
a. Kiln supports or handle molds from Hellenistic workshop at Paroikia, Paros (229-334).
b. Stacking techniques of ancient pottery. LM I kernos from Gortyn.
481
Plate II.17:
482
Plate Exc.1:
Models of Neolithic terracotta ovens and reconstructions of their use in a Neolithic settlement (a), b. Neolithic
model from Plateia Magoula Zarkou in Trikala; c. Neolithic model from Sitagroi.
483
484
Plate Exc.2:
485
Plate Exc.3:
Plate Exc.4:
Archaelogical examples of ovens. a. Neolithic oven from Arhontiko Giannitson; b. LBA two-storied oven at
Anchialos, Sindos; c-d. Roman bakery-ovens from Pompeii and Ostia
486
487
Plate Exc.5:
Plate Exc.6:
Coexistence of a ceramic and a lime kiln from Kokkinovrysi in ancient Corinth (343).
488
Plate Exc.7:
489
490
a.
b.
Plate Exc.8:
491
Plate Exc.9:
492
Plate Exc.10:
493
Plate Exc.11:
494
Plate Exc.12:
Plate Exc.13:
Various types of furnaces. a. Coin foundry at the Agora, Thessaloniki; b. Workshop for preparation of colors on
Cos
495
496
497
498
Plate III.1:
499
Plate III.2:
500
Plate III.3:
501
Plate III.4:
502
Plate III.5:
503
Plate III.6:
504
Plate III.7:
Plate III.8:
505
506
Plate III.9:
Plate III.10:
Plans and sections of rectangular kilns at Olympia (from left to right 73, 347, 392).
507
508
Plate III.11:
509
Plate III.12:
Plate III.13:
510
511
Plate III.14:
Plate III.15:
512
Plate III.16:
513
514
a.
b.
Plate III.17:
515
Plate IV.1:
516
Plate IV.2:
Plate IV.3:
Middle Helladic kilns: Lerna (96), Sparta (101-103), Kirrha (104-106). The scale applies only to the plans.
517
518
Plate IV.4:
Plate IV.5:
Kiln sites on Crete (with the addition of the later production center, Thrapsano).
519
520
a.
b.
a. Late Minoan IB channel kiln at Kommos (145);
Plate IV.6:
b. Reconstruction of the Late Minoan IB channel kiln at Kommos (145).
521
Plate IV.7:
Plans and sections of the Late Minoan IB kiln at Agia Triadha (143).
Plate IV.8:
522
523
Plate IV.9:
524
Plate IV.10:
525
Plate IV.11:
Plate IV.12:
526
Plate IV.13:
Sizes of Prehistoric kilns (all in the same scale). a. Agia Triadha (143); b. Dimini (116); c. Achladia (148).
527
Plate IV.14:
528
529
Plate IV.15:
Mycenaean kilns: Aigeira (108), Berbati (111), Dimini (116), Pylos (114),
Thebes (115), Velestino (117).
Plate IV.16:
530
531
Plate IV.17:
532
Plate V.1:
Plans of Geometric kilns (all in the same scale). Amorgos (13), Athens (01),
Dodona (10), Phaistos (12), Torone (11).
533
Plate V.2:
534
Plate V.3:
535
Plate V.4:
Plans of Archaic kilns. Aigion (18), Knossos (27), Lato (28-30), Phari (25-26),
Prinias (31-36).
536
Plate V.5:
537
Plate V.6:
538
Plate V.7:
Plate V.8:
General plan of the sanctuary of Zeus at Nemea (60-62) indicating area of the kilns
539
Plate V.9:
The sanctuary of Zeus at Nemea. Plan of the kilns area in relationship to the Xenon and the Basilica.
540
541
Plate V.10:
542
Plate V.11:
Plate V.12:
543
544
Plate V.13:
Plate V.14:
Athens, Kotzia Square. Late Roman workshops area (274-300). (Kilns indicated with red, basins with blue color)
545
546
Plate V.15:
547
Plate V.16:
548
Plate V.17:
549
Plate V.18:
Plate V.19:
550
551
Plate VI.1:
552
Plate VI.2
553
Plate VI.3:
Section plans of the East kiln at the Tile Works, ancient Corinth (64-65).
Plate VI.4:
554
555
Plate VI.6:
Estimations of time requirements for the East kiln at the Tile Works to fire roofs of buildings of various sizes.
556
Plate VI.7:
Workshops with rectangular kilns in ancient Corinth. A. Tile Works (64-65), B. West Tile Works (344), C.
Kokkinovrysi (343).
557
558
a.
b.
Plate VI.8:
a. Plan of the Olympia Sanctuary with locations of kilns indicated; b. Detailed plan of
encircled area in plan a.
559
Plate VI.9:
560
Plate VI.10:
561
Plate VI.11:
Plate VI.12:
562
563
Plate VI.13:
Plate VI.14:
564
565
Plate VI.15: